Anonymous wrote:What about the graceful?

still has the logos so same issue.

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 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 wrote:What about the graceful?

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

What about the graceful?

Mine is 30 years old, damier ebene, classic to me.

Boring suburban basic.

Cliche. Damier is ugly and the logo is desperate.

Ugh. The only LV tote I'd buy is the OnMySide because it doesn't have a pattern or logo. I think the Damier is so ugly.

Gauche.

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.

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.

I always assume they’re fake and carried by wannabes

It’s a functional, neutral bag. I’d buy it used because I think they look better broken in. And I prefer the Damier pattern.

Both