Is there a bag Hierarchy???

[Gimmethebag]

I thought faure le page was in that category at some point but when looking into them found out they only started making handbags about 10 years ago. The current owners purchased a storied firearms brand name rights. The “history” is in firearms which is pretty cool but the actual bags are honestly probably average contemporary brand quality. The brand made holsters as the closest thing before, and with quality, but the techniques used then are not preserved in the making of their current bags. I could be wrong but this is my limited impression.

It's the access to the brand. We stumbled on the brand in Paris almost 10 years ago and made some purchases. I live in a major metropolitan international city and other than my MIL and SIL who purchased bags, I haven't seen a single FLP bag since. There is a store in Paris and I think there is now one in Singapore. For a while, you couldn't order off the website and had to call the Parisian store.

As for the quality, the FLP quality is much better than Goyard (or more contemporary Goyard). I still put Goyard in Tier 1 because of the limited access one has to Goyard, plus the customization services and specialty luggage you can order.

I just got the Daily Battle tote in the new Sand color for spring/summer and the recent quality is fantastic. The coated canvas and lining are nice and thick. There is leather piping and reinforced leather corners on the bag. The handles are reinforced to take the stress of a laptop in the bag. The internal pocket is made from thick leather and embossed with a large logo design. I added my gun pochette on the internal D ring for an additional zipper compartment.

My thinking is: that while some bags are more expensive if it requires travel for most people to access a brand, it is a very exclusive brand and I put it in Tier 1. Even though most people have heard of Hermes and the Birkin because of movies, tv, etc. I still consider it the top because there's only a handful of Hermes boutiques in any country at most and it's not a brand with a presence in department stores where they don't have stand-alone stores.

 

[richard m]

I thought faure le page was in that category at some point but when looking into them found out they only started making handbags about 10 years ago. The current owners purchased a storied firearms brand name rights. The “history” is in firearms which is pretty cool but the actual bags are honestly probably average contemporary brand quality. The brand made holsters as the closest thing before, and with quality, but the techniques used then are not preserved in the making of their current bags. I could be wrong but this is my limited impression.

Over the years, my opinion on this has changed. How difficult is it to source a bag or even know about it?

Tier 1: Hermes, Delvaux, Moynat, Goyard, Launer, Faure le Page, any designer exotic

Then there's just plain expensive. There is no doubt this is a luxury item:

Tier 2: Chanel, Louis Vuitton, Dior

Then there's pretty expensive, but IYKYK in certain circles:

Tier 2: Ferragamo, Tod's, Brunello Cucinelli, Bottega Veneta, Tom Ford, Bvlgari, Cartier

And then there are the fashion houses' seasonal collections to compliment RTW:

Tier 3: Gucci, Chloe, Valentino, Balenciaga, Fendi, Celine, Paco Rabanne, Saint Laurent, Prada

Tier 4: Contemporary handbag brands like Tory Burch, Staud, Polene, By Far, Veronica Beard, Coach

I work in luxury fashion and is a pretty clear response, i can correct some things

Tier 1- Hermes and Chanel, overall the most exclusive brands

Tier 2- Lv, Dior, Fendi, Loro Piana (very exclusive but not at the “hermes” level but had some icon bags) and very similar price

Tier 3- Gucci, Givenchy, Balmain, Valentino
(Still exclusive but not at the same level than dior) and a little bit cheaper overall.

Tier 4- Versace ,Moschino, D&G. Still luxury but the price is the more accesible in this range in some items.

i write about luxury brands in general, but you can asociate this with bags.

 

[richard m]

Is only a question, but for me is so interesting. I know some luxury brands are more expensive than others, overall Fendi is more expensive than i expect (more expensive than gucci overall) But i don’t know how, becouse Gucci is more popular. This is my herarchy of luxury brands only based in price.

-Most exclusive Luxury
Chanel, Hermes

-Luxury with high price
Lv, Fendi ,Dior, Loro Piana

-Luxury but still more cheap than Dior
Gucci, Givenchy, Valentino

-Still luxury but more cheap overall
Versace, Tods, Burberry

 

[lill_canele]

Things make a lot more sense when you realize who owns what brands and what kind of clientele each company or brand is catering towards or marketing towards.

Let me post screenshots and do a mini (but not necessarily very thorough) summary in my next post.

By the way, Burberry, Chanel, and Hermes are on their own. I believe Prada is on its own as well, and is one of the few luxury houses in which the original family is involved in the business.

Valentino appears to have changed hands a bit:
From HDP group to Marzotto group
In 1998, Garavani and Giammetti sold the company for approximately $300 million to HdP, an Italian conglomerate controlled, in part, by the late Gianni Agnelli, the head of Fiat. In 2002, Valentino S.p.A., with revenues of more than $180 million, was sold by HdP to Marzotto Apparel, a Milan-based textile giant, for $210 million. It was rumored that HDP was displeased with Garavani's and Giammetti's personal expenses, a claim at which Giammetti has bristled.[7]
Purchase by Qatar
In 2012, Qatari aristocrats acquired Valentino for 700 million euros through an investment vehicle called Mayhoola for Investments S.P.C.[8]





LVMH:



KERING:

 

[richard m]

Things make a lot more sense when you realize who owns what brands and what kind of clientele each company or brand is catering towards or marketing towards.

Let me post screenshots and do a mini (but not necessarily very thorough) summary in my next post.

By the way, Burberry, Chanel, and Hermes are on their own. I believe Prada is on its own as well, and is one of the few luxury houses in which the original family is involved in the business.

Valentino appears to have changed hands a bit:
From HDP group to Marzotto group
In 1998, Garavani and Giammetti sold the company for approximately $300 million to HdP, an Italian conglomerate controlled, in part, by the late Gianni Agnelli, the head of Fiat. In 2002, Valentino S.p.A., with revenues of more than $180 million, was sold by HdP to Marzotto Apparel, a Milan-based textile giant, for $210 million. It was rumored that HDP was displeased with Garavani's and Giammetti's personal expenses, a claim at which Giammetti has bristled.[7]
Purchase by Qatar
In 2012, Qatari aristocrats acquired Valentino for 700 million euros through an investment vehicle called Mayhoola for Investments S.P.C.[8]





LVMH:
View attachment 5416281


KERING:
View attachment 5416282

This is so interesting, so the price depends of the kind of clientele… LVMH have a lot of brands. The price point of Kering is diferent than LVMH price point, so the most expensive LVMH brands are Dior, LV and Fendi and the price point is very similar.

 

[lill_canele]

All companies want to grow (of course) and each company, you could say, specializes in a target population. That population may change or vary over time but usually stays pretty consistent. Eventually of course, they will want to get the next generation so that they continue to do good business.

I don't know how all the brands work, but the public brands do release their quarterly earnings with a statement on their current and projected growth and sales. They're quite an interesting read, and when you get into it, you can really get a feel of why they put their prices where they are. But I can give you an example.

Gucci and YSL are owned by Kering.
If you look at Gucci's and YSL's sales or revenue in the past 5 years or so. Gucci generally has very steep spikes with overall fast growth and YSL has slow but steady growth. They are targeting generally the same group of people but of slightly different interests. Gucci is very into the current styles and trends for young people; they sell what is hot and they sell quickly. It might go out of style, but they don't care as long as they sell it, it's off their hands and someone else's problem.
YSL targets also a young population, their handbags are $2000-$3000 on average, which today would be considered "reasonable". But their bag designs are very classic and safe. They have downsized from selling online and in retail stores and no longer allow discounts. My SA told me that this year, they will discontinue the private sales at the boutiques (and they have been trying to do it for a while). They are going for "slow and steady wins the race", a more classic style with longevity and who's customers are looking for the same.
Both will not do extreme or frequent price increases. That would out-price their target demographic and be bad for business. A little here and there is good enough for their goals.

Let us also consider the following:
- Brand history and prestige (subjective, biased, and debatable but still important to consider)
- location of luxury house factories (China vs France)
- What consumers view as valuable (or more luxurious)
- Exclusivity

Adding all of these things on, includes what kind of brand each luxury house wants to appear to clients.

The very basic way (but a bit narrow minded) of seeing it is that, if you want only the rich and famous to wear your items and project high fashion, top luxury and exclusivity, might as well price your items as high as people are willing to pay. There is a grain of truth in it, in that, no luxury house wants to be an everyday or ordinary brand. They are something better than that.

But we know that there is more to that, that plays in this game of luxury itself, a luxury house, and corporations.

Hope this gave you some food for thought! There's a lot of info on this, you can find it online. I just don't want to be writing a book at this point lol.

 

[richard m]

All companies want to grow (of course) and each company, you could say, specializes in a target population. That population may change or vary over time but usually stays pretty consistent. Eventually of course, they will want to get the next generation so that they continue to do good business.

I don't know how all the brands work, but the public brands do release their quarterly earnings with a statement on their current and projected growth and sales. They're quite an interesting read, and when you get into it, you can really get a feel of why they put their prices where they are. But I can give you an example.

Gucci and YSL are owned by Kering.
If you look at Gucci's and YSL's sales or revenue in the past 5 years or so. Gucci generally has very steep spikes with overall fast growth and YSL has slow but steady growth. They are targeting generally the same group of people but of slightly different interests. Gucci is very into the current styles and trends for young people; they sell what is hot and they sell quickly. It might go out of style, but they don't care as long as they sell it, it's off their hands and someone else's problem.
YSL targets also a young population, their handbags are $2000-$3000 on average, which today would be considered "reasonable". But their bag designs are very classic and safe. They have downsized from selling online and in retail stores and no longer allow discounts. My SA told me that this year, they will discontinue the private sales at the boutiques (and they have been trying to do it for a while). They are going for "slow and steady wins the race", a more classic style with longevity and who's customers are looking for the same.
Both will not do extreme or frequent price increases. That would out-price their target demographic and be bad for business. A little here and there is good enough for their goals.

Let us also consider the following:
- Historia y prestigio de la marca (subjetivo, sesgado y discutible, pero aún importante a considerar)
- ubicación de fábricas de casas de lujo (China vs Francia)
- Lo que los consumidores ven como valioso (o más lujoso)
- Exclusividad

Sumar todas estas cosas incluye qué tipo de marca quiere mostrar cada casa de lujo a los clientes.

La forma muy básica (pero un poco estrecha de miras) de verlo es que, si desea que solo los ricos y famosos usen sus artículos y proyecten alta costura, lujo y exclusividad, también podría ponerles un precio tan alto como la gente. dispuesto a pagar. Hay una pizca de verdad en ello, en que ninguna casa de lujo quiere ser una marca común o corriente. Son algo mejor que eso.

Pero sabemos que hay más en eso, que juega en este juego del lujo en sí mismo, una casa de lujo y corporaciones.

¡Espero que esto te haya dado algo de qué pensar! Hay mucha información sobre esto, puedes encontrarla en línea. Simplemente no quiero estar escribiendo un libro en este punto lol.
[/COTIZAR]

Thanks for the answer! I have a lot of things clear now. So, fendi is more expensive than gucci overall becouse the group (Lvmh) and the brand exclusivity is diferent… thanks for all!

Thanks for the answer! I have a lot of things clear now. So, fendi is more expensive than gucci overall becouse the group (Lvmh) and the brand exclusivity is diferent… thanks for all!

This is so interesting, so the price depends of the kind of clientele… LVMH have a lot of brands. The price point of Kering is diferent than LVMH price point, so the most expensive LVMH brands are Dior, LV and Fendi and the price point is very similar.

Thanks for the answer! I have a lot of things clear now. So, fendi is more expensive than gucci overall becouse the group (Lvmh) and the brand exclusivity is diferent… thanks for all!

 

[Peacock999]

I will always love the simplicity and elegance of Chane.

Chanel, darn it.

 

[Deneuveness]

I would say the "Big 5" are, alphabetically, Chanel, Dior, Gucci, Hermès, and Louis Vuitton.

 

[Volvomom]

I love Chanel, Gucci, Fendi, Saint Laurent and Valentino. I think Gucci is always a safe bet.

 

[Mcandy]

Chanel… dior…. Louis vuitton.

 

[Sa26]

Hey guys I was looking on YouTube and the internet on how exactly the levels of luxury go.

i found something interesting for that pyramid contemporary is not what we conside contemporary for them contemporary is something like Alexander MCQueen and Jackemmus.

i guess for them contemporary is expensive but targeted to the younger crowds.


well here the pyramid I found it was pretty good though I’d do some changes.


foe example accesible id separate it in accesbile and prime accesible. A Rebecca Minkof is way more accessible than a leather longchamp.
all European accesible luxury is quite more expensive than Michael Kors and Kate spade, most European accesible are in the price range of Tory Burch and the expensive coach bags.
by the way I think Coach will leave soon the more affordable Macys stores like The one from Miami to join only stores like bloomingdales or Nordstrom. I think Coach wants to Join the prime accessible brands. I don’t think Coach want to stay in the MK level.

 

[Sa26]

Here is a pyramid I found on this subject.


and here how I’d do it.

accesible Luxury: Michael Kors, Rebecca Minkof, Kurt Geiger, Karl Lagerfeld,Kate Spade and Donney & Burke.

accesible Prime luxury: Zadig Et Voltaire, Demelier London, lancel, Longchamp, Aspinal of Londo, Purificacion Garcia, Tory Burch and Coach.

coach used to be on the accesible luxury but apparently is planning to go towards accesible Prime.

 

[Sa26]

This is so interesting, so the price depends of the kind of clientele… LVMH have a lot of brands. The price point of Kering is diferent than LVMH price point, so the most expensive LVMH brands are Dior, LV and Fendi and the price point is very similar.

Though LV has some entry level bags , their WOCs are quite Affordable if you have a 1,000 dollars budget.

LV is a very interesting brand. It has a good amount of entry level items but also many other really expensive items.

the capuccine, Is almost as expensive Chanel or Dior but the Alma BB is something you can for much less if you to Europe as a tourist Or get a nice Wallet on Chain.

 

[Sa26]

It's the access to the brand. We stumbled on the brand in Paris almost 10 years ago and made some purchases. I live in a major metropolitan international city and other than my MIL and SIL who purchased bags, I haven't seen a single FLP bag since. There is a store in Paris and I think there is now one in Singapore. For a while, you couldn't order off the website and had to call the Parisian store.

As for the quality, the FLP quality is much better than Goyard (or more contemporary Goyard). I still put Goyard in Tier 1 because of the limited access one has to Goyard, plus the customization services and specialty luggage you can order.

I just got the Daily Battle tote in the new Sand color for spring/summer and the recent quality is fantastic. The coated canvas and lining are nice and thick. There is leather piping and reinforced leather corners on the bag. The handles are reinforced to take the stress of a laptop in the bag. The internal pocket is made from thick leather and embossed with a large logo design. I added my gun pochette on the internal D ring for an additional zipper compartment.

My thinking is: that while some bags are more expensive if it requires travel for most people to access a brand, it is a very exclusive brand and I put it in Tier 1. Even though most people have heard of Hermes and the Birkin because of movies, tv, etc. I still consider it the top because there's only a handful of Hermes boutiques in any country at most and it's not a brand with a presence in department stores where they don't have stand-alone stores.

FLP has really beautiful bags, I also like them better than Goyard, their quality feels nicer and more durable.

and if you care for exclusivity FLP is more exclusive that less people know it, like it’s very unlikely you’ll see many people with your bag.
for example it’s not luxury but when I got my Zadig I picked the one which wasn’t popular yet, I don’t mind that many people will get that bag latter but I didnt want to look like a sheep who buys the same bag everyone gets.