What do you think of women dripping in designer items?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have trouble respecting that. It's just trying too hard, and I thought obvious designer labels were totally out now. What I respect is if someone's outfit looks awesome on them, regardless of who made it or where it came from.

+1000. Labels= trying too hard. There is nothing wrong with wearing expensive designer goods, but wearing obvious designer goods (items with labels or that are easily identifiable, such as the love bracelet) is a sign of insecurity with the need to let others know you have money.

[Anonymous]

I'm not sure why DCUMers are so anti-labels. Go to New York, London or LA - the wealthy people there are all in Cartier, Chanel, and Van Cleef. It's fine if you don't like this stuff, but let people enjoy their wealth!

[Anonymous]

How about a little moderation, though? The rich people I know (worth $10 mil or over) spend their money on experiences, not a bunch of stuff that will (for the most part) immediately lose value after you buy it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about a little moderation, though? The rich people I know (worth $10 mil or over) spend their money on experiences, not a bunch of stuff that will (for the most part) immediately lose value after you buy it.

They probably spend money on both.

[Anonymous]

This thread has thoroughly convinced me that it would be better to be a person wearing labels than a person who disdains it and insists that the best rich people would never.

It’s better to look dumb than to be so provincial and puritanical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have trouble respecting that. It's just trying too hard, and I thought obvious designer labels were totally out now. What I respect is if someone's outfit looks awesome on them, regardless of who made it or where it came from.

+1000. Labels= trying too hard. There is nothing wrong with wearing expensive designer goods, but wearing obvious designer goods (items with labels or that are easily identifiable, such as the love bracelet) is a sign of insecurity with the need to let others know you have money.

Or it's the opposite of trying too hard. Someone who's trying hard will want to stand out with their purchases. This is someone trying to fit in. Or who doesn't care about being so special and unique in their taste. They just want to look nice and appropriate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How about a little moderation, though? The rich people I know (worth $10 mil or over) spend their money on experiences, not a bunch of stuff that will (for the most part) immediately lose value after you buy it.

Oh please. Rich people don't have to apportion like that. They have expensive jewelry and clothes, and they have awesome vacations.

[Anonymous]

The one thing I find annoying is how certain brands are now displaying their logos/names as large as possible. Ralph Lauren with their polos got really ridiculous where the little polo player went from being a small mark to this huge thing on the shirts. Same thing with handbags where the brand name is written in large letters on the strap and similar.

At some point they're sacrificing aesthetics for large branding and it just comes across as a status symbol at the expense of actually looking good.

If that's for you, fine, not my business. But I personally steer away from brands that do this because I'm not a fan of how it looks.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The one thing I find annoying is how certain brands are now displaying their logos/names as large as possible. Ralph Lauren with their polos got really ridiculous where the little polo player went from being a small mark to this huge thing on the shirts. Same thing with handbags where the brand name is written in large letters on the strap and similar.

At some point they're sacrificing aesthetics for large branding and it just comes across as a status symbol at the expense of actually looking good.

If that's for you, fine, not my business. But I personally steer away from brands that do this because I'm not a fan of how it looks.

I can’t think of a logical reason why the little polo player is fine but the big one is tacky. That seems very arbitrary to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one thing I find annoying is how certain brands are now displaying their logos/names as large as possible. Ralph Lauren with their polos got really ridiculous where the little polo player went from being a small mark to this huge thing on the shirts. Same thing with handbags where the brand name is written in large letters on the strap and similar.

At some point they're sacrificing aesthetics for large branding and it just comes across as a status symbol at the expense of actually looking good.

If that's for you, fine, not my business. But I personally steer away from brands that do this because I'm not a fan of how it looks.

I can’t think of a logical reason why the little polo player is fine but the big one is tacky. That seems very arbitrary to me.

You can't see how a small embroidered logo is fine but a huge thing taking up 1/8 of the front of the shirt is tacky? Really? You think that is arbitrary? The look of the shirt is completely different. One logo is subtle, the other is bizarrely big. NP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one thing I find annoying is how certain brands are now displaying their logos/names as large as possible. Ralph Lauren with their polos got really ridiculous where the little polo player went from being a small mark to this huge thing on the shirts. Same thing with handbags where the brand name is written in large letters on the strap and similar.

At some point they're sacrificing aesthetics for large branding and it just comes across as a status symbol at the expense of actually looking good.

If that's for you, fine, not my business. But I personally steer away from brands that do this because I'm not a fan of how it looks.

I can’t think of a logical reason why the little polo player is fine but the big one is tacky. That seems very arbitrary to me.

You can't see how a small embroidered logo is fine but a huge thing taking up 1/8 of the front of the shirt is tacky? Really? You think that is arbitrary? The look of the shirt is completely different. One logo is subtle, the other is bizarrely big. NP

Neither one is subtle! It’s an emblem on your chest. Subtle would be a tag on the inside.

I think at some point you internalized that the small one was classy and aspirational, and then you decided the big one was part of a brand turn towards urban youth that you found distasteful. I don’t think it has anything to do with the actual shirt to logo ratio at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The one thing I find annoying is how certain brands are now displaying their logos/names as large as possible. Ralph Lauren with their polos got really ridiculous where the little polo player went from being a small mark to this huge thing on the shirts. Same thing with handbags where the brand name is written in large letters on the strap and similar.

At some point they're sacrificing aesthetics for large branding and it just comes across as a status symbol at the expense of actually looking good.

If that's for you, fine, not my business. But I personally steer away from brands that do this because I'm not a fan of how it looks.

I can’t think of a logical reason why the little polo player is fine but the big one is tacky. That seems very arbitrary to me.

You can't see how a small embroidered logo is fine but a huge thing taking up 1/8 of the front of the shirt is tacky? Really? You think that is arbitrary? The look of the shirt is completely different. One logo is subtle, the other is bizarrely big. NP

Neither one is subtle! It’s an emblem on your chest. Subtle would be a tag on the inside.

I think at some point you internalized that the small one was classy and aspirational, and then you decided the big one was part of a brand turn towards urban youth that you found distasteful. I don’t think it has anything to do with the actual shirt to logo ratio at all.

The big one also isn't well applied, the stitching looks sloppy.