Chanel Purses

[ramili]

Can anyone comment on whether or not these are good investments? Are there any ways to get new ones for less that retail?

[GoingPlaces]

Check a purse forum.

[rr-nyc]

Vintage, yes. Contemporary collection, not so much. Limited edition runs, yes but most are sold before they arrive at the store so unless someone bails on their order, its unlikely you'll get one. Chanel is not like an Hermes Birkin. And no to your second question.

Chanel was known to remove the hardware from their clothing and destroy any unsold merchandise rather than put it on sale at their boutiques. Their handbags sell through without an issue but they are rumored to destroy unsold bags as well. They tried the outlet mall route but I'm pretty sure they closed the one and only store. If your local Saks carries Chanel (not all do) then you have a shot at getting discounts on seasonal bags and clothing.

[andromeda160]

Chanel purses seem to age like beer imo, not like a LV whose leather only looks better with age or a birkin that has a classic design. not to mention Chanel has seemed to lose some of it's runway glamour over the past few years.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Chanel purses seem to age like beer imo, not like a LV whose leather only looks better with age or a birkin that has a classic design. not to mention Chanel has seemed to lose some of it's runway glamour over the past few years.

You're kidding. Chanel is and always will be way up on the totum pole. Their fashion week show in Paris is always one of the most anticipated events, that draws the biggest press and A-listers in the industry.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

You're kidding. Chanel is and always will be way up on the totum pole and their fashion week show in Paris always one of the most anticipated events, that draws the biggest press and A-listers in the industry

Thats like saying Rolex will be the premier watch for generations to come. Nothing is certain in fashion and I dont think Chanel is going to hold their place in my lifetime. If I were to "invest" in a purse, it most certainly wouldn't be a chanel. Sure they're a higher tier than LV. But brand recognition is far more valuable to a collectors market than prestige imo, and while chanel is more prestigious than LV, LV has a much larger customer base, and an hermes birken is the PN of the purse world who only seems to be on the up and up.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Thats like saying Rolex will be the premier watch for generations to come. Nothing is certain in fashion and I dont think Chanel is going to hold their place in my lifetime. If I were to "invest" in a purse, it most certainly wouldn't be a chanel. Sure they're a higher tier than LV. But brand recognition is far more valuable to a collectors market than prestige imo, and while chanel is more prestigious than LV, LV has a much larger customer base, and an hermes birken is the PN of the purse world who only seems to be on the up and up.

First, I'd never say Rolex is the premier watch. Secondly, yes, there is certainty in fashion. Companies like Chanel have a particular element to their design that dates back to Coco Chanel herself. Karl Lagerfeld carries that tradition on and when he retires, they will hire someone that can continue that tradition. Very few top labels, and none that I can recall, deviate from what made them famous in the first place.

As far as an investment bag, you're saying exactly what I said. It's not an investment bag. IMO no bag is an investment bag despite a Birkin secondary market that supports it. That could end tomorrow if Hermes wanted to end it by increasing production.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

First, I'd never say Rolex is the premier watch. Secondly, yes, there is certainty in fashion. Companies like Chanel have a particular element to their design that dates back to Coco Chanel herself. Karl Lagerfeld carries that tradition on and when he retires, they will hire someone that can continue that tradition. Very few top labels, and none that I can recall, deviate from what made them famous in the first place.

As far as an investment bag, you're saying exactly what I said. It's not an investment bag. IMO no bag is an investment bag despite a Birkin secondary market that supports it. That could end tomorrow if Hermes wanted to end it by increasing production.

Same goes for any luxury company, but why destroy demand by flooding with supply? No advantage. Like you said, Chanel has to destroy unsold bags. Which means theyre an overproducing company and their model is unsustainable. You can only artificially inflate your value so long. Design elements can only be "emulated" so long before people want something original again.

Atleast you can see grey market results with Rolex and adjust your offers accordingly.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Same goes for any luxury company, but why destroy demand by flooding with supply? No advantage. Like you said, Chanel has to destroy unsold bags. Which means theyre an overproducing company and their model is unsustainable. You can only artificially inflate your value so long.

Atleast you can see grey market results with Rolex and adjust your offers accordingly.

If a store has to destroy one or two bags, the company didn't over produce, the store overbought. Chanel, as well as all designers, manufacturer based on store orders, not the other way around. Except for limited edition items, of course. They aren't artificially inflating the value either, they're protecting their brand.
LV never has a sale either but I guarantee they have thousands of pieces that go unsold each year. But they first offer the pieces up to their employees through an internal sale and the rest get destroyed.

Rolex on the other hand is trying to do the same but fails miserably. The grey market for Rolex is a perfect example of what you're implying. They force their AD's to hold firm on price, never discount so the AD's are forced to sell inventory out the back door to grey dealers.

[GB-man]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

You're kidding. Chanel is and always will be way up on the totum pole. Their fashion week show in Paris is always one of the most anticipated events, that draws the biggest press and A-listers in the industry.

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

First, I'd never say Rolex is the premier watch. Secondly, yes, there is certainty in fashion. Companies like Chanel have a particular element to their design that dates back to Coco Chanel herself. Karl Lagerfeld carries that tradition on and when he retires, they will hire someone that can continue that tradition. Very few top labels, and none that I can recall, deviate from what made them famous in the first place.

As far as an investment bag, you're saying exactly what I said. It's not an investment bag. IMO no bag is an investment bag despite a Birkin secondary market that supports it. That could end tomorrow if Hermes wanted to end it by increasing production.

Have to agree. Chanel is Chanel.

I have family that works in fashion and nobody considers LV to be on par with Chanel. Nobody. Unless we are talking trunks and luggage.

Investment? Meh but classic flaps have been increasing in price similar to rolex. The motto in the purse forums is buy your flap now because it will cost more later. We all know that model only lasts so long.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

If a store has to destroy one or two bags, the company didn't over produce, the store overbought. Chanel, as well as all designers, manufacturer based on store orders, not the other way around. Except for limited edition items, of course. They aren't artificially inflating the value either, they're protecting their brand.
LV never has a sale either but I guarantee they have thousands of pieces that go unsold each year. But they first offer the pieces up to their employees through an internal sale and the rest get destroyed.

Rolex on the other hand is trying to do the same but fails miserably. The grey market for Rolex is a perfect example of what you're implying. They force their AD's to hold firm on price, never discount so the AD's are forced to sell inventory out the back door to grey dealers.

Point being there is a high demand for grey market watches, If Chanels brand was as valuable as you seem to make it be, their purses would sell in a flash on sale without devaluing the brand. Rolex is increasing production and selling out annually.

If a store "overbought" they would sell the bags at a discount to cover the loss, a company that overproduces destroys bags to prove they didn't oveproduce.

[USALV]

Originally Posted by GoingPlaces

Check a purse forum.

http://forum.purseblog.com/forums/chanel.18/

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Point being there is a high demand for grey market watches, If Chanels brand was as valuable as you seem to make it be, their purses would sell in a flash on sale without devaluing the brand. Rolex is increasing production and selling out annually.

If a store "overbought" they would sell the bags at a discount to cover the loss, a company that overproduces destroys bags to prove they didn't oveproduce.

My counterpoint to you is that Chanel doesn't need to discount because they sell through 99.999999% of their stores.

Grey market is a result of over-manufacturing, not over demand. A secondary market such as the one created by Hermes is one that increases the value of the bag but that is not what happens with Rolex. The vast majority of Rolexes sold through a reseller or grey dealer are not being sold for more than retail. In fact, most are selling for less than retail.

Furthermore, if Rolex sells out of it's production, its because the grey dealers buy the extra inventory from AD's that cannot sell them through retail. Again, that is not the same as Chanel.

As to your last point. I don't think you know how the business works. Who is Chanel trying to "prove" anything to? To you? haha. While a Chanel boutique is owned by Chanel, each boutique has their own operating budget to buy merchandise to fill the store. Chanel manufactures enough product to fill those orders - and that's it. If the store doesn't sell all the merchandise, aka sell-through, that is the fault of the store, not manufacturing. Each store does their own buying. It is company policy not to discount in order to preserve pricing, branding, and customer loyalty, so they destroy unsold merchandise. It sure as hell isn't to hide some secret over production! It's a private company so they don't have to answer to anyone except the people making those very decisions. Botton line is that they would rather destroy a perfectly good bag than sell it to you for less that the last customer paid.

The only time Chanel goes on sale is through department stores. So unless Chanel is gong to buyback unsold merchandise, which it doesn't, those department stores can do whatever they want once the season is over.

It's not a very complicated business.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

My counterpoint to you is that Chanel doesn't need to discount because they sell through 99.999999% of their stores.

Grey market is a result of over-manufacturing, not over demand. A secondary market such as the one created by Hermes is one of increased value of the bag but that is not what happens with Rolex. 99% of Rolex sold through a reseller or grey dealer are not being sold for more than retail. In fact, most are selling for less than retail.

Furthermore, if Rolex sells out of it's production, its because the grey dealers buy the extra inventory from AD's that cannot sell them through retail. Again, that is not the same as Chanel.

As to your last point. I don't think you know how the business works. Who is Chanel trying to "prove" anything to? To you? haha. While a Chanel boutique is owned by Chanel, each boutique has their own operating budget to buy merchandise to fill the store. Chanel manufactures enough product to fill those orders - and that's it. If the store doesn't sell all the merchandise, aka sell-through, that is the fault of the store, not manufacturing. Each store does their own buying. It is company policy not to discount in order to preserve pricing, branding, and customer loyalty, they destroy unsold merchandise. It sure as hell isn't to hide anything some secret over production! It's a private company so they don't have to answer to anyone except the people making those very decisions.

The only time Chanel goes on sale is through department stores. So unless Chanel is gong to buyback unsold merchandise, which it doesn't, those department stores can do whatever they want once the season is over.

It's not a very complicated business. It's basic retail business 101

So how would a .000001% of production sold on sale devalue a brand? For the sake of argument, let's say they sold 99 out of every 100 purses they made. Even a 50% discount on the remainder hardly accounts for a few fractions of a percent in sales. Which wouldn't make a difference in the case of a brand like Chanel. My guess is the number of purses destroyed is far greater than you think, and that they create as many purses as the market will demand... clearly. Since they destroy any unsold.


And I'm not saying Chanel is trying to prove anything to me, but their business model clearly tells me they're not worth the money they're charging. If they were, they'd sell out time and time again, and not just on LEs

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

So how would a .000001% of production sold on sale devalue a brand? For the sake of argument, let's say they sold 99 out of every 100 purses they made. Even a 50% discount on the remainder hardly account for a few fractions of a percent in sales. Which would make sense in the case of a brand like Chanel. My guess is the number of purses destroyed is far greater than you think, and that they create as many purses as the market will demand... clearly. Since they destroy any unsold.

If they charge $5000 a bag and customers knew that they discount unsold merchandise at the end of each season, how many customers would pay full price now compared to waiting 3 months and save 50%? It devalues the brand enormously and slaps your loyal customers in the face. Like I said, Chanel would rather destroy a bag than sell it to you for less than their loyal customers pay. If anything, their loyal customers deserve a discount, not bargain shoppers, which is why some designers have friends and family sales.

And no, the number is not greater than I think. My wife and many of our friends are in the industry. Sell-through at boutiques are in the 9x%. This isn't Coach where they have hundreds of bags filling the stock room and outlet stores outnumbering "boutiques". And these companies don't make x amount of bags hoping someone will sell them. They all have a buying season that coincides with fashion week. Store managers or buyers will place an order and that's what they have. to sell for the season. It isn't Foot Locker where new shipment of Nike's come in each week.

I notice you're in MI. I grew up in MI and know that only Saks and Neimans carry Chanel - Maybe only Saks now. Because they are department stores, everybody knows that eventually, everything will go on sale. I can walk into that Saks tomorrow and will guarantee their display cases are full because the majority of their customers will hope to buy it when it goes on sale in January. That is the polar opposite of what Chanel customers do in high fashion cities where they have boutiques. People buy as soon as they arrive because it's the latest Chanel has to offer. If you wait to buy on sale from saks, you're already a season behind.

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

If they charge $5000 a bag and customers knew that they discount unsold merchandise at the end of each season, how many customers would pay full price now compared to waiting 3 months and save 50%? It devalues the brand enormously and slaps your loyal customers in the face. Like I said, Chanel would rather destroy a bag than sell it to you for less than their loyal customers pay. If anything, their loyal customers deserve a discount, not bargain shoppers, which is why some designers have friends and family sales.

And no, the number is not greater than I think. My wife and many of our friends are in the industry. Sell-through at boutiques are in the 9x%. This isn't Coach where they have hundreds of bags filling the stock room and outlet stores outnumbering "boutiques". And these companies don't make x amount of bags hoping someone will sell them. They all have a buying season that coincides with fashion week. Store managers or buyers will place an order and that's what they have. to sell for the season. It isn't Foot Locker where new shipment of Nike's come in each week.

I notice you're in MI. I grew up in MI and know that only Saks and Neimans carry Chanel - Maybe only Saks now. Because they are department stores, everybody knows that eventually, everything will go on sale. I can walk into that Saks tomorrow and will guarantee their display cases are full because the majority of their customers will hope to buy it when it goes on sale in January.

You are correct, Saks has many great deals. I bought a signature Zegna jacket that retailed for $3k there for $280 and sold it for $1,000. The whole store is generally on sale here though. I don't recall ever seeing any Chanel purses on sale at Saks, but my sisters have purchased chanel dresses for upwards of 90%off there and generally discounts are around 20% on clothing. Niemans generally has a few pieces of chanel on clearance, but 15-20% is the max ive seen on accessories clearance.

[Laszlo]

Not saying this is factual, but my wife said Chanel bags do go on sale. She collects but hey, I'm no expert. LV never goes on sale, ever.

[multimedia]

For the first time ever, the Chanel stores here in Hong Kong did a sale earlier this year (bags included). The "only reason" for this though, is the ongoing slump in sales of luxury goods in HK.

Cheers,
Joe

[cda555]

My gf used to love Chanel. Ever since we were teens I could remember her loving their handbags. She was thrilled that they made their straps long enough for her (she's 6'1"). I guess somewhere along the way they made them shorter to accommodate their customers instead of the runway models. Now she has a hard time finding bags that fit her length.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[bayerische]

Following used bags a bit here, Chanel does take a huge hit directly when used. % wise much more of a hit than say LV.

A year old LV is very close to MSRP. In fact so close that I think it's silly anyone would choose a used over a new one. We're talking a hundred or two.

Chanel on the other hand, say 4K retail, a few months later used 2,5K.

Yes LV is "cheaper" not always, but I mean the mainstream models, say Neverfull is 1K msrp, and it must be the most popular bag, so naturally that model is "in reach" for a much wider audience, and may be a contributing factor.

Chanel makes wonderful bags, I've become interested in leather ware because of my wife. She does not have a Chanel, as in her opinion (pure her opinion here guys) "it's not worth the price". I'm sure she wouldn't kill me though if I bought her one.

[Abdullah71601]

Originally Posted by bayerische

Following used bags a bit here, Chanel does take a huge hit directly when used. % wise much more of a hit than say LV.

A year old LV is very close to MSRP. In fact so close that I think it's silly anyone would choose a used over a new one. We're talking a hundred or two.

Chanel on the other hand, say 4K retail, a few months later used 2,5K.

Yes LV is "cheaper" not always, but I mean the mainstream models, say Neverfull is 1K msrp, and it must be the most popular bag, so naturally that model is "in reach" for a much wider audience, and may be a contributing factor.

Chanel makes wonderful bags, I've become interested in leather ware because of my wife. She does not have a Chanel, as in her opinion (pure her opinion here guys) "it's not worth the price". I'm sure she wouldn't kill me though if I bought her one.

Don't be so certain. My wife was looking for the weapons when I gave her the Hermes wallet.

[bayerische]

Originally Posted by Abdullah71601

Don't be so certain. My wife was looking for the weapons when I gave her the Hermes wallet.

[Star Ferry]

If resale value is your primary concern, then LV is a better bet. Chanel is definitely the higher-end brand, though.

[beshannon]

Originally Posted by ramili

Can anyone comment on whether or not these are good investments? Are there any ways to get new ones for less that retail?

Good investment compared to what? Over what time frame?

[locutus49]

My wife owns a Chanel bag but never wears it anymore. Great quality, but she prefers wearing Hermes, LV, Prada, and her new favorite Faure Le Page. They go more with her more casual style now that she is retired.

She is obsessed with bags, what can I say.

[Etschell]

remember these two letters L V, everything else throw out the window in terms of holding value.

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

You are correct, Saks has many great deals. I bought a signature Zegna jacket that retailed for $3k there for $280 and sold it for $1,000. The whole store is generally on sale here though. I don't recall ever seeing any Chanel purses on sale at Saks, but my sisters have purchased chanel dresses for upwards of 90%off there and generally discounts are around 20% on clothing. Niemans generally has a few pieces of chanel on clearance, but 15-20% is the max ive seen on accessories clearance.

Trust me, Saks at somerset puts their Chanel on sale just like any other department store. Their sales people call up their customers and buy them up. I've bought gloves, wallets, scarfs, and suits for my mom for Christmas. All of which were on sale.

Your example for buying Zegna at such a huge discount if a perfect example of why top brands don't discount. It cheapens the brand and you profited from it while some loyal zegna customers paid full price. Those loyal customers might think twice about paying so much if they knew they could wait and get a huge discount

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[andromeda160]

Originally Posted by rr-nyc

Trust me, Saks at somerset puts their Chanel on sale just like any other department store. Their sales people call up their customers and buy them up. I've bought gloves, wallets, scarfs, and suits for my mom for Christmas. All of which were on sale.

Your example for buying Zegna at such a huge discount if a perfect example of why top brands don't discount. It cheapens the brand and you profited from it while some loyal zegna customers paid full price. Those loyal customers might think twice about paying so much if they knew they could wait and get a huge discount

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh you're talking about their retail stores, I hit up the outlets at GLC. Other than P.F Changs I have no other reason to go to Somerset. Especially sinc FAO Schwartz is gone.

[texex91]

Who knew we had so many Chanel purse experts--this forum is a wealth of knowledge

[rr-nyc]

Originally Posted by andromeda160

Oh you're talking about their retail stores, I hit up the outlets at GLC. Other than P.F Changs I have no other reason to go to Somerset. Especially sinc FAO Schwartz is gone.

Well, considering we were discussing Chanel at department stores vs boutiques - you completely switched topics to an off 5th outlet store...

Nevermind. Even Saks won't put their old Canel in their off 5th outlet. Because they don't need to. An employee will buy it before sending it to an outlet


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk