The cost of the raw denim lifestyle

[dralfonzo]

No jean @ Selfedge or BiG should cost what is charged. but it's worth? thats all decided by us, that demand brings up that price. along w/ shipping/production cost/time and other overhead. if someone's gonna pay for it, why not charge it?

and btw ECZERWONKA, its good to see another Orlando poster...that is if your in Orlando, FL haha

unfortunately i think a lot of people don't realize the cost of making some of this clothing. People can't say that they buy the clothes we are into because they believe in ethical production and manufacturing, just to then turn around and complain when it has a high price tag.

Obviously these companies have to make a profit, I don't know what Kiya's or Flatheads margins are but I can give a bit of insight. I work in the clothing industry for a brand that manufactures in england and in japan, and both countries as you know are very expensive for manufacture. If you take a shirt as example, you can get a shirt made in china (like RL Polo) or india for around £3 or £4 manufacturing cost (obviously there is fabric cost and buttons etc but thats not a huge amount more as these big brands buy so much fabric they can get good prices.) You take your £4 shirt and once you have shipped it back to the UK or US or wherever, your shirt has now cost you maybe £7 or £8 after freight, landing costs, customs etc.

Now depending on what margins the brand is working on, they will always make a good profit on their cost price for the shirt and how much they sell it to a shop for, especially the 'bigger' brands. This £8 probably gets sold to a shop for around £20. In the UK, the 'standard' margin a shop sets retail price at is 2.5, so if they bought this shirt for £20, they will have it on the shelf for you the consumer to buy at £50.

So from this £4 shirt, the brand makes a £12 profit perhaps, and the shop a £30 profit. This obviously will fluctuate a lot between different places, and the costs for shops and clothing brands are hugely different - but this gives you a basic idea.

Now think about this; the factory that my company uses which is a specialist shirt maker just outside of london charges £20 minimum to make a basic shirt - not including fabric or trims. Add in the fact that a lot of these brands that we here are interested in are not huge brands and do not order thousands of meters of fabric, the fabric costs more, so does the trims - many small brands have to pay a surcharge on fabric if they do not order a minimum amount. So the costs escalate a huge amount, to pretty scary prices sometimes. This £35/£40 shirt after other costs goes to a shop for maybe £80, retail@ 2.5= £200. And that example is a basic shirt. Also at the moment - especially in the UK as the £ is weak it costs a fortune to import from Japan, which adds to the price of MIJ.

As a side note I would like for people to realize that there are many (obviously not all) factories in Japan that are fully staffed and run by Chinese workers, same with UK were there is at least one big factory i know that is fully staffed and managed by Pakistanis. I don't say this because I think it is a bad thing, because quality control, working environment etc are all set at much higher standards than in other countries - but these people have lived in this industry all their life and have a huge amount of expertise in what they do.

It is a very confusing and intricate subject the whole case of 'Made in xxxx. ' and I think a lot of the time people over simplify the subject. Another case in point - did you know that with current UK law, a company could have a shirt completely made in china, but then if they bring it back to the uk to sew the buttons on they are allowed to put a 'Made in England' label on the shirt. I don't think there are a lot of companies that do this but I would see it as a problem in the future possibly with people seeing that there is money to be made in 'perceived' high quality clothing.

end of rant.

[entropy kid]

Sorry man but that was NOT a rant:

A rant or harangue is a speech or text that does not present a well-researched and calm argument;

I was waiting for someone with a bit more knowledge in the field to clarify this. If that's not enough check e.g. the Double Volante thread to see how much manual labour goes into a single pair of high quality denim. Then stop and think how much a skilled labourer in an industrial nation gets per hour.

[rnrswitch]

Just as a clarification. I do not care so much about the prices of the jeans. I understand that if I have a garment made in USA or Japan then I have to pay a premium. This is not to say that the prices could be lower if the manufacturing base in the US was what it was in like the 40s and 50s. As we ship manufacturing overseas more the cost of manufacturing here (US) goes up and the cost of manufacturing over there goes down. The only reason I brought up price was because some of the price tag is the "hype" and "exclusivity" aspect.

Also, I could care less who runs a factory, be it Chinese, Pakastani, Mexican, etc. as long as they are being paid "fairly."

Factories in China, Mexico, etc. look like factories in the States around the turn of the 20th century.

[entropy kid]

Coming back to the hype thing. You have to keep in mind that this whole discussion we are leading here mainly takes place because in the middle of the 80s a lot of japanese kids decided that wearing raw vintage denim gave them a great way to express themselves and to stand out from the crowd. Without the initial hype that resulted from this, the whole denim lifestyle thing would probably be limited to distressed denim with only a couple of geeks (sorry Paul T, sorry DrHeech) being interested in the real thing.

[rnrswitch]

I didn't start wearing raw denim cuz of some Japanese kids in the 80s. I was wearing it ever since I was a little kid. I had my first pair of LVC in 97 I believe, way before I knew about Japanese denim. But who cares where it started, because for some reason I don't think it started in the 80s, I care about where it is now and where it is going. Actually I don't really care, but i was just pointing out one aspect of this "culture" if we really want to label it that (which I wouldn't), that I do not like. I hate shit when it becomes some consumer frenzy. It takes a lot of the fun out of it.

I remember when I used to collect DC comics as a youth and all of a sudden the Death of Superman and Breaking of the Bat came out and it wasn't fun anymore. I no longer could walk down to the comic book store and just pick up that months comics. I had to put my name on a list and hope some "collector" didn't buy up all of the next issue. It took a lot of the soul out of it.

[DrMoBueno]

i was thinking the same thing.

chrome covers, people going to comic shops to buy any #1 they could find.

i think that explains why sda and sugar cane sell those horrid hard washes now.

[arem]

The reason I started buying premium denim (let's stop saying raw for this discussion, shall we?) because I found that I could not get the cut I liked from the lower priced options anymore. Japanese kids (and companies) weren't anywhere on my radar in NYC, I just knew how I wanted jeans to fit and how hard it was to get the stuff I liked.

I have no problem with the prices these things cost, I have fully investigated the options out there and I know the things I buy are worth it to me. I just question people buying things solely becuase they are expensive and hard to find, like that buys them membership into a secret society. HIgh prices + artificial rarity creates a negative culture/scene pretty quickly, as we have seen again and with sneakers, sports cards, records, comics, and on and on. I hate the way the sneaker culture was ruined, and it would be a shame if the same thing happened again (to many of the same people), even if I don't really have a dog in this fight.

[entropy kid]

Different attitudes obviously. I completely separated from the whole punk rock culture that I had been following since I was 12 yeras old when the number of people bitching about sellouts and the likes took overhand. Might be that a lot of what you call soul got lost, but at least hearing the music from vinyl/CDs made the lyrics comprehensible while earlier on all you had was the white noise on your umptieth copy of a tape.

I think it also helps to realize that a lot of the people doing the hyping/beasting are maybe between 15 and 20 and I think it's only natural at that age. They will calm down sooner or later, some might even stay with the whole thing afterwards.

[eczerwonka]

I think it also helps to realize that a lot of the people doing the hyping/beasting are maybe between 15 and 20 and I think it's only natural at that age. They will calm down sooner or later, some might even stay with the whole thing afterwards.

That;s the part I still find amusing, probably because I'm old enough to have seen more than a few trends come and go.... like boat shoes, lol.

On Style Forum I got called a "self important redneck" because I once dared to post about how I thought it was amusing to see pics of teens dressing like old miners, farmers and train engineers. I still do, but at that age my pop would always ask why I dressed like a hobo so I can relate, but that was from thrifting, not spending $1000 on a wardrobe to look like my pop did in 1957.

[A Beard of Stars]

I don't mind spending a lot on the jeans because dark vintage denim is hard to find, you sort of don't have a choice if you want that look, that is, raw and vintage style jeans.

But I think the flannels, sweaters, and other things can get silly. Every time I go to a decent thrift or vintage store I find old Pendleton, Woolrich, etc. flannels or old sweaters in good condition and they're fucking knee-deep. The repros are good but there's no reason to buy them except that you want them, when the actual vintage pieces are $10-$20.

[A Beard of Stars]

I don't mind spending a lot on the jeans because dark vintage denim is hard to find, you sort of don't have a choice if you want that look, that is, raw and vintage style jeans.

Also, vintage jeans don't usually have the fit I like, and when they do they often were cheaper trendy pieces without backpocket rivets, selvage, etc. Repro brands with skinny legs let me get the look I want with the details I want, cause I just don't know if I can size down the 501s enough to look like the missing fourth member of The Jimi Hendrix Experience. This is the case with a lot of SuFu, too.

[felinusz]

Those who have voiced the fact that "it costs what you let it cost" are completely correct.

I got my Sugarcane Okinawas for about $160 from Rakuten Market, plus a small shipping and proxy fee. Certain brands may be difficult or impossible to obtain for similarly 'low' prices, but most Japanese brands can be had for a good deal less than stateside stores charge if you do a little bit of legwork and buy them through a proxy.

That said, such a price is still many times the cost of a pair of Levis.

"You get what you pay for!"

Japanese made Flannel shirts and jeans are of superior quality; many of us care about the difference in quality between a $20 flannel and a $150 flannel of the exact same general color and pattern. The $20 shirt is crummy, and many of us are not happy wearing it. $20 Flannels also tend to fade and fray quickly

A pair of Sugarcane or Samurai jeans examined side by side with a pair of Levis... it will be immediately obvious even to the untrained laymen which garment has more integrity to it.

We certainly pay a premium for high quality garments. That premium cost does not survive a "Bang for buck" test.

It is worth the price from the perspective of aesthetics.

There is a certain joy to wearing gorgeous, crafted 21 ounce jeans, watching them change and decay and literally become part of your life.

Off the topic of the above, but another thing.

How many people actually "COLLECT" this stuff? You've got to be kidding about this, right?

I don't know, but personally, I buy jeans and shirts and such with the intent of wearing them!

I know that there are a few people here who are really in to the history of vintage clothing, and actually collect vintage jeans and shirts and such, but surely the "utility consumers" far outnumber the "compulsive collectors" when it comes to denim!?

I think that herein lies the main distinction between, for example, "denim" and "sneakers" - most of the denim consumers only own what they are wearing daily or every other day, whereas the sneaker consumers own so many shoes that it is literally impossible to wear them all in a week.

[shark jacobs]

Japanese made Flannel shirts and jeans are of superior quality; many of us care about the difference in quality between a $20 flannel and a $150 flannel of the exact same general color and pattern. The $20 shirt is crummy, and many of us are not happy wearing it. $20 Flannels also tend to fade and fray quickly

Man, do you actually believe this?

[TTM]

Eloquently said - maybe this thread can make it back to the original topic. I share the same opinion: i buy it for the quality, craftsmanship etc.

Perhaps I feel this way because I'm a product of the upper middle class baby boomer population. Unlike my parents, i've never made my own clothes. In my youth I've lived in relative comfort due to their work. A price tag is an afterthought compared to the style and construction (but still not after though enough to buy those goofy limited run $500 pairs)

I catch a lot of grief from my mother on topics regarding price vs. value. She grew up in a large family, hammy-down galore - you get the picture. When ever she shops, her eyes are peeled for the best deal, the highest mark down, whereas I tend to think the opposite - I know the best stuff generally never goes on sale. I'd rather own a few of those items than a whole lot of the ones that "fade and fray quickly." Hell, i've got items as mundane as a hoodie running strong after 4 years - no noticeable fading, pilling or stretching, all because I spent $80 on it back in the day.

Perhaps warren buffett could tell us as much about investment as he could high quality clothing ownership. Too many people approach this subculture fashion-minded. Boots seem to be the best example - they can achieve decades of use with the proper care, but how many people reach that point? $300 spread over 10 years is a hellava lot less than two pairs of $40 vans twice a year. Fashion changes and people grow bored of their boots and never quite reap the benefits of their investment.

[Dr_Heech]

I don't mind spending a lot on the jeans because dark vintage denim is hard to find, you sort of don't have a choice if you want that look, that is, raw and vintage style jeans.

But I think the flannels, sweaters, and other things can get silly. Every time I go to a decent thrift or vintage store I find old Pendleton, Woolrich, etc. flannels or old sweaters in good condition and they're fucking knee-deep. The repros are good but there's no reason to buy them except that you want them, when the actual vintage pieces are $10-$20.

At last we're getting somewhere.

I buy (..and have collected) repro vintage jeans, although only Levis and Lee, because the original stuff is almost non existent and the prices are way out of my range. The alternative is repro Levis and Lee jeans. Whereas some original shirts, jackets etc are still out there to be found.

(I also dont agree with buying original sweatshirts either, as IMHO it is a minefield trying to get a good fit.)

Look at the Lee Japan 101LJ. Ok, it's a great repro of a 1968-71 jacket, but at £200 its ridiculous, you can pick them up on ebay for a fraction of the cost . Maybe with certain items it is shear laziness. Mind you, twenty five years ago when I started 'thrifting', I used to love spending all afternoon in the backroom of some retro shop, going through ' Bales and Rails '. Now those shops dont exist. Thank God for the Net !

[TTM]

I used to love spending all afternoon in the backroom of some retro shop, going through ' Bales and Rails '. Now those shops dont exist. Thank God for the Net !

Oh they still exist in portland... home of the pabst and land of the stoned. Godda love the shops that appear to be a thrift store but only display merch 'vintage-y' enough to justify the $20 price tag on some t-shirt

[superhero]

On Prices:

I think with clothing the way that it's price, it may be either good marketing or just merely a cost-plus numbers based strategy. But in the end, its the value based proposition that allows the prices to be where they are. It's clear that they are priced (at a premium) at a point where there exists consumers who have valuations equal or exceed that amount. And then again you don't necessarily pay for quality, you pay for PERCEIVED quality.

To each their own I guess, I see on style forum some of the people into tailored clothing just can't make sense of why people buy streetwear as there's nowhere near the level of "tailored workmanship" compared to that in bespoke suits etc...

It's the same thing that applies in an interesting scenario in recent times - the can of coke vs the classic glass bottle coke. Both are the same product and the same quantity. The glass bottle is double the price of the can. Sure the manufacturing of the glass bottle might be double the price of a can, but the markup does not come from just a mere product cost-plus approach. These guys know that there are people who want to associated with the connotations of drinking from this retro bottle - whether it be a throwback to the good ol' days or whether its someone wanting to signal that they are more affluent. But these are reasons why a markup can be justified, and it's a part of the marketing mix.

Often, lucky jeans and selvage denim that is discussed here, are not exactly directly competing for the same customers - sure they are both jeans but the target demographic is worlds apart.

On cost of buying clothing:

Over the years I have come to realise that when i do try to skimp on clothing purchases by not always getting the thing I wanted the most (cheaper alternative), it's ended up costing more. This is because eventually I will discard it, not because it's of poor quality and fallen apart, but rather I just end up not liking it nor wanting to wear it anymore! I used to find that i cared ALOT about the durability of clothing and often thought about it as synonmyous with quality, but from my experiences most of my clothes will fall out of favor with me before it even falls apart. So rather than view it from a durability perspective, I would view it from a more hollistic "longevity" kind of approach, which means that I consider, durability, versatility and enduring style. This way has ensured that I end up spending my money in a way that gives me great pleasure and satisfaction, and reduce my buyers remorse. Sure it has meant that I've spent more on clothing in total (it's only self justification if you think buying better things will really save u money), however this expenditure now includes complete satisfaction on my purchases and looking great (or at least i think i do!!).

[cheapmuthafukr]

great thread...

im not really even sure what the raw denim lifestyle is... i mean, i wear nice japanese selvage denim and redwing boots and shit like that, but i dont think i spend too much money on them. the things i do spend the money on i get alot of use from... 300 on some redwing boots that will keep my feet safe and comfortable on a heavy civil construction site for years to come isnt outragous to me cause ive blown thru pairs of 150 dollar boots in less than a year before. ive lusted after a good pair of redwings for much longer than ive been on here, due to the fact that i used to hear stories about how my father in law got made fun of back in the mid 60s because he showed up on the job site and didnt have a pair of red wings... they were just the best. the only pair of raw denim ive paid full price for was my contest sams, and from those ive gotten a few more pairs of jeans in trade after i had wore them for a year. i wear vintage pendelton flannels instead of the repro stuff because they are the real thing in my eyes... they are what my gradfather wore when he got back from korea and what my father in law wore when he worked construction in the mid 60s. they last forever, as evidenced by my father in laws flannels that i now own.

i have no need for buzz ricksons... i live in a naval town. i can get the originals at the thrift store foe a tenth(or less) of the price.

i also like nice things. i like things with a history. i would be happy to spend the money to get a pair of warehouse jeans, but if i could get real vintage lee or levis at the same price, id go with that. i do know myself well enough to know that i wont be happy in poorly made clothing, so it seems like im stuck in this for now.

oh... i also try to only buy clothing that is made in a country that isnt known for shitty labor practices. if i could, id wear only made in the usa... tho japan is fine too. come to think of it, even with my survey equipment at work i tend to do the same... if i have a choice between a level rod or tape measure that are made in japan as opposed to made in china, i go with the japan.

[cheapmuthafukr]

the oother thing that makes this "lifestyle" not such a costly endevor, is to not think of it as fashion. i try not to buy things because they are hyped up... i mean ive been thru that and it doesnt work for me. i try to think when im going to buy something, "would my grandfater have worn this? would he make fun of me for wearing it?' or " will i look silly wearing this in 5 years" i feel there is something to be said for classic american style, and im not talking about costumey american style like i see around here alot(not naming names)

[youkinorn2]

Come on, guys. We need to come clean.

Let us consider the cost of NOT living the Raw Denim Lifestyle (RDL).

How else is a chunky dude going to fill up all those little green blocks?

[rnrswitch]

True.........

[rnrswitch]

the oother thing that makes this "lifestyle" not such a costly endevor, is to not think of it as fashion. i try not to buy things because they are hyped up... i mean ive been thru that and it doesnt work for me. i try to think when im going to buy something, "would my grandfater have worn this? would he make fun of me for wearing it?' or " will i look silly wearing this in 5 years" i feel there is something to be said for classic american style, and im not talking about costumey american style like i see around here alot(not naming names)

Come on! Name Names.

For me I think this is a bit more expensive than my normal lifestyle. I have been into rockabilly for some time. Not the costumey rockabilly, but more the blue jeans and white ts type of rockabilly. I stayed away from the martini drink shirts and the over the top bowling shirts. I actually used to wear levis 501s for about 8 months, until they were too washed out, then I would buy a new pair and keep rolling. Man I had like closets full 501s. I noticed a pretty deep decline in quality when they started making them in Mexico, so I started seeking out made in usa models. That's when I came across LVC. Dude it was over after that. Now instead of buying 1 pair every 8 months for $40, I would be buying a pair for like $150 every 18 months. Its been downhill from there or uphill. I have to say that I am more than willing to blow a bit extra cash for the "craftsmanship" and quality though and I also think it promotes a more sustainable lifestyle. I am buying less (which means consuming less goods), but it is just more expensive.

[jpsmith98]

Names named: edmond, the relativity, markmont, turntabloid, zissou. These all spring to mind as being pretty hypebeasty in their buying habits, though there are many others. I don’t have any beef with them personally, but these are just the few that seem to have endless clothing budgets whose WAYWT posts look like a Self-Edge mannequin photo followed by a stock list.

Before anyone gets on my case about “criticizing†someone for their clothing budgets—I don’t give a fuck how much you spend on clothes, but there seems to be a disconnect between the current hyped-up Americana style and the ostensible design philosophy behind it…

Generally these clothes come with blurbs on their flashers or in their webstore promotional paragraphs that read something like “Inspired by functional American work/military wear, built to last a lifetime, etc…†I read that as implying this clothing is to be economical, no frills, buy-it-once, etc. but then on the other hand, you have the monthly collabs, the $400 denim vests, the $70 chambray bandanas, etc.

What this is all comes down to is that when I look at somebody’ WAYWT post, all decked out in a MFSC uniform, then compare it to some old photos in the “cool, distressed denim†thread, it’s immediately apparent who was an easy style, and who can’t dress themselves.

This, I think, is what makes it different from people wearing raf, RO, Dior, etc. Sure they spend a lot, but that stuff is admittedly high-fashion, and when you see someone wearing a goth ninja outfit, you figure there’s a different design mentality behind that then a pair of 501s and a white T-shirt, and somehow I feel it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on one of those outfits and not the other.

I guess, ideally, I would like people’s clothes to say something about their personality—and I have no clue what a $70 bandana says, except that there’s some lack of a harmonious identity there…

[TTM]

^^ thats what this thread about. Form follows function. Some are in it for the function whereas some buy for the high fashion. And no matter who you are, everyone wants to look like a construction worker.

[youkinorn2]

I guess, ideally, I would like people’s clothes to say something about their personality—and I have no clue what a $70 bandana says, except that there’s some lack of a harmonious identity there…

that about sums it up, I think.

[kiya]

And no matter who you are, everyone wants to look like a construction worker.

I do not want to look like a construction worker.

[jpsmith98]

I wouldn't say I want to look like a construction worker, but one thing that is necessary to pull off the retro Americana look well is some element of carelessness/casualness, for lack of better words. That means not worrying about how to fix hip flare, knee bulge, washing machine creases, etc... and just owning it. What I mean is that I don't think Steve McQueen worried about his whiskers not being symmetrical.

For an idea of good casual, compare peterock to Lendo, or markmont to cheep, and I think you'll get what I mean.

[16steps]

when i wore trendy jeans (diesel) i had over 30 pairs

now i have 3 pairs of raw denim and 1 pair of jorts. I have a fitted/slim pair, a fitted/ relaxed pair and a pair to just fuck around with. The jorts were done out of frustration cuz i hate the lvc 47 cut on me

Haven't bought a pair since april. That will change at the end of this month when the jungle cloth is released.

[hype_killz]

i dont even think about resale value. I think though that if you invest in a pair of jeans, and can actually wear that one pair for 6 months to a year nearly everyday, then it's worth it. boots go along the same lines. invest in some for the long run.

[rnrswitch]

Names named: edmond, the relativity, markmont, turntabloid, zissou. These all spring to mind as being pretty hypebeasty in their buying habits, though there are many others. I don’t have any beef with them personally, but these are just the few that seem to have endless clothing budgets whose WAYWT posts look like a Self-Edge mannequin photo followed by a stock list.

Before anyone gets on my case about “criticizing†someone for their clothing budgets—I don’t give a fuck how much you spend on clothes, but there seems to be a disconnect between the current hyped-up Americana style and the ostensible design philosophy behind it…

Generally these clothes come with blurbs on their flashers or in their webstore promotional paragraphs that read something like “Inspired by functional American work/military wear, built to last a lifetime, etc…†I read that as implying this clothing is to be economical, no frills, buy-it-once, etc. but then on the other hand, you have the monthly collabs, the $400 denim vests, the $70 chambray bandanas, etc.

What this is all comes down to is that when I look at somebody’ WAYWT post, all decked out in a MFSC uniform, then compare it to some old photos in the “cool, distressed denim†thread, it’s immediately apparent who was an easy style, and who can’t dress themselves.

This, I think, is what makes it different from people wearing raf, RO, Dior, etc. Sure they spend a lot, but that stuff is admittedly high-fashion, and when you see someone wearing a goth ninja outfit, you figure there’s a different design mentality behind that then a pair of 501s and a white T-shirt, and somehow I feel it’s ridiculous to spend $600 on one of those outfits and not the other.

I guess, ideally, I would like people’s clothes to say something about their personality—and I have no clue what a $70 bandana says, except that there’s some lack of a harmonious identity there…

If ever there was a time to say it...... "Ohhh, SNAP!"

In regards to the $70 bandana. Has anyone seen this shit. It is the biggest con job in the world. It is fabric cut into squares (Hill-side). Now that is a hustle. The profit margin must be ridiculous.

I would have pos repped this but I must spread some.