Why Do People Buy Fake Designer Bags Or Fake Designer Anything?

[TrinketTattle]

^

Yeah your right, one main reason why people buy fakes handbags or anything fake is to avoid fashion houses' ridiculous price tags.

I do sometimes wonder when will big fashion houses like Chanel, Hermes and LV will stop doing their yearly (sometimes twice a year) ridiculous price increase. I understand they want to create that "exclusivity" but I can't understand the $500+ price increase.

+1


I think a lot of people are upset because of the price hikes. In Belgium, we pay 21% in taxes and when you combine this with the price increases, a designer bag becomes virtually unattainable, even for reasonably wealthy people. I believe that is a big reason for the production of fakes, sometimes exclusive really becomes too exclusive.

 

[Manelieht]

Yeah I get that exclusivity thing and the crazy part is I do still try to work hard and save up more $$$ in able to afford those lovely handbags LOL. Actually the price increase kinda make feel challenged that why I know I will never buy a fake handbag because there is no challenge getting it.

I think higher prices can be tempting because we are promised higher quality. And sometimes you are so in love with a certain bag design you rather pay more than get a fake. In Europe it is also VERY difficult to get a super fake from China. Customs take every package apart and shred fake bags to pieces if needed. Plus you get a notice from a lawyer. That doesn't sound fun.

I wonder just how much more exclusive these brands want to get, and whom they expect to be selling to. In the US the average household income is around 50K. The average are already priced out of premier designers with a Chanel bag now being about 10% annual income. Even the upper middle class are priced out for the most part. That leaves maybe 5% of the country's population all these companies are trying to cater to exclusively. That does not seem sustainable for every brand currently trying it, and I think the bubble will burst on the wannabe premiers in the next couple of years.

I wonder if it will actually encourage more superfakes, especially among the upper middle class who have gone from being seen as valued customers to riff raff that needs to be kept out. It can be offensive to people who have worked hard to make a very good income to be treated like a cancer that needs to be cut out. Carrying a fake Chanel can be a real stick it to 'em kind of thing.

Exactly my thoughts. I think this will help the superfake industry rise to more popularity. I know many women who would not mind getting a fake if the quality was good. My uncles wife loves LV bags, but at some point even she got a fake bag when on vacation. And she wears it paired with all her designer items.
The whole fake vs. authentic thing does not seem to be a big deal to people outside of TPF.
And I totally agree about being offended. I personally am. I think everyone with a lovefor high fashion and great quality and craftsmanship should be able to afford these things with a little saving.

Thanks, this is precisely the type of info I was looking for. According to writer, Dana Thomas, Chinese companies are 1) spending a lot of money hiring Italian craftsmen to teach the counterfeiters, 2) using 3D computer scans and other high quality electronic equipment and "the process produces perfect copies of patterns"

We are talking organized crime here, using former employees who divulge corporate trade secrets, hiring away legitimate European craftsmen with better wages than the couture houses themselves to teach, probably, my guess here, making deals with subcontractors of the same couture houses to supply them with authentic materials like the correct zipper and hardware company.

I may be wrong but weren't there fake Balenciagas with authentic Lampo zippers made with the same leather because they were from the same source. The only reason it was spotted as a fake was the non-existent ID number or the hardware was twisted in the opposite direction, or the color was not made during that season. It was simply not a quality issue. I would assume the serious criminal would be following the tPF to make corrections. The result is the criminals willing to invest millions to make quality goods are benefiting by the price increases of the design houses because their copies would be sold for $400 and higher where the originals are $2000 and higher. We are talking copies so accurate even returns of fakes would be undetectable by department stores and possibly resold. This is like identity theft.

On one hand we have couture houses selling items that don't require expensive materials (canvas, plastic) at astronomical prices. Their only value is the "uniquenesss"??? of the idea. And on the other hand, we have multi-million dollar crime organizations willing to invest in undetectable superfakes because the cost of the same material is low (high end canvas or plastic is still what it is, and even the best vachetta or other leather has its limits) and they have a trained workforce whose working conditions are not much worse than the legitimate ones (again superfake makers, not the cheapo replica sweatshops) livable working class wages.

If the superfakes can be made at the same cost as the legitimate ones, then the only difference becomes costs of marketing which the criminals don't have, allowing for lower prices and still a healthy profit margin. Raising prices beyond the reasonable cost of materials by the likes of LV, Chanel, Prada, Burberry may actually be doing the counterfeiters a favor because it allows them to make better fakes at higher quality cost and still sell at a price to make a good profit. In order to stop this, the couture houses will have to have astronomical quality goods to match their prices which means less proft margin. So who's being greedy? It goes back to what is the meaning of luxury.

This all seems possible.
This site xxx. is all about fake handbags and the blogger actually tries to find the best replicas out there. There seem to be a gazillion sites that sell fake handbags!

And, may I share with you my own Chloe Paddington Replica. I bought it off of ioffer in 2006 thinking it was real. I really did not know much about bags then.
https://lh6.googleusercontent.com/-alBTTcG9uQk/SxCuS9eU6pI/AAAAAAAAEHY/Y7wezb1cDCs/w275-h366-no/IMG_0059.JPG
It was a real disappointment. I never wore it and I was unable to get rid of it. But the detail of the bag wasn't too bad, even though it is a fairly old replica. The stamps weren't amazing and it wasn't real leather though.
https://lh5.googleusercontent.com/-rhoQwLcs6j8/SxCuVM6qyWI/AAAAAAAAEIM/f5E-f7ZfPJs/w488-h366-no/IMG_0078.JPG
I actually had it analyzed then by a purseforum...might have been tpf, I forgot.

 

[jadeaymanalac]

I wonder just how much more exclusive these brands want to get, and whom they expect to be selling to. In the US the average household income is around 50K. The average are already priced out of premier designers with a Chanel bag now being about 10% annual income. Even the upper middle class are priced out for the most part. That leaves maybe 5% of the country's population all these companies are trying to cater to exclusively. That does not seem sustainable for every brand currently trying it, and I think the bubble will burst on the wannabe premiers in the next couple of years.

I wonder if it will actually encourage more superfakes, especially among the upper middle class who have gone from being seen as valued customers to riff raff that needs to be kept out. It can be offensive to people who have worked hard to make a very good income to be treated like a cancer that needs to be cut out. Carrying a fake Chanel can be a real stick it to 'em kind of thing.

Exactly! How exclusive they want their product to be? If that is the case, why they keep on putting up stores around the world? Here in Hong Kong for a small city Chanel have 7 stores not included the small shop for perfumes and cosmetics. If they really want to give exclusivity they should limit their stores and by appointment or invitations clients only.

I am fortunate to have good salary job and I'm single with no child that's why I'm able to afford a premium designer handbag. But surely when they day come that become I am a parent I know I won't be able to splurge like this.

To be honest, I'm ok with price increase but what is NOT OK is the ridiculous and unreasonable $500+ price increase w/c is for me very offending. Thus, the spawning fake handbags because many consumer don't like spending a life savings for a handbag.

 

[jadeaymanalac]

+1


I think a lot of people are upset because of the price hikes. In Belgium, we pay 21% in taxes and when you combine this with the price increases, a designer bag becomes virtually unattainable, even for reasonably wealthy people. I believe that is a big reason for the production of fakes, sometimes exclusive really becomes too exclusive.

Yikes!!! Here in HK we don't have tax on goods so its alot cheaper to buy a designer handbag here that else where in southeast asia. But still despite of it many Hong Kong people still go to china and buy superfake handbag to avoid massive price tag of the real thing.

 

[foreverdcp]

Being a college student, I don't have the financial income to buy certain bags that I love. I do own luxury designer items due to my wonderful parents. Within my own budget's limit, I would consider buying a replica. I'm being honest and I understand why people are against fakes. I know the replica bag wouldn't have the same feeling when it comes to my other designer stuff.

 

[Mariapia]

Exactly! How exclusive they want their product to be? If that is the case, why they keep on putting up stores around the world? Here in Hong Kong for a small city Chanel have 7 stores not included the small shop for perfumes and cosmetics. If they really want to give exclusivity they should limit their stores and by appointment or invitations clients only.

I am fortunate to have good salary job and I'm single with no child that's why I'm able to afford a premium designer handbag. But surely when they day come that become I am a parent I know I won't be able to splurge like this.

To be honest, I'm ok with price increase but what is NOT OK is the ridiculous and unreasonable $500+ price increase w/c is for me very offending. Thus, the spawning fake handbags because many consumer don't like spending a life savings for a handbag.

It's also because they are opening stores everywhere that they increase their prices! Who pays the huge rents?
The customers of course!

 

[cheidel]

+1


I think a lot of people are upset because of the price hikes. In Belgium, we pay 21% in taxes and when you combine this with the price increases, a designer bag becomes virtually unattainable, even for reasonably wealthy people. I believe that is a big reason for the production of fakes, sometimes exclusive really becomes too exclusive.

+2 I have never understood the continuous LV price increases!!

 

[petite_chic]

I wonder if part of the reason for price increases is to shake off middleclass customers. This would be a concession to their wealthiest clients who prefer to stay exclusive and when these folks lay down their money, its not for a single item but an entire collection from head to toe, made to measure, with assurance that no one else has the same pieces - the real haute lifestyle. These people would find mass production cheapens the brand and demand design houses to make sacrifices as in get rid of the bargain hunters in exchange for their loyalty. Let Coach and Michael Kors serve the masses but Chanel should stay unreachable. Well at least that's my theory.

 

[Manelieht]

I wonder if part of the reason for price increases is to shake off middleclass customers. This would be a concession to their wealthiest clients who prefer to stay exclusive and when these folks lay down their money, its not for a single item but an entire collection from head to toe, made to measure, with assurance that no one else has the same pieces - the real haute lifestyle. These people would find mass production cheapens the brand and demand design houses to make sacrifices as in get rid of the bargain hunters in exchange for their loyalty. Let Coach and Michael Kors serve the masses but Chanel should stay unreachable. Well at least that's my theory.

That is pretty much what the article says that I linked too and I think that sadly it is the truth.

 

[Maice]

I think some people buy fakes because they want the look, but not the price. I also think that in general, people are approaching this in a way that can be improved. Instead of just saving up for bags, maybe people should be focusing on improving their lives in such a way wherein they can easily afford luxury goods. So, not a "micro" view, not a "bag-to-bag" existence, if you will. Look at the bigger picture, work hard to improve your financial situation - THEN think about luxury goods. There's nothing necessarily wrong with the "bag-to-bag" existence either - I just think that what I mentioned is probably a better way to approach it. That's just me, of course. To each his own.

 

[misskris03]

I think some people buy fakes because they want the look, but not the price. I also think that in general, people are approaching this in a way that can be improved. Instead of just saving up for bags, maybe people should be focusing on improving their lives in such a way wherein they can easily afford luxury goods.

I'm not sure that anyone who makes 55K a year has the ability to "improve their lives" in such a way that they can "easily afford" a new Chanel handbag. Middle class wages have been stagnant for years in the US, unfortunately

 

[jadeaymanalac]

I'm not sure that anyone who makes 55K a year has the ability to "improve their lives" in such a way that they can "easily afford" a new Chanel handbag. Middle class wages have been stagnant for years in the US, unfortunately

I used to think like this but I realized I have the power to be limitless. So if there's a WILL there's definitely a WAY.

 

[vintagefinds]

I'm not sure that anyone who makes 55K a year has the ability to "improve their lives" in such a way that they can "easily afford" a new Chanel handbag. Middle class wages have been stagnant for years in the US, unfortunately

I want my husband to have a career he loves more than I want a Chanel bag. I'm not sure obtaining luxury goods should be the motivating factor in anyone's life. Work hard and if it happens one day, great. But I'd hate to think of people shunning professions like firefighting or teaching or social work because it won't get them to a Gucci bag.

 

[Maice]

I'm not sure that anyone who makes 55K a year has the ability to "improve their lives" in such a way that they can "easily afford" a new Chanel handbag. Middle class wages have been stagnant for years in the US, unfortunately

I want my husband to have a career he loves more than I want a Chanel bag. I'm not sure obtaining luxury goods should be the motivating factor in anyone's life. Work hard and if it happens one day, great. But I'd hate to think of people shunning professions like firefighting or teaching or social work because it won't get them to a Gucci bag.

I see where you're coming from. I would think though that if people chose those professions, then they'd also understand that they're not going to get the lifestyle that would afford them luxury goods on a regular basis. That's pretty much in line with what I'm saying - if you chose this certain profession/life, then know your limits. If you want to be able to afford an expensive lifestyle, then you might want to rethink it. I admire the way you think, in that you prioritize your husband's happiness/fulfillment over material wants.


Choosing those professions is admirable of course - it's just a matter of realizing the realities that come with it, both good and bad. I would admire people in these professions more (with or without luxury goods), versus other people who CAN afford luxury goods regularly who live less than admirable lives, quite frankly. I do think everyone should stick to what their lifestyle can afford them - and if they're not happy with that, then they should work on changing it, or just accept what they have. It's not just about the luxury bags - I used that to illustrate, but I was thinking of expensive lifestyles in general.


I feel strongly about this because I have seen people buried in debt over such nonsense, and I have also seen people miserable with their lives because they couldn't live within their means. Again, a bag-to-bag existence is fine, nothing wrong with that - granted you saved for that and all.

 

[Maice]

I used to think like this but I realized I have the power to be limitless. So if there's a WILL there's definitely a WAY.

I agree with this, very much so. ETA: I actually see that you work hard and at this point, given your lifestyle, can afford these things. Good for you!


I just want to say that at the end of the day, what I am saying here is - live within your means. If you cannot afford luxury goods on a regular basis - then don't buy them on a regular basis, until you can afford them. If you are unhappy with your life because you cannot get the things you want - then work on changing it. That simple. Either accept it, or work to change it. Don't live beyond your means. That's something I feel strongly about.


Now, as I mentioned in my earlier post - a "bag-to-bag" existence isn't a bad thing either, granted you don't get buried in debt over it. I am clarifying again to ensure people understand my point. I am not the most eloquent person, so there are times I cannot quite get my point across. Ahhh, now that's one of MY limitations