Does a Collection / Brand Need to Look Good as a Whole for you to Select One Bag?

[Juda]

Yes...and the type of clientele it attracts might affect my decision as well.

 

[JenJBS]

I'm not buying the entire collection, or every bag the company designs, so I don't care what they look like. I have no real brand loyalty, so I don't care about the brand's overall image. I get the point about a cohesive brand image, but don't feel that way. My bags are an an eclectic mix - not a cohesive image; same for my clothes and my home decor. I have eclectic tastes, so I can appreciate a brand or collection that is a bit eclectic.

I will say the above applies to looks/style - not quality. If I get a poor quality bag from a brand (or see it in a store) then I'm totally put off the brand. I don't trust their quality. I guess that's why I understand those who feel that way about looks/style.

 

[Riezky]

It definitely has happened - if I’m looking at a new brand and only find one thing that speaks to me, I feel like that brand isn’t for me and will pass on it. Much more likely to buy from a brand where I like their other offerings, even if it’s only love with one style; feels more like that brand fits me. This mentality makes less sense considering that I tend to get attached to specific styles and just buy multiple colors of them

 

[ccbaggirl89]

I do look at the entire brand as a whole - if I like multiple styles from a brand I know the brand likely fits my 'style' and I'll come back to them. I tend to be loyal to a few companies rather than many, and that's because most of their items appeal to me and not just one or two. Same with clothes.

 

[Sparkletastic]

I don't know why all customers are not teated equally. Why is the taste of their existing customers (any megabrand) not deemed good enough? Why do they have to entice (and pressure) younger and younger consumers (who IMO should be having fun with pre-loved, high-street, streetwear and markets creating their own looks)

I don't think the CF look dated at all, with Chanel it's all in the stying. After all you could also say Chanel needs to look no further than its archives. Every leather House has been copying the Chanel Tassel (camera) bag for years, they could just reissue that.

I agree with every word you said. In chasing the new, they risk alienating their base. Brands have to evolve - we want them to evolve. But, break neck left turns not evolution.

I also agree about the styling of a C classic flap and may have overstated my point. I was trying to say that when a brand doesn’t tweak its foundational items and then jumps to a totally different feel, it makes the brand seem confused and like they aren’t proud of their heritage. Like those items are a cash cow and they’re chasing the desire to be “relevant”. Chanel somehow needs to be more than signature quilted flaps but still not jump to Girl bags and the new non design trash bag to seem “innovative” or “on trend”.

As much as Gucci confuses me at times, they do an outstanding job of continually referencing and refreshing their heritage designs. And, to your point, Chanel ignores styles it pioneered or popularized that others are having great success with. Just makes no sense.

Yes...and the type of clientele it attracts might affect my decision as well.

True. I’m all for embracing everyone. But, I don’t want to wear an item known to be super popular with instagrammers / influencers / celebutantes. Instant turn off.

 

[fettfleck]

Usually I would say no. I choose my bags based on whether I like its design and their functionality for my personal purposes. So often I like a few bags from one brand but not the others, which is ok. The bag should fit my style and lifestyle.

But recently I find that I get repulsive feelings towards those brands that in the recent years started to gift influencers a lot of bags, clothes etc., which somehow lower their value in my eyes. Why is it necessary for a well known and respected big fashion player to do such cheap advertisement for itself in the knowing that they are sought of anyway. Are they in such trouble they need that? I don‘t get it.

It leaves a bitter taste if you buy a precious bag for you which is meanwhile gifted to everybody in the fashion world who flaunts it for an insta story on one day clearly seeing that the person it was gifted to don‘t value it as you would have. Not the best kind of advertisement in my eyes, but that is what‘s happening right now all the time.

I mean if I like that particular bag, I would still buy that bag, but I dislike this kind of representation.

 

[Rani]

Usually I would say no. I choose my bags based on whether I like its design and their functionality for my personal purposes. So often I like a few bags from one brand but not the others, which is ok. The bag should fit my style and lifestyle.

But recently I find that I get repulsive feelings towards those brands that in the recent years started to gift influencers a lot of bags, clothes etc., which somehow lower their value in my eyes. Why is it necessary for a well known and respected big fashion player to do such cheap advertisement for itself in the knowing that they are sought of anyway. Are they in such trouble they need that? I don‘t get it.

It leaves a bitter taste if you buy a precious bag for you which is meanwhile gifted to everybody in the fashion world who flaunts it for an insta story on one day clearly seeing that the person it was gifted to don‘t value it as you would have. Not the best kind of advertisement in my eyes, but that is what‘s happening right now all the time.

I mean if I like that particular bag, I would still buy that bag, but I dislike this kind of representation.

Agree with everything you said. I felt this way about the Mulberry Mini Bayswater. I really liked it and considered buying it many times , but have been put off by how many Influencers have been gifted it.

 

[papertiger]

Usually I would say no. I choose my bags based on whether I like its design and their functionality for my personal purposes. So often I like a few bags from one brand but not the others, which is ok. The bag should fit my style and lifestyle.

But recently I find that I get repulsive feelings towards those brands that in the recent years started to gift influencers a lot of bags, clothes etc., which somehow lower their value in my eyes. Why is it necessary for a well known and respected big fashion player to do such cheap advertisement for itself in the knowing that they are sought of anyway. Are they in such trouble they need that? I don‘t get it.

It leaves a bitter taste if you buy a precious bag for you which is meanwhile gifted to everybody in the fashion world who flaunts it for an insta story on one day clearly seeing that the person it was gifted to don‘t value it as you would have. Not the best kind of advertisement in my eyes, but that is what‘s happening right now all the time.

I mean if I like that particular bag, I would still buy that bag, but I dislike this kind of representation.

Again, it seems like a slap in the face of all their loyal, existing customers to be be giving away bags (and other things) just to entice new customers - that don't exist yet.

So far we've identified 2 off-putting things that are related. Pandering to customers that don't exist through uncharacteristic bags with very little relevance to the brand, then also basically gifting them (or other bags) away to people who have little knowledge or experience with the brand.

So basically it underlines that existing customers or someone who could be persuaded with relevant products that reflect the brand's heritage are just 'mugs' and 'punters'.

It's strange that companies don't realise that with so much choice around turning-off loyal customers or attracting non-typical ones is a poor recipe for the longterm.

 

[Vintage Leather]

For the main topic - I have enough bags that I find it a lot easier to say no rather than yes. I.e. Balenciaga changed from glorious smooshy chèvre and biker-jacket inspired hardware, to an arriviste/influencer look which I loathe.

I’m not getting rid of my beloved bags because their baby sisters are gauche. But I’m not acquiring anything new.


When I see a bag on influencers, I think “It’s so bad, you had to pay someone to take it.”

I don’t feel that way about models - they’re a collaborator making art with a stylist and photographer. I don’t get that same weird feeling when it’s a loan.

Zendaya’s red carpet look doesn’t make me think less of Bulgari and Princess Mary doesn’t cheapen Ole Lynngaard. I think “this is two people who are doing their jobs and helping each other.”

I think it’s because the influencer is literally selling their ”friends” to a company. It feels a lot more unethical. There’s no separation between the art and the marketing and the subscriptions.

 

[papertiger]

For the main topic - I have enough bags that I find it a lot easier to say no rather than yes. I.e. Balenciaga changed from glorious smooshy chèvre and biker-jacket inspired hardware, to an arriviste/influencer look which I loathe.

I’m not getting rid of my beloved bags because their baby sisters are gauche. But I’m not acquiring anything new.


When I see a bag on influencers, I think “It’s so bad, you had to pay someone to take it.”

I don’t feel that way about models - they’re a collaborator making art with a stylist and photographer. I don’t get that same weird feeling when it’s a loan.

Zendaya’s red carpet look doesn’t make me think less of Bulgari and Princess Mary doesn’t cheapen Ole Lynngaard. I think “this is two people who are doing their jobs and helping each other.”

I think it’s because the influencer is literally selling their ”friends” to a company. It feels a lot more unethical. There’s no separation between the art and the marketing and the subscriptions.

Good points following-up from @fettfleck and @Rani . I really love your last point:

I think it’s because the influencer is literally selling their ”friends” to a company. It feels a lot more unethical. There’s no separation between the art and the marketing and the subscriptions.

When you think of how important exclusivity (real or perceived) is supposed to be, it's very curious that luxury companies listen to inside marketing doing what everyone else does, coz you know, everyone does it, and outside PR giants who are usually basically are made-up of aspirational nobody-wannabes. Nothing wrong with social mobility or aspiration, but if a company takes part in this scheme and practice of defrauding 'friends' and making capital (money) out of cultural capital (influence) it leaves a very nasty aftertaste, so I'm not surprised it's off-putting.

Loving Isabelle Huppert for Balenciaga, so I agree celebrities that are also artists in their own right feels entirely different.

 

[limom]

Meh, actors/actresses are paid to rep the brand, so what is the difference?
Isabelle is so petite, lithe, she can wear pretty much anything and looks fantastic.
Balanciaga is coming for all of us, huh?
They might want to guide Kim K though, she looked uncomfortable in her recents pap walks….