At online boutique Jake, white Common Projects canvas 3-hole slip-ons are down from $300 to $100. Just FYI.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
At online boutique Jake, white Common Projects canvas 3-hole slip-ons are down from $300 to $100. Just FYI.
why the hell are these shoes so expensive. i can get a pair of vans that look better, for 20$
ReplyDeleteAnon, with regard to Common Projects (and Moncler), there's definitely a quality factor in terms of construction and materials... then there's the status factor.
ReplyDeletesorry--to clarify, im not saying they've sourced the manufacturing...but most of the design-yes.
ReplyDeleteThey're priced a good 8-10x what converse/vans/adidas (which is what Common projects are--OEM modified versions of those brands) retails their stuff for (especially before converse made its comeback). It's like paying more for a VISIO ldc tv when all they've done is sourced most of their pre-fab to some other company.
ReplyDeleteIt's puzzling, to say the least, although not wholly uncommon in the clothing and fashion industry. You would think, though, that the people who buy these kinds of things--hipsters, mainly, who pride themselves on being intellectually subversive--would see right through it.
But we're talking about a markdown of 67% for a 300$ pair of white canvas shoes, for which 'construction' has a marginal effect of what--2 months more wearability?
Fair enough, HW. For some guys, though, it's all about the details, the status, the fashion, which is obviously not entirely rational... The Beggar advocates rational buying, but it's a relative concept...
ReplyDeleteI know--i'm not trying to sling mud at you. I love your blog. I always thought the Beggar advocated a more moderate position though? (which is what I liked about it over, say, racked.com which is just a sales feed)
ReplyDeleteThanks HW, and we do advocate moderation, but we also cater to a broad swath of guys, some of whom greatly value the attention to detail and clout that particular labels offer. The purpose of a man's clothes in a modern urban society... the subject is so complex that, within limits, we feel its best to leave it to the individual. That said, the question of a product's real value is totally valid, and one we plan to continue exploring. It is perhaps the site's true reason for being.
ReplyDeleteThat's encouraging to hear. For example, I loved when you recommended J Crew's new line for being a good mix of new trends but classic looks at good prices. I don't know how many I speak for, but there are those of us who don't want this blog (even though--who are we to say) to become the blog version of GQ. It's easy to look good when you spend 2k on an outfit, but we need the Beggar to help us take a zero out of that.
ReplyDeleteGood to know, Anon, We can't tell you how valuable your feedback is. Keep it coming! Our working model is to help guys -- whether they want to spend $200 or $2,000 on suit -- get the best deal possible. Every post, therefore, won't be entirely relevant to every reader. (Oh, and that doesn't even factor in the style element.) Definitely tell us if you think that's a bad or inconvenient model for you.
ReplyDeleteI understand that 'value' is relative. I still think though that sometimes we should have rigid guidelines, e.g. no white canvas shoes should cost more than 75$ unless it's the canvas that constituted Jesus' robe. Maybe I have an irrational hatred for Common Projects. It's like the cubism movement for footwear.
ReplyDeleteThe guidelines might not be a bad idea, actually
ReplyDelete