I used to wear j crew in boarding school and graduated in 01' jcrew crew clothes havent been the same since. Ps im 29 yrs old

They can but I don't know if the fiber is cashmere or the place of origin is Kasmir.....

PP, why the hell can they only get it from China??? Can't they just raise these super awesome goats elsewhere?

J crew's sizing is ridiculous. I am not a size zero, but a four..but why am I a 0 there?

Hmm. I do miss a lot about the old J.Crew, but I like quite a bit of their new stuff too (I'm in my early 30s, if that matters). Last fall (2011) had some great items, IMO. I think the suits are great quality and hold up well. As for cashmere, I have never tried it. To those looking for cheap cashmere, please STOP. Cashmere shouldn't be cheap. It comes from one specific breed of goat in one specific area of China. They are killing the land and environment to make your cheap cashmere.

This is not to say I don't wear cashmere; I love it. But I'm willing to pay to make sure it was made in Italy or Scotland by companies that have specific rights to land in China and pay dearly for those rights.

21:44 actually the definition of trendy dresser at this point doesn't usually wear blazers year after year. Other than incorporating colored denim this year I haven't changed my style for the last decade at least...

Anonymous wrote:Ha 19:05 I wonder what you think of me on the street. I wear size 2 or 4 at jcrew, fully embrace the bright colored denim this spring, always love their basic bright shorts, and think you can never go wrong with a jcrew blazer and jeans in the fall/winter. Def am not a trendy dresser by any means.

Um, yes, you are pretty much the definition of a trendy dresser. Not that there's anything wrong with it--you probably look cuter than I do most of the time. But just own it.

I bought a lovely grey dress in their super 120s fabric, wore it once on a horrible hot day, and when I took it to the dry cleaners I saw that it had teeny little holes in the fabric, like the size of a pinhead. What's up with that?

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is kind of funny. Have you thought that maybe, instead of J Crew becoming more trendy, you have become less? As in, you are still lookign for those sweaters and boxy khakis that were in in the 90s? I hear this a lot.

No, I haven't thought that.

By reading the rest of your post, I can tell you are about 27. Which would mean that you weren't around in the late 80s / 90s and so you don't actually have any idea what JCrew was like at that time. It aimed for the conservative dressers, who, by definition, are not trendy. They wear the same thing (oxfords, khakis, loafers, plaid shorts, crew neck sweaters, barn jackets, modest sheath dresses, twin sets) decade after decade after decade.

LLBean and LandsEnd and Vineyard Vines and Murrays fills this niche now. It's JCrew that has changed.

I am the OP of this thread, and you'll note that my biggest issue is the lack of quality with increased price points. JCrew used to have really subtle classics that had preppy bones, but not staid like Brooks Brothers. Now, they still have great pieces, but they a) are not as well made and b) and more expensive. I tried on a pair of shorts earlier in the summer, and they were what I would expect from Old Navy in terms of fit and cut. The cotton material was crap. I recently found an old pair of shorts from the 90s at my parents and they were made with much better material and fit so much better.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is kind of funny. Have you thought that maybe, instead of J Crew becoming more trendy, you have become less? As in, you are still lookign for those sweaters and boxy khakis that were in in the 90s? I hear this a lot.

No, I haven't thought that.

By reading the rest of your post, I can tell you are about 27. Which would mean that you weren't around in the late 80s / 90s and so you don't actually have any idea what JCrew was like at that time. It aimed for the conservative dressers, who, by definition, are not trendy. They wear the same thing (oxfords, khakis, loafers, plaid shorts, crew neck sweaters, barn jackets, modest sheath dresses, twin sets) decade after decade after decade.

LLBean and LandsEnd and Vineyard Vines and Murrays fills this niche now. It's JCrew that has changed.

Nope, I am 35 and somewhat WASP-y, so I think I fit your mold. J Crew still has all that stuff, they just have stylists, and other stuff as well, that is more on-trend, so you have to go through the catalog and find your items. I find Lands End to be made for the huge. Just my opinion.

38 yo NP here, and I agree. I also don't find quality to be a problem with JCrew. I'm a pear-shaped 6, and I don't have fit issues, either, so the "fit model is a skinny boy" thing doesn't hold up in my experience.

Prices can be randomly high on some stuff--that's true.

This is funny. I wore JCrew back in the 80's when I was a young mom, and I wear it now when I'm a grandmother. The colors are gorgeous, the clothes fit. They are cute and so not trendy....

Anonymous wrote:

This thread is kind of funny. Have you thought that maybe, instead of J Crew becoming more trendy, you have become less? As in, you are still lookign for those sweaters and boxy khakis that were in in the 90s? I hear this a lot.

No, I haven't thought that.

By reading the rest of your post, I can tell you are about 27. Which would mean that you weren't around in the late 80s / 90s and so you don't actually have any idea what JCrew was like at that time. It aimed for the conservative dressers, who, by definition, are not trendy. They wear the same thing (oxfords, khakis, loafers, plaid shorts, crew neck sweaters, barn jackets, modest sheath dresses, twin sets) decade after decade after decade.

LLBean and LandsEnd and Vineyard Vines and Murrays fills this niche now. It's JCrew that has changed.

Nope, I am 35 and somewhat WASP-y, so I think I fit your mold. J Crew still has all that stuff, they just have stylists, and other stuff as well, that is more on-trend, so you have to go through the catalog and find your items. I find Lands End to be made for the huge. Just my opinion.

This thread is kind of funny. Have you thought that maybe, instead of J Crew becoming more trendy, you have become less? As in, you are still lookign for those sweaters and boxy khakis that were in in the 90s? I hear this a lot.

No, I haven't thought that.

By reading the rest of your post, I can tell you are about 27. Which would mean that you weren't around in the late 80s / 90s and so you don't actually have any idea what JCrew was like at that time. It aimed for the conservative dressers, who, by definition, are not trendy. They wear the same thing (oxfords, khakis, loafers, plaid shorts, crew neck sweaters, barn jackets, modest sheath dresses, twin sets) decade after decade after decade.

LLBean and LandsEnd and Vineyard Vines and Murrays fills this niche now. It's JCrew that has changed.

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/j-crew-quarterly-profit-jumps-on-sales-growth-2012-03-19

Clearly, many do not agree with your take on it.

I shop at Nordstrom Rack and the Saks oulet for most of my work stuff, supplementing with J Crew. And I always look cute.

This thread is kind of funny. Have you thought that maybe, instead of J Crew becoming more trendy, you have become less? As in, you are still lookign for those sweaters and boxy khakis that were in in the 90s? I hear this a lot. That said, J Crew has always made some stuff with great fabrics -- I like their cashmere, but right now the trend is to do it thin, so it does not last as long. Its the same deal for my cashmere from Nordys. They have also been the go-to khaki people for years, and their catalog still has every style you could want.

As for Jenna Lyons running them into the ground, the store is the most profitable it has ever been. They are appealing to much higher price points. And people don't go to Banana Republic anymore for whatever reason. Clearly, J Crew is filling a niche -- the work girl who wants to look cute, and doesn't mind spending some money, but doesn't want to go whole hog on Theory, which, while similar, is dramatically more expensive.