Do you find that higher prices = higher quality?

well for sfam and r&r, higher prices definitely do NOT equal higher quality. they rip wayyyyyyy too much for the prices they're being sold at..but i don't buy sfam anymore so yeah..not a problem anymore! haha

I think they rely on us thinking that higher prices equal higher quality, but I find most of the time, it's not the case. I despise when well known designers use polyester and other cheapy fabrics, but charge an arm and a leg. Then, there are brands that charge $70 for a regular long sleeved shirt, which has the same quality of any $5 one. IMO, you always pay the high prices for the name on the labels.

ETA: When talking about denim quality, I wonder- Tons people could have the same exact pair of jeans, yet only one of theirs rip. It may happen to different styles, but only a couple of the hundreds manufactured actually get defected. Does quality differ from pair to pair?

Yeah I dont understand where R&R comes off selling their jeans for over $300 and they rip at the ass after 1 wear.

Its too bad that I do like the designs on the back, and Im sure that Im just paying for the name.

great discussion. i have been trying to ask around and get some information about this myself. i would love to put up a guide in the future specifically about quality denim. not denim based on price, but on the actual quality of the materials and workmanship.

gonna have to do a bunch of research first though. if anybody knows any professors at FIT please drop me a PM. i am trying to interview one of them this week.

LOVE primp, all of their stuff is way worth the money imo.. R&R of course sucks, but I've had good luck with SFAM. I looove Juicy stuff too, all of their velour stuff is wonderful!

i really do love TR and the way they are made.

i don't mind at all even having to pay retail for some for this reason too.

even though i don't wear it anymore, Juicy Couture velour was amazing and really well made also so i totally agree with callire about it.

IMO most of the time we're paying for the name. fakes exist because ppl want to look like they've spent a lot or live a rich lifestyle, which of course we know they end up looking like fools because its fake. i agree w/ the not-so-great qualities of sfam and r&r.. even though they fit well, both brands are notorious for thinning and pilling easily.

my 2 cents.

i agree with this on some things. but i don't spend what i do on TR's for the name. i *really* don't like the way most jeans look on me so i'll pay the extra money for TR's that fit like a dream on me.

i will glady spend 100-300 just to have them fit and look the way they do on me.

Probably any brand whore label you are paying more for the name then what you get for your dollar. Look at Ed Hardy and all the other shit that company puts out in their other lines as well.

i am a 36 year old mom of 2 who is always at babies r us or target so i am not out to impress the other moms or 3 yr olds with what i wear.

now if i was some 20 something person hitting the clubs or feeling the need to "fit it" i might buy clothes for the brand name not the quailty and fit.

however that is not the reason i spend more $$ on my clothes. i will buy a $10 shirt from target because it looks good on me and $200 on TR's because they fit and look the best.

but i would never spend $$$ on something just for the brand name. it has to have some quality behind it.

So based on what you guys said...only True Religion and Diesel are worth paying for because they provide both quality and good looking denim. I'm not saying R&R or SFAM is bad or anything but most of you guys seem to be saying that the quality of Diesel and True Religion is good for its high price. Unfortunately however, I hate the back pockets of True Religions so I guess the only brand I can wear is Diesel.

When did TR start making high quality products?

how are they not high quailty now? all my jeans except for 1 pair aren't TR and I have never had any problems with the way they are made.

just because you might not like/wear a certain brand doesn't mean they aren't great quality.

Are you increasing your age to impress us, barbie? I'm pretty sure you aren't 36!

no i find, all you pay for is the brand name but designer jeans definately have much nicer washes an cuts that fit you much better than a pair of like $20 jeans but they arent so much better qaulity at all. like has been said RR an other brands tend to rip alot and im sure a $20 pair of jeans wouldnt rip as much as RR do.
with tops though i find they keep their shape more and have better material than cheap tops.
diesel jeans however are really worth the money, the fit, washes, qaulity etc is all really really good.

lorna hit the nail on the head. The cost of the jeans is paying for the brand and the styling (cut, fit, wash, etc.) and that's about it in most cases.

If you think about it, there is no way for a pair of jeans to be of a level of "quality" purely in terms of durability and workmanship that makes them worth $300. If when you say quality you are referring to the fit and cut and wash/whiskering/etc. as well as the craftsmanship that goes into them and their ability to withstand wear and tear, then it's really a mixed bag.

Buying R&R, 7FAM, Diesel, TR (and all the rest) is paying for a brand name. Of course, with all the money they make selling those brand names, these companies are able to invest a lot more money into the cuts and washes they produce than a company like American Eagle or Bluenotes. Furthermore, 7FAM and R&R do have very well-documented durability issues. But I would argue that TR and Diesel are not of spectacular quality, they just shine in comparison to the easy ripping of R&R and 7FAM. I also like their cuts and styles a lot less, TR in particular -- the only people I know who buy and like TR are people I speak to online, none of my friends in "real life" like the brand at all. (Boring washes, ugly pockets, weird baggy fit...)

If you want to talk about actual quality of denim and workmanship, I think you have to look at PRPS and similar brands, who take the time to craft jeans out of selvage denim on Japanese looms out of African-grown denim.

Nudies are quite hardy, too, so they are worth the money in terms of longevity; but they are pretty trendy and unimpressive in the style department.

it depends a lot of the brand.I'm talking for men's fashion since I'm not a womens fashion critic.

Many are designer stuff whom you'll pay for their interest and efforts put into fashion,+ exclusive materials and insane cuts.
Many others are just 'buzz' brands a la Ed Hardy which are just made to die one month or another,but in order to make profit they'll make you pay $$$ for stupid prints.
And also many designers who are now bankable whatever they do (thinking dolce) don't really fear overpricing stuff even tho materials etc stay far over cheaper lines (thinking d&g).So sales recommended.
oh and I forgot the increasing number of very solid brands like Nudie,APC,Acne,Lindeberg etc who are very nice due to men's fashion going to minimalism

well to sum it up I think prices are justified if there is something really interesting behind the product,many many things are completely broken when you check details and quality (thinking true religion)

I like this idea too, especially the guide for the quality of non-denim. I sometimes see stuff that I like but when the price tag is a little high I sometimes ask my self whether its worth paying for because I'm not sure about the quality.

Has anyone ever considered that just maybe R/R and SFAM were never meant to be worn on a consecutive basis, or even as frequent as members here do. Maybe durability was never part of the equation for pieces earmarked for bimonthly wears, etc.

Maybe they're a *luxury* piece meant to be worn only on *special* occasions or once per month, or whatever, analogous to your higher end vehicles (koenigsegg, ferrari, mclaren, etc)--i.e. they're not daily drivers.




EDIT: Madonna (the material girl) use to never wear any single piece of article twice, ever.

TR's and Diesel are thick and durable, your paying for the quality.

I always lose my buttons from my R&R's. Just got my first pair of Nudies and I absolutely love them but i cant talk about their quality.

I have like 20 pairs of TR's and have never had a problem with any of them. Even the super-t stitching holds up for me.

No offense, but the idea of denim that isn't supposed to be worn sounds quite idiotic. And there are plenty of people who have had their R&R's rip or fail on first wear, including me.

Denim should in principle be durable and last quite some time. Those were the original intentions of denim.

It was just a thought. It might be idiotic, but what if in fact R/R are meant to be worn infrequently. Unless you're the designer or have contact with the designer, you don't know, do you?

Yes, denim was not meant to be a fashion statement either when it was first introduced, they were strictly functional and by default durable. Times have changed, it's now part of the fashion realm, so who is to say infrequent wears is an inconceivable concept.



EDIT: In a broader sense, clothing were never meant to be fashionable in the first place. Functional, not fashionable. Times have evolved, some clothing pieces are design to be worn infrequently, with durability not even a factor.

I've had 2 pair of SFAMs and 1 pair of PPDs rip on me. My COHs have developed a small hole, but if it gets bad, back to Nordstrom it goes.

I expect a lot from my stuff, but when a $150-200 pair of premium denim rips or has the build quality like a pair of Hollister or AE jeans - yuck, I get ticked off. I'll still buy it for the fit. I'm probably the small minority that won't fit into Diesels - even though they make my size, both Zathans and Zafs won't fit on my frame - and most Diesel stuff is made around European standards.