I think you've got it pretty much spot on..
Thanks Judy!
For me, I'd put Tods a peg higher
You could well be right (if there is a right!), but don't you think that Tod's' perceived status is somewhat affected by the fact that it isn't a R-T-W designer brand?
After all, status isn't just about quality. Otherwise a list would be a lot easier to compile and we'd all, presumably, agree!
and Chloe and ordinary Burberry both a peg lower
Chloe bags are handmade from beautiful materials. Not as high quality as BV (and not suede-lined), admittedly, but still very nice and while Stella and particularly, Phoebe were designing for the house, it had immense fashion kudos (the older bags still have).
I agree that the popularity of the former 'it' bags (such as the Paddy) is beginning to wane, due to overexposure, though and the new designs are certainly not as popular.
But, Chloe has
a lot of loyal fans and if the new Creative Director can produce popular designs, it will definitely rally, IMO. I'm not a naturally brand-loyal person, but I continue to be hopeful about Chloe's future.
Don't you think us Brits are very biased against Burberry, though, due to the Chavvy associations? It still maintains popularity in other parts of the world, but as they are considering transferring production from Wales, I agree that its perceived status will soon be affected in many places.
and I'd question Mathew Williamson as a leather goods brand...although I might be unaware.
He does make bags. I have one!
Mine's leather (pony skin [calfskin]), but some of them are fabric.
And what's the take on artisans like Henry Cuir. Largely unknown, but does that in it's own way have a certain status with some? It's sold in Barneys for years...Curious to know what people think about that.
Beautiful quality bags.
Personally, assuming there was a design I really liked, I'd far rather have a beautiful quality Henry Cuir bag, than an equally well designed, but less good quality bag, from a well known designer.
Is there an exclusivity about being the first with a new brand, or does it have to be 'out there' before you consider buying it?
I would definitely consider a new brand (or a previously less popular brand, that I feel is on the up). I certainly wouldn't hang around waiting for a brand to gain in popularity; assuming I really loved the designs and the quality was there, of course.
Although, I'm not sure that the fact that other people don't yet know about something can, on its own, be viewed as exclusivity, can it?
I think it's certainly very rewarding to feel that you were one of the first to discover an up-and-coming new brand/a new designer/the resurgence of a previously less successful brand, though.
It seems like no one really agrees. For instance, I would put Hermes at the top...but why? Because it cost more and is a higher quality. However, if I sell two Chloe's I could acquire a Hermes. So it's only hard to get if you don't have the $$$ (and if you have the patience). $$$ and patience doesn't always equal rights to the #1 spot. !