Chanel less flashy than Louis Vuitton... think so?

  1. My boyfriend indulged me with an inane conversation about handbags yesterday. He asked why I don't carry LV which is everywhere here in Chicago. I said that bag for bag, it struck me that LV was a lot more conspicious than Chanel bags, especially many of their limited edition items (I'm thinking fushia denim with logos, for example). I personally think that even Chanel's more stand-out bags are a bit more subtle. He disagrees. What do you ladies think?
  2. I mostly agree.Off the top of my head I cannot think of any Chanel bag w/ a repeating logo everywhere like LV.However, the Epi Line is pretty discreet.But if you compare each designer's collection to one another, I'd say Chanel is definitely more subtle logo-wise.One of my favorite things about Chanel is the immense amount of styles, textures, colors, etc . . . and mostly that I do not see them on even a daily basis around here! :biggrin:But I do see a lot of LV {or fake LV} and Coach.
  3. Are you kidding? Whith those HUGE C's? Even when the C's are the same color as the bag, it's still pretty loud!
  4. I don't know. . . . I guess it's all relative.I know FOR SURE that people don't notice right away that I'm carrying a Chanel, but you can't miss that repeating logo on my LV.Obviously, not every bag is this way.Just like I said not all LV's are logo'd, not all Chanel's are. . . . in fact, there's a lot of Chanel that doesn't have a logo at all - just look at the Reissues or the new pony hair bags.
  5. It would really depend on the bag. Like if you take the Cerf vs. say a MC Speedy, the Speedy would be more flashy. But if you took a black Epi Alma vs. (sorry I'm a Chanel newbie so I don't know all the names...insert name of flashier Chanel bag here! :lol: ) :shrugs: Overall I'd say LV has more lines that are flashier like MC, perfo, limited edition stuff, Suhali (the metal studs) and even just the monogram.
    But I love both's nice that both have understated bags and fun/flashy bags. :flowers:
  6. Oh my goodness--I am here in Chicago too! And I agree with you--I believe that chanel is more subtle but more versatile also--plus I am bias to chanel anyway--you know Chanel gives you everything--various colors to choose from, modern yet conservative styles, and of course the designer label--how can LV compete---LOL:smile:
  7. That's exactly what my boyfriend said! More often than not, however, I find the big CC logo more subtle than the repeating LVs... and more than it should happen, I come across people who think the CC logo = Coach!:shrugs:
  8. I think Chanel is less flashy because there are simply less knock offs out there! It does make the "brand" itself more discrete IMO also!
  9. I think chanel is more elegant than LV, except the cambon line. the big CC is too much for me :p
  10. In general, Chanel doesn't scream as much a LV does which is why I don't particularly like LV except for small goods in Epi. The rest is just too logoed and loud for me, I'm afraid.
  11. I don't like LV's for exactly that reason. I even shy away from Chanel logos unless they are the smallest cc.

  12. I think seahorseinstripes makes a really good point! I'd say that Chanel's cambon line gives the traditional LV monogram a run for its money. :p

  13. my mother has a cream chanel that has repeating CHANELs all over it =p but it doesn't look tacky haha! but discreet? hell no.. ;)
  14. ^Discreet? Nope, not at all!
    Never seen one!
    Notice how I DIDN'T say ALL Chanel bags are more discreet than LV's.;)
  15. A Chanel boutique manager told me yesterday that the Cambon line is the most knocked off - and IMO it is the least attractive and much too "in your face"