Luxury brands today- In a “Death Spiral?”
The quality of luxury and the luxury of quality- Are we wasting our money on a value system that doesn't deserve it?
First, some food for thought from a New York Times Opinion Essay entitled: “Obscene Prices, Declining Quality: Luxury Is in a Death Spiral.” By Katherine K. Zarrella
First paragraph: “The holiday shopping season is hitting its apex. And do you know what I, a longtime fashion editor, will not be buying my loved ones this year? Big-name luxury fashion. I'd sooner set my eyebrows on fire. Why? Because prices increased wildly and quality declined at the same time."
Commenter named “Reason:” To learn the true cost of any item, divide the purchase price by the number of times you will use it or by the number of years you will actively take advantage of owning it. A guide: For every $1,000 of price for an item “used” for 5 years is $200 per year. So $5,000 is $1,000 per year! Making $100,000/year? This is about 1.25% of your income after taxes. Used 10 times- you paid $500 dollars to carry that purse for the evening. Does this make sense for overall spend for a night out? Do the math….
The same article reports: "From October 2019 to April 2024, the cost of Prada's popular Galleria Saffiano bag increased 111 percent. In the same period, the cost of Louis Vuitton's canvas Speedy bag doubled, and Gucci's Marmont small matelassé shoulder bag went up by 75 percent. Chanel is particularly notorious: Its iconic medium 2.55 leather flap bag, which cost $5,800 in 2019, will now set you back $10,800 — and is increasingly the subject of quality complaints.”
Two fundamental issues cover the mindset of the luxury consumer who purchased and purchases these items:
1. The aspirational nature of the purchase. Price is determined by the value of owning something iconic that would give yourself and those who see you the impression that you can afford to own something you don't need (the accepted definition of luxury) and Forego the opportunity to buy other items with that money;
2. Quality- There is no doubt that quality is a must-have with luxury purchases. What is the ROI in paying $1000 for a shirt when you could have a perfectly beautiful and well-made alternative for $200? IF it does not satisfy $1000 worth of quality in your mind, it crushes the aspirations.
What is not thought through often enough is what Reason points out above: Functionality.
If you buy a Birkin bag and use it only once because you are afraid to take it out of your home, it is furniture, not apparel. And, it is a bad investment. Two sleeves on a shirt, two legs on pants, are there for function. And the better it functions, as well its occasionality, the better your ROI.
And how about originality? I can still clearly remember the day when everyone and their sister carried an LV bag. Does that mean to demonstrate that you, too, can afford that item (which I thought was particularly ugly)? Maybe. But the satisfaction has to diminish when you come across 10 or 20 people carrying the same bag, right?
Using Reason's metric above, it also trashes the justification of buying cheap Crap from Shein or Temu. If I buy something for $10 and wear it even 3 times, it cost $3.33 per wearing. If, on the other hand, I buy something for $200 and wear it twice a month for 3 years, it cost $1.67/wearing. More, if time is money, how much time is spent over the course of shopping that could be used for more productive endeavors?
Does that mean that clothing which is multifunctional and great quality has to be boring? Not at all. What it entails is that acceptance of classic fashion, enhanced by new colors, fabrics, embroidery and more is a good investment because it can be beautiful and functional for a long time. Just like a beautiful flower; does it lose appeal because it blooms every year with the same face? Not at all.
And, if others' perception is important to your mindset, how do you explain, other than price, why you bought this crap? Those who accept your explanation are probably buying the same crap!
Next excuse to discard is the justification of buying second-hand fashion because of the savings involved. Does this mean you couldn't afford to buy new so you chose to buy a hand-me-down? In this case, we have to debunk the “recycling” explanation.
So where does that leave us? Let's go back where we started so we can move forward. Regardless of your income, if you spend the increasing price for branded “luxury” goods AND its quality does not absolutely match its price, you are pissing away money, throwing good money after a bad product. In that case your investment, according to Reason's logic, is bad. And nobody, regardless of how rich they are, likes a bad investment.
So where does that leave us?
According to Zarrella, it leaves us with a lot to think about regarding how we live:
“Today, instant gratification, profit and appearances are more desirable than substance, depth or intrinsic worth. And while the decline of “luxury” might not seem like the end of the world (especially with so many apocalypse-adjacent events unfolding), its fall represents a deeper decay that's gnawing at so much of our existence — from education, media and literature to interpersonal relationships and quality of life."
So some introspection is called for, especially every time you take out that credit card to buy something you really don't need and maybe can't afford.
What should we do if we realize the importance of originality and quality in our lives (not just fashion)?
Again, Zarrella: "But back to shopping. Now is the perfect time to seek skilled, independent craftspeople and designers who remain uncompromised by the luxury conglomerates' production quotas and politics." Something unique, something beautiful, and something which will look and function as well next year.
Her advice: "If something is obviously awful and obscenely expensive, don't buy it."
IF you agree, it requires a reassessment of your concept of Value.
And, one more important factor that Zarrella didn't cover—What I call Modern Decency.
How something is created and executed should be part of your decision process. The fact that luxury brands have been caught making goods in sweatshops, the fact that profit is more important than sustainability (or the BS they give you about it). The bottom line is this:
If you buy something that was made in a sweatshop, where workers were exploited and not paid fairly so they and their families could live a secure existence, YOU share responsibility with the brand that made that choice in the first place.
Fashion is always a matter of choice; most of us don't actually NEED clothes.
Article NYT 12/19/2024, Opinion: “Obscene Prices, Declining Quality: Luxury Is in a Death Spiral.” By Katherine K. Zarrella https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/19/opinion/vuitton- chanel-burberry-lvmh-hermes.html
Great thanks for the title, which is originally from a 2018 article,
“The Quality of Luxury versus the Luxury of Quality”
Stanciu Anca Cristina
Condrea Elena
Ovidius University of Constanta, Faculty of Economic Studies
Want to see original, wearable, artisanal value? Visit Lotus & Michael, www.lotusandmichael.com
Multifunctionality in action: www.youtube.com/@lotusandmichael
