Shopping

Pay-For-Play Fashion?

You Got Me by VHS or Beta.jpg
Fall clothes tend to cost more than Spring ones - cashmere and leather, coats and boots, everything really adds up.

There’s great vintage finds in those categories, and J. Crew’s latest batch is crisply awesome, but still -

There’s that one big thing, the coat or the bag or the shoes, that probably cost more than rent. And still, it tugs at your gut until you finally give in and buy it.

So we have a system in our heads:

Buy that Big Thing and wear it once - it cost you $1100.

But wear it twice, and it only costs $550.

And if you wear that Big Thing to work every day for a year… well, you get how it goes. Pretty soon we’ve convinced ourselves that the $1100 trench or the $1500 bag really costs 75 cents - even negative money, if we imagine giving it to our (equally imagined) daughter.

We call this system Pay-for-Play fashion, and though it’s risky and can only be done in moderation, it does soothe our panic when we know an item is extraordinary, but we also have a budget.

Are you a Pay-for-Play girl, or do wait for the Sample Sale?

Comments

avatar
1

posted by h

Aug 09, 2007 11:42AM

When I was in middle school, my mother forced me to go to Barbizon modeling school in an attempt to correct my posture in a way that would be "fun". Part of their brainwashing scheme was this theory, but they called it "price per wear." Yes, in theory it's a wonderful idea that can help you pluck down that cash, but if you can't make rent that month than that cute little trench coat will become your home. Just think smart, if you're going to wear it right then go for it. If it's going to be a few months, wait for the sale.

avatar
2

posted by katie

Aug 09, 2007 11:54AM

I have a pretty strict "never pay full price for anything--no matter what" policy, but even with that taken into consideration, I have purchased some pretty steep things, even on sale, and used the "I can give it to my daughter one day" thing. It's one of my boyfriend's favorite things to make fun of me for..."Buying that bag for the grandkids? That's sweet."

And I'm one of those complete idiots who are willing to exist on ramen noodles to meet their shoe needs...but I'd obviously never spend my rent money on fashion.

avatar
3

posted by Keane

Aug 09, 2007 11:55AM

Seriously? Busting out the old cost-per-wear nugget already? This has been a staple of cheap people since before the internets even existed. I can't believe you guys devoted an entire post to this.

That having been said, it is useful, not as justification for purchasing something, but for determining what clothes in your wardrobe need to go to the Sal-Arm and which need to go to the consignment shop.

avatar
4

posted by sick six

Aug 09, 2007 11:57AM

ill pay-for-play with handbags because i wear them to death. though, i sample sale most other large purchase because regardless of how much i spend on coats/etc each year i wont wear the one from the previous fall or winter.

avatar
5

posted by Faran

Aug 09, 2007 11:58AM

Actually I've never seen this kind of thing discussed, either online or in a fashion magazine, so I'm not quite sure what you mean by "already."

That said, we think it's usually best to give our clothes to friends or charities, and not resell them afterwards.

avatar
6

posted by LL

Aug 09, 2007 12:06PM

thats the least of my ridiculous justifications for splurging.. i've even gone so low as to rationalize that i don't smoke, and if i did smoke i would spend like an extra $50 a month on cigarettes or whatever, so look at all the money i've saved there, so i can totally let myself buy those shoes...
pathetic, i know.

avatar
7

posted by brendastarlet

Aug 09, 2007 12:08PM

I pay for play my power clothes, coats and shoes I know I'll wear most.

avatar
8

posted by GG

Aug 09, 2007 12:11PM

Yes, I often turn to amoritizablity as a justification. What's really scary, though, is doing the reverse: a $2 iced coffee 5 times a week = $520 a year. $8 salad 5 times a week = $2,080. So I try to scare myself into bringing my lunch and making my own coffee, but then I tell myself I can buy the $500 purse...

avatar
9

posted by leia

Aug 09, 2007 12:16PM

GG-I do almost the same thing!
I don't have cable for that reason!
$50/month=$600/yr.....that's almost 2 pairs of Marc x Marc shoes!

avatar
10

posted by kelly

Aug 09, 2007 12:20PM

Like other commenters I have seen pay for play discussed on various websites and in magazines, usually in discussions of investment purchasing, disposable fashion vs. classic style, How Frenchwomen Shop, or general cheapness. It's also something my mother taught me when I was learning the difference between buying for quantity and buyiing for quality.

I totally do this for coats, perfectly tailored pants, and shoes.

Back in my wild thrifting days, I used a version of pay for play called $1 / wear: I could buy whatever insane 70s print mini or battered purple leather jacket or ironic grandpa sweater I wanted, as long as I wore it one time for each dollar it cost. $3 sequin mini dress? Must be worn 3 times, which in those club-heavy days was completley possible. But $30 for the same dress? Unlikely to wear it 30 times, so it stayed in the store.

avatar
11

posted by Liberty Girl

Aug 09, 2007 12:20PM

Amortise all costs!! But, in reality, I buy private order from the lookbooks at pre season appts, from sample sales with High St and TopShop thrown ine...

avatar
12

posted by Lauren

Aug 09, 2007 12:24PM

I once starved myself for a week in order to afford a chanel bag i HAD to have. I literally felt as if I could not exist if I didn't get it; that being said, obviously not a good idea and would never do it again. What we do all in the name of fashion.

And please, don't judge you fashionista haters..fashion is my passion, not superficiality or status.

Katie - your grandchildren will loooove you one day, i have closets of vintage everything thanks to my nonna. LOVE ITTT

avatar
13

posted by Kimberly

Aug 09, 2007 12:50PM

Granted I am a college student (STARVING, at that hahahaha) but I haev a pretty strict never pay full price policy as well, and even then i STILL use the pay-for-play motto.

but every now and then i think its important to treat yourself (as long as your credit score can afford it)

avatar
14

posted by Keane

Aug 09, 2007 1:11PM

Faran: Really? Maybe I'm missing some fundamental difference between this and what you posted above, but this seems to cover exactly the same territory that you tried to in the above post.

Check the date stamp on the article.

avatar
15

posted by Keane

Aug 09, 2007 1:12PM

Where "this" would be

http://www.goines.net/Writing/cost_per_wear.html

avatar
16

posted by WendyB

Aug 09, 2007 1:37PM

I do love a sale, but pay-for-play works for me too. I like high quality things that I can get lots of use out of. I'm not into disposable fashion. A $10 item that I wear once and send to a landfill is not appealing to me.

avatar
17

posted by Sarah

Aug 09, 2007 2:36PM

pay for play is how i justify chie mihara and anna sui to my closet. i'm hopeless at sample sales.

avatar
18

posted by Miss_Nadine

Aug 09, 2007 4:38PM

I remember reading about this in a magazine for kids, pre-middle school days, and I totally used it on my mom to get a RAD Benetton sweatshirt.
I now use the dinner check method to determine if something is worth it for one wear. If I would spend that much on a meal, I will spend that much on a fabulous one-time wear.

avatar
19

posted by katie

Aug 09, 2007 4:54PM

Miss Nadine:

My boyfriend uses that one with his spending. He loves saying things like, "...of course, that's less than the price of an expensive dinner with you."

...making it sound as though I INSIST that he take me to every douchbag establishment in West Hollywood. rawr.

avatar
20

posted by Sarabelle

Aug 10, 2007 7:05PM

What an interesting discussion. I actually have a Masters degree in luxury goods & services (my focus was high-end fashion) and this exact discussion-or paradox- took place at least once a week in the classroom. Our conclusion was that prices have steadily increased at an exponential level and the demand continues to be there (regardless of competition from the H&M's, Zara's, Mango's or whatever that keep popping up). There will always be those that can afford the $5,000 jacket without batting an eyelash and there will always be those that buy the perfume, the key-chain, the hair accessory or the sunglasses....just to "be apart" of the lifestyle...it's a never-ending "vicious" cycle that we, in fact, perpetuate.
P.S. My teacher from my program actually was around back in the day when the Hermes Kelly bag had a price-tag of $200, when it was first introduced...without the 2-5 year waiting list...imagine!!!!!

avatar
21

posted by Sarabelle

Aug 10, 2007 7:11PM

Oops, I just realized my last post was meant for the "Hey, Big Spender" Post...My Bad!!!

avatar
22

posted by ani

Aug 10, 2007 11:53PM

That J.Crew trench coat is so classic. I checked the site and could not find it?

avatar
23

posted by andrea

Aug 11, 2007 3:57PM

Faran, a fashionista like you has never heard of cost per wear? I remember when i first read about it in the 70s in a super cool book for the time called "Cheap Chic", by Caterine Milinaire. It was my then fashion bible. It mentioned the above modus operandi, which i have used many times, talked about vintage clothing, and interviewed many style setters of the then times. It's also beautifully laid out, just fun to look at. It's worth looking for. (I don't know if it's in print still). But if you want to see it, contact me, I have a copy, and also the follow up, Cheap Chic Update.

Post Your Comment