[saturn]

> My favorite pair of jeans gets worn 10 times more often than my other jeans. If I did away with the other jeans, I could afford to buy more of those things I really love.

This took me embarrassingly long to realise. Instead of buying clothes because they were pretty nice and on sale, buy only what you absolutely love, and pay full price. Instead of having "favourite underwear", get rid of everything that's not your favourite and make sure you only own favourites.

Yeah, it costs more at first. But over time you build up a wardrobe of high quality clothes you love. Quality over quantity, indeed.

[lsc]

huh. my jeans usually fail through use; they don't usually languish.

The thing is? I have some costco brand jeans I bought during the first dot-com that I still wear. they were under $15. Actually, at the same time I bought a bunch of designer jeans. The designer jeans all failed (at least one of them catastrophically... dramatically ripping the crotch wide open as I lifted a server in front of something of a crowd.) within a year of purchase.

My experience has been that expensive things are not always better. In fact, expensive clothing is usually designed for rich people, who don't need to lift things or trace cables through crawlspaces, and who will want clothing of the new style next year anyhow.

Clothing designed for working people is usually much more durable. And yeah, you can sometimes get increased durability by buying something more expensive within that sector? but the nicest dickies brand work pant is on par with the designer jeans they sell at target, price-wise.

So yeah, in general? if you are selecting for durability in clothing? the price signal is actually the opposite of what you want to look at.

[kaolinite]

I have a friend who used to buy jeans from Costco. If he was ever with me when I was buying clothes, he would always be shocked at the money I was spending on jeans (I'm not talking designer, I mean £40 high-street jeans, that kind of thing). He would say that I could buy 2 or 3 pairs for the same price at Costco and there'd be no difference.

I challenged him to buy a pair and now that's all he wears. They last longer (his old ones used to rip at the crotch) and feel much nicer to wear. However, you're right, price sadly isn't too good an indicator now. I doubt that spending £100 on jeans will provide much improvement over the kind of jeans I wear but buying slightly more expensive - as opposed to dirt-cheap - is definitely worthwhile.

[lsc]

eh, I think that most of what you are paying for is, well, paying more.

I mean, today, the kids are buying $400 jeans that are thick and tough (then they don't wash them, which sounds disgusting, but what do I know?) but, you know, at least they are probably durable. But during the first dot com? the expensive jeans were made of this super thin denim that was then pre-stressed at the factory;

So yeah, in '99? if you walked in to a store and bought the very cheapest jeans you could get, you'd get a medium weight denim that was reasonably durable. If you spent USD$50-$80 for the 'calvin klein' low end designer stuff? it was this ridiculously thin denim that had been bleached to hell.

But yeah, my point is that if you really do choose your product based on price positioning, rather than on the merits (and price) of the product? you are likely making suboptimal choices. Just because there is a more expensive version and a cheaper version available, that doesn't make the middle of the road choice the most reasonable.

A more recent example: I recently got a giant TV for the office for my montoring setup, and I lost the HDMI cable it came with.

I went to Frys, and the first HDMI cable I saw was the $150 "monster cable' version. So I look a little further, and I see a $15 cable by some middle of the road cable company. I look further, down on the bottom, and I see a $1.50 HDMI cable with no brand.

as far as I can tell, they were the same gold-plated HDMI cable. Of course, I bought the cheapest version and it worked just fine.

I mean, I always spend the extra money for ECC ram and for 'enterprise' or 'raid edition' drives in stuff that matters. Yeah, if I get more of what I want for the money, I'll pay more. But I have to see evidence that I'm getting more of what I want. I'm unwilling to pay extra for a label that says I paid extra.

[itmag]

Is it just me, or do jeans seem very cheap in America?

In Sweden, a pair of regular Levi's jeans might cost you 1000 SEK, which is about $136. The designer jeans might cost 1500+ SEK.

[_delirium]

Clothing in general seems much cheaper in the US than in Europe (I live in Denmark but buy most of my clothing when I visit the US). Seems like some mix of economic and cultural factors. Clothing shops in Denmark seem more commonly to be boutique and have higher-end stuff; e.g. Levi's would be the low-end here, whereas in the US Levi's is mid-market. And there don't seem to be discount shops like Ross. Taxes also make about a 25-30% difference: the EU has a ~10% import tariff on apparel (to protect the European fashion industry), plus Sweden's 25% VAT, so ~35% total taxes, versus a typical 5-10% sales tax in the US.

[lsc]

Levi's are what I'd call 'designer jeans' or maybe low end designer jeans. I mean, uh, I might be using that word incorrectly, but yeah, they are very expensive compared to off-brand jeans of similar quality. (I believe you can mostly evaluate the quality of jeans with your eyes and your hands.) I dono exactly how much I'd pay for them here, just, well, probably more than I'm willing to pay.

[maxerickson]

Levi's are "Name brand" or something like that. The more expensive stuff in box stores are designer branded or something like that, not actually designer clothing.

Macy's is probably the low end for actual designer stuff.

And yeah, jeans are cheaper in the U.S., Levi's go for ~$40-$60.

[freehunter]

I have a friend in Finland (Hyvinkää) who comes over to America on business trips a few times a year. When he's here, he buys things like jeans, nice shirts, golf equipment etc and has them mailed back home. Even paying the taxes at customs, he says it's cheaper than buying them in Finland.

The Wrangler jeans I'm wearing right now (wonderful pair of regular jeans) cost me $20.

[fceccon]

> The Wrangler jeans I'm wearing right now (wonderful pair of regular jeans) cost me $20

Wow, in Italy Wrangler costs around €70, some models are over €100. I don't buy them anymore because I noticed they deteriorate faster than other slightly more expensive trousers, but for $20 they are really good!

[aes256]

That's more of a Levi's thing.

In the US they're a fairly low-end brand, whereas in the rest of the world they're marketed as a more upmarket, almost premium brand.

[matwood]

I spend more money on things I use all the time. My computer, bed sheets, jeans, etc... all have higher threshold of diminishing returns to me. I think you make a good point about the build quality of 90s jeans and jeans today. With that stated, while I like my 'designer' jeans I'm still likely paying too much. They do last longer than other cheaper jeans I have owned, but this could be a function of me being picky. The last time I bought jeans I had to go through many pairs to find ones that were not pre-torn. Why would I spend good money for jeans that are already ripped?

[lsc]

eh, I guess my problem was more with this idea that expensive stuff usually lasts significantly longer. From what I've seen, it usually doesn't. Expensive stuff usually isn't optimized for use per dollar.

If the expensive stuff is giving you value on another axis? like the higher thread count sheets being more comfortable or what have you? that's great. I buy luxury items too. And I am willing to pay significantly more for tools that are easier or more comfortable to use.

I was just taking issue with the idea that expensive stuff is usually cheaper in the long run.

You should buy luxury items when you think the enjoyment you will get out of them is worth more than the money you spend on them. If someone tries to tell you that the luxury item is actually cheaper in the long run than the 'value' item, (the item actually designed to maximize use per dollar) well, I suppose it's possible, but it's pretty unlikely. You should be very, very suspicious.

[cschmidt]

I don't think anything 'designer' is what the OP was talking about. You're certainly right that designer clothes are not necessarily the best quality, as they are being sold on (at least perceived) exclusivity.

I do wear expensive jeans because they're comfortable and nicely made. I like a German brand called Hiltl:

http://www.hiltl.de/eng/index.php

I typically have about 3 pairs, that I replace when they wear out.

There are other nifty jeans like Hiut:

http://hiutdenim.co.uk/

Generally, the smaller and more craftsman-like the company the better. I think that agrees very well with the OP.

[ivanvanderbyl]

More to the point you will actually get more wear per dollar.