Designer Brands You Will Never Buy

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#136
taco said:
Actually, my granma had exquisite taste & her bags still look amazing. There is nothing hot about carrying a "different" bag that is crap just to be able to say LOOKATME!! I am soooo different. Carry a bag because you love it, not for what it says about you. LOL people are different & some like old fashioned & some like risky
Click to expand...


I agree - although I often like slightly unusual bags (and certainly don't stick with one designer/design house when I'm no longer inspired by their designs), I don't just like them because they are unusual, they have to be beautiful (to me), as well.

Vintage and antique looks are very popular, at the moment and although I agree with urbanwrunlmtd that there is no point in sticking rigidly to older designs/design houses, just because they're well-established; there is also no point in abandoning them for newer, inferior designs/designers, just because they're different.
 
#137
I don't care if a bag is $50 or $5,000, a cute bag is a cute bag! But I don't want a trendy bag that costs a fortune or an ugly bag that costs anything!

Add Fendi Edith & betty to my list of hot bags that I don't get, they look like they will fall apart in a week. Why is that a good thing?
 
#139
I have a $100 Kathy van Zeeland that IMO looks nicer than that Prada Giraffe - I mean Gauffre.:p
That bag is $1800 if you're lucky.
I never like to decide on a bag based on price. If i love it, i buy it. Period.

Now, if a bag is less expensive and more beautiful than a designer bag, then better for me and my wallet.

BTW, i agree that the new LV stuff is garish except the Polly - lovin it really bad.
 
#140
I never said anything about carrying crap. Going out and buying a piece of crap bag is not the answer. I wouldnt. All I am saying is these others designers dont really stand a chance when the world has already made up its mind on whats hot and whats not just because of who makes it.
 
#141
I don't think that is a fair statement, some designers don't stand a chance because their bags aren't appealing to enough people. I think that some of the bags you posted aren't meant to appeal to the masses, that is not what the designer intended. Popular bags are usually popular for a reason, be it function or form. Having a label or being a classic design is not a bad thing, being of poor design, quality or bad marketing is usually the reason bags don't catch on. Every label has bags that fail or are not popular, the reason those lines are still going strong is that they also make bags that are stylish, puposeful & of high quality. Please don't shout at those of us who like vintage, classic or bags that bore you, to each his/her own. change can be good, and so can classic style.
 
#142
mlbags said:
Oh, I love how you said this, ..... I'm trying to kill my Hermes lemmings. I think I wanted an Hermes just because it's an Hermes.
Click to expand...

That was what I did, I wanted a Birkin, I went the store and said I want a Birkin, bought one 35cm Tan Box. Then that's it, I gave it away to my mum and now she has agreed that if I want to sell it along with all my other Hermès stuff (that I like way more than the Birkin) she is willing to part with it. The reason why I am selling everything? In Bangkok, they told me that I have to make purchases amounting to $12,500 equivalent before I have the privilege to get on the list. You know what I have more interesting things to buy (including things with that cross symbol in my avatar pic ;)).

Still I don't get why people are drooling over Hermès leather, especially the patina, though. If someone can give me a pic of box leather with a more beautiful patina than my Loewe briefcase I posted earlier then I'm willing to apologise but I doubt so (and this is coming from someone who has two huge box bags).

I also agree that good, classic bags don't have to cost a fortune. Guess what my favourite is not any designer one but Longchamp Le Pliage - epitome of understated elegance with a utilitarian/practical mindset.
 
#143
Bee...Bee said:
I also agree that good, classic bags don't have to cost a fortune. Guess what my favourite is not any designer one but Longchamp Le Pliage - epitome of understated elegance with a utilitarian/practical mindset.
Click to expand...

I was just having a discussion yesterday about this very same subject and my example for a very understated, classy, and functional bag that fits EVERYTHING I carry (that's alot of junk, BTW) was the Longchamp Le Pliage.

Can I just say I am addicted to these bags. After my discussion, I went to their website and ordered one. Will get it in @ 3 weeks. Can't wait.:wlae:

The Birkin is a total waste of very good money IMO unless you are filthy rich, or really have a hankering for that bag. Never got it - never will.:rolleyes:
 
#144
This is a great thread. I love this question. I love handbags so I appreciate most of 'em. The only one that comes to mind that I really can't imagine anyone actually buying are those new-ish Prada bags that look like trees. I believe it's called the Prada chevron antic whatever... Ewwwww...! I just don't get it.:sick:
 
#145
I think some Chloe's are cute, and some...not so much. I don't see myself ever investing in one, or a Balenciaga either. Part of why I like these message boards so much is to see how different everyone's taste is! I really like Louis Vuitton...BUT not all of the styles. Some are just strange looking! Call me boring, but I still prefer the monogram line over the others.
 
#146
taco said:
I don't care if a bag is $50 or $5,000, a cute bag is a cute bag! But I don't want a trendy bag that costs a fortune or an ugly bag that costs anything!

Add Fendi Edith & betty to my list of hot bags that I don't get, they look like they will fall apart in a week. Why is that a good thing?
Click to expand...

There sould be a law against drunken posting, obviously Fendi does not make Betty or Edith. I am going to go sober up now.
 
#149
I was into Louis Vuitton for a while and bought a lot of it, but when I see every woman in Orange County carrying the same bag as me and seeing how ugly it is on someone else, well, thats when I woke up. I dont like logo stuff much...HOWEVER, I still have all my Cerises, Panda and Cherry Blossoms and eye love you bags and accessories...HATED the Perforated line. eeeuuuuwww!...Got into Chloe, still like Chloe but I think the locks are to juvenile for someone my age, so I sold all of it...Balenciaga is my baby. Sometimes you have to kiss a lot of frogs before you find your prince, and my Balanciagas are my favorites! Soft smooshy leather is for me.

My BIGGEST dislike is Dooney & Bourke and Coach. When Coach came out with their under the sea (or whatever) themed bags and Dooney with its hearts, well, Target is too good for them. They belong at Walmart. JMHO.
 
#150
Yeah, Coach has made some pretty weird bags. That fish one you're talking about is pretty ugly. I didn't like the bags they made last year with the C's scrbbled on them in bright colors either. However, the majority of my purse collection consists of Coach bags, but I stick to their leather and suede goods. They are much prettier and more mature looking than the signature bags I own. I have never owned nor will ever own a Dooney & Bourke. Sorry to those who like it, I could never get into it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top