Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

boondainc.wordpress.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 115 posts

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#81

Post by PaulHoule »

larrys wrote: post #76
PaulHoule wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

High end consumers are often jerks, but so are some people who sell to them. I know a woman who makes hand-knit sweaters for about $250. She makes them out of acrylic yarn, which shocks me. If I'm going to spend a lot for clothes I'm going to want a nice material, like wool. Particularly when you consider the cost of the labor, the extra cost of the wool is nothing. She told me she did sell a wool sweater to somebody…

"She told me she did sell a wool sweater to somebody who went home and washed in hot, it shrank, and then heard no ends of complaints about it, so she resolved to never sell wool sweaters unless they are specially commissioned." n=1 there then, right? Perhaps she was a bit to hasty based on that single data point? One of the things luxury brands do is bake into their costs margin to account for customers like this. O…

I think I'm also unusually snobbish about materials.

If you go to a crafts store they usually have a big section of wall devoted to acrylic yarn. You might find one or two kinds of wool yarn and maybe a blend, but it's pretty clear that grandmothers who knit stuff for their grandkids value 20 hours of their time less than the $10 or so difference in the price of the materials.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#82

Post by PaulHoule »

notahacker wrote: post #70
edw519 wrote: post #41

The target audience for Rewire Attire, the high end fashion marketplace, was women with enough money ... Whenever I read "target audience" and "with enough money" in the same sentence, I run the other way. My experience with prospects "with enough money": - there are far less of them than everyone else - many of them didn't earn it themselves, so... - they really don't really understand the concept of "value" - they…

In fairness, these elements of customer behaviour are actually in the favour of someone starting a designer clothes business targeting the rich: - many of them didn't earn it themselves, so... - they really don't really understand the concept of "value" - they don't understand investing vs. consuming (that's also why "designer" markets don't appeal to me as a startup space either) A bigger issues with targeting rich…

The main pain in the ass I see in that is you need to travel to one of a few big cities to find a store that sells certain brands.

Personally I live the Howard Hughes lifestyle and don't travel a lot and being able to get fancy stuff without going anywhere.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#83

Post by Domenic_S »

PaulHoule wrote: post #81
larrys wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"She told me she did sell a wool sweater to somebody who went home and washed in hot, it shrank, and then heard no ends of complaints about it, so she resolved to never sell wool sweaters unless they are specially commissioned." n=1 there then, right? Perhaps she was a bit to hasty based on that single data point? One of the things luxury brands do is bake into their costs margin to account for customers like this. O…

I think I'm also unusually snobbish about materials. If you go to a crafts store they usually have a big section of wall devoted to acrylic yarn. You might find one or two kinds of wool yarn and maybe a blend, but it's pretty clear that grandmothers who knit stuff for their grandkids value 20 hours of their time less than the $10 or so difference in the price of the materials.

Look at it the other way: maybe acrylic yarn serves a pain point. Maybe grandmothers spent 20 hours knitting a beautiful little hat or coat or something, only to have it ruined in the wash by a young, sleep-deprived parent, inexperienced in caring for quality hand-crafted goods.

Grandma figures out she can just use acrylic and now her work doesn't get ruined by washing & drying, and as a bonus the moths don't eat it because who has a cedar chest anymore?

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#84

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

PaulHoule wrote: post #82
notahacker wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In fairness, these elements of customer behaviour are actually in the favour of someone starting a designer clothes business targeting the rich: - many of them didn't earn it themselves, so... - they really don't really understand the concept of "value" - they don't understand investing vs. consuming (that's also why "designer" markets don't appeal to me as a startup space either) A bigger issues with targeting rich…

The main pain in the ass I see in that is you need to travel to one of a few big cities to find a store that sells certain brands. Personally I live the Howard Hughes lifestyle and don't travel a lot and being able to get fancy stuff without going anywhere.

For many people in that target market, that's probably a feature; use your shopping trip as an excuse for a vacation in NYC.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#85

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

tarr11 wrote: post #35
ericabiz wrote: post #15

I agree with you that perfect sizing is the future of fashion retail--especially online. However, I completely disagree with your methodology. This demographic is going to be won over by marketing , and you didn't have the correct marketing play in hand when you ran this survey. I'm going to give you an example: If you ask people: "When shopping for clothes on the web, would you submit your email address if...?" Most…

"perfect fit" may be less of an issue than you think for high end fashion. If you asked them if they have trouble finding the perfect fit, I wonder what they would say. A lot of these women wear things like Lululemon, which fits really well, and makes their butt look good. They don't necessarily wear high end fashion (heels, skirts, whatever) because it "fits". They wear it because they like how it looks, how it make…

I'm a little puzzled by the "perfect fit" thing myself. In college I worked for a men's specialty clothing store in NYC. All the expensive stuff (IOW, most of what they sold) was adjusted by the in-house tailors. You'd buy something off the rack, and then be immediately taken to someone who would take your measurements and take it in/let it out to get a good fit.

Doesn't this kind of thing happen anymore?

D

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#86

Post by majani »

chc wrote: post #46
diego wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One data point is not generalizable. I was very successful building enterprise products, and I never figured out how to build anything for the masses. I disagree strongly with your conclusion. If anything, save yourself some agony by building something for a market that you know well, and are interested in.

This is what I hear from everyone besides Ed that I've ever heard on the subject: It's easier to make money with a product that appeals to a few rich people than with one that depends on large numbers of average people buying in.

It's easier, but what I've noticed with many companies that follow that model is that a handful of clients(maybe even just one) end up controlling most of the revenue. That sort of buyer power is not good for any company's long-term prospects.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#87

Post by overgryphon »

The OP is way overestimating the importance of body measurements and is targeting the wrong demographic.

1. What looks flattering varies drastically from one woman to the next, and the determining factor of what looks good on you isn't body measurements. It's body shape. Designers tend to target a specific body type, and women who shop for designer clothing need to identify which type they are. This is where style is hard, and where women could use help.

2. Body measurements help determine type, but it's not that straight forward. Petite women with have smaller differences in measurements to indicate type. Shape of certain body features (especially bust) isn't fully indicated by measurements.

3. Type is important not for fit but to determine what styles you should wear. If a user's measurements indicate narrow shoulders, you should not be displaying halter tops, even if the bust, waist and hips sizes are correct.

4. Women with enough money to buy designer clothes and care about fit also have enough money to pay a tailor. They are much more concerned about style and quality, and will pay someone else to make it fit them.

Mr. Borden, if you're still interested in the idea I have a few suggestions for your next iteration. Target women with enough money for nice clothes, but don't know how to shop for them.

Use either body measurements or some sort of questionnaire to determine a few important body characteristics- type, bust-size, petite, plus, tall, broad shoulders, ect- you could even ask what part of their body they like most/don't like. Market your platform to women as a way to discover their own personal style, to feel more confident in the body they have (self-image is a huge source of shame for many women). Hire some personal shoppers to help write blog posts on style, body type, confidence.

Then display clothing based on what would look good on that woman. Not size, style. So if she has a large bust, don't display turtlenecks. This is where you provide value.

You could take this a lot further- a user clicks on a top, show pictures of skirts or belts or shoes that would go with it, or even generate outfits that will flatter her.

Search is another way to provide value here. It would be awesome to say, I want to look at dresses with this or that neckline, or shirts that match this color.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#88

Post by rdl »

This is why I wouldn't want to build a product where I'm not the target audience. You don't see me doing women's fashion startups, or tampon subscription as a service, or child/teen games, or whatever.

It's a problem because ~no 3 year old is an iOS developer, and most developers are 15-40 year old men, so it's less likely you'll find good products for 3 year olds vs. developer tools, but it does avoid this particular problem.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#89

Post by hownottowrite »

The margins in high-end apparel are so high that it would be better to send three sizes rather than magically select the right one. It's also a better customer experience as the consumer gets a chance to try on merchandise that feel their way to the right choice for their particular body. It also appeals to affluent buyers because they feel the merchant is catering to them in a way that is common in an in-store experience.

Re: I dropped over 40 grand when I could have spent $100

#90

Post by crgt »

rdl wrote: post #88

This is why I wouldn't want to build a product where I'm not the target audience. You don't see me doing women's fashion startups, or tampon subscription as a service, or child/teen games, or whatever. It's a problem because ~no 3 year old is an iOS developer, and most developers are 15-40 year old men, so it's less likely you'll find good products for 3 year olds vs. developer tools, but it does avoid this particula…

FWIW, some developers do have young kids. I make software for mine.
Post reply on HN