7 ms·

There's also been a huge trend reversal on "conspicuous consumption". Even the wealthy now do their wealth-signaling through minimalism, instead of flash and ex

by _bxg1 6y ago

There's also been a huge trend reversal on "conspicuous consumption". Even the wealthy now do their wealth-signaling through minimalism, instead of flash and excess. Self-proclaimed "luxury brands" have a dwindling market.

chadash 6y ago
Do the numbers reflect this? I'm just looking at the stock prices of a few luxury companies like LVMH and and Kering and it seems they were are at all time highs prior to COVID.
- _bxg1 6y ago
  Just my anecdotal impression; it's possible I'm biased by the extents of my bubble
  - ghaff 6y ago
    You probably are. Go to Vegas and there are whole shopping malls where, to indulge in just a degree of hyperbole, I'd have to look hard to find something I could afford. Or at least would even consider affording.
    - jaywalk 6y ago
      And those malls are usually pretty empty, from my experience.
    - _bxg1 6y ago
      In fairness, conspicuous consumption is one of the primary draws of Vegas. Probably not a very representative example.
      - blaser-waffle 6y ago
        And it's also a one-off, in a national and international sense. It's like judging consumption levels in the Muslim world by Dubai.
        kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
        NYC has more than one of these sort of malls.
    - ardy42 6y ago
      > Go to Vegas and there are whole shopping malls where, to indulge in just a degree of hyperbole, I'd have to look hard to find something I could afford. Or at least would even consider affording. IIRC, Americans don't really shop at those stores. Their costumers are mainly foreign nouveau rich people.
- alephnan 6y ago
  Coronavirus accelerated the trend. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/retail/our%20insights/its%20time%20to%20rewire%20the%20fashion%20system%20state%20of%20fashion%20coronavirus%20update/the-state-of-fashion-2020-coronavirus-update-vf.ashx https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/retail/...
- paganel 6y ago
  It might be because of China and the Chinese market/customers. It's only anecdotal, but last October I got to visit Vienna for one day (I live in Europe) and I was surprised to see a a lengthy queue outside the Louis Vuitton store close to the St. Stephen's Cathedral. First, I was surprised because I couldn't understand why would anyone still wait in that sort of queue for something to purchase in this day and age (when everything it's at a few clicks distance), and second I was also a little surprised by the fact that about 75% of the people waiting in that queue were of Asian origin, most probably Chinese.
  - cat199 6y ago
    > couldn't understand why would anyone still wait in that sort of queue for something to purchase in this day and age for the social media photo / story of buying it in $exotic_locale bonus points if you are confusing things by buying french items in austria, obviously
  - chillacy 6y ago
    These people are probably wealthy enough not to care but if I were buying a $5000 purse I'd want to do it in person, like I'd test drive a car before I bought it. Also if I were traveling on vacation, ordering online and shipping to my hotel would not be my first choice.
adventured 6y ago
> Self-proclaimed "luxury brands" have a dwindling market. There's no evidence that supports that as a comprehensive statement. It very much varies from brand to brand and situation to situation. The king of luxury, Bernard Arnault (LVMH), recently became one of the richest people on the planet (current net worth of $76 billion) because luxury has been massively expansive over the past decade. His wealth increased four fold over eight years up to the pandemic. Another person in the same luxury boat as Arnault is Francois Pinault. $31 billion net worth. His wealth also increased four fold in roughly eight years, from $11b to $43b, up to the pandemic. Don't tell these people luxury is dwindling - their outcomes indicate it has boomed. Ferrari's business has doubled in size and they have a market cap higher than Ford or GM because luxury has done so extraordinarily well over the last decade. Their stock hasn't crashed during the pandemic, unlike most auto stocks. Do you know why? The luxury buyers are not hurting like everyone else is (thus far). Times are good for Ferrari. So what situations are causing this? China for one. And more broadly, the emergence of greater wealth all around the world, rather than it mostly being contained to the well-established developed nations of the post WW2 era. That global wealth increase is not matched by there being a lot more high-end luxury goods makers like Ferrari or LVMH, so the result is they've spent most of the past decade dealing with more business than they can easily keep up with.
- notyourday 6y ago
  While NM sold the likes of LVMH here it mostly made money by selling comfortable middle market rather than the top tier luxury because of the buying agreements: The way the buying is structured, retailers cannot complete with flagships of the luxury brands they carry within a certain distance which means that the stored NYC, LA, Boston, SF, Miami which should be the most profitable can't carry the hot items of the seasons if the flagships carry them. Since flagships are not just retail but marketing and demo stores flagships always carry all the hot items. The mid-tier market outsourced manufacturing to the same factories that at best create wear it a couple of times before it falls apart products while charging 3x-10x of the likes of Zara. That market has been shrinking for years as the likes of Zara, H&M and others cleaned up the lower end and started moving up. Also the lion's share of luxury growth is coming from outside of the US, namely from Asia which is not accessible to NM.
colechristensen 6y ago
I went in a Neiman Marcus a few months ago and was struck by how much they seemed to be selling "luxury". Like luxury apartments or Las Vegas facades, it all seemed like shoddy but shiny. I was asking people who their target consumer is and there really wasn't an answer. I didn't recognize any but a few of the brands and most of them seemed like they'd been invented for a thirty second scene in a TV show.
- _bxg1 6y ago
  Exactly. People 20-30 years ago ate that stuff up; these days I think most people see it as garish and tacky. Wealth signaling absolutely still happens, but today the facades it tends to orbit around involve words like "minimal", "natural", "open", "honest". Organic groceries, modernist houses, meditation retreats to exotic places, environmentally-friendly vehicles, freedom from clutter and complication. These, sadly, are unattainable for many people. And so of course, brands have co-opted and packaged up that fact to be sold as a set of signals that make people feel good about themselves in comparison to others.
  - gen220 6y ago
    I grew up in the south bay, around the early-googler generation of nouveau-wealth. I assumed the kind of wealth signalling typical then was normal. In my experience, fancy clothes were very abnormal and got you the wrong kind of looks. People liked to live in very nice houses on expensive land, but flaunting your wealth beyond that (and maybe your fast car) was generally looked down upon. Porsches were seen as a mid-life-crisis kinda thing. I moved to NYC for after high school, and was incredibly shocked to see people actually wearing Gucci, Louis Vuitton, and not feeling self-conscious but rather better for it. I was likewise shocked to see how expensive the trendy secondhand stores were, again compared to the bay area. It all seemed designed so that, if you saw someone dressed in a certain style of clothing (either "boho-chic" or fancy brands), you could be safely confident they were rich. I used to be repulsed and holier-than-thou about this kind of thing. But now, when I go back to the valley to visit my parents, I recognize the same things flourishing there, where I naively thought the "humble Californian spirit" wouldn't allow them to take root. It's been kind of sad to see the Santana Row-ification of the south bay take place during my lifetime, but everything moves in cycles, I suppose. Does this match anyone else's experience? Is there a place where humility has survived as a popularly-held virtue, even in the face of not-atypical wealth/abundance?
asdff 6y ago
It's on the upswing among the youth. I'm seeing a lot more plain black hoodies with BALENCIAGA screen printed across the front. Gucci and versace have seen a resurgence, even their rubber slides which are probably less comfortable than a $15 pair are coveted and featured in music videos. Dressing nicely to some might mean a gaudy branded t shirt under a blazer, percieved by the wearer as passable for nice attire due to the three figure price tag, but really it's the same material as the $5 undershirt I have under my button down.
- lazerpants 6y ago
  To be fair, the materials and labor used by high end brands (at least the ones you mentioned) are different from cheap brands. Most of the labor is Italian or Portuguese, and those workers get a paid month off every year in addition to benefits, even if they aren't highly paid. Likewise, the materials they use are generally higher quality and are sourced more carefully. High end brands also do a shitload of QC. I'm not a fan of $100 t-shirts but there is absolutely a difference including much fairer practices in how the garment is manufactured.
  - chillacy 6y ago
    Even that depends now. For awhile there was a strategy for diffusion lines where brands would sell cheaper goods under a slightly different label. Think Burberry Brit, Versace Collection, or Polo Ralph Lauren. Nowadays the trend is to put everything under the mainline brand, which I find kind of deceptive. You really have to check garment quality and price for everything.

by _bxg1 6y ago

chadash 6y ago

Do the numbers reflect this? I'm just looking at the stock prices of a few luxury companies like LVMH and and Kering and it seems they were are at all time highs prior to COVID.

_bxg1 6y ago
Just my anecdotal impression; it's possible I'm biased by the extents of my bubble
- ghaff 6y ago
  You probably are. Go to Vegas and there are whole shopping malls where, to indulge in just a degree of hyperbole, I'd have to look hard to find something I could afford. Or at least would even consider affording.
  - jaywalk 6y ago
    And those malls are usually pretty empty, from my experience.
  - _bxg1 6y ago
    In fairness, conspicuous consumption is one of the primary draws of Vegas. Probably not a very representative example.
    - blaser-waffle 6y ago
      And it's also a one-off, in a national and international sense. It's like judging consumption levels in the Muslim world by Dubai.
      - kevin_thibedeau 6y ago
        NYC has more than one of these sort of malls.
  - ardy42 6y ago
    > Go to Vegas and there are whole shopping malls where, to indulge in just a degree of hyperbole, I'd have to look hard to find something I could afford. Or at least would even consider affording. IIRC, Americans don't really shop at those stores. Their costumers are mainly foreign nouveau rich people.
alephnan 6y ago
Coronavirus accelerated the trend. https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/retail/our%20insights/its%20time%20to%20rewire%20the%20fashion%20system%20state%20of%20fashion%20coronavirus%20update/the-state-of-fashion-2020-coronavirus-update-vf.ashx https://www.mckinsey.com/~/media/mckinsey/industries/retail/...
paganel 6y ago
It might be because of China and the Chinese market/customers. It's only anecdotal, but last October I got to visit Vienna for one day (I live in Europe) and I was surprised to see a a lengthy queue outside the Louis Vuitton store close to the St. Stephen's Cathedral. First, I was surprised because I couldn't understand why would anyone still wait in that sort of queue for something to purchase in this day and age (when everything it's at a few clicks distance), and second I was also a little surprised by the fact that about 75% of the people waiting in that queue were of Asian origin, most probably Chinese.
- cat199 6y ago
  > couldn't understand why would anyone still wait in that sort of queue for something to purchase in this day and age for the social media photo / story of buying it in $exotic_locale bonus points if you are confusing things by buying french items in austria, obviously
- chillacy 6y ago
  These people are probably wealthy enough not to care but if I were buying a $5000 purse I'd want to do it in person, like I'd test drive a car before I bought it. Also if I were traveling on vacation, ordering online and shipping to my hotel would not be my first choice.

adventured 6y ago

> Self-proclaimed "luxury brands" have a dwindling market. There's no evidence that supports that as a comprehensive statement. It very much varies from brand to brand and situation to situation. The king of luxury, Bernard Arnault (LVMH), recently became one of the richest people on the planet (current net worth of $76 billion) because luxury has been massively expansive over the past decade. His wealth increased four fold over eight years up to the pandemic. Another person in the same luxury boat as Arnault is Francois Pinault. $31 billion net worth. His wealth also increased four fold in roughly eight years, from $11b to $43b, up to the pandemic. Don't tell these people luxury is dwindling - their outcomes indicate it has boomed. Ferrari's business has doubled in size and they have a market cap higher than Ford or GM because luxury has done so extraordinarily well over the last decade. Their stock hasn't crashed during the pandemic, unlike most auto stocks. Do you know why? The luxury buyers are not hurting like everyone else is (thus far). Times are good for Ferrari. So what situations are causing this? China for one. And more broadly, the emergence of greater wealth all around the world, rather than it mostly being contained to the well-established developed nations of the post WW2 era. That global wealth increase is not matched by there being a lot more high-end luxury goods makers like Ferrari or LVMH, so the result is they've spent most of the past decade dealing with more business than they can easily keep up with.

notyourday 6y ago
While NM sold the likes of LVMH here it mostly made money by selling comfortable middle market rather than the top tier luxury because of the buying agreements: The way the buying is structured, retailers cannot complete with flagships of the luxury brands they carry within a certain distance which means that the stored NYC, LA, Boston, SF, Miami which should be the most profitable can't carry the hot items of the seasons if the flagships carry them. Since flagships are not just retail but marketing and demo stores flagships always carry all the hot items. The mid-tier market outsourced manufacturing to the same factories that at best create wear it a couple of times before it falls apart products while charging 3x-10x of the likes of Zara. That market has been shrinking for years as the likes of Zara, H&M and others cleaned up the lower end and started moving up. Also the lion's share of luxury growth is coming from outside of the US, namely from Asia which is not accessible to NM.

colechristensen 6y ago

I went in a Neiman Marcus a few months ago and was struck by how much they seemed to be selling "luxury". Like luxury apartments or Las Vegas facades, it all seemed like shoddy but shiny. I was asking people who their target consumer is and there really wasn't an answer. I didn't recognize any but a few of the brands and most of them seemed like they'd been invented for a thirty second scene in a TV show.

_bxg1 6y ago
Exactly. People 20-30 years ago ate that stuff up; these days I think most people see it as garish and tacky. Wealth signaling absolutely still happens, but today the facades it tends to orbit around involve words like "minimal", "natural", "open", "honest". Organic groceries, modernist houses, meditation retreats to exotic places, environmentally-friendly vehicles, freedom from clutter and complication. These, sadly, are unattainable for many people. And so of course, brands have co-opted and packaged up that fact to be sold as a set of signals that make people feel good about themselves in comparison to others.
- gen220 6y ago
  I grew up in the south bay, around the early-googler generation of nouveau-wealth. I assumed the kind of wealth signalling typical then was normal. In my experience, fancy clothes were very abnormal and got you the wrong kind of looks. People liked to live in very nice houses on expensive land, but flaunting your wealth beyond that (and maybe your fast car) was generally looked down upon. Porsches were seen as a mid-life-crisis kinda thing. I moved to NYC for after high school, and was incredibly shocked to see people actually wearing Gucci, Louis Vuitton, and not feeling self-conscious but rather better for it. I was likewise shocked to see how expensive the trendy secondhand stores were, again compared to the bay area. It all seemed designed so that, if you saw someone dressed in a certain style of clothing (either "boho-chic" or fancy brands), you could be safely confident they were rich. I used to be repulsed and holier-than-thou about this kind of thing. But now, when I go back to the valley to visit my parents, I recognize the same things flourishing there, where I naively thought the "humble Californian spirit" wouldn't allow them to take root. It's been kind of sad to see the Santana Row-ification of the south bay take place during my lifetime, but everything moves in cycles, I suppose. Does this match anyone else's experience? Is there a place where humility has survived as a popularly-held virtue, even in the face of not-atypical wealth/abundance?

asdff 6y ago

It's on the upswing among the youth. I'm seeing a lot more plain black hoodies with BALENCIAGA screen printed across the front. Gucci and versace have seen a resurgence, even their rubber slides which are probably less comfortable than a $15 pair are coveted and featured in music videos. Dressing nicely to some might mean a gaudy branded t shirt under a blazer, percieved by the wearer as passable for nice attire due to the three figure price tag, but really it's the same material as the $5 undershirt I have under my button down.

lazerpants 6y ago
To be fair, the materials and labor used by high end brands (at least the ones you mentioned) are different from cheap brands. Most of the labor is Italian or Portuguese, and those workers get a paid month off every year in addition to benefits, even if they aren't highly paid. Likewise, the materials they use are generally higher quality and are sourced more carefully. High end brands also do a shitload of QC. I'm not a fan of $100 t-shirts but there is absolutely a difference including much fairer practices in how the garment is manufactured.
- chillacy 6y ago
  Even that depends now. For awhile there was a strategy for diffusion lines where brands would sell cheaper goods under a slightly different label. Think Burberry Brit, Versace Collection, or Polo Ralph Lauren. Nowadays the trend is to put everything under the mainline brand, which I find kind of deceptive. You really have to check garment quality and price for everything.