You are not negative. I live in New York and you would be surprised how many fakes are out there. One morning (within 10 minutes), I saw a good eight women with LV bags; forget about the afternoon. I must say, at least no one will try to steal your bag because the person wouldn't know if it is real or fake. If I were you, I would buy the bag. Look for every original there is a fake. Enjoy yourself!!!!
Why Do People Buy Fake Designer Bags Or Fake Designer Anything?
- Thread starter uber-chic
- Start date
TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others
I agree. If you like the Manhattan bag, buy it. This is the part about the "fakes vs. real" argument that I just didn't understand. I buy my purses because *I* like them. It makes not a bit of difference to me whether other people have them or not, real OR fake. It shouldn't matter whether other people might think one's bag is fake. That shouldn't effect how one feels about one's own handbag (I'm trying to avoid using "you"). If what you're saying is that one's bag is less prestigious because there are so many others around (real or fake), then in my humble opinion, a person would be buying it for the wrong reason.
OK this thread and the 'Authenticate This' have now got me completely obsessed on the streets of London and am now on permanent involuntary spot the lady with the fake duty wherever I go.
I cannot believe how many fakes there are out there.
Now I've started to notice I can't stop!
My sister-in-law held a "purse party" at her house last year. The room was FILLED with fakes, and they had to keep the windows shut and covered because the woman selling them was afraid. And the prices weren't cheap either- $120 for a fake bag is so not worth it in any way- why not just go to a department store and buy a Michael Kors that's on sale, or go to Marshall's or TJ Maxx? My sister-in-law has carried her fake D&G ever since, and I think about the shady "party" every time I see it. When I expressed distaste at the whole thing, she said, "I think maybe they're the factory's mistakes, because they look too good to be knock-offs". I didn't tell her that all those companies have factory outlets!
I'll be honest- I do own two fakes. One I purchased when I was 19 and knew no better, and the other my mother-in-law bought for me at that party because she felt bad that I wasn't buying anything (while extended family members had bags by the armfull!). I still use them, because I feel that not to would be a waste, but I would never buy for myself. I know all about what goes on in the world of making/dealing fakes, and none of it is pretty. In another instance, we were having a "girls" trip to NYC, and our group seperated into my sister-in-law's (different then before) friends from kid's school/club, and my cousins, me and my sister. We went into one of those junky shops in Little Italy because my sister wanted a hat, and a guy asked her if she liked Coach bags, and if she wanted to see some. I wasn't there, I was outside with my cousin, but my sister started to follow him to "talk to Nicky", until she realized that the room had a fake hidden door, and she freaked out and backed away. The guy followed her out of the store (which is when I was invovled) and kept saying, "You sure you don't want to talk to Nicky?" It was our joke for the rest of the night. Of course, the other group had no problem with this kind of situation and came back loaded with bags.
I actually have a rule about my bags- either you have to know who made it right away, or you shouldn't have any idea who made it. And I think that works pretty well. And thus, I don't buy fakes.
I'll be honest- I do own two fakes. One I purchased when I was 19 and knew no better, and the other my mother-in-law bought for me at that party because she felt bad that I wasn't buying anything (while extended family members had bags by the armfull!). I still use them, because I feel that not to would be a waste, but I would never buy for myself. I know all about what goes on in the world of making/dealing fakes, and none of it is pretty. In another instance, we were having a "girls" trip to NYC, and our group seperated into my sister-in-law's (different then before) friends from kid's school/club, and my cousins, me and my sister. We went into one of those junky shops in Little Italy because my sister wanted a hat, and a guy asked her if she liked Coach bags, and if she wanted to see some. I wasn't there, I was outside with my cousin, but my sister started to follow him to "talk to Nicky", until she realized that the room had a fake hidden door, and she freaked out and backed away. The guy followed her out of the store (which is when I was invovled) and kept saying, "You sure you don't want to talk to Nicky?" It was our joke for the rest of the night. Of course, the other group had no problem with this kind of situation and came back loaded with bags.
I actually have a rule about my bags- either you have to know who made it right away, or you shouldn't have any idea who made it. And I think that works pretty well. And thus, I don't buy fakes.
What really makes me laugh are those ladies who carry fakes to the stores to compare details. I went to seveal Louis Vuitton stores while I was in Hong Kong during New Year vacation. I seen many ladies just sit there looking through bags to check out on the lining, tags and zipper pulls and etc. while their fake Louis Vuitton, Hermes or whatever were right next to them. I feel sorry for those SA because they can't refuse to entertain them knowing they are up to no good. I am thinking perhaps they are trying to remember all the details, so, that they can go back to their factories to produce more fakes. The nerve of some people.
Good post! I think more should be done to educate people that fakes aren't harmless and are funding these illicit activities
I think if everyone does their part (don't buy fake bags), you've done enough. There is no way one person or a group of people are going to stamp out fake bags. Let's be honest. Because if that was the case, the original designers would have stamped out that market a long time ago. And with regards to child labor, it's obviously deplorable, but it happens especially in countries in Asia (China) where there is rampant poverty and children are forced to work to help take care of their families. Until China becomes more industrialized and child labor is deemed illegal (let's remember before the U.S. became industrialized, children were working over here too), it's going to happen not with just factories that make "fakes" but in other industries as well.
I guess I'm different in that I would never go up to somebody and ask them if their bag is a fake...nor would I advise strangers (or really anybody unless asked) about the virtues of bags, real or fake or challenge their character, morals and ethics.
I also think if you have an authentic designer bag, and you get mad that there are so many "fakes" of that bag around, something is wrong--you likely purchased your bag for the wrong reason. I have an authentic LV (wish I could get my money back actually because I realized I wasn't big on logos) and I could care less about people running around with fake LV. I actually bought that bag because I thought it was a status symbol.....and I have paid the price because I have carried it maybe 4 times and I spent a lot of money on it. Money that I should have kept in my pocket or put toward other things.
*disclaimer* - "You" is "collective general you" not anybody specific.
I guess I'm different in that I would never go up to somebody and ask them if their bag is a fake...nor would I advise strangers (or really anybody unless asked) about the virtues of bags, real or fake or challenge their character, morals and ethics.
I also think if you have an authentic designer bag, and you get mad that there are so many "fakes" of that bag around, something is wrong--you likely purchased your bag for the wrong reason. I have an authentic LV (wish I could get my money back actually because I realized I wasn't big on logos) and I could care less about people running around with fake LV. I actually bought that bag because I thought it was a status symbol.....and I have paid the price because I have carried it maybe 4 times and I spent a lot of money on it. Money that I should have kept in my pocket or put toward other things.
*disclaimer* - "You" is "collective general you" not anybody specific.
I carry only authentic designer bag and I usually purchase a bag because I love the look of a bag and appreciate the workmanship. I do tend to chose bags that are less copied because I like exclusivity. I am label whore and I freely admit it without shame. 
I do believe fakes are poorly made because I have seen co-workers with fake LV's for example, where the canvas part may look identical to the real thing but the give away is the immitation leather handles which crack and peel like old paint within months. I think it's better to carry an inexpensive genuine leather or canvas bag with no label than to carry a fake and I believe there is an obvious reason other than cost why some people chose to carry a fake instead of the inexpensive non-knock-off bag. If cost were the only factor they would be just as happy with the no-name genuine non-designer bag as they are with the fake. So the why spend that much on a bag argument doesn't quite cut it for me.
I do not believe that fakes fund terrorism. That argument popped up after 9/11 and I think some genius P.R. person saw that argument as a great way to make carrying fakes socialy rephrehensible and shameful because the other arguments against fakes were unsuccesful. It was a genius P.R. strategy to link buying fakes with funding terrorism in the post 9/11 world to shame people but I'm just not buying into the "buying fakes fund terrorism" claim.
That being said, I don't get angry when I see people with fakes. I'm just thankful I'm blessed enough to afford the real thing. I hope this doesn't provoke a barrage of angry nasty posts. That'sjust my take on the matter on the fake versus real debate and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.
I do believe fakes are poorly made because I have seen co-workers with fake LV's for example, where the canvas part may look identical to the real thing but the give away is the immitation leather handles which crack and peel like old paint within months. I think it's better to carry an inexpensive genuine leather or canvas bag with no label than to carry a fake and I believe there is an obvious reason other than cost why some people chose to carry a fake instead of the inexpensive non-knock-off bag. If cost were the only factor they would be just as happy with the no-name genuine non-designer bag as they are with the fake. So the why spend that much on a bag argument doesn't quite cut it for me.
I do not believe that fakes fund terrorism. That argument popped up after 9/11 and I think some genius P.R. person saw that argument as a great way to make carrying fakes socialy rephrehensible and shameful because the other arguments against fakes were unsuccesful. It was a genius P.R. strategy to link buying fakes with funding terrorism in the post 9/11 world to shame people but I'm just not buying into the "buying fakes fund terrorism" claim.
That being said, I don't get angry when I see people with fakes. I'm just thankful I'm blessed enough to afford the real thing. I hope this doesn't provoke a barrage of angry nasty posts. That'sjust my take on the matter on the fake versus real debate and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.
Last edited:
^Too true! Connacht might be the least bag-minded place on earth. Some people I talked with were totally baffled by the notion of "fake bag", as if it was a practical joke: something what looks like a bag but isn't. Like a plastic banana or those water-squirting 'cameras', KWIM. Either you can't put your stuff into it or it falls out at the bottom.
I think a lot of people don't give a damn toss about bags' provenance - they seem to believe that all bags are made in some big, abstract, faraway "bag factory" churning out little bags, big bags, red bags, Prada bags, Primark bags, monogrammed bags, blue bags, leather bags, LV bags, plasticky bags, black bags, & so forth & so forth. (I'm not making it up!
hahahahahahaha very true!
Venus - You made a good point, IMO, about the terrorism aspect. After 9/11, EVERYTHING was linked to terrorism. Just the world we were living in at the time.....even though it's died down a bit...that fear is still alive and well.
I carry only authentic designer bag and I usually purchase a bag because I love the look of a bag and appreciate the workmanship. I do tend to chose bags that are less copied because I like exclusivity. I am label whore and I freely admit it without shame.
I do believe fakes are poorly made because I have seen co-workers with fake LV's for example, where the canvas part may look identical to the real thing but the give away is the immitation leather handles which crack and peel like old paint within months. I think it's better to carry an inexpensive genuine leather or canvas bag with no label than to carry a fake and I believe there is an obvious reason other than cost why some people chose to carry a fake instead of the inexpensive non-knock-off bag. If cost were the only factor they would be just as happy with the no-name genuine non-designer bag as they are with the fake. So the why spend that much on a bag argument doesn't quite cut it for me.
I do not believe that fakes fund terrorism. That argument popped up after 9/11 and I think some genius P.R. person saw that argument as a great way to make carrying fakes socialy rephrehensible and shameful because the other arguments against fakes were unsuccesful. It was a genius P.R. strategy to link buying fakes with funding terrorism in the post 9/11 world to shame people but I'm just not buying into the "buying fakes fund terrorism" claim.
That being said, I don't get angry when I see people with fakes. I'm just thankful I'm blessed enough to afford the real thing. I hope this doesn't provoke a barrage of angry nasty posts. That'sjust my take on the matter on the fake versus real debate and everyone is entitled to his or her opinion.
I liked your post. And I also feel blessed to be able to buy what I like. But I can also see how, in a society SO obsessed with status and its related symbols, how someone could be drawn to buy a fake. It's a lot of pressure and it takes a great deal of confidence to not give in, young or old. I happen to live in one of the wealthiest communities in the United States and I see grown adults trying to "out do" one another all day long. I feel even more blessed to not really care and not play into that. As I said before, I carry my designer handbags with the same confidence that I carry my Eddie Bauer diaper bag (it was the most functional of what was out there!). My choices are based on what I like and not what everyone else has.
So beautifully put. I feel there is too much of the "status" mentality. And that does drive the fake market.
But it does work both ways, people still maintain the LV sold at Costco must be fake. Hermes has sold kelly bags on Bluefly.
very, very interesting article at the huffington post.
Alexandra Sinderbrand: Fashion's Fight Against Fakes: An Exercise in Hypocrisy
Fashion's Fight Against Fakes: An Exercise in Hypocrisy
Let's be honest: The equation, Made In China + Prada Logo - Child Labor Laws = Designer Knockoffs, isn't all that shocking for anyone whose reading material extends beyond Vogue. We're vaguely aware of the counterfeit industry's use of sweatshop labor; we'd just rather not think about it. It kinda kills our shopping buzz.
Acknowledging the connection between retail and the rights compromised to produce what we buy is a rarity in the world of material goodies. Guilt of the socially conscious ilk is (and always has been) toxic for business. At least that's what the Fashion industry's banking on with its crusade against counterfeit goods. Welcome to the Fight Against Fakes.
The story goes that buying cheap replicas ($) of authentic luxury goods ($$$$) isn't a victimless crime; that child labor and human trafficking are intimately connected with faux Louis Vuitton bags and Chanel "inspired" shades. According to editorial authorities (Harper's Bazaar, in this case) Fakes Are Never In Fashion. Seeing as what's In Fashion is obvs more important than what's in our checking accounts, we're to boycott the Fake in favor of the Real. We're decent, law-abiding, compassionate fashionistas, after all; anything that's So Cheap, It's Criminal isn't for us.
2009-07-20-95237Fakebag.jpg That knockoffs come with a side of sweatshop labor isn't just a valid argument against the counterfeit industry. It's a brilliant marketing strategy, one that paints Fashion -- an industry notorious for its elitism and exclusivity -- as a beacon of altruism, a sartorial crusader all-too-eager to right the wrongdoings of its evil spawn.
Boycott counterfeit goods, and Fashion will save the "sad, tired and dirty children" in Thailand from slave-like working conditions in which they suffer continual abuse; boycott counterfeit goods, and Fashion will provide the 750,000 American jobs outsourced by the industry of Fakes.
The message so artfully implied by the propaganda surrounding Fashion's crusade is clear: Authentic luxury goods don't damage the world, knockoffs do, and if we care about the world at all, we'll embrace the former in lieu of the latter. It's a classic case of Good vs. Evil where the evidence against designer replicas is simply too damning to make us question its source. And that's no coincidence.
Unfortunately for Fashion, the notion that expensive and real is any less criminal than cheap and fake is a massive crock of ****.
Activism might be like-so-hot-right-now. But it wasn't in vogue last summer, when Turkish leather factory DESA harassed and fired any worker foolish enough to protest "extensive and mandatory overtime" and ask for benefits and minimum wage. DESA management even sanctioned kidnap attempts on the children of its workers. Since this sounds like the same kind of morally questionable crap embraced by the counterfeit industry, it's logical to assume that DESA-produced leather is used to make fake designer bags... Right?
Wrong. So effing wrong. The main buyer of DESA-manufactured leather isn't Pvada. It's the real thing. When Prada learned of these offenses via labor rights activist group Clean Clothes Campaign, the coveted brand elegantly distanced itself and refused to take action in support of the workers' case.
There it is -- that placid, self-contained sigh breathed by the luxury goods industry whenever the world outside of its privileged target market asks to be heard. It's time to lay the smackdown on snobbery. Get excited.
Activism was also Out in 2002, when luxury goods conglomerate PPR took some heat for contracting supplier factories engaged in similarly subpar treatment of their workers. What family in India can't live on 10 cents an hour? Workers in the Philippines want to be paid minimum wage? The nerve!
Guess who PPR's all-star player is? Gucci. And we can't talk about Gucci without double airkissing all the labels it owns -- I wouldn't want anyone's feelings to get hurt. So, if you've ever wondered about the origins of those bags we covet, dream on and drool over -- the Yves Saint Laurent Bowler, the Balenciaga Satchel, the Alexander McQueen Messenger, the Stella McCartney Clutch, the Bottega Veneta Tote -- wonder no more.
They're all owned by Gucci, who's owned by PPR, who once got their goods from factories where workers were denied basic human rights. I'm using past tense here because PPR canceled contracts with its sweatshop abuse-riddled supplier factories shortly after reports of violations surfaced.
Crisis of conscience? Hardly -- try damage control. PPR didn't attempt to rectify the abuse suffered by the hands behind its bags. Tres drag. Instead, it pulled the money plug, and it put those hands out of work.
Prada, Gucci. Yves Saint Laurent, Alexander McQueen, Balenciaga, Stella McCartney, Bottega Veneta. All high-end heavyweights frequently ripped off by the counterfeit industry; all entities poised to benefit from the mockery of a cause that is Fashion's Fight Against Fakes; all labels happy to expose and condemn their counterfeit competition for crimes that they, in all their brandtastic glory, too have committed. Hypocrisy must be the next big thing.
Ultimately, this isn't a judgment on anyone who's ever bought anything Real, Fake or otherwise. Shopping in a fiscally, socially and environmentally responsible way is no easy task, and few brands are as free and clear of offenses as Fashion would have you believe. The best way to shop sustainably is to recycle what's already out there, but the argument for thrift and re-sale is another post for another day.
Buying an authentic designer goody in lieu its counterfeit alternative isn't a step toward ending sweatshop labor: It's playing into Fashion's latest and greatest, activism-focused marketing initiative. If the industry really wants to educate consumers about what they buy, perhaps it should start by doing what it regularly encourages us to do: Take a good, hard look in the mirror.
Alexandra Sinderbrand: Fashion's Fight Against Fakes: An Exercise in Hypocrisy
Fashion's Fight Against Fakes: An Exercise in Hypocrisy
Let's be honest: The equation, Made In China + Prada Logo - Child Labor Laws = Designer Knockoffs, isn't all that shocking for anyone whose reading material extends beyond Vogue. We're vaguely aware of the counterfeit industry's use of sweatshop labor; we'd just rather not think about it. It kinda kills our shopping buzz.
Acknowledging the connection between retail and the rights compromised to produce what we buy is a rarity in the world of material goodies. Guilt of the socially conscious ilk is (and always has been) toxic for business. At least that's what the Fashion industry's banking on with its crusade against counterfeit goods. Welcome to the Fight Against Fakes.
The story goes that buying cheap replicas ($) of authentic luxury goods ($$$$) isn't a victimless crime; that child labor and human trafficking are intimately connected with faux Louis Vuitton bags and Chanel "inspired" shades. According to editorial authorities (Harper's Bazaar, in this case) Fakes Are Never In Fashion. Seeing as what's In Fashion is obvs more important than what's in our checking accounts, we're to boycott the Fake in favor of the Real. We're decent, law-abiding, compassionate fashionistas, after all; anything that's So Cheap, It's Criminal isn't for us.
2009-07-20-95237Fakebag.jpg That knockoffs come with a side of sweatshop labor isn't just a valid argument against the counterfeit industry. It's a brilliant marketing strategy, one that paints Fashion -- an industry notorious for its elitism and exclusivity -- as a beacon of altruism, a sartorial crusader all-too-eager to right the wrongdoings of its evil spawn.
Boycott counterfeit goods, and Fashion will save the "sad, tired and dirty children" in Thailand from slave-like working conditions in which they suffer continual abuse; boycott counterfeit goods, and Fashion will provide the 750,000 American jobs outsourced by the industry of Fakes.
The message so artfully implied by the propaganda surrounding Fashion's crusade is clear: Authentic luxury goods don't damage the world, knockoffs do, and if we care about the world at all, we'll embrace the former in lieu of the latter. It's a classic case of Good vs. Evil where the evidence against designer replicas is simply too damning to make us question its source. And that's no coincidence.
Unfortunately for Fashion, the notion that expensive and real is any less criminal than cheap and fake is a massive crock of ****.
Activism might be like-so-hot-right-now. But it wasn't in vogue last summer, when Turkish leather factory DESA harassed and fired any worker foolish enough to protest "extensive and mandatory overtime" and ask for benefits and minimum wage. DESA management even sanctioned kidnap attempts on the children of its workers. Since this sounds like the same kind of morally questionable crap embraced by the counterfeit industry, it's logical to assume that DESA-produced leather is used to make fake designer bags... Right?
Wrong. So effing wrong. The main buyer of DESA-manufactured leather isn't Pvada. It's the real thing. When Prada learned of these offenses via labor rights activist group Clean Clothes Campaign, the coveted brand elegantly distanced itself and refused to take action in support of the workers' case.
There it is -- that placid, self-contained sigh breathed by the luxury goods industry whenever the world outside of its privileged target market asks to be heard. It's time to lay the smackdown on snobbery. Get excited.
Activism was also Out in 2002, when luxury goods conglomerate PPR took some heat for contracting supplier factories engaged in similarly subpar treatment of their workers. What family in India can't live on 10 cents an hour? Workers in the Philippines want to be paid minimum wage? The nerve!
Guess who PPR's all-star player is? Gucci. And we can't talk about Gucci without double airkissing all the labels it owns -- I wouldn't want anyone's feelings to get hurt. So, if you've ever wondered about the origins of those bags we covet, dream on and drool over -- the Yves Saint Laurent Bowler, the Balenciaga Satchel, the Alexander McQueen Messenger, the Stella McCartney Clutch, the Bottega Veneta Tote -- wonder no more.
They're all owned by Gucci, who's owned by PPR, who once got their goods from factories where workers were denied basic human rights. I'm using past tense here because PPR canceled contracts with its sweatshop abuse-riddled supplier factories shortly after reports of violations surfaced.
Crisis of conscience? Hardly -- try damage control. PPR didn't attempt to rectify the abuse suffered by the hands behind its bags. Tres drag. Instead, it pulled the money plug, and it put those hands out of work.
Prada, Gucci. Yves Saint Laurent, Alexander McQueen, Balenciaga, Stella McCartney, Bottega Veneta. All high-end heavyweights frequently ripped off by the counterfeit industry; all entities poised to benefit from the mockery of a cause that is Fashion's Fight Against Fakes; all labels happy to expose and condemn their counterfeit competition for crimes that they, in all their brandtastic glory, too have committed. Hypocrisy must be the next big thing.
Ultimately, this isn't a judgment on anyone who's ever bought anything Real, Fake or otherwise. Shopping in a fiscally, socially and environmentally responsible way is no easy task, and few brands are as free and clear of offenses as Fashion would have you believe. The best way to shop sustainably is to recycle what's already out there, but the argument for thrift and re-sale is another post for another day.
Buying an authentic designer goody in lieu its counterfeit alternative isn't a step toward ending sweatshop labor: It's playing into Fashion's latest and greatest, activism-focused marketing initiative. If the industry really wants to educate consumers about what they buy, perhaps it should start by doing what it regularly encourages us to do: Take a good, hard look in the mirror.