I have been surfing the consignment sites: Yoggies and fadhionphile and I have a question for long time Balenciaga lovers as I have only been loving this brand for about a year. Ok- so my question is how do some bags look so terrible after a year? I see photos on these sites and some bags (especially light colored) look terrible and have fading. I find it hard to believe that people are spending $$$$ on a handbag and not caring for it. I have a LV collection (the DE print) that looks great. Should I expect my beige nougatine bag to look terrible in a year? Will my black bags fade? I am hoping to pass these bags along to my daughter. She's only 4.
How does a 2013 bag get "well used"?
- Thread starter Tralynn
- Start date
I use my Bal bags as everyday bags but I take good care of them (clean, moisturize regularly; store carefully), so most of them still look good after heavy use and a few years. I do have one exception though, my 2013 Blue Acier, which has been nothing but problems since I got it no matter how careful I am. The ones you see in bad condition were probably just used hard and not cared for properly.
May I ask what the problem is with Blue Acier? I almost bought a near-new one. The price was not that great for a pre-loved and I generally don't like to purchase multiple bags from a year with just okay leather. Glad that I didn't make the purchase.
This idea always strikes me as sweetly intended but rather improbable, for lots of reasons. To start with, a B bag of recent years is a fairly delicate lambskin. With a lot of use, in 15 years it could easily look like hell, in a good way. That's its DNA. Will your future teenager/young woman go for a major piece of vintage funk? Maybe. Or she could be horrified.
i have to agree - the only bags I can see stand the test of time to pass on are H bags and even then I am not sure my daughters would go for it. Instead I plan to buy them bags that I don't use but keep for them at some point (especially considering crazy price increases for some brands).
as for B bags, I have zero experience but that they look super preloved in some cases is what has held me back - I do like the look though so perhaps I have to accept that these will not be life time but rather certain periods of my life bags
as for B bags, I have zero experience but that they look super preloved in some cases is what has held me back - I do like the look though so perhaps I have to accept that these will not be life time but rather certain periods of my life bags
Okay .. here I go (as this has been a topic for many years).
The 'usage' of a bag is at the hands of it's owner .. pure & simple! Now, while I agree that the Lambskin (Agneau) is more "delicate" than the Chevre and Hamilton leathers, if you are hard on your bags, thrash it around, use it everyday, etc. -- then of course, it's not going to look great even after 1 year of use.
I have bags in my collection that are 14-years old (yup - from the 1st season 2001 1 of Balenciaga) and they look fantastic. Why? .. well, first of all, while I don't "baby" my bags per se, they are Caribou leather which can take a fair amount of wear & tear. Also, I have a fairly extensive collection of bags in general and switch things in/out often. As such, I have some '04 and '05 Chevre bags that are still in fab condition (as a matter of fact, those are the ones that typically get the most compliments when I'm out and about .. people love the slouch/distressed leather look of the old Bals).
Yes, Hermes are great bags as are Chanel .. but Balenciaga is the only brand IMO .. that actually looks better with wear (mind you, I'm not talking holes in the leather or things like that). So, in the end .. would you rather have a "distressed" Bal bag -or- have the same in Hermes/Chanel?? Yup - CASE CLOSED!
The 'usage' of a bag is at the hands of it's owner .. pure & simple! Now, while I agree that the Lambskin (Agneau) is more "delicate" than the Chevre and Hamilton leathers, if you are hard on your bags, thrash it around, use it everyday, etc. -- then of course, it's not going to look great even after 1 year of use.
I have bags in my collection that are 14-years old (yup - from the 1st season 2001 1 of Balenciaga) and they look fantastic. Why? .. well, first of all, while I don't "baby" my bags per se, they are Caribou leather which can take a fair amount of wear & tear. Also, I have a fairly extensive collection of bags in general and switch things in/out often. As such, I have some '04 and '05 Chevre bags that are still in fab condition (as a matter of fact, those are the ones that typically get the most compliments when I'm out and about .. people love the slouch/distressed leather look of the old Bals).
Yes, Hermes are great bags as are Chanel .. but Balenciaga is the only brand IMO .. that actually looks better with wear (mind you, I'm not talking holes in the leather or things like that). So, in the end .. would you rather have a "distressed" Bal bag -or- have the same in Hermes/Chanel?? Yup - CASE CLOSED!
Lol at the bolded - good point I guess
. Although I know some gals that think a beat up 2.55 is amazing! but seriously, I get what you are saying, I guess my point was that it takes a lot longer with some H leathers to have them distressed even with daily use. I had a Clemence bag that I was super hard on and it looked new even after a year.
good to know that chevre holds up well - I was debating whether I should get agneau or chevre, and it seems you made up mind
. Thanks