Anonymous wrote:Op here. Is there the same demographic wearing coach bags outside of the USA?
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.
Anonymous wrote:Carry what you like.
Don’t worry about what demographic typically favors a purse. I mean, seriously…
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.
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
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".
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.