
How Premium Mediocre Conquered Fashion - technobabble
https://www.businessoffashion.com/articles/opinion/op-ed-how-premium-mediocre-conquered-fashion
======
Nasrudith
There is so much wrong with this article it isn't funny. The lack of self
awareness is enough that Eugene could flunk a Turing test and would be
complained about as lousy writing if he was placed in a movie.

The whole damn point of the Fashion Industry is to fabricate an experience of
luxury and exclusivity in the first place! Otherwise they would just be
commodity textiles with a far smaller margin - the ones any early developing
country can produce with a little bit of investment.

Then there is the frankly incoherent bashing of millennials for not spending
money on the "real high end" while complaining about them splurging and
calling them entitled. Look do you want them to buy your overpriced crap or to
join the list of victim entitled industries "killed by millennials"?

From a guy who feels entitled to profits at a large mark up, and setting the
standards of taste for everbody. Who feels the place of the customer is to
serve the merchant. Talk about projecting like IMAX....

As for why the fashion signaling niche has been taken up by logoed
commodities: tt is the economy stupid. It is no wonder people are going for an
accessible "high end" when essential expenses and debts related to them are
high. People splurge a bit for mental health - done within their means it can
be healthy even.

Plus even those who are better off can get dirty looks for conspicious
consumption outside a sufficently matched setting - and not even in an envious
sour grapes way like "I would totally get a Tesla/Buggaratti if I could afford
it." but "What kind of asshole spends $50k on a handbag when even $500 is
overkill? That is more than my car!".

------
bartread
The end of the article hints at it, but I think this stuff really represents
the "high end" of the fast fashion cycle. You got the logo, and you spent
enough money to feel like you've bought something premium, but actually it's
low quality, disposable tat.

I'm vaguely aware of a lot of this simply due to working with a tracking
product for fashion brands, but where I'm really aware of it is with watches,
which are a bit of a hobby for me.

Notably, brands such as MVMT, Vincero, Daniel Wellington, and Michael Kors,
take the cheapest of the cheap quartz movements, case them up - particularly
with MVMT and Vincero - in cheap, generic cases, with straps made of the
lowest quality materials, slap their logo on, do a ton of _fantastic_ social
media marketing, and then chuck on a ridiculous markup to charge sometimes
hundreds of dollars or pounds for these effectively disposable time-pieces.

MVMT in particular have come in for a lot of flak recently, because people
have started calling them out on the fact that you can buy the exact same
watch, minus the MVMT logo, on Alibaba for $5 as opposed to $100.

Still, overall these brands are absolutely killing it, and aren't having a
great effect on more established brands that produce higher quality
timepieces. These are brands that offer objectively better products, but
aren't nearly as savvy with their marketing: Timex, Seiko, Orient, Citizen,
Tissot, Inox, Hamilton, Zeppelin, Junkers, Junghans, and the list goes on.
None of these specialise in luxury watches, but in the same price range as the
fashion brands they do offer _good_ watches, many extremely stylish, that will
last for decades.

Premium mediocre might also be the reason that TAG Heuer get such short shrift
amongst watch aficionados. They're nominally a luxury brand, and they
certainly do make some decent timepieces. For example, the Monaco is a classic
and - for a horology geek - their high end chronographs are seriously
impressive (and way the hell above my price range).

Nevertheless, you really get ripped off on TAG's entry level quartz pieces.
These are still kind of pricey, but the quality isn't there. For example, they
will cheerfully charge you well north of £1000 for a quartz Aquaracer with a
misaligned second hand. Not OK, but a lot of people buy into it because it
makes a TAG Heuer attainable.

~~~
joncrane
Aren't watches anachronistic, though? It's basically a fashion statement
rather than a functional timepiece; we're surrounded by devices that can tell
the time for us. A watch's only purpose is wealth/fashion signalling.

I haven't worn a watch since I started carrying a cell phone and it perplexes
me why they are still so popular.

~~~
bigiain
"I can see by my watch, without taking my hand from the left grip of the
cycle, that it is eight-thirty in the morning. The wind, even at sixty miles
an hour, is warm and humid. When it’s this hot and muggy at eight-thirty, I’m
wondering what it’s going to be like in the afternoon." \-- zen and the art of
motorcycle maintenance, robert m. pirsig

For some people, there are some times when a watch is _way_ more useful than
that phone in their pocket...

(Also, I can trust my 1962 vintage mechanical watch to not be silently
tracking me and selling me out to advertising companies...)

~~~
screye
I think the OP was talking about quality differences on watches than the
utility of a watch itself.

A 10$ watch does everything the $1000 watch does. The $990 are purely a
fashion statement. The quartz being low quality doesn't affect the usability
of the watch in anyway. If anything, the cheap digital watch with silicone
straps is the e most comfortable and fuctional of all watches.

This is unlike clothing, where the 300$ suit or jacket does often have
genuinely better fit, comfort and lasts longer.

------
Geekette
" _Brands are giving the masses the illusion that they are consuming luxury,
when in reality they are doing nothing of the sort, argues Eugene Rabkin._ "

This approach to serving the midmarket has been around for a long time,
especially in the consumer goods sector. Very lucrative indeed because the
margins are so much higher when you charge premium for a mediocre product that
cost correspondingly little to make. A good example is the Victoria's Secret
underwear brand. It produces mediocre products but pumps huge money into
marketing itself as a luxury brand. Worked well in N. America where until
recently, there was little variety of underwear brands available.

I've also noticed over time that European fashion products tend to have a
higher quality threshold even at the lower ends. I attribute part of it to the
region having longer history with haute couture (high-end luxury), which in
turn established higher quality expectations for the aspirational and lower
end brands, as well as more choices of brands including within the underwear
sector.

------
narrator
The logo/brand obsession that they talk about in this article really annoys
me. I went into REI to try and buy a jacket recently and could not get
anything without an unremovable brand name on the front of it. Underwear
without a brand name readable from across the room on the waistband is also
difficult to find in stores.

~~~
ftio
Check out Uniqlo!

I have extreme aversion toward advertising a brand on my body. Uniqlo has nice
basic clothes with zero logos on them.

~~~
tvanantwerp
I'll second Uniqlo. I'm also very happy with the quality for the price.
Probably half my clothes are from there now.

~~~
walterbell
They also invent textiles for their target markets, i.e. Apple style vertical
integration.

------
burger_moon
What's interesting to me is how big and accessible the fake market has gotten
for luxury brand clothes and shoes. I remember when you'd buy fake Jordans and
Coach purses out of trunks. Now you just go on Taobao and you can buy fakes
that are completely indiscernible from the real items and costs $20. There's
even user reviews for fakes that compare them to the real items like Amazon
reviews so you having buying confidence from certain sellers that quality is
high.

For a lot of people it's more about repping the right brands than it is about
having authentic items. This of course has consequences for the real brands
who potentially lose sales to fakes, but from what I can tell it's similar to
people who pirate movies, they only watch it because it's free, but wouldn't
buy the dvd or see it in the theaters otherwise.

~~~
userbinator
_Now you just go on Taobao and you can buy fakes that are completely
indiscernible from the real items and costs $20._

If you realise that a lot of the time the fakes come from the same factories
and use the exact same materials as the real products, then this makes a lot
of sense --- the only difference is where/how it's sold, and whether the
original brand owner gets its huge profit.

------
mlacks
I'm typing this out from a laptop I keep in a Coach laptop case. I only have
it because it was a gift from a friend. His mother works at Coach and
frequently gifts her son "premium mediocre" items such as card holders and
nylon bags such as my laptop bag. His closet has Coach-branded wallets
literally spilling out of it.

I'm very grateful for the laptop bad. It was an unsolicited present when I
mentioned I was in the market for one, however when I went to his home to
receive it, I couldn't help but feel disappointed in the feel of it.

On one hand, its very subtle. I prefer Coach products over something like LVMH
or GUCCI because the labeling isn't in your face. And the Coach leather duffel
I paid 800 for in 2013 is still with me in excellent condition after 6 years
and 10 countries of daily use.

On the other hand, this is not worth 115USD. Its simply a laptop sized sleeve
with a zipper, some padding, and and the official seal with a serial number.
No straps, no additional pockets. I guess in some instances you really do pay
for the privilege of the name.

~~~
seem_2211
The cheap Gucci / LV stuff has the biggest logos. Their expensive stuff is
generally quite subtle which is pretty interesting.

From a clothing point of view, the worst thing that premium mediocre does is
break the relationship between price = quality, which as a consumer is just
depressing.

~~~
vitaflo
>The cheap Gucci / LV stuff has the biggest logos. Their expensive stuff is
generally quite subtle which is pretty interesting.

I noticed this when looking at Mercedes-Benz vehicles. Their most expensive
car (the $200k Maybach) has a very small, subtle hood ornament. Their other
cars have those huge MB backlit emblems in the grill.

I took this to mean that at a certain level of wealth you don't need to show
off a brand to prove your worth.

------
Zanni
While I agree with the basic premise of the article (disparaging low-quality
goods attached to premium brands), I take exception to two of the examples:
Starbucks and premium economy airline seats.

I regularly upgrade to premium economy when I fly for the very real benefits
of 1) earlier boarding, ensuring convenient overhead access to my carry-on
luggage and 2) extra legroom; I find it's impossible to open and use a laptop
with today's shallow seat pitch configurations unless you upgrade.

As for Starbucks, I'm paying a premium (but not much, as a tea drinker) for
the amenities: air-conditioning, clean bathrooms, quality furniture. Too many
local coffee shops lack these basics.

~~~
ghaff
Economy Plus seating seems a lot more utilitarian. Also Acela on the Amtrak.
There's a market for things that give a bit more convenience and comfort
relative to what those buying solely on price are getting. While not providing
a product that's significantly higher cost and price--especially to the point
where paying for it becomes an issue even for many business travelers.

~~~
around_here
The issue here is that they're cutting away from what was actually the
standard before in order to create something "premium". What used to be
"economy" is now "premium economy" with a price hike, and now "economy" is
something that was made deliberately worse.

~~~
Zanni
That's _an_ issue, true. And it's a frustrating state of affairs. But it's not
in keeping with the theme of the article. I think the author is hinting at the
idea that "premium" economy is an oxymoron, like jumbo shrimp, and that people
who pay for it are being suckered into paying for pseudo-prestige because of
the "premium" label. But unlike the other examples they cite, premium economy
is actually better.

~~~
around_here
I mean, not really? When is the last time you ever gave a shit about "premium"
beer? That's literally on every beer out there.

------
abnry
Most of clothing sales are based on branding, not quality, and buying a
certain brand means buying into a certain image you want of yourself.

People will avoid WalMart like the plague because they don't want to be
"someone who gets their clothes at WalMart," not because their jeans are too
crummy for them to wear.

~~~
sonnyblarney
Design is a real factor, and the difference in design between what you get at
wallmart, and what is offered by 'premium luxury' is clear.

The article may be upside down:

"Luxury" is the real hustle, because they are selling you 'good design' that
is 'inaccessible' to others, i.e. the 'inaccessibility' is the key point.

"Tory Burch" may actually be selling you really great design. But it's
affordable and accessible. Nothing wrong with that, although it's probably
positioned as less accessible than otherwise.

It's all misleading because this is a category in every consumer product and
has been for a long time. Even in finance and private wealth management.

It's a segment in the marketing mix like anything else.

The King of this segment though by far is Apple: they sell you aspiration and
a hint of exclusivity without actually being exclusive.

But remember:

\+ Tory Burch stuff is a lot nicer than the stuff at Walmart by almost
anyone's measure.

\+ Before Starbucks, you couldn't get a cappuccino anywhere.

\+ Premium Economy in flights is worth a lot if you get bigger seats without
the service. No hustle there - it's what I want, it's the best thing.

I think where it gets ridiculous is when there's are seriously overpriced
items, like the $200 keychains etc.. That's so sad.

~~~
pessimizer
> \+ Tory Burch stuff is a lot nicer than the stuff at Walmart by almost
> anyone's measure.

Including the measures of people who both couldn't identify Tory Burch, and
have never shopped for clothes at Walmart. That's how branding works.

> \+ Before Starbucks, you couldn't get a cappuccino anywhere.

There were coffee shops everywhere in the US before Starbucks. The trend
migrated from the Pacific Northwesterners who created a coffee culture so the
rain wouldn't make them kill themselves, and then that coffee culture collided
with the urban leftover memories of 50s Beat coffee culture, back-to-nature
hippie tea culture, and europhile intellectual coffee culture (a lot of tables
had inlaid chessboards.)

This was homogenized by the aggressive expansion of Starbucks, starting in the
Pacific Northwest again, wiping out most of the variations that we used to
enjoy.

And I lived in places like Northwest Arkansas and Mississippi at the time, so
this is not a big-city perspective.

~~~
sonnyblarney
"Including the measures of people who both couldn't identify Tory Burch, and
have never shopped for clothes at Walmart. That's how branding works."

If someone sees the value in something, never having heard of the brand, then
that's not 'branding' \- it's the opposite, it'd seem there's a universal
appeal of Birch beyond what Wallmart provides that is not derived from brand.

\+ Starbucks didn't wipe out 'coffee' \- coffee was a total commodity and
there were no 'varieties'. It was just called 'coffee' by everyone.

Moreover, Starbucks spread Italian style coffee: Cappuccino, Late, Espresso -
without that, there'd be no Starbucks.

------
motohagiography
As a former (or perhaps just occasional) style writer who has put a great deal
of thought into what peoples decisions about what they wear actually mean, 20
years ago the author's "premium mediocre," used to be called "aspirational
products."

These were the keychains, perfumes, and ballcaps with astronomical margins
that made the real money on the other side of the business, which was their
loss leading spectacle (haute couture, etc.) You can't afford a DeHavilland
Beaver airplane, but you can buy this saddle stitched wallet as a symbol to
remind you of the image of one.

The aspirational products matter because they give us information about
peoples true desires. It's a leading indicator for culture and politics. Even
the Cambridge Analytica scandal was started by someone who was able to link
peoples political leanings to the brands they chose. (I'd link the article but
it's behind the FT paywall.)

When someone gets up in the morning, the things they choose to wear are an
expression of what team they think they are on, what tribe they think they are
a part of, who they think their main stakeholders are, and what kind of
incentives motivate them. In business, that's about all you need to know about
someone.

Given this, I get the impression fashion, business and culture are not the
main field of the author of this op-ed.

~~~
roymurdock
i encourage you to read the original piece that coined the term:
[https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/08/17/the-premium-
mediocre-l...](https://www.ribbonfarm.com/2017/08/17/the-premium-mediocre-
life-of-maya-millennial/)

the reach and scale of social media and how brands can interact (or not) with
their followers has really changed the marketing game, and i think premium
mediocre combines this insight with the poor economic prospects of the
millenial generation

"Premium mediocrity is the story of Maya Millennial, laughing alone with her
salad. She’s just not a millionaire…yet. She just doesn’t have a mansion…yet.
She just doesn’t drive a Tesla…yet."

strongly implied is the fact that she never will have any of these
increasingly mediocre/disposable goods, and that she will be happy to consume
increasingly premium but increasingly mediocre asipirational products for the
rest of her life because she will never be productive enough to earn close to
what her parents earn to afford true quality goods

but also maybe this isn't an intrinsically bad thing and just a sign of a more
disposable/fleeting relationship with houses, cars, etc. (which is bad on
further reflection, does not bode well for the environment)

~~~
motohagiography
Gave it a read, and the distinction between previous incarnations of entry
middle classes and this new category still do not seem to supplant the
originals. It's interesting, and recommend it.

------
wisdomoftheages
This reminded me of a classic essay on how a lot of "luxury" branding is meant
to appeal, not to the true elite (the kind of people who are born with seven
or more figures in a trust fund and / or live off capital gains), but to the
aspirations of professional-class strivers (lawyers, doctors, advertising
directors, software engineers, etc.):

[https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/11/luxury_branding_the_...](https://thelastpsychiatrist.com/2011/11/luxury_branding_the_future_lea.html)

~~~
reidjs
That was a really interesting read. I embarrassingly have never thought deeply
about how marketing or branding works to manipulate the viewer in very subtle
ways. I think I’m starting to understand why some serious money is put towards
advertising budgets.

~~~
o_____________o
Do yourself a favor and watch:

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Century_of_the_Self](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Century_of_the_Self)

~~~
reidjs
Hey thanks! I actually found it on youtube if anyone else is interested
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnPmg0R1M04](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnPmg0R1M04)

------
kochikame
I have to take issue with the inclusion of "craft beer" in the list of
examples of "premium mediocre" at the top of the article.

There is certainly "fake" craft beer, made by the macro beverage companies
that is designed to basically trick people into shelling out more because they
believe they are buying into some premium category. It's classic aspirational
stuff all built around marketing.

But then... well, there's all the REAL craft beer, which is (for want of a
better word) crafted, made with care, creativity and in an environment of
independence and experimentation. This stuff is genuinely good, or can be
(sometimes experiments fail and this is fine), and like indie movements in
music, art and literature deserves to be celebrated as an authentic expression
of human endeavor.

So don't buy Goose, buy Revolution. Don't buy Elysian, buy New Glory. Go see
what your local brewery is making. Better still, make some yourself and see
how you like it.

Don't order "$25 signature burgers" from those places with all the trappings
of the hipster movement but are actually owned by investment banks, order them
from your local places that're actually doing it for themselves. It's not that
hard to tell the difference usually.

I guess I agree with the article in the final analysis because I hate to see
big companies ripping the genuine creativity out of grassroots/artisanal
scenes and turning it into a shadow of itself for profit.

~~~
seliopou
“Craft beer” as far as I can tell just means overhopped. There’s nothing
crafty about it beside swindling people into overpaying for something that
tastes like acetone smells. So I think this article was spot on by including
it.

~~~
kochikame
I disagree. Good craft beer is far more than "overhopped". It's very difficult
to make, and make consistently, and there are a plethora of different
ingredients, styles, techniques and methods out there that people are using
and innovating with.

A lot of the "overhopped" stuff is actually macro beer disguised as craft
beer.

If you don't like it then that's fine of course, but I think it's hard to deny
the amount of creativity and innovation that goes into making a really good
beer.

~~~
ghaff
And while I’m mostly not going to get excited about macro beer mascerading as
craft beer, I still find it a net plus that I can get some e.g. Goose Bay IPA
on a plane flight. It’s probably overhopped but it’s still better than
Heineken to my taste.

------
tsunamifury
On the other hand, genuinely premium brands like Brunello Cucinelli stay quiet
and do provide high quality, but at a price no one can afford. For those in
the know, the namesake CEO is in tight with the Silicon Valley power players.
Mark Zuckerberg trademark hoodies are made by Brunello, as are most of the
Apple, Salesforce, and various other major tech companies wardrobes. Unlike
what this writer believes, even billionaires signal, but it’s far more subtle.

------
DenisM
Ok, so if you can't rely on the price to signify quality, what can you rely
on? Where does one go to purchase a pair of shoes that will endure?

The best I came up with so far is using Wirecutter reviews. This way I
discovered, for instance, where to buy treat-quality bedding and towels, but
it doesn't cover anywhere near the spectrum of things that I need. Sometimes I
find something good and they stop making it a year later.

~~~
bartread
> Where does one go to purchase a pair of shoes that will endure?

There are some fairly strong indicators in the construction of a pair of shoes
that bear witness to quality (or not): an upper stitched to the sole is
generally better than one that is glued, for example.

~~~
ValentineC
Adding on: I believe the keyword to look for is usually known as a "Goodyear
welt".

------
coleifer
Some people are literally ignorant of luxury brands. My bougie sisters-in-law
are locked in a competition to outdo one another with Kate spade bags, Michael
Kors watches, etc., and have no idea that these aren't the height of luxury.
Here in Topeka, they are (where 100k gets you a nice 3br home).

Me? I'll stick to my brand name athleisure thank you very much.

~~~
dehrmann
If only they knew the Spade in Kate Spade is because she was married to David
Spade's brother. Nothing says "luxury" like "Joe Dirt."

------
natvod
People buy based on recognizable brand names because it signals you're able to
afford something in that price range and know "what's cool".

What's interesting is that some luxury brands's true high end lines are not
really profitable (example: haute couture) and are actually supported by the
brand's entry level "premium mediocre" products like canvas bags, perfumes,
etc. In a way, the true luxury products acts as a marketing expense to bolster
brand cachet, so their entry level products are coveted by the masses as
status symbols.

------
jiveturkey
it’s called mid market

~~~
hatmatrix
I was thinking something like that too, but I don't think it's the same ("mid
market" being defined by size of business, though I think I've heard it
colloquially used to describe middle price tag). "Premium mediocre"
specifically emphasizes the discrepancy between product quality vs. branding
and price tag.

------
draw_down
The banner at the top of the page proclaims:

    
    
        Become a BoF Professional
    
        Get members-only exclusive content and unlimited access to articles.
    

Probably just a coincidence.

