Louis Vuitton is now a 'brand for secretaries' in China

  1. Sign up to become a TPF member, and most of the ads you see will disappear. It's free and quick to sign up, so join the discussion right now!
    Dismiss Notice
Our PurseForum community is made possible by displaying online advertisements to our visitors.
Please consider supporting us by disabling your ad blocker. Thank you!
  1. #31 Feb 28, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2015
    I exactly agree with you. Your post did not come across as witchy to me, just funny. I like to laugh. Human behavior can be very funny. People have a right to purchase what makes them feel good. I find it sad to tie self-worth or identity to a bag, but people do it every day. If having a bag that is more exclusive makes people feel special then so be it. I just don't think people need to tie brand or style to only certain groups of people. It seems mean to me. Everybody deserves a nice purse if they want one. A bag is not too good for anybody.:smile:
  2. #32 Feb 28, 2015
    Last edited: Feb 28, 2015
    I know this point has been made on this and many other threads, but while "the apparel oft proclaims the man," it cannot tell us everything about the man . . . or woman (Hamlet Act 1, Scene 1).

    My cousin is worth millions, and she carries lovely Kate Spade bags. I enjoy a comfortable, blessed life, but even though my net worth is nowhere near my cousin's, I carry LVs. People who judge my cousin and me by our handbags might come to numerous incorrect assumptions about us.

    The entire quotation from Hamlet which seems particularly appropriate for this thread:
    "Costly thy habit as thy purse can buy,
    But not expressed in fancy—rich, not gaudy,
    For the apparel oft proclaims the man,
    And they in France of the best rank and station
    Are of a most select and generous chief in that."

    Scene starts just after the one minute mark:


    "This above all: to thine own self be true."
  4. Couldn't agree more.
  5. And I won't worry that you think my Balenciaga Cities and Chloe's are "dated". My favorites!
  6. LOL.
    Good. Enjoy.
  7. I understand that many people see the monogram as Low-Class now.

    BUT whatever happened to ladies and gents just buying items because THEY like the ITEM and not just as a LV piece or something everyone has.... Yes the prices are rising which i think is quite insulting to weed out the ones that can't afford Monogram:sad: EVERYONE should be entitled to own a piece of Luxury i say.

    I get that many tourists here in AUS from Asia buy LV cause the exchange rate is good and is cheaper as is Chanel and etc and you sometimes you can't walk in LV without being pushed and shoved (mind you the Sydney Maison is massive yet i still get pushed and shoved to look and things in glass cases). That turns me off more than the rising prices and popularity of a product. This is why i shop at Versace, Prada and Chanel now, every time i walk in these shops (yes even Prada) Quiet, Calm, Peace and Tranquility. I tend to buy more as does my family, when not felt like we are packed in tight sardine tins;(

  8. Oh, don't get me wrong, I LOVE both bags,
    I am just saying that Louis Vuitton is more of a timeless classic. :smile:
  9. Amen.
  10. No, seriously. I'm NOT worried about it. Just was trying to be funny.

    I've never cracked a fashion magazine. I have no idea what is "in". I just know what I like and that's what I carry. :biggrin:

  11. Lately, I see it a lot on one of the sub-forums, people don't understand what Luxury USED to mean.

    Luxury used to be about high quality…

    People USED to care that their shoes were Made In Italy.
    People used to care that their watches were Made in Switzerland.
    That their Crystal was made in Austria.
    Their silk in Hong Kong..

    Now, people just care about getting the latest "IT" bag.
    they don't care where it is made.
    "Oh, I see my Prada bag is made in China, I don't care though, I like the bag. "

    One only need to visit the Prada Sub-Forum to see this.

    Prada being made in China, falling apart within a year.

    People only care about the names, not the quality behind these names
    This I find terribly sad. This is why Luxury no longer hold the status
    is used to, it is no longer about the history or the craftsmanship
    and standing behind the name.

    I tried on a pair of Lanvin Boots a few years back,
    with the conversion they would have cost me over $1,000
    The price was reasonable in my opinion, it was the fact
    that they were made in China that turned me off from buying them.

    Don't get me wrong, there are some thing I have no problem being made in
    China, just not $1,000 Lanvin Boots.

    Luxury has become mass produced and disposable. Which is the antithesis of what Luxury used to stand for.

  12. LOL… I swear, I was going to include a PS, I know you were kidding.. :biggrin:

    I forgot… :roflmfao:
  13. I just bought a Fendi Spy bag, so clearly I will carry a bag that is not "in" anymore, LOL. :roflmfao:
  14. I got my Paddington when it was reissued as part of the Chloe' anniversary in 2013!
  15. Very well said! Quality should be very important and the main focus but that is unfortunately not the main focus anymore.
    I remember cars in the past. You could drive an old German car with over 500.000 km and it was still a good car. Nowadays the cars around 200.000 km are regarded as old and have lost of repairs.
    The companies want us to buy new things constantly. That is why they don't want a a long product lifecycle and we are also guilty because we let them do this with us.