Category Archives: Clothing
Subtle Signs of Luxury
I’ve written about this before, but I’m writing about it again because I am particularly fascinated by this topic. Slate has an article up about how during the recession the most wealthy are focusing on more quiet signals of luxury. Instead of flamboyant branding and logos, more subtle designs and a distinct lack of branding is popular. No reason to eschew the high priced goods, just don’t flaunt them.
In a last-ditch attempt to escape the guillotine, the top 1 percent are resorting to ever more devious tactics. First and foremost, they have adopted a bizarrely nondescript way of dressing: It’s spare simplicity with foncy labels; it’s a white gold Rolex that resembles a plain old tin Timex; it’s L.L.Bean-style basics with haute-couture prices. Simply put: The 1 percent are occupying Hermès (the luxury retailer most synonymous with understated extravagance).
This breathy, low-key mode of camouflage is described by its proponents as “quiet luxury.” It speaks in a modulated voice, and only to fellow Quiet Luxurians. It’s an Upper East Side/Mayfair/Palm Beach kind of a thing. It’s not a Gowanus Canal kind of a thing, or, God forbid, a Zuccotti Park thing. No Zuccotti denizen would be capable of decoding the subtle nuances of this particular style. That’s how deathly quiet it is.
Last week I clocked a Quiet Luxurian boarding a plane for Florida the day before Thanksgiving. To the untrained eye, her sensible and discreetly accessorized slacks ‘n’ sweater ensemble rendered her all but invisible. Her monochromatic, tawny, fawny outfit was severely ascetic and suggested a raging antipathy toward self-indulgent glamour. And yet… My estimate of the total cost of her outfit, including T. Anthony nylon tote,Hermès purse, Tod’s drivers, and gold bangle? A quiet 25 grand.
I noticed this even back in college. But back in the middle 200s it wasn’t trying to blend in. No, pre-recession it was about trying to separate the truly wealthy from the newly rich.
People with more cultural capital in a particular domain prefer subtle signals because they provide differentiation from the mainstream. Such insiders have the necessary connoisseurship to decode the meaning of subtle signals that facilitate communication with others “in the know.”
Different motives, same method.
Dressing Simply
When you dress this simply, you should be wearing clothes of good enough quality and fit that you look sharp. You should be aware of texture. You should avoid pictures and words. You should always have a point of difference. You needn’t be afraid of looking uniform from day to day. You should be comfortable and confident.
Fashion Is For Kids
For men, fashion is for kids. I always thought Prince Charles was a stylish dresser. Lots of Englishmen think he’s old-fashioned, but my Italian friends agree with me. Men should be stylish, not fashionable.
-Michael Drake, Wall St. Journal
De-Branding Ourselves
A few months after I started attending a prestigious private liberal arts university known for its wealthy student body – I had a discussion with someone from home. They put forward a though about how the student parking lot must be full of lexus, BMW, and Mercedes badges. While there were certainly a fair share of those – there were also a surprising number of Fords, Chevrolets, and Jeeps. And there certainly weren’t any expensive “rims” or custom body work.
For the students I went to school with, this didn’t raise an eyebrow. It is just the way things are. There isn’t a lot of status or value in showing off wealth. Too ostentatious to show off that you have money.
If you truly are wealthy – generations of family money – then people just know you are wealthy. Only those who recently have come into money feel the need to show it off. They have to prove they belong in this class – by buying fancy labels and brands that loudly show off their expense.
Recently I found a NY Time article discussing a new study showing that the very rich and very poor both like brands that don’t use a lot of logos. My thoughts on the reasons:
Anything we buy with prominent branding serves to signal to others. What it signals depends on the brand. A luxury car might signal you have money to spend on a nicer car with greater performance or safety features, while driving a Toyota might show you prefer reliability.
For the lower class purchasers – any brand they could purchase would probably only serve to signal that they were low class. Imagine if Wal-Mart put out a line of “wal mart” clothing. Those people who were striving to get out of the lower class and into the middle or upper classes wouldn’t want to brand themselves as low class by putting wal-mart all over their bodies. So, instead they purchase clothing with few brands on it. Hard to label someone without clear identifying signals.
For the extreme upper class, the motives are slightly different. The study thesis states:
people with more cultural capital in a particular domain prefer subtle signals because they provide differentiation from the mainstream. Such insiders have the necessary connoisseurship to decode the meaning of subtle signals that facilitate communication with others “in the know.”
W&L Alum Men’s Clothing Company – Ledbury
A friend of mine posted about a boutique men’s clothing shop in Richmond, Va – Ledbury. Their goal is to be “a brand that offered European quality, English fit and American style; all at an attainable price.”
I have been on a small personal journey for a while to find a perfectly fitting shirt. Too often, (probably because of the obesity problem in America) men’s shirts are cut very large around the waist. This is why you see men’s shirts billow out from their pants. Its kind of like a muffin top, but with fabric. It looks like this:
So, to get around this I buy “slim cut” shirts, which use less fabric. These guys seem to have that concept down, while also focusing on other great details, and having great “classic” style – which is what I like to think I subscribe too. Not quite dandy enough to be Trad or Preppy, and not stuck up to be too formal. Think Clooney.
You can tell they have a put a lot of thought into their shirts. Even down to the button placement.
Ledbury’s “Work Shirt” has a lowered second button that creates just the right amount of man-cleavage for the tieless business casual environment favored by many entrepreneurs. “Unbuttoning one button on a standard shirt is too constrictive while opening up two buttons is a little aggressive for the workplace,” Ledbury’s founder, Paul Trible.
Here is a video from one of the founders talking about their shirts:
A nice side note is that one of the founders is a fairly recent W&L grad. Always love to give my school any attention I can – so alums who read my blog should go and check these guys out. I only wish I had known about this place when I was in Richmond and could have gone and visited. For you DC readers, they have a Georgetown store you should go peruse.
Does Fashion Need Copyright Protection?
I have quibbles about a few of her points that she seems to gloss over, but a thought provoking presentation on copyright protection, and reform or rethinking of it. Great TED talk from Johanna Blakley.
Style Skips a Generation
My siblings and I have made a bad habit of mocking my dad’s choice of athletic socks (they go mid calf) no matter the shoe. But, men older than my father certainly cared about appearance, as I do.
Today the well-off 55-year-old is likely to be the worst-dressed man in the room, wearing a saggy T-shirt and jeans. The cash-poor 25-year-old is in a natty sport coat and skinny tie bought at Topman for a song. Young men are embracing the “Mad Men” elements of style in a way that the older men never did, still don’t and just won’t. The result is a kind of rift emerging between the generation of men in their 20s and 30s and those in their late 40s and 50s for whom a suit was not merely square but cubed, and caring about how one looked was effeminate.
The question is what is the reasoning behind this? Was the previous generation more about function over form? More about substance than style? Maybe it was reaction to their parents’ being concerned about appearance? The writer has a few theories:
“It strikes me as being of a piece with the way young people buy their coffee or their food: paying attention to authenticity or quality, and to whether something is organic or local. They stand for a rejection of the idea that all consumer goods are ephemeral and inevitably made in China and bought at Wal-Mart.”
Perhaps this is about my generation’s looking for quality in things we spend money on. This is the undernoticed side effect of the big recession. Sure, we still spend a lot on items, but we expect quality when we do. We want to get what we pay for.
The funny part is that each generation of course believes it is doing it the right way. The older generation thinks dressing casually is a reward for years of hard work. The younger generation sees dressing up as a mark of having made it.
“The older generation, say 45-plus, look upon success as being able to dress down,” said Marshal Cohen, the chief analyst at NPD Group, which tracks retail sales. “They think being able to wear jeans is the epitome of achievement.”
“But the younger generation is looking at getting dressed up and making their mark,” Mr. Cohen continued. “It’s a real generation gap here. I teach at three different colleges, and I am amazed how dressed up some of the students are. Girls still come in their hoodies and pajamas, but boys come in their suits.”
I would argue above all, it is just an expression of style. How many combinations of clever t-shirts and ripped jeans can you really have? Dressing well sets you a bit apart from the crowd.
“I think it’s a reaction against the homogeneity of casual wear,” said Gordon Richardson, the design director of Topman. “There’s nowhere to go with that in terms of personality, whereas a suit sets you apart. And now there are suits that are cut for young people. There’s never been that before, so it’s new to them.”
When Aspiration Stops
My dad was commenting during the hustle and bustle of black friday how all the stores my young teen sister shops at have these adult models way beyond her age in their photos throughout the store. No one resembling a high schooler is modeling the clothing.
There is a known method of marketing to various teen age groups. Teens and tweens always like to “aspire” up beyond their age group. When they are young, they want to be like tweens, when they are tweens they want to be teens, when they are teens want to be grown up individuals out of their parents reach. Always reaching beyond. So, Abercrombie markets with teen models to appeal to high school and middle schoolers.
However, something interesting happens after the early 20s are entered. That seems to be the sweet spot where you don’t want to get any older. You peak aspirationally. It’s all downhill from here. You certainly don’t want to be marketed to by 30 year olds.
I believe this marks a critical shift, where certain groups give in and say “okay, I’m old”. They move on and start dressing older and arguably more professional. Most would probably argue this is because the professional world demands it. I agree, and think there is a critical element that can be extracted to explain a socioeconomic truth.
However, there is a second group that keeps wearing the stuff they thought was cool in High School and College. They decide to try to stop growing. I argue it is easier for this group because they don’t have professional jobs that require a new set of more adult clothing. It might even involve a uniform so they don’t have to buy any new work clothing.
My thesis is that this is the one of the earliest indicators of a socioeconomic split among your peer group after high school and college. Look around, are you the boring adult dresser in your group? Or, do you still shop at Hollister? I bet your early career and income have a lot to do with that.
I should put in a caveat that there are certain exceptions. Certain industries would have to dress more trendy (fashion, entertainment), and as always there is no accounting for taste. You could have a lot of income and buy nothing but Ed Hardy. (shiver) Which while terrible, is not a “boring” look and quite expensive. But again, I bet you don’t work in a professional type industry.
And I also want to qualify and say – you can be stylish and still dress professionally. I would just argue that your high school self would look at you and say you are dressing like an old person. Whereas some would still wear tshirts and sneakers everyday and their high school self would approve.
How Businesses Should Ride Out the Recession
Retail and consumer spending in general is down. Some businesses are doing better than others at staying afloat during the downturn.
An article from Time Magazine discusses how bad Abercrombie & Fitch is doing. A&F is commonly described as an “aspirational brand“. So, they charge a bit more for their goods than competitive brands.
However, “In the second quarter of 2009 alone, sales were down an eye-popping 30%”. People aren’t buying their clothing there anymore. Analysts are saying this is because at a time when people are feeling the pinch in their wallets, A&F aren’t lowering prices.
A&F isn’t lowering prices because they know a nasty truth of the retail business. People won’t buy goods at the higher price once they see the lower price. That lower price becomes the normal price, even after the economy recovers.
“According to various research findings, a company will have a tough time increasing prices once they’ve lowered them,” says C.W. Park, a marketing professor at the University of Southern California and editor of the Journal of Consumer Psychology. “Shoppers start to think the discounts are the base prices, and you risk alienating the shoppers if you raise them. Logically, you’d think that consumers would appreciate the lower prices and be understanding when they go back up. It doesn’t always work that way.”
So, what are companies supposed to do? Time’s analysts say smart companies do other measures, such as giveaways. Certain hotel chains are giving away a third night after a customer purchases two. Then, when the economy recovers, people don’t still expect to get a third night free and the previous price point stays the same.
USA Today is also reporting that certain high star hotels are solving the problem in a different way. They are simply shedding a star. Hotels rate service by stars. The higher the stars, the better the service. Keeping up those high quality services is expensive. So, they just lower their stars for now. Again, they keep their prices high, and in most people’s mind – the W hotel is still the W hotel, and carries all the cache of that brand even with one less star.
In my opinion, A&F will rebound. People still like the brand, they just can’t afford the stuff now. By not lowering their prices or having any sales they keep the status of their brand aspirational. Their brand is anchored in exclusivity. If they lower the price point so everyone can afford it, it loses all meaning. As long as they can ride out the economy, when the rebound comes everyone will be rushing back to get back to the comfort of their favorite casual luxury brand.
Ticket Pocket Trend in Suits
Noticed a recent trend in men’s suits. I haven’t seen it called out in GQ or online or anything yet, so you can be ahead of the curve.
The traditional suit has two pockets – one on each side. Recently I’ve seen a third pocket popping up here or there on a suit. Did some quick research and have found out this is called a “ticket pocket”. Originally it was used when men were traveling long distances and wanted a special ticket for their train tickets.
From Wikipedia:
In addition to the standard two outer pockets, some suits have a third, the ticket pocket, usually located just above the right pocket and roughly half as wide. While this was originally exclusively a feature of country suits, used for conveniently storing a train ticket, it is now seen on some town suits.
Normally, because it is such an old concept, it would be outdated. However, like vests and other items that have lost their utility but come back just as a style decision, it is super trendy right now. Don’t take my word for it. Check out these celebrity examples:
Kanye West
Jimmy Fallon:
And NFL 2009 No. 1 draft pick Matthew Stafford wore a jacket with a ticket pocket with jeans when appearing on Letterman last night.
