I should probably tread lightly with this post, because I know literally nothing about whether fashion is an investment. I am dependent on the advice of women when I buy clothes. I used to go find the hottest salesgirl I could and go ask her for advice, but then I’d end up with a pile of crap to try on when I went in looking for a pair of jeans. So instead I take the hottest girl who I’m trying to sleep with. Or a friend. Whatever. So yeah, I’m a rookie here.
Like every straight guy, I own exactly one suit. I own quite a few dress shirts from a previous career when I tried to be taken seriously and a whole bunch of casual clothes. (I have a particular affinity for sports jerseys) For me, clothes don’t mean a whole lot. They’re just something I need so I’m not naked. Yes, I like sports jerseys, but I’ve only bought a handful in my life. The rest were gifts. I don’t care enough to buy brand names. Basically, I want women to not shun me for my fashion choices. I have my priorities straight.
I suspect my attitude is pretty similar to most straight males. And this attitude couldn’t be further from the opinion of most females.
I’m not going to crap on the amount of clothing most women have, or the attitude of shopping as a leisure activity, or even the amount of money spent on clothes. If you’re still saving a decent amount of cash, I don’t really care if you buy too many clothes. What I am going to take issue with is calling clothes “investments.”
First, what’s an investment? We all know the answer to that. It’s money that you put into something which is expected to increase in value. How could this happen with clothing? You could argue that:
1. Nicer clothes at work equal a better impression, which means mucho raises for you.
2. Nicer clothes mean the ladies/fellas will find you sexier, which means mucho humpage for you.
3. Nicer threads will make you more appealing in general, which will lead to better things overall.
How many times have you heard the ladies say that? Sure, sometimes dudes say stuff like that, but it’s mostly the fairer sex who have this attitude. And ladies, please, you need to stop it.
You need food. Is your trip to Subway for lunch an investment?
You need a place to live. Is your rent or mortgage payment an investment?
You “need” a car (I use the quotes because many of us don’t actually need one, myself included) yet I would hope that none of you consider your car an investment.
Why would clothes be any different? Yeah, I realize you need a purse to carry around your tampons, (THAT’S SEXISS!) but do you really need a Coach purse? Or do you want that fancy purse so all your girlfriends will be jealous, even if it’s just for a little while? There’s a huge difference between functional and luxury. How often do you cross that line?
Everybody needs a suit for interviews, weddings or for when Grandma bites it. Mine gets cracked out about once a year, where I promptly forget how to tie my tie. Like riding a bike my ass. But just because I need a certain piece of clothing doesn’t make it an investment.
Some of you may work in jobs where you’ll be ostracized if you don’t wear designer items. Maybe you’re a high end Realtor. Finance is filled with $1000 suits too, especially on Wall Street. Typically though, those jobs pay more than enough over the average salary that employees can easily make up the expensive wardrobe with their bonuses. This situation is the closest clothing becomes to an investment, but it’s still a pretty loose definition of the term.
There are ways to dress well on a budget. I won’t get into them because I don’t care about any of them. Doing it is pretty easy, especially as a dude. Why don’t more white collar workers focus on that? As long as you don’t look like a putz, your work can stand out. That’s ultimately much more important.
So ladies, I think we’re onto your game. Necessities are not investments. Your shoe collection may look pretty and it may make your girl parts wet, but it’s a liability. We want to avoid those, right?
Well said! I’m a girl and while I like to spend money on clothing now and again, I don’t consider them investments. They don’t appreciate, and I’m just going to have to replace them in a few years, if anything its an annoying expense. Anyone who says anything different is most likely trying to rationalize a purchase.
I don’t think of clothing as an investment, but I don’t think it’s something to ignore either. Especially guys, it’s just too easy. Shirts – T-shirts, Polos, shirts. Pocket or no pocket is pretty much the only decision to be made here. Shorts/pants – pick a waist size and appropriate inseam. Shoes – running shoes, casual shoes, loafers, dress shoes. There are, at most, 10 different types of material for any guys piece of clothing, and even that might be a stretch.
So, basically, I’m glad to be a guy. More so than chicks, guys have it easy. Look at what women wear today vs. 10 years ago. Look at what men wear today vs. 10 years ago. Women are basically pushed to buy new stuff every single year. A guy can get away with buying a shirt and wearing it for the next 10 years.
TL;DR – It’s good to be a dude when it comes to clothing. Guys can _almost_ call clothing an investment. Women’s “fashion” changes as soon as marketers convince women to buy the newest thing. Sorry, ladies – you have it hard.
I agree completely. My one suit is a decade old and it still looks great. I’ll get years more out of it before it becomes unfashionable. Same thing with the dress shirts I have.
Plus, we get to pee standing up. THAT IS THE TICKET.
On the upside, having ovaries is not a definite sentencing to a doomed life of buying by the marketers’ word, and it’s high time women stopped using their sex as an excuse for their poor decisions.
Women do tend to have to work a little harder with regard to clothing, as there is more variance in what is acceptable where, but the annual fashion cycle is completely unnecessary unless you work within that industry.
Smart women can quickly figure out what suits their body and what does not, then buy carefully for good prices, and wear the same clothing for years. Fashion does few women any favours, and only buys credibility with other fashion victims. A stable wardrobe of flattering, appropriate clothing (just like for men, if slightly broader in scope) will serve any woman just fine, and be a much better use of money.
“Like every straight guy, I own exactly one suit.” – I need to go break the news to my wife.
Luckily I’m not working again til 2013. My outfit choice is “jeans or shorts?” I’ve slowly constructed a higher quality set of clothes over time (sales, gift certificates, free stuff, etc.), tossing out my items as I go.
I will say this: the cliche “dress for the job you want, not the job you have” is true in most white collar environments. But typically that doesn’t need to cost a ton of money.
Fashion is not an investment… unless you bought Coco Chanel’s tweed suit and kept it in pristine condition. Would be worth a killer amount these days. SUCH a collectible.
Or Tom Ford circa Gucci line is likely to become higher in value as years go on. Or Alexander McQueen who tragically suicided.
But I see your point. I don’t consider buying clothes investments. At least, not the ones I buy… although if you talk to Bridget over @ Money after Graduation, she sold her barely worn Herve Leger dress for more than she bought it
I’ve got to disagree with this somewhat. As someone who loves to shop and is paying off her debt, there were a lot of times I bought something frivolous and tried to pass it off as an investment. Very few fashion items appreciate over time, except for impeccably-kept vintage accessories like Chanel or other limited-edition bags with high resale value. But most things we wear, like everything else, depreciate. I think when a woman talks about an investment in fashion-speak, she means something she will get a lot of wear out of, like a well-made pair of black shoes or the perfect jeans.
I prefer designer bags for the prestige factor but also because they simply last longer than cheaper ones. If you search “My Louis Vuitton Handbag was $700 and Worth Every Penny” you’ll find more of my thoughts on cost-per-wear and designer bags. Just my twosense
Feel free to post a link next time. I don’t mind.
Here’s the problem I have with that logic: I understand a $9.95 purse from Wal-Mart would fall apart after a week and a half. But there’s a huge difference between the cheapest purse and the most expensive one. Why not go for one somewhere in the middle?
I think I’ll write a post exploring this further.
Certainly there are better- and worse-built purses. But a $700 handbag is not possibly fourteen times better than a $50 one. You’re paying a small markup for quality, and a huge markup for logo.
Plus, how many people who claim the benefit is that their expensive item will last forever are actually going to keep using it for its lifetime when it will go ‘out of style’ in a year or two?
In the case of my particular bag, I have to disagree. I’ve been wearing it for five years now. Also, if something on it should need repair, which it hasn’t, high end designers like Louis Vuitton, Prada and Burberry will fix the bag for free.
If I were blowing money on a seasonal style, yes, that would go out of style and I wouldn’t want to wear it forever. But with classic styles like the Speedy bag that I have or any Chanel flap bag, anyone who knows anything about fashion trends knows those don’t ever go out of style.
I don’t know anything about fashion trends. I just know that the people I see buying designer purses keep buying more designer purses every year, so there’s hardly a ‘I buy one good quality and stick with it until it dies forty years later’ going on. At any rate, While I don’t doubt many are well-made and can last a long time, something a step or two off the bottom end also lasts an extremely long time, and carries only the small quality markup with no big branding markup on top of it.
As Nelson mentions above, it’s a false dichotomy to compare a designer purse to only the cheapest piece of crap and ignore the still fairly inexpensive good-quality-no-branding options.
Careful when taking advice from women. Women seem to desire to dress men up as fashion dolls, and it rarely does you any favours. I’ve seen what saleswomen try to sell my husband…
[...] Uproar – Is Fashion an Investment? Says Nelson: “For me, clothes don’t mean a whole lot. They’re just something I need so [...]
“mucho humpage”? I can’t imagine why the ladies aren’t fawning over you …
I’d say that there’s a certain investment quality to looking attractive. Statistically speaking, attractive people tend to make more money than unattractive people. Don’t shoot me; I’m just the messenger.
But attractiveness doesn’t necessarily equal Louis Vuitton. Attractiveness means having a healthy body weight, keeping your hair and nails well-groomed, and wearing clothes that are flattering and well-cut for your body. A flattering $10 shirt from Forever 21 can make you look better than an unflattering, doesn’t-fit-you-right $100 shirt.
Higher prices, in my opinion, are justified only if you need to pay the extra amount in order to get something that fits your body correctly.