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

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#3,421
zestylemons said:
Hi, thanks for your kind answers. And yes, unfortunately it's a fake so you're right, it's best off in the bin :)
To lady Sarah, I agree it sucks to throw away something that is still useable, but I don't want to get in trouble so I suppose the bin it is... Sigh, what a waste of money that was!
Oh well, lesson learned.
Thanks again :D
Click to expand...
If you decide not to bin it like missarewa recommended, I suggest writing fake somewhere on the bag or take off a hangtag that might suggest it's the real thing, so they might not resell the fake bag.

I've been seeing tons of designer 'inspired' but really look like counterfeits on Instagram and its just so annoying since no one to report it to.
 
#3,422
Ok, so I have to get this off my chest because it's been on my mind lately...
What REALLY annoys me about fakes or involving them, is when someone tries to pretend or pass off that they are real, when anybody that is a fan of the brand, has done research, knows the products, and can just tell quality, can tell that it is an obvious fake...

It honestly gets me so worked up because, if you can't afford it, you shouldn't have it...
It takes me months and months to save up for purchases, and in that time I do so much research and planning, in order to get exactly what I want and know all I can find out. So all my items are very important to me and were carefully selected.
All of that work and time and energy and saving, and some person is trying to pass off a fake of an item, simply for attention and who knows for what else...

It's just so classless to me, and shows total lack of respect for brands and quality and history, etc. especially if you "say you're into fashion" or better I should say, "try to act like you're into fashion."

Like, people work so hard for some of their items, and some person is just "la-la-la"-ing to followers or whatever that their item is real....

:jrs: lol sorry for my long rant! It's just this one instagrammer is always trying to pass off fakes, and gets likes from so many people including some insta famous people who are fashion and luxury icons on there.

I'd gladly tell anyone who it is if you want to know Hahahah :p :roflmfao:
 
#3,423
What about designers inspired bags or replicas? I am assuming they are lumped together with fakes and counterfeits? When the buyers maybe just want to own the designs without shelling out the thousands? By the way I do not own any inspired or replica bags, all my bags are real from in stores and reebonz.
 
#3,425
@b_lux it's ultimately just instagram though, right? :)

More seriously: we're all born with different means into this world- attractive and not-so; brilliant and middling; charismatic and dull; king and commoner. These things can be worked on (exercise; makeup; acting lessons; selling out to work in finance) but ultimately your lot is your lot.

I love luxury bags as things. High-end clothes even more. I hope to build my small collection of them. But I still think that the idea of fashion being about having the same things that the wealthy have is both dangerous and highly antidemocratic. It's equating money with taste. So even while I admire the products of prestigious fashion houses, I'm uncomfortable saying something like "it's just classless" to use fakes.

Yes, I get what you mean. And yes, you're completely right. But that word - "class"-- ! To the extent that it's so embarrassing to have fakes -- "Oh, you want to show you're in X club, but you didn't want to pay the dues? Or you couldn't?" -- it also should make us ashamed that entree into some exclusive club is demarcated by money. What makes a 15-year-old heiress more deserving than a middle-class mom? They've grown up under the same values and probably both wanted to be princesses when they grew up. Only one had her dream come true.

It's interesting, because in a sense the brands of LV and Burberry and Gucci and Chanel (esp those) thrive because they're ripped off. Everyone wants in - and to the real deal. The fakes are part of the aspirational culture that creates demand for a brand which the fashion house then sells in cheap, branded gear: LV, Gucci, and Burberry all make most of their money on things with logo print, while Chanel sells perfume, makeup, & accessories at entry-level. Even Coach has lower-end prints for the aspiring customers.

In a way, the millions wearing fake Burberry check on the streets of Istanbul (I was there -- I counted) give my Burberry bag and coat more meaning, not less. I get to feel subtly better than them, don't I? It's only when the "faker" gets something we want like Instagram recognition that it stings a little.

TL;DR: the whole point of luxury brands is that they're slightly out of reach and make themselves that way on purpose. Fakes are bad and make us feel crummy, sure. But we should also think about why people are driven to want fakes... to anyone with a sense of ********ic kinship, that should make us far, far more uncomfortable.
 
Last edited:
#3,426
babysunshine said:
What about designers inspired bags or replicas? I am assuming they are lumped together with fakes and counterfeits? When the buyers maybe just want to own the designs without shelling out the thousands? By the way I do not own any inspired or replica bags, all my bags are real from in stores and reebonz.
Click to expand...

Everything is "inspired." Military uniforms begat the Burberry trench begat other trenches. Something inspired Chanel before Chanel inspired MK, Kate Spade, Tory Burch, and every other fashion shop in Guangdong to put envelopes at the ends of chains. Chanel fans would know their brand design's history better. But emulation is adoration and I don't think there is anything wrong, or disrespectful, about that.

There's a theory that fashion is driven by three main forces:
- the rich wishing to distinguish themselves from the poor;
- the young wishing to distinguish themselves from the old;
- everyone wanting to be the center of attention in whatever room they're in.

So trends will continue to evolve. Designers will be pushed forward into new shapes and styles. If MK keeps beating Prada at selling saffiano like Ford beat Rolls-Royce, that means Prada will have to invent a new bag shape and texture for its customers to buy and feel good about themselves. Innovation! I think that's a good thing all around.
 
#3,427
babysunshine said:
What about designers inspired bags or replicas? I am assuming they are lumped together with fakes and counterfeits? When the buyers maybe just want to own the designs without shelling out the thousands? By the way I do not own any inspired or replica bags, all my bags are real from in stores and reebonz.
Click to expand...

Inspired are not the same at all as replicas. The main difference is that they are legal, so their production, working conditions, taxation etc will be regulated to the same extend as any other legal item. That in my book means they don't do the horrendous harm that illegal counterfeits do, anyone who is seriously interested please go back and read about this as plenty of responses have already been posted.
 
#3,428
elisian said:
@b_lux it's ultimately just instagram though, right? :)

More seriously: we're all born with different means into this world- attractive and not-so; brilliant and middling; charismatic and dull; king and commoner. These things can be worked on (exercise; makeup; acting lessons; selling out to work in finance) but ultimately your lot is your lot.

I love luxury bags as things. High-end clothes even more. I hope to build my small collection of them. But I still think that the idea of fashion being about having the same things that the wealthy have is both dangerous and highly antidemocratic. It's equating money with taste. So even while I admire the products of prestigious fashion houses, I'm uncomfortable saying something like "it's just classless" to use fakes.

Yes, I get what you mean. And yes, you're completely right. But that word - "class"-- ! To the extent that it's so embarrassing to have fakes -- "Oh, you want to show you're in X club, but you didn't want to pay the dues? Or you couldn't?" -- it also should make us ashamed that entree into some exclusive club is demarcated by money. What makes a 15-year-old heiress more deserving than a middle-class mom? They've grown up under the same values and probably both wanted to be princesses when they grew up. Only one had her dream come true.

It's interesting, because in a sense the brands of LV and Burberry and Gucci and Chanel (esp those) thrive because they're ripped off. Everyone wants in - and to the real deal. The fakes are part of the aspirational culture that creates demand for a brand which the fashion house then sells in cheap, branded gear: LV, Gucci, and Burberry all make most of their money on things with logo print, while Chanel sells perfume, makeup, & accessories at entry-level. Even Coach has lower-end prints for the aspiring customers.

In a way, the millions wearing fake Burberry check on the streets of Istanbul (I was there -- I counted) give my Burberry bag and coat more meaning, not less. I get to feel subtly better than them, don't I? It's only when the "faker" gets something we want like Instagram recognition that it stings a little.

TL;DR: the whole point of luxury brands is that they're slightly out of reach and make themselves that way on purpose. Fakes are bad and make us feel crummy, sure. But we should also think about why people are driven to want fakes... to anyone with a sense of ********ic kinship, that should make us far, far more uncomfortable.
Click to expand...

:goodpost:
 
#3,429
This has probably been said before but I think a lot of it is status. Some people don't care if their bag is fake. To the normal person it looks real. If it didn't, this board wouldn't be full of authenticity threads. Some people buy fakes knowing they are fake and some buy thinking they are real but IMO they're buying for the same reason. They want some sort of attention or they just feel good knowing they have a bag with a designer label on it.

I mean why do people buy designer stuff anyway? You can't say it's for quality because IMO fossil bags have the same if not better quality than Coach but you don't see people bragging about their new fossil bag. If someone was so into quality, they would probably carry the same bag for years before buying a new one. My MIL carried the same Wilson leather bag for over 10 years. I asked her why and she said the bag just would not quit and because it was made so well, she couldn't see buying a new one. It finally died a few months ago and my SIL gave her a D&B and my MIL said she hopes it lasts another 10 years because she associates that designer with quality.
Anyway I know this is all over the place. I guess my point is, if people were totally in it for quality there wouldn't be fakes as no one would buy them.
I don't mean to post this to offend anyone as you like what you like and that's OK. I love bags as much as the next person and I'm constantly looking for my perfect bag. One day I will find it.
 
#3,430
ladysarah said:
Inspired are not the same at all as replicas. The main difference is that they are legal, so their production, working conditions, taxation etc will be regulated to the same extend as any other legal item. That in my book means they don't do the horrendous harm that illegal counterfeits do, anyone who is seriously interested please go back and read about this as plenty of responses have already been posted.
Click to expand...


I have in fact read those articles. I think it's fair to say that the manufacturing conditions of fakes can be (doesn't have to be, but can be) abysmal. So are the manufacturing conditions of authentic Gap. And, probably, a lot of high-end pieces, too.

And so are the manufacturing conditions of illegal drugs when they're illegal -- eg, imported/dealt marijuana and cocaine in the US. Now, I am not a pot smoker but I have actually helped to trim plants - in Oregon, for a legal medicinal grower- and we laborers were lovely, articulate, unabused adults. (Though I wasn't paid... hmm? :p) That's what legalization does - it makes things unseedy. It lifts them into the light. The marijuana trade has taken many, many lives, but alcohol once started the freakin' Mafia.

It's not the thing that causes violence/terrorism: it's the fact that it's illegal.

Which is to say: the prosecution of counterfeit luxury is what makes it harmful to laborers. And actually it's what makes fakes so expensive (yes, expensive!) for their quality. The fact that I can buy a fake LV for $200-300 implies I could buy a no-name bag of LV quality for under $100 in a world without as much (1) prosecution, and (2) demand.

(Counterfeit luxury, to me, is a completely different issue than counterfeit food and medicine. So is passing off a counterfeit to a consumer vs a consumer passing one off to the "world".)

To be clear, I don't think we should buy fakes. I also don't think we should buy luxury fashion when we could use that cash to help the poor or to build schools or to cure cancer reach Mars - take your pick. And should we even still be slaughtering animals to stack their corpses up in our closets? ... well, now that I put it that way... Luxury is hedonistic and materialistic and self-absorbed. I don't mean that people who buy it are - but the thing itself is; there's not a lot of ethical rightness to luxury as a use of money, to begin with. A bit of hedonism is right in life. But getting up on our high horse about it... not so much.

Because isn't the most ethical thing we can do to prevent counterfeiting just... stop buying luxury brands? No more logo obsessions. Celebrate indie designers and craftsmanship. Buy local. Buy bespoke. Buy brands who emphasize relevant quality over branding (eg, indestructibleTumi luggage instead of LV). Many of the wealthy (especially the 'old' wealthy and the hypereducated) do this already. Luxury houses even offer it as a service to those willing to pay... but go with a small workshop and you'll get that kind of service at a fraction of the cost.

Others have said that we need to ask (ourselves) why people (we) buy luxury, not why "they" buy fake luxury. The consensus - "status." I agree with it. People think fakes give them status for the same misguided reason they think real bags give them status. That misdirection earns fashion houses billions a year.


-- enough from me on this. I was a social theory student in college and studied a great deal about marketing and brands, so this is my favorite topic for rumination. The disclaimer: I've never intentionally purchased fakes though one's been foisted on me more than one occasion... I don't smoke pot... I don't think you're evil to carry leather although I do think it's morally problematic, because I know we all do morally problematic things, and obviously I too carry leather.
 
#3,431
elisian said:
I have in fact read those articles. I think it's fair to say that the manufacturing conditions of fakes can be (doesn't have to be, but can be) abysmal. So are the manufacturing conditions of authentic Gap. And, probably, a lot of high-end pieces, too.

And so are the manufacturing conditions of illegal drugs when they're illegal -- eg, imported/dealt marijuana and cocaine in the US. Now, I am not a pot smoker but I have actually helped to trim plants - in Oregon, for a legal medicinal grower- and we laborers were lovely, articulate, unabused adults. (Though I wasn't paid... hmm? :p) That's what legalization does - it makes things unseedy. It lifts them into the light. The marijuana trade has taken many, many lives, but alcohol once started the freakin' Mafia.

It's not the thing that causes violence/terrorism: it's the fact that it's illegal.

Which is to say: the prosecution of counterfeit luxury is what makes it harmful to laborers. And actually it's what makes fakes so expensive (yes, expensive!) for their quality. The fact that I can buy a fake LV for $200-300 implies I could buy a no-name bag of LV quality for under $100 in a world without as much (1) prosecution, and (2) demand.

(Counterfeit luxury, to me, is a completely different issue than counterfeit food and medicine. So is passing off a counterfeit to a consumer vs a consumer passing one off to the "world".)

To be clear, I don't think we should buy fakes. I also don't think we should buy luxury fashion when we could use that cash to help the poor or to build schools or to cure cancer reach Mars - take your pick. And should we even still be slaughtering animals to stack their corpses up in our closets? ... well, now that I put it that way... Luxury is hedonistic and materialistic and self-absorbed. I don't mean that people who buy it are - but the thing itself is; there's not a lot of ethical rightness to luxury as a use of money, to begin with. A bit of hedonism is right in life. But getting up on our high horse about it... not so much.

Because isn't the most ethical thing we can do to prevent counterfeiting just... stop buying luxury brands? No more logo obsessions. Celebrate indie designers and craftsmanship. Buy local. Buy bespoke. Buy brands who emphasize relevant quality over branding (eg, indestructibleTumi luggage instead of LV). Many of the wealthy (especially the 'old' wealthy and the hypereducated) do this already. Luxury houses even offer it as a service to those willing to pay... but go with a small workshop and you'll get that kind of service at a fraction of the cost.

Others have said that we need to ask (ourselves) why people (we) buy luxury, not why "they" buy fake luxury. The consensus - "status." I agree with it. People think fakes give them status for the same misguided reason they think real bags give them status. That misdirection earns fashion houses billions a year.


-- enough from me on this. I was a social theory student in college and studied a great deal about marketing and brands, so this is my favorite topic for rumination. The disclaimer: I've never intentionally purchased fakes though one's been foisted on me more than one occasion... I don't smoke pot... I don't think you're evil to carry leather although I do think it's morally problematic, because I know we all do morally problematic things, and obviously I too carry leather.
Click to expand...

:tup: Great post!
 
#3,433
ladysarah said:
My dear, just because some things are wrong it doesn't sort the problem out if we excuse ourselves by doing more harm! The answer is to thoroughly research the provenance of what we buy - with counterfeits, that is simply not possible, as they are illegal. :cool:
Click to expand...

You're right. I don't have to excuse myself since I don't buy fakes. :smile1: I'm just saying I have trouble judging others who do... I do hate people who sell fakes like the real thing, because that's fraud.

Interesting article from 2008 (out of date, I wouldn't bet on Gucci today) @ Forbes might explain why we have different opinions about this stuff: http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/25/brand-luxury-desirable-forbeslife-cx_nr_0325style.html

“In emerging markets such as Latin America and the Asian Pacific, designer brands are probably more of a proclamation,” says David Boyd, vice president of Nielsen Global Research, “a way to set themselves apart or feel that they’ve arrived as part of the new economy.”

Regional differences also emerge over counterfeit goods peddled at market stalls globally. Over a quarter of North Americans questioned believe that fakes are just as good as the real thing, but in Asia, where most of the fakes are produced, consumers hold them in low regard, with only 8% putting them on par with the genuine article.

“People in Asia can pick out a fake bag like no one I’ve seen,” says Boyd, “But in the U.S., people are less aware and less concerned, because in the U.S. luxury brands are considered more mainstream.”
Click to expand...

Maybe this explains our fundamental disagreement. I'm not in that 25% but I'm clearly much closer to it than you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top