4 ms·

Except for sneakers, I can't think of a single category of clothing where it is common to have visible logos?

by IfOnlyYouKnew 4y ago

chongli 4y ago
T-shirts with logos all over them are extremely common. The t-shirt as a form of advertising is essentially ubiquitous.
- LBJsPNS 4y ago
  I wear one to advertise my Pro Wrestling promotion. Because it's my promotion. Why I would want to wear someone else's ads I have no clue.
dylan604 4y ago
What? All of those branded T-shirts, hoodies/jumpers, blue jeans that have logos embroidered, printed, stitched on to them doesn't ring a bell? All of the sports people do it. Nike swoosh. Adidas symbol. Kappa's posed back-to-back figures, etc. Abecrombie & Fitch's giant A&F on every thing. Ball caps with logos. None of this sounds vaguely familiar?
- corrral 4y ago
  It actually took me a minute to figure out what OP meant. I think it depends a lot on where you shop. And even somewhere like Wal-Mart, there's plenty of clothing available that doesn't have prominent branding and isn't "legible" clothing. I don't think finding men's clothing without branding is at all difficult, and it's actually easier the higher end you go.
- IfOnlyYouKnew 4y ago
  Yeah, I guess it depends on location to some degree. In Europe, the cheap mainstream would be H&M and Zara, neither of which puts logos on things. Above that, you're wearing a dress shirt, which never ever has a logo. Adidas and the like is strictly worn only by people who have lost control of their lives.
- rr888 4y ago
  > Nike swoosh. Adidas symbol. Kappa's posed back-to-back figures, etc. Abecrombie & Fitch's giant A&F on every thing. Ball caps with logos. None of this sounds vaguely familiar? That is expensive trash, not fashion. If I go to a nice restaurant in a big city, people aren't wearing that crap.
9dev 4y ago
Pretty much any shirt or hoodie or jacket you’re going to find in common stores will have a brand logo on it. If there’s no logo, at least it sports some random gibberish (New Mexico Surf Club ‘86). I’m also from camp „not your free advertising estate“, and it’s difficult to find plain or ad-free clothes at times. Unless you’re strictly into suits, that is.
criddell 4y ago
In the US at least, a lot of people wear athleisure clothing and that stuff almost always has a logo on it somewhere.
- dymk 4y ago
  Maybe it’s because I shop at Costco often but not a single piece of my athletic nor leisure clothing has a logo on it
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
sneak 4y ago
Designer hoodies.
- mypalmike 4y ago
  Also, $18 Amazon Basics hoodies.
__alexs 4y ago
The entire luxury segment (e.g. LVMHs 300bn market cap) is pretty much entirely predicated on putting logos on things.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]

Except for sneakers, I can't think of a single category of clothing where it is common to have visible logos?

chongli 4y ago

T-shirts with logos all over them are extremely common. The t-shirt as a form of advertising is essentially ubiquitous.

LBJsPNS 4y ago
I wear one to advertise my Pro Wrestling promotion. Because it's my promotion. Why I would want to wear someone else's ads I have no clue.

dylan604 4y ago

What? All of those branded T-shirts, hoodies/jumpers, blue jeans that have logos embroidered, printed, stitched on to them doesn't ring a bell? All of the sports people do it. Nike swoosh. Adidas symbol. Kappa's posed back-to-back figures, etc. Abecrombie & Fitch's giant A&F on every thing. Ball caps with logos. None of this sounds vaguely familiar?

corrral 4y ago
It actually took me a minute to figure out what OP meant. I think it depends a lot on where you shop. And even somewhere like Wal-Mart, there's plenty of clothing available that doesn't have prominent branding and isn't "legible" clothing. I don't think finding men's clothing without branding is at all difficult, and it's actually easier the higher end you go.
IfOnlyYouKnew 4y ago
Yeah, I guess it depends on location to some degree. In Europe, the cheap mainstream would be H&M and Zara, neither of which puts logos on things. Above that, you're wearing a dress shirt, which never ever has a logo. Adidas and the like is strictly worn only by people who have lost control of their lives.
rr888 4y ago
> Nike swoosh. Adidas symbol. Kappa's posed back-to-back figures, etc. Abecrombie & Fitch's giant A&F on every thing. Ball caps with logos. None of this sounds vaguely familiar? That is expensive trash, not fashion. If I go to a nice restaurant in a big city, people aren't wearing that crap.

9dev 4y ago

Pretty much any shirt or hoodie or jacket you’re going to find in common stores will have a brand logo on it. If there’s no logo, at least it sports some random gibberish (New Mexico Surf Club ‘86). I’m also from camp „not your free advertising estate“, and it’s difficult to find plain or ad-free clothes at times. Unless you’re strictly into suits, that is.

criddell 4y ago

In the US at least, a lot of people wear athleisure clothing and that stuff almost always has a logo on it somewhere.

dymk 4y ago
Maybe it’s because I shop at Costco often but not a single piece of my athletic nor leisure clothing has a logo on it
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]

sneak 4y ago

Designer hoodies.

mypalmike 4y ago
Also, $18 Amazon Basics hoodies.

__alexs 4y ago

The entire luxury segment (e.g. LVMHs 300bn market cap) is pretty much entirely predicated on putting logos on things.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]