I'm someone who owns a few of these pieces but wouldn't wear a stack of them. If I see someone holding a monogrammed LV bag with a stack of Cartier and Tiffany bracelets, and a Tiffany necklace, and diamonds... Yes, I assume some or all are fake, or that they are tasteless / overly materialistic. I understand why people of some backgrounds/cultures do it.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

So, you don't really like those bags. Your primary concern would be that it be accepted as a sign of wealth. Ok.

NP-I would feel bad if people thought I carry fake things personally, like signaling striver-ness.

That's on you, though. Do you normally let what other people think stop you from doing, wearing, or buying something you like and can afford? It really matters not whether it's real or fake.

Well yes, how I feel is on me. I would not like people to think I am being showy or inauthentic and it would bother me personally. It's easy enough to buy items I like, can afford and don't trigger that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think people with true wealth don't show it off in that manner. In Aspen the people who can afford to live there year round don't wear recognizable brands. In Greenwich the people who have the private jets look well dressed by ordinary. There's no need to show off, and if anything, they are trying to look more conservative and modest for their kids and safety.

This isn't true. I see lots of Cartier and Van Cleef in Greenwich and other HCOL areas.

I wear Cartier Juste un Clou and Bvlgari Serpenti bracelets most days. They're not as recognizable. These luxury brands have more offerings than Love and Alhambra.

In Greenwich and Darien the teens have Cartier and Van Cleef. And I'm sure they are real. The people in Aspen who live there year round are the locals/workers. The seasonal people who have 4+ houses around the country/world are the wealthy ones. The visitors are the flashy ones.

I have a Cartier tank watch that I've had for 20 years. It is not flashy. Also have small alhambra earrings, again, not flashy.

Anonymous wrote:I think people with true wealth don't show it off in that manner. In Aspen the people who can afford to live there year round don't wear recognizable brands. In Greenwich the people who have the private jets look well dressed by ordinary. There's no need to show off, and if anything, they are trying to look more conservative and modest for their kids and safety.

This isn't true. I see lots of Cartier and Van Cleef in Greenwich and other HCOL areas.

I wear Cartier Juste un Clou and Bvlgari Serpenti bracelets most days. They're not as recognizable. These luxury brands have more offerings than Love and Alhambra.

I think people with true wealth don't show it off in that manner. In Aspen the people who can afford to live there year round don't wear recognizable brands. In Greenwich the people who have the private jets look well dressed by ordinary. There's no need to show off, and if anything, they are trying to look more conservative and modest for their kids and safety.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

Did you have a desire for one at some other point? If so, why does that change because someone less affluent than you can afford the same look?

DP. You can pretend that it’s about the look, but it’s not.

I wear cartier and vca. My engagement ring is 6ctw oval solitaire D-VVS1 mined diamond. If you enjoy them, wear them. I do not care what anyone thinks.

The key is you can only wear the look if 65%+ of designer items worn are real. Then the rest will pass or go unnoticed. If you wear a high % of fakes, no one will believe any of them are real even if they are. Better to go with a real mid-tier brand that people will believe.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

So, you don't really like those bags. Your primary concern would be that it be accepted as a sign of wealth. Ok.

NP-I would feel bad if people thought I carry fake things personally, like signaling striver-ness.

Oh ... I'd bet you are signaling striver-ness. And that people can see it. Whatever bag you are carrying.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

So, you don't really like those bags. Your primary concern would be that it be accepted as a sign of wealth. Ok.

NP-I would feel bad if people thought I carry fake things personally, like signaling striver-ness.

That's on you, though. Do you normally let what other people think stop you from doing, wearing, or buying something you like and can afford? It really matters not whether it's real or fake.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have a Van Cleef alhambra necklace and a Cartier love bracelet. I love and wear both. They don't feel necessarily trendy to me because I don't see them in the wild very often. I think social media has skewed our sense of what's overdone/saturated.

That said, I find stacks of Cartier bracelets to be impossibly tacky.

Really? I feel like I see almost nothing but.

Same I see a LOT of both of these. Even more if you include Alhambra bracelets and Cartier Love rings in the mix.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

So, you don't really like those bags. Your primary concern would be that it be accepted as a sign of wealth. Ok.

NP-I would feel bad if people thought I carry fake things personally, like signaling striver-ness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

Did you have a desire for one at some other point? If so, why does that change because someone less affluent than you can afford the same look?

Anonymous wrote:I have a Van Cleef alhambra necklace and a Cartier love bracelet. I love and wear both. They don't feel necessarily trendy to me because I don't see them in the wild very often. I think social media has skewed our sense of what's overdone/saturated.

That said, I find stacks of Cartier bracelets to be impossibly tacky.

Really? I feel like I see almost nothing but.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
They used to be a symbol of conventional, westernized wealth.

Not anymore, since now there are so many credible fakes.

This -- I also have no desire for a Hermes or Chanel bag at this point since there are just so many people with fakes.

So, you don't really like those bags. Your primary concern would be that it be accepted as a sign of wealth. Ok.