How come Chloe keep onsale their bags??

[phoebe_0526]

I am wondering, how come chloe keep onsale their handbags with unbeleivable discount? like 50% off 70% off etc.

In past 2 years, they were highly demand, and sold out everywhere. I need to put my name on waiting list for a blanc paddy.
But now, it seems everywhere. and it doesnt hold the resale value, too.

Do you think this will detract your love toward chloe??

i personally wont pay retail for chloe now, since I know if I wait 2 more month it will go onsale. which make me dont want to spend much on chloe.
I love all my chloe still. They are pretty and unique.

I just dont get the huge discount thing.ush:

 

[LambLovesChanel]

I love all my Chloe bags, some I got on sale, some I didn't.

I have never found one for 70% off though!!!!

 

[leanbeanee]

It's very sad. I guess the demand for them was so high back then that they thought they'd capitalise by making more. Now that the popularity has died down, they have an over supply.

 

[chloehandbags]

To be frank, it's because the quality (of materials, make and design) has gone down, whilst the quantity available has risen dramatically and yet the retail prices have also increased well above the rate of inflation (not decreased, as you might expect, given all that).

It's simple economics - supply and demand. The supply has seriously outstripped the demand for the bags at full retail price.

This has, inevitably, lead to a glut of relatively below par bags, so the only thing that retailers can do to shift them is to reduce the prices dramatically.

Unless they reduce the retail prices by 40% or more, they are still vastly overpriced IMHO and as they are past season, by the time they get around to it, I'm no longer happy to pay over half price, personally.

 

[kicksarefortwids]

it happens with all "it" bags. when they first come out, they don't produce many (to make sure the demand is there) and gift them to celebrities to create buzz (and it usually works if one of the celebrities is nicole ritchie) and if all goes as planned, demand will initially far exceed supply and it will take a while to catch up. then at some point the market will get saturated AND demand will plateau or die down and voila! the once impossible to find bag is on bluefly or overstock at 30% off (i too have never seen 70% off). this has happened to the chloe paddington, the balenciaga motorcycle, the fendi spy -- you name it. but each season there is always a particular style or color that is so hot that you will never see it on sale so if you don't have the foresight to buy it right away, you will miss your chance. i don't think it's sad or a detraction from the bag -- it's the natural cycle in the life of a bag. i have bought bags at retail and for a premium and i don't love those bags any more than the ones i bought at a discount. it depends on why you love a bag -- for me, the popularity (or unpopularity), exclusivity or trendiness doesn't mean anything.

 

[ssangit]

If I love a bag, I love a bag. It doesn't matter if it's full retail or on sale. Better for me if they go on sale since I'm the consumer in all this. I somehow love Chloe's even more when I know I've gotten a great deal on one!

 

[ivysun]

but think about it.... even it is at 50% off. The price of a paddy is still higher than a LV speedy (LV doesn't really have sales). I know the quality/design is different. But what does that tell us. I think when brand name mark down their price, the perceived value of the bag decrease. Which the lowers the resell value of the bag.

But the thing is, who does the mark down? The maker or the authorized dealers? If the marked down is down by the authorized dealers (NM, Nordstrom etc). Then this may be a signal that the demand for the bags is decreasing. However, their cost of good sold (the price they purchased from the makers such as chloe) is still the same.

 

[phoebe_0526]

LV never go onsale. therefore, when the customer bought their bags, they will know for sure, this item will not be any cheaper in the future, which means you better get it now.
Isn't that the way to keep a brand name stay longer?
Chloe betty did onsale for 70% off, I beleive I read a thread about that before.
I still love Chloe, they have amazing leather, and unique design.
I am wailling to pay retail price them only if they are not everywhere.

Thank you all for answering my question. there's nothing wrong to get a onsale stuff, everybody hoping to get anything cheaper. I am just dont understanding why can't they keep limited supply in order to keep they as a luxury brand longer.

 

[Jenova]

I'll bet that Chloe have their profit margins worked out very carefully and that there is more cash to be gained from selling more for less than staying exclusive.

As someone else has already said, all trends blow out.

Have you also considered the fake bag factor. Bringing the prices down makes the bags more affordable to a whole set of mid range consumers (like me) and reduces the number of people shopping for fakes on Ebay etc.

I think the biggest killer for a luxury brand is for consumers to worry that everyone looking at them suspects them of wearing a fake. Soon you don't want to be seen with one, real or not.

Suspect bag order:

1. LV
2. Chloe
3. Balenciaga (but maybe a bit less now)
4. Mulberry (fakes still going strong in the UK)
?????

 

[chloehandbags]

LV never go onsale. therefore, when the customer bought their bags, they will know for sure, this item will not be any cheaper in the future, which means you better get it now.

Isn't that the way to keep a brand name stay longer?

Well, possibly, but personally, that's one of the many things that puts me off LV, as it's so artificial and snobby (and terribly wasteful, if a style of bag doesn't sell) and I don't think current Chloe fans are into artificiality and snobbery that much!

I think most Chloe girls love fashion, design and quality. We are not, generally, into status; otherwise we'd choose a more obviously logoed brand.

We, no doubt, come from a wide range of income levels, but we don't buy a bag because it's expensive, or exclusive; in fact, most of us are very inclusive, I think! As is demonstrated by the friendly and helpful nature of this sub-forum.

I just don't think the average Chloe girl (even one that can afford to buy at full price whenever she likes) would buy into that sort of marketing hype - in fact, I think she'd find it a complete turn-off.

I think that Chloe would be wise to stick to producing beautiful, well-made items at relatively reasonable prices (or as reasonable as high-end designer ever got!) and not to alienate its fans (who are already feeling more than a little alienated by the jump in retail prices, the fall in quality and the loss of Phoebe Philo and Zoe Knight) any further.

BTW, Chloe has been around for quite a long time - the regular leathergoods line is relatively new (launched in 2002), although leathergoods were made before that too, but the design house has been running since 1952.

 

[chloehandbags]

it happens with all "it" bags. when they first come out, they don't produce many (to make sure the demand is there) and gift them to celebrities to create buzz (and it usually works if one of the celebrities is nicole ritchie) and if all goes as planned, demand will initially far exceed supply and it will take a while to catch up. then at some point the market will get saturated AND demand will plateau or die down and voila! the once impossible to find bag is on bluefly or overstock at 30% off (i too have never seen 70% off). this has happened to the chloe paddington, the balenciaga motorcycle, the fendi spy -- you name it. but each season there is always a particular style or color that is so hot that you will never see it on sale so if you don't have the foresight to buy it right away, you will miss your chance. i don't think it's sad or a detraction from the bag -- it's the natural cycle in the life of a bag. i have bought bags at retail and for a premium and i don't love those bags any more than the ones i bought at a discount. it depends on why you love a bag -- for me, the popularity (or unpopularity), exclusivity or trendiness doesn't mean anything.

Couldn't agree more!

Especially with your last comment.

 

[chloehandbags]

I'll bet that Chloe have their profit margins worked out very carefully and that there is more cash to be gained from selling more for less than staying exclusive.

As someone else has already said, all trends blow out.

Have you also considered the fake bag factor. Bringing the prices down makes the bags more affordable to a whole set of mid range consumers (like me) and reduces the number of people shopping for fakes on Ebay etc.

I think the biggest killer for a luxury brand is for consumers to worry that everyone looking at them suspects them of wearing a fake. Soon you don't want to be seen with one, real or not.

Suspect bag order:

1. LV
2. Chloe
3. Balenciaga (but maybe a bit less now)
4. Mulberry (fakes still going strong in the UK)
?????

I do see what you're saying and that may be the case for some people, but personally, I don't give a monkey's if people (who can't be very familiar with the brand) assume I'm carrying a fake; just because so many people are.

I know I'm not and that's all that matters to me.

Not that that would happen to me very often, as I have, almost invariably, liked the slightly more obscure designs (which are often better looking than the hyped ones, IMHO); so most people probably don't even know that they are designer at all, let alone which one!

TBH, I am happy that the prices came down so much, as it confirms the point that many people made last Autumn (that they were simply too high in the first place) and hopefully, gives people, who might not otherwise get the chance for ages, a chance to get their first Chloe.

If that means that the second-hand price of Chloes dips for a while, so be it. As soon as they produce some interesting bags again and/or given a few years, the secondhand market will, no doubt, recover.

Although, I expect most of the really low priced bags will end up on eBay, anyway! :blink:

 

[chloehandbags]

but think about it.... even it is at 50% off. The price of a paddy is still higher than a LV speedy (LV doesn't really have sales). I know the quality/design is different. But what does that tell us.

I think it tells us that, at full price, Paddys are currently overpriced.

I think when brand name mark down their price, the perceived value of the bag decrease. Which the lowers the resell value of the bag.

Well, that is, no doubt, true.

That's why I think Chloe should lower their retail prices by about 40%, which would bring them back to around the equivalent of what they charged about 4 years ago, allowing for inflation (or raise their quality back to former levels, in which case, they would probably only need to reduce their prices by about 30%) and then insist that retailers only discount by a maximum of 60%.

This would keep both the retail and the resale market more buoyant, IMO.

But, personally, I think it would definitely be a step too far to completely control the market (and its customers), as LV does. :s

But the thing is, who does the mark down? The maker or the authorized dealers? If the marked down is down by the authorized dealers (NM, Nordstrom etc). Then this may be a signal that the demand for the bags is decreasing. However, their cost of good sold (the price they purchased from the makers such as chloe) is still the same.

I'm sure the authorised dealers control the mark down (although, apparently, NAP claim otherwise), but, no doubt, Chloe tells them what they should originally retail the bags for; so really, Chloe are more responsible if they don't sell at full price.

Although, if the dealer has overbought, then I guess that is, at least partly, their responsibility.

The thing is, that if items are substantially overpriced, I think it becomes extremely hard to tell whether (and by how much) demand has fallen, as most people have psychological limits, over which they are uncomfortable to spend on a specific type and quality of item (even if they can afford it) and if these limits are exceeded, it becomes far harder to ascertain whether it is the price which is putting them off, or that they simply don't want the item at all.

Even when these items are, eventually, put on sale, it can still be hard to tell, as, I don't know about you, but as I say, I am unwilling to pay as much at the end of the season, as I would have at the beginning; especially if the item is seasonal looking.

On retail websites, I believe there are ways of counting how many clicks an item gets - which, supposedly, indicates its popularity. But I suspect this may be a fairly unreliable indicator; as some people may just be curious and not a potential buyer, at all.

BTW, as you can, no doubt, tell from my numerous posts ( ), I am loving this topic!

Thanks for posting, phoebe!

 

[chloebagfreak]

Wow, you guys are so knowledgable! I have learned so much about Chloe and it's history from joining this forum. I got my first Paddy a month ago, and I was into Tylie malibu, and Coach. I did purchase my Red Paddy on sale and was amazed at the quality-06. I purchased another White Paddy at Aloha Rag at full price and was extremely dismayed by the lack of quality in the 07 leather, that I sent it back. So, probably the 05 and 06 bags will hold their value more so.:0)

 

[phoebe_0526]

I am totally agree with you now. Thank you all for sharing your opinion.
I do learn a lot from these posts.
I think chloe should raise their quality in order to lead their customer back.

I think it tells us that, at full price, Paddys are currently overpriced.





Well, that is, no doubt, true.

That's why I think Chloe should lower their retail prices by about 40%, which would bring them back to around the equivalent of what they charged about 4 years ago, allowing for inflation (or raise their quality back to former levels, in which case, they would probably only need to reduce their prices by about 30%) and then insist that retailers only discount by a maximum of 60%.

This would keep both the retail and the resale market more buoyant, IMO.

But, personally, I think it would definitely be a step too far to completely control the market (and its customers), as LV does. :s





I'm sure the authorised dealers control the mark down (although, apparently, NAP claim otherwise), but, no doubt, Chloe tells them what they should originally retail the bags for; so really, Chloe are more responsible if they don't sell at full price.

Although, if the dealer has overbought, then I guess that is, at least partly, their responsibility.

The thing is, that if items are substantially overpriced, I think it becomes extremely hard to tell whether (and by how much) demand has fallen, as most people have psychological limits, over which they are uncomfortable to spend on a specific type and quality of item (even if they can afford it) and if these limits are exceeded, it becomes far harder to ascertain whether it is the price which is putting them off, or that they simply don't want the item at all.

Even when these items are, eventually, put on sale, it can still be hard to tell, as, I don't know about you, but as I say, I am unwilling to pay as much at the end of the season, as I would have at the beginning; especially if the item is seasonal looking.

On retail websites, I believe there are ways of counting how many clicks an item gets - which, supposedly, indicates its popularity. But I suspect this may be a fairly unreliable indicator; as some people may just be curious and not a potential buyer, at all.

BTW, as you can, no doubt, tell from my numerous posts ( ), I am loving this topic!

Thanks for posting, phoebe!