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
  2. The Nordstrom Spring Sale is now live! Serious savings on customer favorites - up to 40% off with free shipping and free returns. Shop the sale!
    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. This is why I like vintage...better chance of getting something well-made. Not that new bags are bad either. Just my preference.
     
  2. I think a lot of people do care about these things.
    I do. Many people on this forum do.
    I care where my shoes are made. I care where my Louis Vuitton products are made. But made in Italy or Made in France or Made in the USA does not guarantee quality either.

    You are making a blanket statement. It may be true in some cases, but there are a lot of people who don't fit the description you provide. I give shoppers a lot more credit in discerning what they buy.
     
  3. +1 This is an incredibly well written and positive post. I wish I saw more posts like this on this forum. I like the way you think!
     
  4. Exactly!

    I remember when the marketing of Shoes Made in Italy,
    and that people bought them because they would have them forever because they were well made, they would last forever.

    Or, when I bought my first Louis Vuitton Speedy,
    the SA said to me, Louis Vuitton is the kind of bag you will have for the
    rest of your life, the kind of bag that you can pass down to your daughter.
    By the way, that bag in 1995 was $335… Not exactly an expensive bag.

    Luxury was not about the price, it was about the quality workmanship.
     
  5. Secretaries in China aren't "low class," as has been referred to in this thread. They are the rising consumer class, which China is very proud about. Sure, the super-rich in China want to make sure they stand out from these other consumers, but I think LV has to pleased to be expanding its customer base in Asia, at all tiers.
     
  6. OMG I just saw one pop up on Fashionphile the other day and all I could think about was: "remember when this was the hottest bag ever?"...

    Tout passe, tout lasse, tout casse.
     
  7. I sure don't want to keep my shoes that long! I wear them a couple of years and then off to eBay!
     


  8. I think that most here know, I was not talking about EVERYBODY…
    and that most people here would not fall into that category.
     



  9. Most of the very wealthy men I know have their shoes resoled
    every couple years.
    There is no reason to replace shoes every few years if you take proper
    care of them.

    I have Bally shoes I have had for 15 years, you can't even tell they have
    been worn, yet they have.
     
  10. I just want new shoes. Fashion changes, taste evolves. My shoes are in great shape, I just want new styles!
    So rather than store them and clutter my closets, I would rather sell them and get new ones!
     
  11. You've misunderstood me.

    What I say is that in an old money society it's considered low class to brag about money. So croc Birkin would be considered vulgar by the definition. It's like wearing a sign saying look at me, I've spent so much money on this and I want to brag about it.

    If you spend a lot of money on something it should be special. For example, he doesn't wear Rolex, thinking its vulgar. He wears discreet Breguet and Patek Phillip.

    Even my dad who doesn't care about brands recently described an outfit of a prostitute or a gold digger as HL dress, CL shoes, Chanel bag.

    I personally not as concerned about this. But I don't wear my LV mono to my office. Nor do I use Birkins to my office. I find those items to be very recognizable and therefore inappropriate for work.
     
  12. And I am not wealthy LOL
    I work for a university.
     
  13. Really? Secretaries in general aren't particularly low lass wherever they may live but i do find this post a bit offensive
     
  14. ^You understand that I was responding to some other people using the expression "low class," right? I'm saying that it is not at all an appropriate way to talk about these employees.

    Did you read the article in the first post?
     
  15. I totally understand.
    And somewhere, someone is looking at that Patek Philippe watch and thinking "what a piece of trash..."