Good point about the fixation with displaying brand names as a fashion statement. I never got the point of that, myself. Generally, the only label I wear publicly is the characteristic back label on my beloved Levis, and the belt obscures that, anyway. And don’t get me started about Nike, etc…I’d rather not wear Klingon-inspired footwear, thank you.
Well for what it’s worth, I have never owned a single piece of clothing from abercrappie and fitch, the gap, tommy hilfiger, old navy, or pretty much anything else from those crappy overpriced mall stores. I refuse to spend more than 20 bucks on a shirt (and even then, only if it’s something I really like) or 25 bucks on a pair of jeans, unless it’s something spectacular (and as of yet, I have only bought one pair of 35 dollar jeans in my LIFE.)
To be fair, I don’t buy a lot of clothes. I tend to wear something until it practically shreds. My mom has gone around me and thrown away shirts with a few too many holes for her taste, actually…
Me either… though I sometimes buy them used, if the fit or color is right for whoever in the family needs said particular type of garment. I’ve found some very good quality garments at yard sales, but they are rarely the ones with the “big names” on them. My kids don’t care a fig for those names.
It used to be that the store would give away items like T-shirts with the brand name on them to promote the store… then they figured out they could actually get people to pay them to let them advertise for them… not a dumb move on the store’s part, but dim as an old night light on the part of consumers.
Peace,
annie
Yeah!
I must be one of those twenty-somthings that those silly ad marketers are having frustration with trying to peg. I don’t watch much TV anymore because I personally find that more and more it’s either brainless and stupid or outright offensive. For one small example, I get so sick of the commercials advertiseing the “sexiest new show of the year”. Since when was that the supposed to be the most important aspect of a show? To be “sexy”? Pathetic I think… doesn’t sell with me, but apparently it’s supposed to.
As for clothes, I’ve never cared about brands. If the price is right and it’s comfortable and I like it, then who cares what anyone else thinks. Also can’t see spending thirty dollars (or more) on an item when I could get the same or similar item in nearly new condition at a second hand store. A good majority of my clothes consist of six dollar jeans and four dollar shirts, etc. Occasionally I’ll purchase new, but it has to be a good deal or something I really need that I can’t obtain elsewhere for less. Try to stay away from clothes with brand names plastered across the front like a banner, I refuse to be an obvious walking advertisement for some big brand. Another nail in the advertisers coffin of confusion I guess.
Anyhoo… interesting article.
Sara
I remember when my oldest was about thirteen, she went through this phase where she just had to have a particular kind of shoe, she’d die without it. We could easily have afforded it at the time, but there was simply no way I was paying a hundred bucks for a stupid pair of shoes.
So, when Christmas came I got her a gift certificate at a local mall and took her shopping. She discovered that for what she was going to pay for those shoes she could get two pairs of jeans, a skirt, and a sweater.
I never heard about “name brands” again
My oldest son (now in college) is the only one for whom this seemed important, and he is still that way to some extent, so I treat him for Christmas and his birthday.
How I handled the “shoe” thing ~ when out shopping for back-to-school, I told him he could have any shoes in the mall ~ I would contribute X amount toward the shoes, and he could pay the difference out of his savings.
Amazingly, he was able to find a nice pair of shoes without spending a dime of his own money
Mary
I mostly agree with the sentiment of this thread, but, I do find Old Navy to be pretty reasonably priced compared to most of the alternatives.
I get khakis there for $20-25.
When I was growing up, we were dirt poor. If we wanted, for the sake of argument, a pair of levis, mom would put up the price of a pair of sears toughskins, and we would have to come up with the rest.
Regards,
jb
I take it you all only play Generation whistles then?
No. We wear Generations; we play Abells and Copelands.
This article also exposes the economic myth that market forces work instantaneously; and that both businesses and consumers are rational and have perfect knowledge, rather than making mistakes all the time.
If the 18-34 bracket indeed has less value, the market will adjust, but slowly and with some pain.
Caj
Spot on, Caj! You win the hearty handshake and pat on the back!
BTW, did you know this link was intended to remind you of the movie industry?
You can’t get things much cheaper than the clearance rack at Old Navy. Plus almost all their clothes are comfortable enough to sleep in, which is my major requirement for clothing. If I wouldn’t be comfortable enough to sleep in it, why walk around wearing it?
I don’t wear sneakers, but I will pay the extra money for shoes by Ecco or Simple. My feets got to be comfortable. Luckily I live right by a big outlet center where you can get good shoes on the cheap.
Makes you wonder where most of this merchandise is manufactured…hhmmmmm.
I for one refuse to patronize WalMart…their marketing strategy of treating the entire North American market as a loss leader is a deplorable one in oh so many ways.
Yah, I noticed that. 
Of course, even if the industry is completely wrong about what people want, that doesn’t change the fact that they are motivated fundamentally by profit. Either they put “filth flarn filth” on the screen because people want it, or because they think people want it. Either way, “filth flarn filth” is just a product of simple supply and demand.
Speaking of which, I personally think the worst thing about seeing a movie in the theater is sitting through gawdawful cheesy trailers. Especially the ones with the nonsensical voice-over they must assume nobody is actually listening to: “This summer … the only thing that matters … is living the dream … of a man who had to find his heart … in order to find hope … etc etc etc.”
These are the movie trailer equivalent of automobile commercials. Then you have trailers for action movies aimed at junior-high school kids, in which someone is just about to say the F-word and the trailer stops. Oooh, someone’s going to say the F-word. Cool! I’ve got to see that movie!
Caj
Well, as a “plus-size” woman, I’m pretty limited in what I can buy in those trendy stores anyway, so I don’t bother shopping there. Unfortunately, I also don’t do well at second-hand stores because of the size issue, and because I don’t have the patience to sort through all the racks in search of the couple of things that might fit.
We were fairly poor when I was growing up, especially when my dad made a career change and took a 65% cut in pay overnight. (I was 10 and the youngest of 6). My mom also did the thing where if we wanted a particular brand, she’d give us what she would pay and we would come up with the difference. Normally, I would of course just get the off-brand, but I do remember when I was about 12 saving up my money to finally be able to buy the dove gray Nikes with the pink swoosh that I was dying for (what can I say, I was definitely young and tasteless). I don’t remember now how much they cost, but I was never prouder of any article of clothing, sure, because of the “brand name” (I think it was probably the first brand name thing I ever owned), but also because I did pay (mostly) for them myself.
And I will spend more money on good shoes, but then they last and life is definitely too short to wear uncomfortable shoes. I am addicted to Birkenstocks, but I almost always buy them on clearance as well.
Beth
I never went into abercrombie until a month or so ago, b/c of that annoying abercrombie song from a few years ago-- Anyway my first time in there they had cords for $5.00 on sale.