Cartier love bangles

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I agree. Also, I assure you, the haters posting on here do not have them, and most likely cannot afford them or they have no-one to buy it for them and lack the confidence to buy it for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think they are timeless, my aunt got them in the 1980s and wore them until she passed away this past spring.

Did her children inherit them?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are basic and totally played out for sure.

However the real reason not to get the Love bracelet is they aren't very sturdy (yes the gold weight is very solid and pleasing but the screws etc aren't the most secure) and Cartier's customer service is very bad. I bought a juste un clou in Dubai on holiday and the spring mechanism wasn't working properly just weeks later. I took it into a local boutique mere weeks after buying it and they flat out refused to fix it for free which shocked me, given the price of the item and how new it was. They also talked down to me and made me feel cheap and small. They did send it for repair that I had to pay for (!!!) but never again.

If you want trendy go with Van Cleef or Tiffany or Bulgari, not Cartier.

Tiffany and Cartier are in different leagues. Plus, OP states she wants a "staple" not something trendy.

[Anonymous]

I like them in all forms except rose gold. Not a fan of the rose gold look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

+1 I like mine because it feels understated and luxurious. Sure it's popular right now, but it's really just a single gold bangle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think they are timeless, my aunt got them in the 1980s and wore them until she passed away this past spring.

Did her children inherit them?

Yes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I agree. Also, I assure you, the haters posting on here do not have them, and most likely cannot afford them or they have no-one to buy it for them and lack the confidence to buy it for themselves.

DP. This argument is as played out as the bracelet itself.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They are basic and totally played out for sure.

However the real reason not to get the Love bracelet is they aren't very sturdy (yes the gold weight is very solid and pleasing but the screws etc aren't the most secure) and Cartier's customer service is very bad. I bought a juste un clou in Dubai on holiday and the spring mechanism wasn't working properly just weeks later. I took it into a local boutique mere weeks after buying it and they flat out refused to fix it for free which shocked me, given the price of the item and how new it was. They also talked down to me and made me feel cheap and small. They did send it for repair that I had to pay for (!!!) but never again.

If you want trendy go with Van Cleef or Tiffany or Bulgari, not Cartier.

No. They're customer service is even worse, and their jewelry is cheaper and uglier.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I used to like the Love bracelet until a few years ago when I saw a pair of 13-14 year old girls getting manicures at the table next to me who were both wearing the bracelet.

Doubtful. There are loads of knock-offs around. If you look at them closely, you can tell. But probably not from a table away.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

The real ones are not everywhere unless you live in an affluent area. Get a grip on reality, honey.

I live in DC, honey. But I'm not sure you're making the point you think you are. The fact remains that these bracelets don't have the same clout as they once did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So basic. If you actually want to invest in a nice gold bracelet get an Elizabeth Locke or Temple St. Claire. But then people wouldn't know how much you spent, which I assume is the point of the Cartier.

I can’t afford any of this, but the point of the Cartier bracelet is to have a certain spare aesthetic. I looked at those two websites, and they’re NOTHING like the love bracelet. Literally not a single thing on the Elizabeth Locke website that I wouldn’t return. I’d take a Cartier tank over any of those $100,000 necklaces. Now would I buy a bracelet I can’t take off? Nope. But that snark was completely uncalled for.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I think what people mean when they says it's tacky is that it's the jewelry equivalent of the LV Neverfull. At one point in time it was somewhat unique and a status piece. Now it's everywhere and it's no longer a status symbol.

Exactly this. It reminds of when all the teens were buying those clunky heart chain return to Tiffany’s bracelets in tge 2000s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To all the people saying that the Love bangles are "tacky" or "trashy"... I'm confused. They are objectively a fairly minimalist piece of jewelry. Do I think that they are overpriced for what they are? No doubt! You can get a similar gold bangle for 1/3 the price, but this doesn't make the piece in poor taste. Maybe some of the people who wear them are trashy, but the piece itself is bordering on blandly understated.

I agree. Also, I assure you, the haters posting on here do not have them, and most likely cannot afford them or they have no-one to buy it for them and lack the confidence to buy it for themselves.

LOL, whatever helps you sleep at night knowing you are in the same jewelry league as tacky Bravo ladies....