Luxury: A Game of Thrones, Without the Dragons. Let’s dissect the inner workings of snobbery and gatekeeping within the luxury goods realm. Grab your monocle and take a seat…
While meandering through the abyss of old blog posts, I stumbled upon one that held my attention. Not due to the anonymous author’s riveting prose but because of a dramatic comment section saga unfolding beneath.
Who hath the right to don CHANEL?
As writers, we know the comment section can be a wild west of opinions, but seeing someone’s hard-earned dream purchase of an LV Onthego bag met with such contempt was disheartening. What was the issue, you ask?
The anonymous commenter had no qualms about fake luxury goods being the scourge of the Earth, which is fair game. The problem arose when the commenter deemed the author unworthy of owning the genuine article based on her less prestigious, low-wage job. According to this critic, the author would never be “one of us, ” even with the bag in hand.” Ah, gatekeeping at its finest.
Who deserves CHANEL?
This got the wheels turning: How do we decide who belongs in our luxury-loving community? What mysterious criteria are used to judge the worthiness of one’s consumer habits? Who, pray to tell, is genuinely “deserving” of luxury? Spoiler alert: everyone. Yes, luxury goods are pricey and not accessible to all, but that doesn’t dictate who’s worthy of ownership.
Luxury Branding suggests luxury consumption helps fulfill social needs and build identity. Luxury goods are status symbols, signaling one’s actual or desired societal position
So why the division? Research from the 2020 Handbook for Luxury Branding suggests luxury consumption helps fulfill social needs and build identity. Luxury goods are status symbols, signaling one’s actual or desired societal position. Possessing such items is often seen as a privilege reserved for those with inherited or earned status. And no, this mindset isn’t fresh off the press.
We haven’t evolved much from ancient Greeks banning Spartans from owning gold or silver. But as luxury brands open the gates to the “non-elites,” it becomes trickier for gatekeepers to maintain their exclusivity. They grasp at straws, like socio-cultural capital, to determine who’s “worthy.” But when someone defies these arbitrary standards, the gatekeepers feel threatened and resort to petty tactics to protect their fragile identity.
After all, we’re all just people with a penchant for pretty things.
Frankly, it’s an unpalatable display. The only undeserving ones are those who forget that kindness and understanding are free and can only enrich a community that thrives on our shared love of luxury. So, let’s ditch the snobbery and gatekeeping, shall we? After all, we’re all just people with a penchant for pretty things.
A growing number of Gen Z and Millennials are drawn to affordable and accessible luxury alternatives, with many opting for dupes instead of the real thing.
Despite their interest in luxury goods, a substantial 47% of 13-39-year-olds have never purchased a luxury product due to affordability concerns. Consequently, the majority concur that luxury brands should offer more affordable items for wider accessibility. This has prompted these innovative generations to explore alternative means of acquiring luxury items.
Gen Z loves GUCCI Dupes
The Thriving GUCCI Dupes Trend Among Gen Z
The luxury resale market, driven by young consumers, offers one way to acquire luxury products at lower prices. According to YPulse, 33% of 13-39-year-olds shop for secondhand luxury items, with high demand for brands like Gucci, Prada, and Louis Vuitton. Moreover, research from The Real Real indicates that sold-out pieces attract 50% more new buyers than regular resale items.
The Rise of Luxury Dupes on Social Media
Another approach that young consumers are adopting to access luxury is by purchasing “dupes” or cheaper imitations of high-end items from affordable brands. This trend has gained significant traction on social media in recent years, with accounts like @dupethat amassing 1.2 million followers on Instagram. Additionally, lifestyle publications frequently share advice on where to find the best luxury dupes. On TikTok, hashtags like #makeupdupes and #dupes have garnered millions of views, with users showcasing fake products from brands like Gucci, Chanel, Lululemon, Louis Vuitton, and Cartier.
A Global Interest in Dupes
Approximately 47% of 13-39-year-olds have purchased a luxury dupe or fake product, with cost being the primary reason they haven’t bought genuine luxury items. This trend has led to a surge in demand for dupes on platforms like Amazon, AliExpress, and DHGate. Interestingly, this phenomenon is not limited to North America; similar numbers have been reported in Western Europe, indicating that the interest in dupes is a global occurrence. While luxury dupes may be beneficial for cost-conscious young consumers, they may pose challenges for luxury brands seeking to maintain exclusivity and brand value.
The resale market has allowed more commoners to obtain these bags, but one’s image is now intricately linked to the bag’s condition.
A 33-year-old fashion enthusiast, Jenny Walton, said HERMÈS Birkin bags never go out of style. She believes a worn-out bag conveys a particular cool factor rather than merely flaunting one’s wealth. Jenny snidely remarked that reality TV stars and their ostentatious displays of pristine HERMÈS Birkin bags are pretty tacky.
Carrying an HERMÈS handbag that looks beat up, like this Birkin bag with faded corners, can suggest it is not simply being worn as a marker of status.Resee
Celebrities like Candice Bergen, Julia Fox, Danielle Steel, and Mary-Kate Olsen have all dared to use HERMÈS bags with visible signs of wear and tear, making them seem more approachable and less focused on material possessions. It’s a subtle way of saying, “I’m so fabulously wealthy that I don’t even care if my $10,000 bag looks like a used-car salesman’s briefcase.”
The iconic Birkin bag, released in 1984, was conceived during a chat between actress Jane Birkin and Jean-Louis Dumas, the CEO of HERMÈS at the time. Jane needed a bag to carry around her children’s belongings, and Dumas obliged. Who knew that such a mundane conversation would lead to the creation of one of the world’s most sought-after status symbols?
As Mr. Marx eloquently said, “It’s just a bag. Who cares if it’s beaten up?”
Even the Haut à Courroies bag, originally designed for transporting saddles and riding boots, has found a new life among the fashion elite. A well-loved version of the bag, once owned by fashion editor André Leon Talley, recently sold for a whopping $32,000 at a Christie’s auction.
W. David Marx, a luxury culture expert, claims that luxury items must possess an air of nonchalance to function as status symbols. A beat-up HERMÈS bag suggests that the owner isn’t merely using it to flaunt their wealth but rather appreciates it as a functional item.
As Mr. Marx eloquently said, “It’s just a bag. Who cares if it’s beaten up?”
The art director Ryan Reineck said that his Haut à Courroies bag’s imperfections give it character and “a history.”Ryan ReineckJane Birkin carrying her namesake HERMÈS bag, personalized with keychains, in 2009.Francois Durand/Getty Images
After all, it’s pretty gauche to parade around with a new bag, desperately seeking validation.
If you’re fortunate enough to own a HERMÈS Kelly or Birkin, embrace the snobbery and irony of a well-worn bag. After all, it’s pretty gauche to parade around with a new bag, desperately seeking validation. Simply put, a scuffed-up HERMÈS bag epitomizes high fashion irony.
Fake Luxury Shoe Store Prank proves Luxury is just Perception
What makes a product luxurious? Is it the quality of materials used or the craftsmanship involved? Or is it simply the brand image and the price tag? A recent PAYLESS Shoe Store prank suggests the answer is the latter.
PAYLESS rebranded their entire store and the name and significantly increased their prices; the results are fascinating.
PAYLESS, a low-priced footwear retailer in the US, rebranded its entire store and name for a weekend to test how much people would pay for their shoes if they didn’t know they were theirs. They built a fake luxury store called PALESSI, filled it with avant-garde sculptures and displays, hired an entire team of sales associates, and filled all the shelves with PAYLESS shoes, jacking up the prices by as much as 1800%.
Potential consumers were scouted from the streets and the Internet for social media influencers and fashionable people who looked likely to attend the event. Attendees purchased overpriced shoes, some for $200, $400, and $600, and were taken to the backroom, where the prank was revealed.
Consumers have been paying hugely inflated prices, some of the pleasures that we get from things that we buy come from the money we spent on them.”
Inside the PALESSI shoe store.
The results were fascinating. People were willing to pay hugely inflated prices for PAYLESS shoes simply because they were marketed as luxury items under the for this occasion invented brand name PALESSI. It shows that people care much more about the brand image and prices than the product and its quality.
This is not to say that all luxury brands are guilty of this. Some have legitimate reasons for their prices due to the high quality of materials used and the craftsmanship involved. A brand’s exclusivity is also marketed as a status symbol representing wealth and success. In many cases, the high prices of luxury items result from the market’s supply and demand.
People care a lot more about the brand image and, in some cases, the prices more so, than they do about the actual product and the quality of it.
Compliments are great, but would these fashionista influencer types open their wallets for our shoes? The PAYLESS team watched from the room backstage as the first customer approached the register. All celebrated the first sale, but then they witnessed more and more shoes selling. Shoes sold for 250, 400, and even $600.
Before they left, we let them know the shoes were from PAYLESS. Anyone who bought the shoes got them from PAYLESS as a gift, but we proved they could sell for over ten times the average PAYLESS price. Now anyone can come into PAYLESS and get these shoes for as low as 19.99.
People care a lot more about the brand image and, in some cases, the prices more so, than they do about the actual product and the quality of it. Even though this is nothing new, it makes you think more about the situation. So if we look at it in reverse and start with a luxury brand, for example, GUCCI, take a few of their products. For instance, you’ll see that the watch logo t-shirt or the Ace trainers are not luxury items. They’re just priced very highly. But because of GUCCI’s brand image, they’ll get categorized as luxury products, and many buyers buy into that.
This won’t be the case for every luxury brand, of course. Some have legitimate reasons for their prices due to the high quality of materials used and the craftsmanship involved. A brand’s exclusivity is also marketed as a status symbol representing wealth and success. In many cases, the high prices of luxury items result from the market’s supply and demand.
The debates surrounding luxury brand product quality and prices will continue forever.
However, the debates surrounding luxury brand product quality and prices will continue forever. Some argue that the high prices of luxury brands are unethical, as they often exploit the labor of workers in developing countries and perpetuate inequality. Critics also say that luxury goods marketing creates an unsustainable culture of overconsumption and waste.
On the other hand, some people argue that luxury brands are justified in charging high prices because they provide jobs and contribute to the economy. Others say that consumers have the right to spend their money on what they choose, including luxury items, and that the high prices reflect the value consumers place on the brand and its products.
In conclusion, the perception of luxury is not solely determined by its price tag, but by the overall value it holds for the consumer expressed through its brand identity, craftsmanship, and quality of materials. Whether or not the high prices of luxury brands are ethical and justified is a matter of perspective and values. It is important to understand that the value of a product is not just based on its price tag, but also on the emotional connection that consumers have with the brand identity and what it represents.
Despite economic uncertainty and digital disruption, luxury brand stalwarts DIOR GUCCI and CHANEL SAINT LAURENT also remain resilient in their leadership.
A lot has changed in luxury over the past six months, with Covid restrictions easing in China, corporate reshuffles at LVMH, the acquisition of TOM FORD by ESTÉE LAUDER and the departure of Alessandro Michele from GUCCI. The top four brands of the VOGUE BusinessIndex have nonetheless remained the same, defending their positionings. Look under the hood, though, and some changes seem to be happening, with purchase intent down for most major players (except in China) and diminishing scores across many of the consumer metrics tracked.
Few luxury consumers want to switch brands but may shop differently if prices increase, with a readiness to wait for sales.
Survey data shows few consumers want to switch brands as economic instability continues but may shop differently if prices increase, with a readiness to wait for sales. Brands should continue to grow their digital reach, being mindful of the fastest-growing channels, and working with culturally important figures and collaborators in spaces like gaming, film/TV, hospitality, and leisure to cement their appeal even if times are tough.
1. LOUIS VUITTON
LVMH
Rank change: 0
A leader in almost all areas covered by the VOGUE Business Index, LOUIS VUITTON maintains its spot at the top of the rankings. Enthusiasm for the French Maison among luxury consumers only grew over the course of 2022, and its score on the innovation pillar improved too. New CEO Pietro Beccari has the strongest of foundations from which to work.
2. DIOR
LVMH
Rank change: 0
Beccari’s former home came incredibly close to unseating Louis Vuitton, but it was not to be this time. DIOR is once again the standout digital performer in the Index and even ranks slightly ahead of LOUIS VUITTON on purchase intent. One reason for its failure to take the top spot is it’s underdeveloped omnichannel (or cross-channel) shopping experience when compared to its peers.
3. GUCCI
Kering
Rank change: 0
Creative director Alessandro Michele has left, and GUCCI is at a crossroads. Demand for the brand has diminished among consumers across almost all of the major markets tracked, upping the pressure on Kering to pick an exciting successor. Despite this, GUCCI remains incredibly well-liked among luxury consumers worldwide and a pioneer across ESG (environmental, social, and governance), as well as all things digital.
4. CHANEL
Chanel Limited
Rank change: 0
Little has changed for CHANEL. Its resistance to digital sales and innovations like resale makes it a laggard in some of the key metrics tracked. The brand nevertheless impresses consumers more than any other when all VOGUE Business Index survey questions are taken into account, leading on awareness, recommendation, and purchase intent.
5. SAINT LAURENT
Kering
Rank change: +2
As the hype around Gucci has become more muted, SAINT LAURENT has been a bright spot for parent company Kering. It takes the fifth spot in the ranking from RALPH LAUREN in this edition of the Index. Consumer appreciation for the brand has increased over the course of the year and its digital performance has also improved. A new approach to ESG scoring that takes the work of parent companies like Kering more into account also helped SAINT LAURENT’s score. It continues to be a low scorer on innovation, with room for growth in this space.
Markets have undergone pretty big changes since millennials entered their prime earning years.
The Luxury Industry is One Millennials Haven’t Killed, and People Are Still Mad About It. Remote work, online shopping, and social media have all affected consumer spending habits to the point of detriment to specific industries while causing a boom for others.
Now marketing professionals in every sector are stuck trying to figure out how to please a generation under-40s that has more access to goods and services than previous generations but less disposable income to spend on them.
Consequently, this leads to much commentary about what 20 and 30-somethings choose to or not to spend their bit of money on. We see this with all those articles about them killing the casual dining/ cable TV/ whatever industry, and it’s almost always framed as a bad thing. But in truth, some sectors are better at catering to these Millenials (and Gen Z) than others. The camping, skincare, and luxury goods designer bags industries are doing just fine.
The luxury industry was particularly innovative and had the strongest branding throughout the pandemic.
We accept that in the free market, only those who’re the most innovative and have the strongest branding and ability to navigate economic downturns can come out on top. – something the luxury industry was particularly good at throughout the pandemic. But I’ve noticed Millenials’ spending habits seem to face a bit more scrutiny than others did at their age due to the particular economic concerns that prevented them from obtaining more traditional markers of adulthood like home ownership. Whenever we spend on something, topics surrounding housing, marriage, or starting a family are also brought into the conversation and often lead to many snap judgments about Millenials’ perceived irresponsibility or misaligned priorities.
Millennials and Gen Z seem to have no problem spending some of their disposable income on luxury goods
A great example is when Fortune magazine recently revealed data showing that Millenials and Gen Z seem to have no problem spending some of their disposable income on luxury goods, but only because they save so much money by living at home with mom and dad.
As you can imagine, these findings made their way around the internet. As any Millennial-focused topic does, it got some pretty unsavory reactions from those who misunderstand the motivations of younger generations.
For better or worse, Millennials are an economic force to be reckoned with, and I think understanding their approach to work and life is key to understanding why they would choose to spend on things like luxury goods and leisure activities over putting as much energy into more traditional markers of success.
Even in places with more moderate housing prices, a luxury designer handbag is still cheaper than a home.
Many Millenials – especially those on the coasts and HCOL areas – have accepted the economic realities of their lifetime and have begun to make tradeoffs for the sake of still wanting to live fulfilled lives, even if it means becoming a permanent renter or living with their folks.
If you feel like you’ll never be able to own a home no matter how much you save, at some point, you’ll simply stop aiming to do so and divert your money and attention elsewhere. Even in places with more moderate housing prices, a luxury designer handbag is still cheaper than a home.
Cultivating Cultural Capital
Never underestimate how having the right tastes, preferences, and interests can help move you forward. For some industries like real estate, banking, and advertising, projecting an image of success is somewhat necessary to get ahead (meaning eventually making more money to be able to move out of your parent’s house) so looking the part can be a strategic move to show you mean business or that you’ve still managed to make it.
Gone are the days of waiting for a CHANEL bag from your employer alongside a fat pension. You’ll have to figure out how to get that CHANEL flap bag yourself.
Home is Where the Heart (and Your Luxury Collection) Is
Low or high income, debt or no debt – I always feel like articles about adults still living at home ignore the fact that some people prefer living in households with their parents, children, and other relatives.
According to the World Economic Forum, one-quarter of U.S. adults ages 25 to 34 lived in a multigenerational family household as of 2021. And for many of those households, remaining at home isn’t only considered to be the financially savvy thing to do. Still, it is encouraged and embraced, if not outright expected (depending on the culture.) Because even if it doesn’t save money on rent, it sure does on child and elder care.
I’m not writing this to encourage anyone to spend outside of their budget or at the expense of their financial well-being. I don’t feel like these headlines ever tell the whole story.
I’m in my own home now but wouldn’t feel bad about moving back in with family if my spouse or I ever needed to – there’d be more love and LOUIS VUITTON to go around.
