My professor told me Chanel bags are all made in China but assembled in Europe?

[tutushopper]

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.


Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Likewise, when Hermes created the Birkin for its namesake, the notion that a customer might collect dozens in myriad colors, leathers, and sizes would've been considered insane. Once you bought one in your preferred color and size, why would you need another unless the older one wore out? It's Hermes, you only need the one.


Today, fashion houses have become little more than bling purveyors. The top 10% buy for the sake of it, to have the latest and newest, and to show off. When a woman has 100 bags, who needs quality? She won't use any of them enough to notice or care. The brand value matters more than the actual object, and our attitudes toward consumption today reflect this in every way.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success. In the end, Chanel is merely playing an existing zeitgeist to its profit, not creating it.

Yes; someone else gets it!!!

So now it's made in Europe and not specifically France or Italy? Why not say France or Italy, since all of Chanel's bags are produced in either one of the two countries? I would assume that Chanel would be so proud to say, "Yes, most of our prized merchandised is either produced in France or Italy." I noticed that other premier designers like Burberry are outsourcing their production of clothes, accessories and bags to eastern European countries like Romania. Let's say Chanel isn't outsourcing to China, but they're main production factory is in eastern europe and the final assembly line in France or Italy so they can get the "made in France/Italy" emblem. That way, Chanel can still say that their bags, by definition, are solely made in Europe, just not which parts. Would you still be able to justify a $5-6,000 handbag that is made in eastern Europe? I wouldn't!

Yes, when did the "Made in France" or "Made in Italy" turn into the UK, Spain, Portugal, Ukraine, Turkey, India, Thailand, etc., etc., etc.? Say what it is, be honest with the customer; don't hide it, don't dance around it, tell the truth. Total transparency, then see if your PR department can spit it so people will still try to "catch 'em all" like Poke'mon cards.

 

[Chanbal]

first of i wanna say i'm biased and this is prob off topic...
but my question is: why is made in china such a horrible thing?
I understand the effect from the stuff sold in walmart; they're cheap and fall apart fast most of the times
but one should know that's the quality control problem with the company
in terms of the declining quality from chanel,
if the brand chose to compromise quality for low cost
why do the suppliers get the blame?
there are skilled workers in china as well as in other parts of the world,
it all depends on whether the company are willing to pay for these skills
I just felt it's unfair to label china's entire manufacturing industry as cheap and crappy just because a few companies have chosen the inferior products.

Hi pikapika,

I noticed that you just joined TPF, so welcome.

I agree with you, 'made' or not 'made in China' has likely little (or nothing) to do with Chanel's decline in quality. There are highly skilled workers everywhere in the World, including in China. Though, it can be annoying that companies move their factories to countries where labor is cheaper, decrease quality control, and keep increasing their prices. Again, the prices only increase because we keep buying their products.

 

[nori west]

This is more about not being honest and transparent IMO. If they sell items advertised as Made in Italy or France then they shouldn't be mostly made in China. or Turkey. or Fiji. KWIM?

Yes, I think I agree with this. I posted about buying a D&G leather jacket and being disappointed when I read the label. At the price point, 'made in Turkey' was not what I was expecting. At least the label was honest, though.

If a label says 'made in x-country', as a customer, I tend to take that at face value.

 

[Luv iz Louis]

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.


Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Likewise, when Hermes created the Birkin for its namesake, the notion that a customer might collect dozens in myriad colors, leathers, and sizes would've been considered insane. Once you bought one in your preferred color and size, why would you need another unless the older one wore out? It's Hermes, you only need the one.


Today, fashion houses have become little more than bling purveyors. The top 10% buy for the sake of it, to have the latest and newest, and to show off. When a woman has 100 bags, who needs quality? She won't use any of them enough to notice or care. The brand value matters more than the actual object, and our attitudes toward consumption today reflect this in every way.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success. In the end, Chanel is merely playing an existing zeitgeist to its profit, not creating it.

Oh wow, yes, well written and I get it too - it is true - our formers used to buy and expect things to last. Look how we have all swooned over Coco's own beloved bag, worn for years - but us modern ladies, we want them to look new forever and are never satisfied with just one. True story.

 

[ladysarah]

Oh wow, yes, well written and I get it too - it is true - our formers used to buy and expect things to last. Look how we have all swooned over Coco's own beloved bag, worn for years - but us modern ladies, we want them to look new forever and are never satisfied with just one. True story.

[

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.

Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success.

These are valid points, but there is no evidence to support the blanket statement that all CHANEL bags are made in china, which is frankly ridiculous. It would seem to me some people here, have personal vendettas against CHANEL, and some are quality control experts about all things made in Asia. It is actually quite offensive to make
unsubstantiated claims, EU law ( and a French LAW) s very strict about things like MADE in France or England or whenever they are made. If a company like CHANEL did find a way to circumvent the system, you can be sure it would have been all over our tabloid newspapers like the daily mail or the mirror. and a hefty fine would follow for the offending company. Some of the articles posted here as 'evidence' come from the Chinese press, which is known for many things, but not necessarily impartiality.

 

[LVk8]

Yes, they do have strict fines for circumventing the law...but no luxury manufacturer (any of them) are circumventing the law whatsoever by outsourcing manufacturing and finishing the process in-country. In the EU it is perfectly legal to do this

I'm interested to learn more about what the professor knows as well when barbie444 has class again. Some people seem to be getting really offended by this conversation but I went to business school so supply chain conversations are fascinating to me

And for what it's worth I get it that when I make a luxury purchase that I am paying largely for branding. I love my Chanel aviators but get it that a pair of Ray Bans or even cheapies from Target would do the same job

:sunnies

 

[uadjit]

The response did not say made in Europe though they said "leather goods being made exclusively in Europe". Isn't exclusively essentially meaning solely, only, completely, wholly? That is how I took this statement.

No, "exclusively" means only in Europe. But that could mean that their product is finished only in Europe. Any manufacture that is currently following the letter of the law and doing the bare minimum finishing on their product in Europe can make that claim so it really means very little to me.

They didn't say entirely which would confirm that the whole construction process takes place in Europe.

This thread is really only speculation but then that's all Chanel is really giving us to go on.

I'm waiting to hear where OP's professor claims to get her information.

 

[ladysarah]

Yes, they do have strict fines for circumventing the law...but no luxury manufacturer (any of them) are circumventing the law whatsoever by outsourcing manufacturing and finishing the process in-country. In the EU it is perfectly legal to do this


:sunnies

Actually that's not true. EU law closed that loophole years ago. There are specific quotas to be met - otherwise everyone would do it and there would be no made on china labels for anything. I have vintage CHANEL cashmere from the 80,s and it was always made in Scotland, that is clearly stated on the label.

 

[JE2824]

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.


Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Likewise, when Hermes created the Birkin for its namesake, the notion that a customer might collect dozens in myriad colors, leathers, and sizes would've been considered insane. Once you bought one in your preferred color and size, why would you need another unless the older one wore out? It's Hermes, you only need the one.


Today, fashion houses have become little more than bling purveyors. The top 10% buy for the sake of it, to have the latest and newest, and to show off. When a woman has 100 bags, who needs quality? She won't use any of them enough to notice or care. The brand value matters more than the actual object, and our attitudes toward consumption today reflect this in every way.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success. In the end, Chanel is merely playing an existing zeitgeist to its profit, not creating it.

I've been quietly following this thread. I don't know if Chanel is made in China or not, so I am not going to comment on something I don't know much about. However, I think you are spot on! I could not agree with you more on this! Gluttons!! Bravo, Valley O! Very well said!!

 

[OCMomof3]

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.


Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Likewise, when Hermes created the Birkin for its namesake, the notion that a customer might collect dozens in myriad colors, leathers, and sizes would've been considered insane. Once you bought one in your preferred color and size, why would you need another unless the older one wore out? It's Hermes, you only need the one.


Today, fashion houses have become little more than bling purveyors. The top 10% buy for the sake of it, to have the latest and newest, and to show off. When a woman has 100 bags, who needs quality? She won't use any of them enough to notice or care. The brand value matters more than the actual object, and our attitudes toward consumption today reflect this in every way.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success. In the end, Chanel is merely playing an existing zeitgeist to its profit, not creating it.

Thank you for this, which completely sums up how I feel. Extremely well-put.

 

[Chanbal]

Here are a couple of interesting links (IMO) for the ones that have an academic interest on the subject of this thread.

The 2014 article below entitled "European parliament votes for compulsory 'made-in' labels", provides some light on the "Made In" disclosures in Europe.

"The European Parliament voted on Tuesday to oblige manufacturers to label all non-food goods with their country of origin, a step designed to help consumers know what they are buying, but one that has divided industry."

"'Made In' is about consumers who have a right to know where a product came from," said Fabio Aromatici of Assocalzaturifici, the Italian footwear industry association. "It supports European companies who choose a local production strategy and promotes the EU manufacturing industry."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/15/uk-eu-labeling-idUKBREA3E1M620140415

The second article entitled "The empire of desire" is from 2012, but it's still interesting to read IMO.

http://www.economist.com/node/21556270

 

[keodi]

Here are a couple of interesting links (IMO) for the ones that have an academic interest on the subject of this thread.

The 2014 article below entitled "European parliament votes for compulsory 'made-in' labels", provides some light on the "Made In" disclosures in Europe.

"The European Parliament voted on Tuesday to oblige manufacturers to label all non-food goods with their country of origin, a step designed to help consumers know what they are buying, but one that has divided industry."

"'Made In' is about consumers who have a right to know where a product came from," said Fabio Aromatici of Assocalzaturifici, the Italian footwear industry association. "It supports European companies who choose a local production strategy and promotes the EU manufacturing industry."

http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/04/15/uk-eu-labeling-idUKBREA3E1M620140415

The second article entitled "The empire of desire" is from 2012, but it's still interesting to read IMO.

http://www.economist.com/node/21556270

Thank you for posting very interesting.

 

[keodi]

I think Chanel has gradually let off their quality standards for one reason: they can.


Once upon a time, luxury goods like Chanel handbags and RTW were the exclusive province of the affluent and outright wealthy. These people spent plenty but had high standards: a sweater, bag or pair of shoes was expected to last. They stocked a wardrobe, not an exhibition, and very few were purchasing multiple flaps in a single shot.


Likewise, when Hermes created the Birkin for its namesake, the notion that a customer might collect dozens in myriad colors, leathers, and sizes would've been considered insane. Once you bought one in your preferred color and size, why would you need another unless the older one wore out? It's Hermes, you only need the one.


Today, fashion houses have become little more than bling purveyors. The top 10% buy for the sake of it, to have the latest and newest, and to show off. When a woman has 100 bags, who needs quality? She won't use any of them enough to notice or care. The brand value matters more than the actual object, and our attitudes toward consumption today reflect this in every way.


Designer bags are no longer little everyday luxuries that make our lives a little happier. They are a massive "collection", an assortment to be maintained and displayed like badge of our material success. In the end, Chanel is merely playing an existing zeitgeist to its profit, not creating it.

I agree 100%

 

[ValleyO]

[It is actually quite offensive to make unsubstantiated claims, EU law ( and a French LAW) s very strict about things like MADE in France or England or whenever they are made.

Ladysarah, this is patently false. What few labeling laws the EU has are incredibly permissive: it is entirely legal to add a button to a foreign garment and call it "Made in Italy." Manufacturers can list the "made in" tag by country, as simply EU, or not at all. They are not skirting laws because there aren't any.

This statement is pulled directly off the European Commission website:
At the moment, there are hardly any rules, and manufacturers have no obligation to indicate on their labels the exact origin of their products. This is an advantage for unfair businesses which use fake labels or no labels at all.

From WSJ:
Valentino, a unit of fashion and textile maker Marzotto SpA, rips out the "Made in Egypt" tags in its suits before shipping them to boutiques in Europe, where companies don't have to divulge where they make their products. For the U.S. and Japanese markets, where labeling rules are stricter, Valentino produces suits in Italy, where it also still makes its priciest items.

I don't find it "offensive" to debate facts. While we do not *know* that Chanel is outsourcing part of its production, we should be aware that they very easily (and legally) *could* do so.

 

[ladysarah]

Ladysarah, this is patently false. What few labeling laws the EU has are incredibly permissive: it is entirely legal to add a button to a foreign garment and call it "Made in Italy." Manufacturers can list the "made in" tag by country, as simply EU, or not at all. They are not skirting laws because there

Actually - I think you are mistaken- I was always taught it was the exact opposite. EU rules are very strict about country of origin, whilst US and other countries were a little more lax. France in particular has even more tight legislation. The french are very proud of their products, food & fashion, history of craftsmanship and everything like that. UK is the same- you can't just slap on made in the UK labels on anything you like.