Chanel’s Rise & STALL: Defects, Difficulties & Deflection (formerly the 19 tote saga thread)

So what's on everyone's Chanel wish list? :biggrin:

In all seriousness. Are we still going to buy bags?

I’ll still be buying too, still on the hunt for a beige clair jumbo CF and have not had any problems with my reissue, boy or medium CF, all purchased from the boutique in the last two years.

Am considering the C19 too after seeing how indestructible it is. Half wondering if it’s bulletproof
 

gail13

O.G.
Dec 25, 2009
6,104
1,456
Im pretty sure that there are other bags that are bonded leather too. Looking at the onslaught of small shiny bags and I'm suspicious of these newer things. I am interested in buying if I know what Im getting. Trust in a brand is important, feeling like they will stand behind their products and they are honest about what is being sold. But if you ask the brand "what is this item made of" and they won't tell you, how do we respond? Is it ok if you wear a bag two or three times and it peels and you can't resell it because its damaged?

In no way am I a designer, but its not hard to look at the 22 bag design and know that it should have had a reinforced casing where the chain slides as well as grommets. There could not have been a thorough test drive of the 19 or 22 bag. No, these bags are not meant to be well used or abused, but I would expect light wear and tear is factored into any wear testing.

One of my friends who is watching this thread messaged me and said she would be furious if she went to the grocery store and bought a cut of meat labeled steak, but after buying it discovered it was something completely different disguised as steak. True enough.
 
Last edited:

TraceySH

Always hunting for the next bag
Feb 28, 2016
4,578
25,167
O
Im pretty sure that there are other bags that are bonded leather too. Looking at the onslaught of small shiny bags and I'm suspicious of these newer things. I am interested in buying if I know what Im getting. Trust in a brand should be important, feeling like they will stand behind their products and they are honest about what is being sold. But if you ask the brand "what is this item made of" and they won't tell you, is that ok? Is it ok if you wear a bag two or three times and it peels and the value plummets?

In no way am I a designer, but its not hard to look at the 22 bag design and know that it should have had a reinforced casing where the chain slides as well as grommets. There could not have been a thorough test drive of the 19 or 22 bag. No, these bags are not meant to be well used or abused, but I would expect light wear and tear is factored into any wear testing.

One of my friends who is watching this thread messaged me and said she would be furious if she went to the grocery store and bought a cut of meat labeled steak, but after buying it discovered it was something completely different disguised as steak. True enough.
All true. I think most consumers desire, or even demand, absolute transparency. We are particular about how food is sourced, the air we breathe, the emissions from vehicles we drive, animal fur, recycled plastics, carcinogens and hormone disrupters in cosmetics, growth hormones used on farms etc. To me it’s bizarre that people don’t think to (or rather want to) know what they are buying, wearing, or how it got to them as they do in probably all other areas of their consumption.

My guess is that association with a brand (the psychological hijacking of common sense) does more for their ego than looking at or searching for details that SHOULD matter. In essence, people choose denial and make excuses why their behaviors are hypocritical. They can’t bear to let go of the way something makes them FEEL about themselves, the enhancement it brings to their self-esteem, and maybe the improvement it adds to their insecurities.

This is the definition of cognitive dissonance, and it’s pervasive in the material world.
 

ntntgo

Style has no price
O.G.
Jul 15, 2009
2,182
665
association with a brand (the psychological hijacking of common sense) does more for their ego than looking at or searching for details that SHOULD matter.
THIS is exactly why companies like Chanel (trying to stay OT at least brand wise) can get away with selling bonded leather or pleather at the prices of actual high quality leather.
The more CC logos or the bigger the logo, the more people want it. It’s called emotional branding. Brand loyalty is created by how that CC logo makes people feel about themselves. The attachment to the logo is about how people want to see themselves or how they want others to see them. Not about who they really are.
When you see someone like a Lois Pope or Sunny Sessa around Palm Beach, there’s not a logo in sight. Why? They don’t need a logo to feel an elevated sense of wealth or status. Quite the contrary. They‘d prefer people not know their status. In fact, they’d prefer that people don’t even know who they are. (Ugh! They’re going to kill me for using them as examples.)
Back to the psychological warfare being waged on the, let’s call it the down the street consumer. Slapping Chanel on bonded leather is bad. The fact that people are ok with it is worse. People wanting to feel that warm glow of Chanel or CC on their shoulder and being tricked into paying $5500+ for a bonded leather bag, that’s the worst.
In marketing Chanel‘s type of marketing falls under the category of sensory branding because they rely on stimulating excitement around their product. FYI, I’m not coming up with this on my own. It’s marketing 101 and yes, there are literal brand marketing sub categories that are deployed to achieve their goal of emotional branding. Which is basically creating a consumer who is brand loyal, won’t ask too many questions about the quality of what they’re buying, and will continue to buy regardless of poor customer service, declination of said quality, and continue to buy as quality decreases and prices increase. Hence, the 22 bag.
No one besides me thinks this is a test run to see how far they can dilute the quality of the product, slap Chanel on it with a $5500+ price tag and see if people will still buy? Seriously?
Someone asked if we will continue to buy Chanel. For me, new bags, no way. Vintage, yes. Shoes, sneakers maybe. RTW, only if they fix the laughable quality and bring back the dual line. Fine jewelry, nope. If I want noticeably named FJ, I’ll stick with VCA, Cartier, etc.
This is thread is what I used to love about TPF. The sharing of information and how the topic that is initially used to start the thread morphs then expands to include an increasing amount of info.
I realize we get OT but if OP is ok with it going sideways sometimes, then I hope we keep this going.
 

TraceySH

Always hunting for the next bag
Feb 28, 2016
4,578
25,167
THIS is exactly why companies like Chanel (trying to stay OT at least brand wise) can get away with selling bonded leather or pleather at the prices of actual high quality leather.
The more CC logos or the bigger the logo, the more people want it. It’s called emotional branding. Brand loyalty is created by how that CC logo makes people feel about themselves. The attachment to the logo is about how people want to see themselves or how they want others to see them. Not about who they really are.
When you see someone like a Lois Pope or Sunny Sessa around Palm Beach, there’s not a logo in sight. Why? They don’t need a logo to feel an elevated sense of wealth or status. Quite the contrary. They‘d prefer people not know their status. In fact, they’d prefer that people don’t even know who they are. (Ugh! They’re going to kill me for using them as examples.)
Back to the psychological warfare being waged on the, let’s call it the down the street consumer. Slapping Chanel on bonded leather is bad. The fact that people are ok with it is worse. People wanting to feel that warm glow of Chanel or CC on their shoulder and being tricked into paying $5500+ for a bonded leather bag, that’s the worst.
In marketing Chanel‘s type of marketing falls under the category of sensory branding because they rely on stimulating excitement around their product. FYI, I’m not coming up with this on my own. It’s marketing 101 and yes, there are literal brand marketing sub categories that are deployed to achieve their goal of emotional branding. Which is basically creating a consumer who is brand loyal, won’t ask too many questions about the quality of what they’re buying, and will continue to buy regardless of poor customer service, declination of said quality, and continue to buy as quality decreases and prices increase. Hence, the 22 bag.
No one besides me thinks this is a test run to see how far they can dilute the quality of the product, slap Chanel on it with a $5500+ price tag and see if people will still buy? Seriously?
Someone asked if we will continue to buy Chanel. For me, new bags, no way. Vintage, yes. Shoes, sneakers maybe. RTW, only if they fix the laughable quality and bring back the dual line. Fine jewelry, nope. If I want noticeably named FJ, I’ll stick with VCA, Cartier, etc.
This is thread is what I used to love about TPF. The sharing of information and how the topic that is initially used to start the thread morphs then expands to include an increasing amount of info.
I realize we get OT but if OP is ok with it going sideways sometimes, then I hope we keep this going.
Excellent post!
 
Are there ANY OTHER luxury brands NOT OWNED by LVMH, Kering, Richemont, the Prada Group NOR ANY OTHER conglomerates, OTHER than Chanel and Hermes which offer a large range of products? Serious question.

So, just like I try to avoid shopping through Amazon for the reason that these megacompanies are becoming too big to fail, I try whenever possible not to shop at conglomerates brands.

Tracey, let me know if you’d like me to take down the post, I realize it’s off topic. My apologies.

I think so, (pls correct me if I'm wrong), Salvatore Ferragamo, Tod's (owns Schiaparelli), Moncler (owns Stone Island), Burberry, Ermenegildo Zegna, Canali, Missoni, Kiton, Brunello Cucinelli. Probably many more I haven't thought of.

Then, there are those niche, up-and-coming, and/or avant-garde houses like COMME des GARÇONS, Haider Ackermann, Vetements, BODE, The Row etc

Shoe designers: Christian Louboutin (EXOR owns a minority stake), Edward Green, Manolo Blahnik, George Cleverley, John Lobb (UK, John Lobb Intl is owned by Hermes)
 

TraceySH

Always hunting for the next bag
Feb 28, 2016
4,578
25,167
I think so, (pls correct me if I'm wrong), Salvatore Ferragamo, Tod's (owns Schiaparelli), Moncler (owns Stone Island), Burberry, Ermenegildo Zegna, Canali, Missoni, Kiton, Brunello Cucinelli. Probably many more I haven't thought of.

Then, there are those niche, up-and-coming, and/or avant-garde houses like COMME des GARÇONS, Haider Ackermann, Vetements, BODE, The Row etc

Shoe designers: Christian Louboutin (EXOR owns a minority stake), Edward Green, Manolo Blahnik, George Cleverley, John Lobb (UK, John Lobb Intl is owned by Hermes)
Valentino, Dolce Gabbana, Schouler, Valextra, Tom Ford
 

JamaisAssez

Member
Dec 13, 2021
111
1,054
Thank you @cerulean blue and @TraceySH for the insightful replies. I learn a lot from both of you.

Valentino is owned by Qatar-based investment group Mayhoola who also owns Balmain, although I reckon its luxury portfolio is nowhere near the scale of LVMH, Kering and Richemont.

Zegna went public recently and also owns Thom Browne. As a gentleman I love their products although I also perceive a change in quality recently.

Someone mentioned earlier (perhaps it was you Tracey, or @ntntgo), that Chanel was prepping itself for sale, until the pandemic hit then they registered record numbers. Could you imagine if LVMH bought Chanel? Would it be for better or for worse? Lol!
 

TraceySH

Always hunting for the next bag
Feb 28, 2016
4,578
25,167
Thank you @cerulean blue and @TraceySH for the insightful replies. I learn a lot from both of you.

Valentino is owned by Qatar-based investment group Mayhoola who also owns Balmain, although I reckon its luxury portfolio is nowhere near the scale of LVMH, Kering and Richemont.

Zegna went public recently and also owns Thom Browne. As a gentleman I love their products although I also perceive a change in quality recently.

Someone mentioned earlier (perhaps it was you Tracey, or @ntntgo), that Chanel was prepping itself for sale, until the pandemic hit then they registered record numbers. Could you imagine if LVMH bought Chanel? Would it be for better or for worse? Lol!
I mean, honestly better. IMHO. I’ve received better CS and more perks as a VVIC w/ LV than at other house. They are just beyond impressive.
 

Jayne1

Working Canvas
O.G.
Aug 2, 2006
29,436
14,519
The super fakes are why insurance companies won’t accept on line certificates and most of the old school, reliable Chanel authenticators won’t do it from a picture for a bag post 2016. They want to see it and feel it. Even then some bags get authenticated incorrectly.
Sorry OT again.
Also OT, but I was wondering what you think about Entrupy for Chanel or other high end bags.

I wouldn't trust a seller who uses it, but I'm such a skeptic these days.
 

sjunky13

Dreaming............
O.G.
Dec 17, 2006
14,990
1,834
How do these brushes compare to more reasonably priced makeup brands? If they aren't willing to divulge the materials, how do we know they are better in quality than Sigma, MAC brushes or even Sephora brand (to be extreme here)? Is there a noticeable difference in how they apply makeup?
I am a big fan of FUDE and collect brushes. I mean they all get the job done, just like bags. But the difference is feel vs performance for me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: piosavsfan

sjunky13

Dreaming............
O.G.
Dec 17, 2006
14,990
1,834
I just purchased a Fendi Peekaboo. I do not know why the Fendi forum is not bumping. The leather is amazing and the bags are beautiful! I guess the brand doesn't have SM clout?
I feel Fendi is on fire! I will always love Chanel and the styles work for me. I am just surprised at the Fendi leathers and how lovely it is and how much bag for the price. I am going to a Fendi event and I will ask about the composition of leathers. I really hope there is no drama on Fendi leathers! @TracySH , so you know anything?
 

fantajisan

Member
Jun 9, 2021
120
457
I just purchased a Fendi Peekaboo. I do not know why the Fendi forum is not bumping. The leather is amazing and the bags are beautiful! I guess the brand doesn't have SM clout?
I feel Fendi is on fire! I will always love Chanel and the styles work for me. I am just surprised at the Fendi leathers and how lovely it is and how much bag for the price. I am going to a Fendi event and I will ask about the composition of leathers. I really hope there is no drama on Fendi leathers! @TracySH , so you know anything?
I bought a selleria mini peekaboo earlier this year. It’s very well made imo (can’t find a single thing wrong with it), and the design is quite practical (no useless love note pockets whose only purpose is to leave a dent in the flap).
 
Apr 15, 2007
64,150
11,943
Valentino, Dolce Gabbana, Schouler, Valextra, Tom Ford

Estee Lauder is in talks to acquire the luxury brand Tom Ford in the arena of 3billion & upwards

Just asking the question
Is Valentino still part of the Marzotto Group as well as
NEO Investment Partners having an interest in Valextra
 
Last edited:
  • Wow
Reactions: platanoparty
Top