Did you know...

[Italiahaircolor]

Tiffany & Co is now producing eye glass frames?

So, my question is ....

Do you think that when a brand, such as Tiffany or Vera Wang, steps outside of their typical branding to produce new things at a very different price point and of a completely different nature then what they are known for does that it in fact "cheapens" the brand as a whole?

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Personally, I answered maybe...

I think Tiffany & Co selling glasses at Lenscrafters to be sketchy. Tiffany is such an upscale brand with such an impactful name and reputation, that selling glass frames at a discount eyewear store seems odd to me. It makes me uncomfortable and I feel like Tiffany has "sold out"...as if luxury is no longer reserved, but they are all about the bottom line. I feel the same with Vera Wang selling clothing at Kohls. I mean seriously, Vera Wang, Kohls? Come on. Vera Wang is legendary for her finery...and Kohls, well, it isn''t so much famous for being the retailer of fine goods...so when she opted to sell her line there, I felt like it stole some credit from the Vera Wang name.

Now, with Coach...Coach sells sunglasses in their store, and they are little bit more mass-marketed from the get...plus, Coach glasses (from my experience) are only sold in small, more upscale eye boutiques. I think it "fits" with their image just fine and doesn''t harm their good name.

 

[BeachRunner]

Just from my observations, I''ve noticed "designer" glasses popping up more and more. My frames are Coach, and it wasn''t a big price difference between Coach frames and other "no name" frames, which I thought was surprising.

So, I''m not entirely sure about how upscale companies go about selling eyeglasses that are mass produced. Good question.

ETA: I did purchase my glasses at a privately owned doctor''s office; it was not a chain store.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Date: 1/22/2009 11:56:03 AM
Author: BeachRunner
Just from my observations, I''ve noticed ''designer'' glasses popping up more and more. My frames are Coach, and it wasn''t a big price difference between Coach frames and other ''no name'' frames, which I thought was surprising.

So, I''m not entirely sure about how upscale companies go about selling eyeglasses that are mass produced. Good question.

ETA: I did purchase my glasses at a privately owned doctor''s office; it was not a chain store.

I think glasses kind of follow the Coach brand line...very upscale accessories. Shoes, purses, fun jewelry, scarfs, hats, key chains. I think eye glasses falls in line with the rest of their products, so finding them at a modest price point doesn''t shock me. However, Tiffany & Co is a different story...they are known for diamond jewelry, and other extravagant pieces, not crystal studded eyewear.

 

[Elmorton]

I was a little surprised when I read here that Tiff''s was going to make eye wear - I can tell you there''s no way I''d ever buy a Tiffany handbag, and I really wouldn''t buy a coach knit sweater, either. If I''m going to purchase a brand name item, I agree, I want it to be what the company is known for or at least in that same realm (though I say this and there''s a Coach lipstick and perfume in my bathroom).

There was a thread awhile back about Coach being a "cheaper" now because everyone has it. I''ll admit, I don''t really like things after I''ve seen it on a 12 year old, and I think a lot of companies, including Tiffany and Coach (and Dooney? I think) have raised their prices after extreme popularity in order to make their items seem like a premium item again. Psychologically, I think doing that works for the customer. If you''re going to make a designer purchase, you want it in part because you want to feel like few people have what you have.

That said, I love factory store stuff and I''ve even eyeballed the Dooney stuff on QVC - a lot of times it''s hard to justify a luxury purchase, and the factory stuff makes it a lot easier because $150 feels fine compared to $380 - and not many people can glance at your bag and know whether it was a factory store one or a came from a boutique.

But I am bugged by some of the brand items that are made cheaply and have little to do with the original product - Tacori rings with silver coating and czs...that''s kindof a yuck to me - or Target just started carrying Hayden Harnett bags - but they''re vinyl. The best part about a Hayden Harnett is that super soft leather. That does make it feel a lot cheaper to me. Yet, I love the Target Issac Mizarahi stuff for the most part, because most of the pieces look simple, designer, and are made well. I''d totally shell out for "real" Issac if I had the opportunity.

So I guess it just depends on the design/construction for me - if the company''s secondary line product looks cheap, then yeah, it cheapens the first. But if the secondary line has the same qualities that are good about the original, then I think I maintain my belief that the more expensive is also worth the tag.

 

[neatfreak]

Yes it cheapens the brand because for the most part designers are just selling the use of their name and then glasses are being made in random factories, slapping on a versace or dolce and gabbana (two of the worst offenders) label, and charging more for them.

I do think there are brands that do it better than others like Chanel. I also think it''s less weird for clothing/accessories companies to go into it than a jewelry store.

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Date: 1/22/2009 1:00:11 PM
Author: neatfreak
Yes it cheapens the brand because for the most part designers are just selling the use of their name and then glasses are being made in random factories, slapping on a versace or dolce and gabbana (two of the worst offenders) label, and charging more for them.

I do think there are brands that do it better than others like Chanel. I also think it''s less weird for clothing/accessories companies to go into it than a jewelry store.

Agreed, agreed.

 

[Definitely. Maybe]

I did not know Tiffany was selling glasses now!? I honestly don't like it. I also think of Tiffany as more of an upscale brand and going into Lenscrafters just to sell an item, to me lessens its value.

I also saw the Vera Wang at Kohls. I think she also sells mattresses (!) at Belk. I personally don't think of mattresses when I think of Vera Wang.

Kind of weird to me. oh well.

ohh, Italia, I found this post while trying to search for a thread with your dog that's in the picture. I couldn't find one, do you have a thread for it? It is soooo cute!

 

[Italiahaircolor]

Date: 1/22/2009 3:43:11 PM
Author: Definitely, Maybe
I did not know Tiffany was selling glasses now!? I honestly don''t like it. I also think of Tiffany as more of an upscale brand and going into Lenscrafters just to sell an item, to me lessens its value.

I also saw the Vera Wang at Kohls. I think she also sells mattresses (!) at Belk. I personally don''t think of mattresses when I think of Vera Wang.

Kind of weird to me. oh well.

ohh, Italia, I found this post while trying to search for a thread with your dog that''s in the picture. I couldn''t find one, do you have a thread for it? It is soooo cute!

That is Diesel, and no I don''t have a thread on him.

He was a rescue puppy we got a while back. Isn''t he too cute? That look he''s wearing in the picture, the "huh? what? me?" face is classic Diesel. Smart as a whip...but, he came to us with a lot of problems.

He''s a pure bred Chihuahua (backyard breeder/puppymiller). He is a blue/fawn which is a desirable yet unrecognized color by the AKC. His mother was an apple head (correct) his father was a doe head (incorrect). His coloring (the blue/fawn) is actually a delutted pigment which causes him to burn easily after sun exposure, his eyes are very sensitive, and his skin is often very dry and requires a fatty acid shampoo. So, while the color is very cool, it is also very undesirable to people who "know better". He also had a puppy hernia from where is ambicial cord never headed properly when we adopted him...which caused weight issues. But none of that matters, we love love love him.

 

[Definitely. Maybe]

Date: 1/22/2009 4:26:53 PM
Author: Italiahaircolor

Date: 1/22/2009 3:43:11 PM
Author: Definitely, Maybe
I did not know Tiffany was selling glasses now!? I honestly don''t like it. I also think of Tiffany as more of an upscale brand and going into Lenscrafters just to sell an item, to me lessens its value.

I also saw the Vera Wang at Kohls. I think she also sells mattresses (!) at Belk. I personally don''t think of mattresses when I think of Vera Wang.

Kind of weird to me. oh well.

ohh, Italia, I found this post while trying to search for a thread with your dog that''s in the picture. I couldn''t find one, do you have a thread for it? It is soooo cute!

That is Diesel, and no I don''t have a thread on him.

He was a rescue puppy we got a while back. Isn''t he too cute? That look he''s wearing in the picture, the ''huh? what? me?'' face is classic Diesel. Smart as a whip...but, he came to us with a lot of problems.

He''s a pure bred Chihuahua (backyard breeder/puppymiller). He is a blue/fawn which is a desirable yet unrecognized color by the AKC. His mother was an apple head (correct) his father was a doe head (incorrect). His coloring (the blue/fawn) is actually a delutted pigment which causes him to burn easily after sun exposure, his eyes are very sensitive, and his skin is often very dry and requires a fatty acid shampoo. So, while the color is very cool, it is also very undesirable to people who ''know better''. He also had a puppy hernia from where is ambicial cord never headed properly when we adopted him...which caused weight issues. But none of that matters, we love love love him.

Aww that is so sad about his skin! Poor thing. I rescued a chihuahua mix a few years back (now my parents dog) and she had a puppy hernia too and had to have emergency surgery, but she is all better now! I know what you mean about still loving them no matter what!

Thanks for telling me about Diesel he is lucky to have you to take good care of him! It''s a shame what people will do to animals just because they are desirable.

 

[oobiecoo]

I think it depends on the item and brand. I like that Target has the designer clothing brands now that switch out every once in a while... I appreciate that they are trying to offer good design/quality at a lower price point. The designer handbags get to me though because they are always PLEATHER which is NOT good quality. In that case, I think it definitely cheapens the designer''s name. I think Tiffany''s eyeglasses would be kinda fun to have... but I would expect them to be sold in a nicer optomotrist''s office, not at lensecrafters in podunk, texas.

 

[butterfly 17]

Hey Italia!

I don''t want to hijack your thread, but I couldn''t help but notice your dog diesel looks similar to mine, Bambi blue! She is a blue/fawn as well with lavender eyes. Here''s a picture! She is two years old now!

 

[purselover]

I voted that it does cheapen the brand. Licensing is a very dangers game for designers to play, which is why they only usually do it when they need the money. Take Vera Wang she said she started her Kohl''s line because her high end line wasn''t profitable enough to keep her in business. When you license you give up a certain level of control, especially with goods like sunglasses, and sheets, they don''t actually design those goods they just place their stamp of approval on them (and in some cases designers don''t even do that)