I totally agree with this. People buy premier brands not only for the quality, but also for the branding and the perception that the bag is a status item. I never bought for this reason. I was a Bal Gal because of the yummy leathers and the styling. But many buy labels for the label and the "It bag" status. Those buyers will never consider Coach a premium bag I agree.
What is your hope for the future of Coach?
- Thread starter AManIntoFashion
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
I totally agree with this. People buy premier brands not only for the quality, but also for the branding and the perception that the bag is a status item. I never bought for this reason. I was a Bal Gal because of the yummy leathers and the styling. But many buy labels for the label and the "It bag" status. Those buyers will never consider Coach a premium bag I agree.
But...the 1941 stuff is quality and in my opinion a value for the price point it is at, as long as you are not trying to signal "wealth" to everyone by wearing it
I was walking through Nordstrom one time, carrying my black Rogue 36, and a sales associate came up to me and asked if it was by a certain premier designer! While the 1941 line is under-the-radar, it's really cool to see that the quality of materials and crasftmanship is recognized by people who have an interest in bags! I think she was shocked when I told her it was Coach.
I think this is one of the reasons Reed Krakoff failed. His bags were exceptional quality but his association with Coach made it difficult for buyers of premium brands to consider buying his items. I think most of his customers were Coachies. I believe this same thing would happen with Coach. I think they can creep the prices higher and that might keep the same buyers they have always had, but it isn't going to attract most premium buyers, except for those who bought Coach in the past. MK has a higher priced line. I wonder how well it sells. I often see it on sale.
I've had this experience with my Tea Rose Rogue as well. I've had a couple of 'THAT'S a Coach bag?!' reactions.
I like 1941 because of the quality, but I also like how under the radar it is. It doesn't have any obvious Coach branding. The metal hangtag is only recognizable to those of us who recognize 1941. I live in the outskirts of Toronto and work downtown. Most of the Coach bags I see being worn are MFF bags. I rarely see 1941, although I saw a pair of women carrying Rogue totes at Saks last week.
Michael Kors' higher priced line actually existed before the contemporary line. I am surprised it is still going, because the bags would always go on sale, and the contemporary line has pretty much taken over. Everyone and their grandma has a MK bag where I live. They're all over TJ Maxx here, so they can be had super cheaply. A Michael Kors outlet is even opening in the local outlet mall, which has already had a Coach outlet for a few years now, so I guess the saturation will get even worse.
I had the same reaction with a Coach leather Madison Sophia many years ago.
I think the split Coach has now is fine. I like having the 1941 bags that are better quality and more sophisticated designs. And I am not going to begrudge coach access to larger markets with the outlets. I do agree with previous comments that they should stick to their guns and do no sales on 1941 bags. Or maybe just do seasonal stuff - Chanel puts seasonal stuff on sale, correct?
Coach doesn't need to be premier, there are plenty of those. There aren't a lot of high quality contemporary designers though. I think they fit that niche nicely.
Coach doesn't need to be premier, there are plenty of those. There aren't a lot of high quality contemporary designers though. I think they fit that niche nicely.
Oh and really, I like that the people in the coach forum buy the bag because they just like it. Not because it is going to impress someone. So it can just be about the bags.
Good points! Coach can market itself as a contemporary brand with higher quality than other contemporary brands.
I agree, buying something, anything just to show it off is strange and sad. Buy something because you like it, not for the perceived status you believe comes with it.
I agree, buying something, anything just to show it off is strange and sad. Buy something because you like it, not for the perceived status you believe comes with it.
I was just about to write this. I am glad I checked all the replies lol
Michael Kor's higher priced line was a line that was comparable to Marc Jacobs and when Marc Jacobs came out with the Marc by Marc Jacobs lower priced line Michael Kors came out with the Michael by Michael Kors line. Both lower priced lines cannibalized the higher price lines, a much given but never heeded warning to Coach I don't think many of us completely separate the status from the purchase. Signature print is an example of this. I freely admit that I don't do signature fabric, from any company. It's not a Coach aversion, it's a walking billboard aversion. Having said that, plenty of people are buying for the logo and the perceived status that comes with it. If the Cs were Ws for Walmart or T for Target and the quality and design were exactly the same, I doubt very much that people would be willing to pay the same price for the bag. I think Coach MFF bags sell well because they're Coach branded, not because the quality is so high. Any of us who remember every high school girl rushing to get one 15 years ago can attest to that. Quality had nothing to do with it for most; it was all about status. Take the Coach branding/logo off the bags, and sales would drop.Good points! Coach can market itself as a contemporary brand with higher quality than other contemporary brands.
I agree, buying something, anything just to show it off is strange and sad. Buy something because you like it, not for the perceived status you believe comes with it.
I agree that we should buy because we like an item, but I don't think many of us are really purists who completely divorce brand from value. It's just human nature to be influenced by branding/advertising.
I say this as someone who has bought a lot of Coach over the last couple of years, but as long as Coach has the outlets and MFF bags I don't see how they could possibly market themselves as having better quality than other contemporary brands. That's just not true. I think the 1941 bags are high quality, but I don't think the quality is consistently high across the brand.
This is relative though. On purseforum, it is not a status symbol to wear coach branding the same way it is if one wears LV mono. If I get the Riley, I get it knowing Chanel buyers will snicker at me. So it depends on the crowd.
I get what you are saying about Coach quality but I consider it two houses in one. So I separate out 1941 from outlet stuff. Not everyone really wants to do that though, I guess.
I feel like a lot of people don't even know there are 3 levels of products within Coach!
Ok, but the the problem with that statement is that you want them to remain a mid level price point, but then you'd like them to go make to american manufacturing?
If coach were to go back to american manufacturing then the price points would easily rival LV/GUCCI.
Exactly. Bags are made in China because it is cheaper, and at least part of those savings are passed on to the consumer.