Do Coach bags carry the same stigma outside of the USA?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Not sure.

Exit the matrix and stop carrying a bag. Use pockets like a man.

Bags are overpriced and just another way to make women spend more money when we already make less than men. They seem as cool as pantyhose.

I'm totally stealing this phrase!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone kindly gifted me a coach tote and it’s not my style. It really seemed fake because the material was like plastic, but I searched and it’s an “outlet” style.

Coach peaked in like 2005 but it’s been a weird downfall.

No, no, no. You have not been to a regular Coach store. They have gorgeous bags! NO logos, great leather.

+1.

Coach should just do away with their outlet stores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone kindly gifted me a coach tote and it’s not my style. It really seemed fake because the material was like plastic, but I searched and it’s an “outlet” style.

Coach peaked in like 2005 but it’s been a weird downfall.

They peaked between the late 1960s and 2001, when they stopped using full-grain leather and moved their production to China. This was the start of the logo era. Look for any of their bags from 2001 or earlier-- they are incredible quality. I have some gorgeous bags made in their NYC factory in the 70s. Even if you find a really beat-up looking vintage bag online or at a thrift store, you can easily wash and moisturize them and they will look great.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s a stigma, it’s just a reality that they are a lower priced designer brand so aren’t as aspirational for the UMC as other designers. They’ve sold out to be an outlet brand, and it’s value has declined as its sales volume increased. Maybe equal to or a little below Michael Kors and Kate Spade, but above Chinese brands on Amazon.

Coach is above Kors. I would put Coach way above. Marc Jacobs is up top as well of midrange bag brands. Dooney is lower end IMO. Dooney and Tory Burch below Coach.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think there’s a stigma, it’s just a reality that they are a lower priced designer brand so aren’t as aspirational for the UMC as other designers. They’ve sold out to be an outlet brand, and it’s value has declined as its sales volume increased. Maybe equal to or a little below Michael Kors and Kate Spade, but above Chinese brands on Amazon.

Coach is above Kors. I would put Coach way above. Marc Jacobs is up top as well of midrange bag brands. Dooney is lower end IMO. Dooney and Tory Burch below Coach.

The Coach Rogue bags are much nicer than anything MJ, Dooney, Tory Burch, Kors, etc. offer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stigma?

Don’t come for me. But, I think the stigma is that there are many knock offs because a certain segment of the population thinks it makes them look rich and fancy. So they’re using knock offs and walk around Walmart with fake huge logo purses. I didn’t think it was limited to coach but also Gucci.

I think the word is "ghetto".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What stigma?

Don’t come for me. But, I think the stigma is that there are many knock offs because a certain segment of the population thinks it makes them look rich and fancy. So they’re using knock offs and walk around Walmart with fake huge logo purses. I didn’t think it was limited to coach but also Gucci.

I think the word is "ghetto".

Knockoff Coach bags don’t create a stigma around authentic Coach bags any more than Wirkins create a stigma around Birkins. Not even when a “ghetto” demographic buys them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My teenaged niece got two Coach bags for Christmas - she asked for them. Just FWIW.

Then she has no taste and they are made poorly

Have her stop reading Marie Claire and start reading vogue

That's great advice. I think most teens are reading Marie Claire today.

[Anonymous]

I would rather carry an unbranded bag from Kohls or Target than carry a Coach logo outlet bag. In fact this is what I do. But my purse is not my identity or a reflection of my worth as a person. Neither is the car I drive or the niceness of my kitchen.

[Anonymous]

Op here. Is there the same demographic wearing coach bags outside of the USA?

[Anonymous]

Carry what you like.

Don’t worry about what demographic typically favors a purse. I mean, seriously…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would rather carry an unbranded bag from Kohls or Target than carry a Coach logo outlet bag. In fact this is what I do. But my purse is not my identity or a reflection of my worth as a person. Neither is the car I drive or the niceness of my kitchen.

I wholeheartedly endorse this. And I can afford any stupid bag I want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Carry what you like.

Don’t worry about what demographic typically favors a purse. I mean, seriously…

People don’t know what they like. They just know what marketers tell them to like.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm also 40 and yeah, Coach does have a stigma associated with it.

I know that it is trendy again and their true vintage bags are great quality, but I'm not sure I'd ever be able to bring myself to buy a new Coach bag. When I was a young adult they were definitely considered "Hermes for Housekeepers": a brand poor people considered fancy and aspirational but that actual rich people would not wear.

I also probably could never bring myself to buy Michael Kors for the same reason.

There is a stigma with Michael Kors, but you are wrong about Coach. I think Saks, Neimans and Bergdorf Goodman would disagree with that attachment.

I have never heard that term before and I am pretty sure you are a terrible person.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Op here. Is there the same demographic wearing coach bags outside of the USA?

Coach is much less well known outside of the USA. I don't think anyone can speak for the whole world. As for my experience I spent 10 years in
Poland and I can say most people had never heard of Coach so did not associate it with a stigma.