Want to buy or sell something? Check the classifieds
  • The Fedora Lounge is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Continuous declining quality of outwear

Status
Not open for further replies.

mihai

A-List Customer
Messages
340
Location
Europe
Lately I've been through several clothing / shoes stores around western Europe(continental part). They are not within my target(with scarce exceptions) but I had to accompany someone shopping, most of the times. I'm going to refer to male outwear only.
So, wondering through the stores I could notice a omnipresent drop in quality of materials, construction, patterns(this could be subjective). This affects companies on different levels:
- the bulk of mainstream "mall" companies that offer clothing made of thin, poorly colored materials (they are new but have that rag appearance). The patterns are cut very loose, the clothes look like they are flowing off you. Perhaps they are most targeted for teenagers. To me the stuff looks cheap. I rarely can find something that looks like having decent quality. I happened to wear in the past (early 90s) and I can say for sure that the quality was way better in every aspect. Even from one year to another you can find surprises. For example I used to like polo shirts from CanA (I have like few dozens), they were nice fitting and although the quality not exactly at Lacoste level for example, they were def better than the rest while cheap - 9 EUR. But starting from this autumn I had a nasty surprise. The quality of these shirts declined visibly - def thinner material, poor colors. I think that they changed the factory producing them. In the last years they were produced in South America. Now perhaps they moved to Asia, in an effort to keep prices. I am glad I bought more in the past bc I won't buy from them again while they have this poor quality.

- the most hyped American jeans companies like that have a marketing based on heritage. However the quality difference very different to what it used to be. Their jeans are made of thin denim. I see lately that asian made jeans have a very thin material, that does not compare even with shouth american made ones. The prices in Europe are 2-4 times bigger for a pair of 501 for example. Not to mention that you can not find Raw unwashed. On a visit to a their shop I noticed most items had about the same quality like the bulk of the companies from above: belts from thin split leather, cheap shoes, thin shirts and t-shirts, Their pea coats (imitating somehow the original design) had such a poor material of the consistency of your average cotton track jacket. The way it draped, making wrinkles all over made it look cheap. The reduced price was at about 60-70 EUR. The Schott 740 is years light ahead in terms of quality. I wonder up until where they will continue with these "improvements".

About shoes is the same, I rarely go in a European shoe store and find something to make me spend my money.

How does this wind of change feels in North America? I am tempted to think that you can find more quality at competitive prices there. At least this is what I heard or witnessed as I shop most of my clothing from US and Canada. In Europe the prices are high and the quality poor, promoted by the large retailers. I understand that there is inflation but trying to keep an absolute price reference makes quality go down unavoidably. Still better quality alternatives do exist. They come from few manufacturers that should be supported.

To conclude with, if mainstream quality drops this way I'm determined to spend lesser money on such lousy stuff. And more on vintage stuff for obvious reasons. You can not compare quality of a WW2 military coat/pea coat or G1 jacket(that you get for bargain prices) with mainstream stuff that are even more expensive.
 
Last edited:

armscye

One of the Regulars
Messages
143
Location
New England
In the US, there are more choices at more quality levels than ever before. Even the lowest priced national retailer Walmart sells Levis, Lee, Wrangler, and several other brands of jeans for prices under $30. Decent quality leather jackets, cut loose but with decent hides, are available under $200. High grade canvassed suits can be found at many stores for under $500. Yes, most clothing is now made offshore from the US, but a discerning eye can see that very high-quality goods are available cheaper than ever before. Or consumers can turn to artisan companies through online venues.

I strongly suspect that the declining quality of retail goods in Europe is related to the ongoing Euro crisis (you have 3 countries holding up 15 others, which is unsustainable), and to the ever higher levels of taxation and regulatory burden. These are choices that Europeans have made at the ballot box over the past twenty years.
 

Capesofwrath

Practically Family
Messages
780
Location
Somewhere on Earth
The quality of all mass produced goods has been falling steadily for a long time, and not just in Europe but worldwide. It doesn't have anything to do with so called regulatory burdens either but is a product of our throwaway culture. It includes food, which is cheap compared to decades ago but also tasteless too, and you have to pay a lot more for good quality food or good quality anything. But if you factor in inflation you find that good food and good clothes cost about as much as they always did. But people have become used to buying cheaply in both, and are not prepared and very often can't afford to pay the equivalent price today for the quality which was normal once.

We also have to remember that not everyone used to be able to afford to eat nutritiously and well as the majority can now either; and that increased prosperity for the many in western societies isn't a one way journey but has stopped for the majority, and gone backwards for many in the US since the seventies, and that Europe is following that trend..

Up until about the second world war working people would buy a pair of shoes which they expected to last with repairs for years, and they cost a fairly high percentage of what they earned in a week too. Now most people buy shoes for which they have to work only a few hours to afford to purchase and they are made to wear out and be unrepairable.

So we live in a cheap and cheerful throw away culture where brands matter more than quality. Some brands still do exhibit high quality but many are just overpriced tat. That's why it's so easy to fake them convincingly and why they need to be so vigilant. Because the brands are made in the same sweatshops and tat factories as the fakes.
 

armscye

One of the Regulars
Messages
143
Location
New England
Frankly, the preceding is the usual hate-america/hate-enterprise agitprop, which to any moderately conscious person is obviously untrue.

"Quality of mass produced goods falling for some time"-- probably typed on a low-cost laptop or tablet that offers 100x the computing power of the Eighties.

Our "throwaway culture" throws things away not because they are valueless, but rather because consumer goods are now so much more inexpensive to manufacture, and are improved so quickly, that the repair/replace question becomes silly: my 1983 Saab 900S was a superb car with very high build quality, but compare the cost of restoration to any contemporary automobile and it will seem absurd to contemplate.

I find it astonishing that anyone could complain that food is too plentiful-- hunger has been the basic human condition for milennia, yet childhood obesity is now a much larger problem for the contemporary United States. Food is amazingly diverse and plentiful. It's cheap because of science and technology-- 1% of the US population feeds America, and parts of the third world, whereas in 1815 more than 80% of America farmed to feed the country. American food distribution is astounding, and literally bedazzles third world visitors. I can walk into my local supermarket and buy the expected pop-tarts or froot loops, but I can also pick up five varieties of Quinoa, a dozen types of fresh baked artisan breads, and free-range chicken breasts.

I have moldering in my closet a $500 Brooks Brothers suit from the early Eighties-- Super 70s coarse fabric, unlined trousers, semi fused construction, plastic buttons, bartacked pocket. Last year I bought an Italian suit at Marshall's for $250, with Super 110 fabric, half lined trousers, a floating chestpiece, corozo buttons, and D-reinforced pockets. The ONLY argument one can make for the Old Brooksie is that the fabric is heavier-- because it was being sold as a year-rounder. In the Eighties the middle class was only learning of summerweight wool fabrics woven the Italian alfresco way.

The most pernicious claim above is that the standard of living of Western societies is going backwards since the Seventies-- a claim generally advanced by union advocates attempting to tie the labor movement's lagging fortunes to highly selective measures of prosperity. Think of how utterly absurd this contention is in the real world! I remember the middle class life of the Seventies, even in the homes of white collar workers. A typical Seventies family lived in a crowded home with one television, took photos only on a few holidays, drove to grandmother's house for Independence Day in a non air conditioned car, and ate steak on special occasions. Does anybody seriously believe that today's levels of prosperity-- even for many welfare recipients-- are not vastly higher?

Let's stop, think, and recognize the evident truth: we live in the most prosperous society in human history. That's not something to be bemoaned, but rather celebrated.
 
Last edited:

Capesofwrath

Practically Family
Messages
780
Location
Somewhere on Earth
In the US, there are more choices at more quality levels than ever before. Even the lowest priced national retailer Walmart sells Levis, Lee, Wrangler, and several other brands of jeans for prices under $30. Decent quality leather jackets, cut loose but with decent hides, are available under $200. High grade canvassed suits can be found at many stores for under $500. Yes, most clothing is now made offshore from the US, but a discerning eye can see that very high-quality goods are available cheaper than ever before. Or consumers can turn to artisan companies through online venues.

I strongly suspect that the declining quality of retail goods in Europe is related to the ongoing Euro crisis (you have 3 countries holding up 15 others, which is unsustainable), and to the ever higher levels of taxation and regulatory burden. These are choices that Europeans have made at the ballot box over the past twenty years.

So good you posted it twice?
 
D

Deleted member 16736

Guest
Incomes have not kept up with inflation, so the average man can't afford the quality he once did. Sad.
 

Seb Lucas

I'll Lock Up
Messages
7,562
Location
Australia
I remember people complaining about the decline in quality 35 years ago. Over here I can get decent (but boring) clothes at Target which last a long time. The brand name things have always been variable in quality and I never buy a brand since the money tends to go into marketing rather than the product and I have always found that an $80 t-shirt, for instance, is no better than a $10 one.
 

Cyber Lip

Practically Family
Messages
783
Location
Seattle
I remember when the production of Converse Chuck Taylors switched from USA to China. I had worn nothing but Converse High Tops (black) for years back then, and I remember encountering the first Chinese made pair. The canvas was like half as thick! That's when I stopped buying them. Probably a good thing, because it forced me to grow up and start wearing real grown-ups shoes, lol.

Same thing with Levis, I wore nothing but 501's for years and years and remember when they started making those in China too...same thing, much thinner fabric. That's when I switched over to mostly Lucky's for my jeans needs, but now those are made in China also!
 

Capesofwrath

Practically Family
Messages
780
Location
Somewhere on Earth
Frankly, the preceding is the usual hate-america/hate-enterprise agitprop, which to any moderately conscious person is obviously untrue.

"Quality of mass produced goods falling for some time"-- probably typed on a low-cost laptop or tablet that offers 100x the computing power of the Eighties.

Our "throwaway culture" throws things away not because they are valueless, but rather because consumer goods are now so much more inexpensive to manufacture, and are improved so quickly, that the repair/replace question becomes silly: my 1983 Saab 900S was a superb car with very high build quality, but compare the cost of restoration to any contemporary automobile and it will seem absurd to contemplate.

I find it astonishing that anyone could complain that food is too plentiful-- hunger has been the basic human condition for milennia, yet childhood obesity is now a much larger problem for the contemporary United States. Food is amazingly diverse and plentiful. It's cheap because of science and technology-- 1% of the US population feeds America, and parts of the third world, whereas in 1815 more than 80% of America farmed to feed the country. American food distribution is astounding, and literally bedazzles third world visitors. I can walk into my local supermarket and buy the expected pop-tarts or froot loops, but I can also pick up five varieties of Quinoa, a dozen types of fresh baked artisan breads, and free-range chicken breasts.

I have moldering in my closet a $500 Brooks Brothers suit from the early Eighties-- Super 70s coarse fabric, unlined trousers, semi fused construction, plastic buttons, bartacked pocket. Last year I bought an Italian suit at Marshall's for $250, with Super 110 fabric, half lined trousers, a floating chestpiece, corozo buttons, and D-reinforced pockets. The ONLY argument one can make for the Old Brooksie is that the fabric is heavier-- because it was being sold as a year-rounder. In the Eighties the middle class was only learning of summerweight wool fabrics woven the Italian alfresco way.

The most pernicious claim above is that the standard of living of Western societies is going backwards since the Seventies-- a claim generally advanced by union advocates attempting to tie the labor movement's lagging fortunes to highly selective measures of prosperity. Think of how utterly absurd this contention is in the real world! I remember the middle class life of the Seventies, even in the homes of white collar workers. A typical Seventies family lived in a crowded home with one television, took photos only on a few holidays, drove to grandmother's house for Independence Day in a non air conditioned car, and ate steak on special occasions. Does anybody seriously believe that today's levels of prosperity-- even for many welfare recipients-- are not vastly higher?

Let's stop, think, and recognize the evident truth: we live in the most prosperous society in human history. That's not something to be bemoaned, but rather celebrated.

Incomes of all but the richest have been falling since the seventies that's a fact. Sorry if it upsets your world view.

Meanwhile back in the reality based community...
 

ProteinNerd

My Mail is Forwarded Here
Messages
3,902
Location
Sydney
Its the double edged sword of supply and demand, people want cheaper clothes they can wear for one season and replace the next so don't want to spend a premium on them, thus suppliers need to reduce the cost which is done by using cheaper thinner fabrics etc...

If everyone started wanting to buy good quality that would last for years do you really think the major clothes manufacturers wouldn't change to fit demand?
 

Graemsay

Practically Family
Messages
998
Location
Melbourne
There are still companies making clothes the way they used to be, if not significantly better. The Japanese denim brands (Flat Head, Iron Heart, Samurai, etc.) are almost certainly a step up from '50s or '60s Levis. And I wouldn't be surprised if John Chapman is putting together the nicest A-2s in any era.

The fact is that most clothing is in a race to the bottom in terms of both cost and sales price, which leads to things like the Primark factory disaster.

There are a few things that have declined, though. Modern cattle rearing means that a lot of leather isn't such good quality, which is why stitching on modern shoes isn't as fine as it used to be, and the quality of timber has fallen in recent decades.
 
D

Deleted member 16736

Guest
I remember when the production of Converse Chuck Taylors switched from USA to China. I had worn nothing but Converse High Tops (black) for years back then, and I remember encountering the first Chinese made pair. The canvas was like half as thick! That's when I stopped buying them. Probably a good thing, because it forced me to grow up and start wearing real grown-ups shoes, lol.

Same thing with Levis, I wore nothing but 501's for years and years and remember when they started making those in China too...same thing, much thinner fabric. That's when I switched over to mostly Lucky's for my jeans needs, but now those are made in China also!

Earl's Jeans are still made in US.

Van's are 10X better than Converse. I'm hooked.
 

EmergencyIan

Practically Family
Messages
918
Location
New York, NY
The only thing that I will add to this conversation is in regard to jeans. I like wearing Levi's, but I have not purchased newly manufactured Levi's in over 12 years. Since the production went overseas, the weight of the denim most noticeably lighter. I want nothing to do with them.

However, I still purchase Levi's on ebay. In fact, I received two pair in the mail today. I have about 15 pair of the Levi's 517 or 20517 Saddleman bootcut jeans. They're all between 30-40 years old. A lot of times, I have been able to get them in NOS condition (raw denim). Of course, they are not Big E Levi's, but the Levi's quality is still there, without question. And, generally, they are very reasonably priced (there are always a couple of people who think that they have a rare treasure in their possession). The two pair I received today are in near new condition, both date to the early 1980s and I got them for $29 shipped. That was a really good deal, however. Typically, I spend about $30-$35 per pair.

- Ian
 

Tadite

Familiar Face
Messages
99
Location
New England
Not to get all economics pedantic but some of the statements are confusing absolute with relative growths.

1. In Relative growth the lower 90% of most western societies have had only the most limited economic growth in the past thirty years. Meaning what proportion of the new economy you had in comparison with the old. Or rich v. poor.

2. In Absolute growth everyone has gone up.

That explains the difference in opinions. In Absolute we all have higher life expectancy, lower food costs (famine basically doesn't exist), more avoidable TVs/Cars/Stuff. We also have more of it primarily due to increased efficiency. So things are cheaper so even with no actually income growth you get more for the same amount, lots more. What we don't have is the same proportion of the total economy by economic class. So the rich are really REALLY richer (US Census, before it got closed, showed that 95% of all US economic growth last year went to the top 1% of the country...) but it terms of stuff everyone got more.

Both are issues but both shouldn't be convoluted with each other. You can still have more but lose in terms of income inequality. So the poor/middle are lower proportionally then the rich but still have more then what they had 30 years ago.


In terms of clothing I'm not sure we have all that much difference between the US and EU. I've noticed shocking declines in Mall quality clothing. You still do have exceptions (I happen to like 501s) but it's a decline. I'm not all that sure why people want something that doesn't last but the replacement is so cheap, I think, that's the argument. I would rather have something well made for a long period of time then by into the constant need for replacement. But at the same time that's expensive from a time to research standpoint.... But I am a member of Fedora Lounge... so you know it goes with the territory.
 

Xenophon

One of the Regulars
Messages
142
Location
New Delhi (India) / Ostend (Belgium)
In my opinion the quality of mass produced consumer goods -not just clothing- has been steadily deteriorating simply because the average Joe and Jane while bemoaning the 'cheap chinese crap' and the loss of their jobs in western manufacture demand a high turnover (new clothes every season) coupled with lower prices. The clothes available in most stores have simply become disposable articles. Supermarkets are overflowing with cheap, largely tasteless processed food. Technological advances have made it possible to 'mask' the obvious quality difference to some extent.

I've stepped out of that system a long time ago; when I purchase jeans nowadays it's high quality japanese denim, my clothing is more or less timeless as far as the cut and design go. It's still possible to find quality but you need to do a lot of legwork and research -long live the internet- and be prepared to pay more although taking durability into account I'm convinced that in the long run I have the better financial deal and get to wear quality stuff as a bonus. A positive development is that -at least in Europe and I have the feeling also in the US- there are more and more specialised manufacturers, mostly small or medium sized enterprises with a solid focus on quality, sustainability and in-house or at least local production that cater to a niche market of buyers who appreciate quality and are willing (and able) to pay a correct price for it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
109,635
Messages
3,085,406
Members
54,453
Latest member
FlyingPoncho
Top