Neverfull - cheesy/ suburban or classic?

[Anonymous]

What about the graceful?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about the graceful?

It’s the garish logos that are tacky, not the shape of the bag!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing about the Neverfull is that people will make one of two assumptions about you: (1) You can't really afford luxury items and you've saved up for years to buy this one so people will think you're fancy or (2) It's fake and you want people to think you can afford it.

Sadly, this is generally true. I see very few people who pull off an LV looking chic or elegant. It happens, but it’s unusual.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Basic.

op - this is sort of my gut, as a new yorker - that it feels a little basic/ cheesy. Not like - michael kors level. But not good.
But at the same time I saw a woman with one the other day and she really pulled it off. Granted she was waspy (and I am a little edgier)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about the graceful?

still has the logos so same issue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am extremely basic and would never carry a bag that is covered in logos. The one that is less logo plastered is a bit more subtle but honestly just sends messages that I don’t wish to convey. But that is my opinion, and if others enjoy carrying them and can afford it, more power to them and Bernard Arnault.

op - i am willing to bet you are not as basic as you think you are. judging by your take here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What about the graceful?

still has the logos so same issue.

I like the damier ebena (chckerboard) pattern. is that still horrible?

[Anonymous]

Very useful bag. Say what you will about LV, but mine have held up so much better than my other expensive bags (Chloe, Gucci, Mulberry, YSL). You can throw them around and not baby them and they are pretty indestructible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Classic. As a warning, this bag seems to trigger a lot of DCUM users.

This

The thing is a tank I don’t care what others think.

[Anonymous]

Cheesy, suburban, and classic.

I own one but dont use it much past my 30’s. Maybe to schlep a bunch of stuff to the dry cleaners or carry returns to the mall

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing about the Neverfull is that people will make one of two assumptions about you: (1) You can't really afford luxury items and you've saved up for years to buy this one so people will think you're fancy or (2) It's fake and you want people to think you can afford it.

THIS. 100% this.

[Anonymous]

Good convo! I agree - I think it can be all of those. It's a personal choice, and if you want one go for it and eff what anyone else thinks. I don't like logos, so I wouldn't get one even if I could afford it. But who cares what I think?

[Anonymous]

I think the LV monogram can look classic, chic even, on a well dressed woman who wears it in a very utilitarian way. That’s hard with the NF due to its size and how closely it’s worn to the body. It’s too schlepy, I think. And I say this as a woman who owns the Neverfull

Here’s a some good example of Angelina Jolie nicely rocking the sac plat. Hopefully the image embedding works.

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/f7/d0/bb/f7d0bb875b375884245ce5ab4a911ce9.jpg" border="0" class="embeddedImage" />

https://i.pinimg.com/474x/f7/d0/bb/f7d0bb875b375884245ce5ab4a911ce9.jpg

[Anonymous]

Another example of Princess Di with the monogram toiletry pouch. I think she looks very stylish, but again, I’m not sure the NF gives the same polished look.

https://cdn.shopify.com/s/files/1/1007/2348/files/EmOZKbYUYAEUsHV_480x480.jpg?v=1608158904

[Anonymous]

Classic. Good work tote. Indestructible and never shows wear.