Actually, that's not the case. For me, the truth is I just don't want to support a designer that makes a living by putting his name on other people's work. MK has done it long enough to completely lose its appeal. Also, the bang-for-buck factor is very low - the quality just isn't there.
What bag do you wish would go away?
- Thread starter Megs
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
- Status
Actually, that's not the case. For me, the truth is I just don't want to support a designer that makes a living by putting his name on other people's work. MK has done it long enough to completely lose its appeal. Also, the bang-for-buck factor is very low - the quality just isn't there.
Totally agree, the price is such a big factor for a lot of people. Premier designers have difficulty offering a diffusion line without it diminishing the brand's image, something with which MK is very familiar. Not everyone can afford to spend thousands on a bag, but a few hundred is an "attainable luxury." To me, they aren't competitors at all as they're customer base is nowhere near the same.
Depends on the bag, like most brands they have winners and losers.. ok well maybe not losers but ones that are not as well made as others.
Seems to me though so many are inspiring off of one another these days, to truly gain something different/unique i find designer is NOT where to buy.
Is this verifiable information about ethical sourcing and scraps? Have they really said that? Because more than one companies have gotten caught making the same claim about their small fur items and fur decorations on f.e. coats, then later admitting that's not the case.
Also, ethical sourcing for fur would mean catching the animals in the wild, using a method that isn't painful or doesn't leave the animal stuck for hours or even days before ending its life. Another alternative would be that the animals get to live in cages that are abt 50x50 m wide because they naturally have a large territory and they move a lot. Also, the chance to hunt, forage and breed should be available. The animals should be put under by using chloroform or something of the sort (carbon dioxide is not ethical, it's very painful) before being put down. Then we could talk about things being ethical.
In Finland, the production method is in the most humane edge of the scale and even here, it's a brutal business. Tiny cages, net flooring, no stimulants like toys, forced cannibalism, and the end comes very painfully (it starts by stunning the animal using an electric shock to the nose and that's not even the worst part). So, for Fendi to use the words "ethical" and "scrap pieces" really puts their PR under the lens of scrutiny. I don't buy it.
Without getting into debates about ethics know that for Fendi's idea was initially in response to brain storming ideas by the team (knowing a couple of 'the team') to use up 'waste' in-line with what Hermes did/does with petit H. This was to maximize profit of course, just like H, rather than from any altruistic motive. Now that demand now is above supply I don't know if that's still the case.
Sourcing from the wild can be crueler and is actually more harmful in the long-run as of course the animals will become scarcer and cubs etc may have no parental guardians/providers. Although, I do understand that unfortunately the reason that much non-farmed countryside around the World is managed/tolerated at all is due to the huge popularity of hunting and fishing (some by native peoples). Without it, no doubt humans would argue to destroy every scrap of 'non-used' land. Well managed and heavily regulated farms are what are needed. A verifiable, accountable, highly regulated and effectively monitored fur supply is the only way. Consumers need to be careful and accountable too. That of course goes for all animal products and by-products.
Good point for the beach bag - but neverfull is so comfortable, it is literally never full, and that is great quality for the purse. I love to travel with it, because it looks pretty enough for me and it fits everything I might need during my travel adventures.
Why anyone should feel bad if they own a bag they like but someone from Forum does not? We all have our preferences in terms of purses - someone likes MK, Prada, Gucci, Dooney, etc. someone doesn't. We all cannot love the same things, because we are all different and unique, like purses we buy. This is forum where we can exchange opinions and share our experiences. There are threads where one can share their bags and get praised, but this one is just to share what one doesn't like. So why not?
Totally agree with you. If we know the difference in styles and brands and all that, I doubt that general public knows as much as we do. Not all women are obsessed with purses, and MK is good quality for the money paid.
agree. i'd love to buy the alma pm, but just to handhold it? it's got about a 3" drop. beautiful, but no options.
Good for you. Then I guess you won't be buying bags from, like, 70% of brands out there (including premier designers).
Well, I'm actually not. Can you give an example of another "designer" that rips others off as blatantly as MK? (I already named DKNY so that's that for that)
YES! As much I agree with some of the sentiments of other posts; yours made my heart scream, "YES!" This is what I wish would go away already, I just find the pony/calf hair bags creepy feeling.
LV Alma is a copy of Hermès Bolide. LV Totally is a copy of MK Jet Set. Saint Laurent Sac de Jour for Birkin. Givenchy Nightingale is a copy of an older Celine bag (first season of Phoebe for Celine). Mansur Gavriel bucket bag is a copy of LV Noe. Jimmy Choo Mave is a copy of Balenciaga clutch. The list goes on....
- Status