Last Year, Kate Moss wore a dress from Topshop (yes, we know it was her own design, but still) to the Met Ball - the party of the year and the most appropriate time to wear couture.

A few weeks ago, Sarah Jessica Parker, that ultimate paragon of the cheap dress / expensive shoes look showed up to Matthew Broderick's premiere in a dress from Bitten. It's one thing to go on Oprah wearing a $40.00 outfit and $700.00 shoes to promote your new line - but the red carpet's a bit of a different scene. And this is the woman who not too long ago wouldn't step out on a red carpet in anything less than couture. Now she's in a $10 cotton sun dress?

Is this what she meant when she said she and her friends compete over who spends the least on their outfit?

And then last Thursday, Vanessa Von Bismarck, PR Princess and real life Countess wore Banana Republic to a Lulu DK event at Antony Todd. Her wedding was documented inVogue and the dress was custom made Derek Lam. But now that she's pregnant she decides mid-priced career wear is more her speed? As far as we know, she is not designing a line for BR.

We love Banana and Topshop, but given the choice, Britt would wear Vivienne Westwood, Natalie would go straight to Matthew Williamson, and I would be on the phone with Thom Browne. Maybe if we wore Chanel Couture on a weekly basis, we too would be jonesing for a cheap and chic red carpet look.

How about you?

--BRETT KANE

Something's happening over at Wet Seal, but we can't quite put our finger on what it is.

First, they let Ashlee Simpson design a line of t-shirts, some even with her face on them.

Now, they've launched a Community section on their site, which includes a "social networking element" meant to create a more in-store kind of experience, so that girls can chat with each other while they shop.

We're not sure what to make of this, but here's a funny coincidence -

Last week's episode of The Office (is this a shameless, un-fashiony television reference? Why yes, it is) started with the return of Ryan, and the problems that arose from Dunder Mifflin's attempt at incorporating a social networking component into their paper-purchasing site, which nobody saw a reason for...

I love J.Crew. My mom snuck me out of class to go to the store opening in Orlando, I bought my first winter coat at the Rockefeller Center store, and I wait in suspense for each new shipment of Favorite Boxers. But scrolling through the site recently, I worry that someone has replaced my favorite preppy retailer with an evil twin sister like in Double, Double Toil and Trouble. Here's why:

1. Yoga Clothes. Seriously? As Natalie points out, the Yoga trend died years ago, and more importantly, do J.Crew girls really do yoga? Don't you picture them in a spinning class, or on a tennis court?

2. Awkward Girl. This isn't a W spread, we swear. It's just a J.Crew model sitting in a most unflattering position, making this cute gingham frock look about as attractive as a t-shirt at Savers.

3. The Luggage Collection. No joke. Italian leather luggage, in white, orange and yellow no less, for $1200 to $2000. For a little more, you could buy Louis Vuitton (or better yet, Tumi plus a plane ticket to Paris).

I get it. J.Crew wants to play with the big boys of luxury - thus the fine jewelry, organza ball gowns, and now editorial catalogs and insane luggage - but taken as a whole, are they really selling all of this to the same customer? Don't pull a Gap on us now, there aren't enough Patrick Robinsons to go around.

--BRETT KANE

Remember that NYLON party we went to a couple weeks ago?

Well, I walked away with the prettiest glass bottle of Chloé perfume. The smell, however, wasn't nearly as nice. But I tried it, just in case. Natalie said, "all wrong" and "too woodsy".

I tried again. My roommates loved it, and so did my boy neighbors. And the woman shopping in Jumelle. And the girl who stopped me on the street today to ask what "divine" scent I was wearing. Even Natalie asked, "Wow, what is that?"

I know scents vary depending on the person, but do they vary on the same person from the first spritz to the third? Did my skin somehow adapt? Is that even possible?

Ruth La Ferla just wrote about bloggers and the dramatic way in which they're changing the fragrance industry. They've cracked open the world of niche perfumes to an audience that's used to learning about new scents in People or the billboard above their gas station, giving giants like Estée Lauder and Coty a mini panic attack.

Natalie is indeed prompted to smell a new perfume based on a positive review whereas I'm influenced by the print ads, (ridiculous, I know). And yet we're both aware it's impossible to form an opinion of a scent without wearing it repeatedly.

If I'd read Chandler Burr's scathing review of the Chloé scent and trusted my initial sniff, I would have kept Chloé as a pretty paperweight. Instead, it's replaced the YSL Homme I've trusted for almost a year.

Do you read scent reviews? How do you determine which perfume is right for you without wearing it for a bit? And more importantly, has an offensive scent ever become your fave?

Apparently, guys love a girl in polka dots.

We learned this fun fact last week after a friend professed his love for the dots' retro vibe, which in turn made us wonder whether he loved the actual spots or just the 50's housewife look it connotes.

So we asked around this weekend, and yes, apparently they love a buttoned up, full skirted, high-heeled woman. Brett even remembers Matthew Broderick saying he preferred a woman in a Stepford Wife-like outfit, (obviously interesting in and of itself since his wife dresses like anything but), and he distinctly recalls a GQ spread in which men professed their love for the women on the Food Network in part because yes - they can cook, but also because they're beautiful and dress conservatively.

The message appears to be that guys don't like girls who dress like Posh or Carrie Bradshaw but want a girl who looks more like Katie Holmes or Charlotte York - and polka dots are an added bonus.

We're wondering though, can stars replace polka dots? Because we're really obsessed with this romper and we're pretty sure every guy we know would think we'd lost it if we started wearing it around.

But if it was spotted - well apparently it'd be ok?

We've been talking about it for a while, and we've come to this conclusion: We hate cover headlines.

They aim to say everything, but really, say nothing at all. We get that it's an advertising thing for all of those non-subscribers out there, but shouldn't the cover girl be enough?

We're reminded of this whenever we find ourselves envious of most foreign fashion covers, especially the latest Vogue Italia with a magical Natalia covered by only one (very appropriate) word: ICON. Now, that says it all.

People already try to knock us for reading fashion magazines as part of our literary diet, and it doesn't help our case when our eyes are peeking over the top of a cover that reads "DIY Dermatology" "The Junk Food Diet," and "Space-Age Fitness" (all US Vogue headlines, mind you, but they're not the only culprits).

We wish covers would return to the days of Dali art - couldn't magazines at least go the way of Bazaar and send cover line-less editions to subscribers?

They clutter and confuse what should be the best photo of the entire edition. But phrases like "plastic surgery" sort of kill the glamour buzz.

What do you guys think?

--JAZZI McGILBERT

Giorgio Armani makes roller skates now.

1. If any designer's making roller skates - shouldn't it be Heatherette?

2. That new business plan - the one where he refrains from sticking his name and logo on everything in order to re-establish himself as a luxury instead of mass market brand - was introduced less than six months ago. So has it not started yet or did they just ditch the idea?

3. Why don't they come collaged with pictures of David Beckham rocking his Armani briefs?

4. Does Giorgio himself roller skate through the streets of Milan? Because we would LOVE to see that.

5. Who, exactly, is the target consumer for this $425 product? We're dying to know.

I really do eat an apple every day.

But I usually just throw it in the depths of my bag and hope it's still ok when I go searching for it at three in the afternoon.

Hermès doesn't think that's a great idea. In fact, they've gone so far as to develop a separate purse for my apple.

They've just launched a new section on their website called, "Travel the World of Hermès." You can watch videos, (some awkward but some with very cute boys), read illustrated storybooks and watch the computer add color to a blank silk scarf.

Or you can go straight to the tile with the apple and "mon amour" scrawled on the left. The slideshow displays the granny-smith-apple-green, lambskin apple holder with stainless steel lining. And of course it comes with a horn-handled knife for snack time.

A little apple shoulder purse might be adorable for a twelve-year old's allowance, but we're guessing this is just a bit out of an adolescent's price range... and mine.

We haven't been on Bluefly in awhile.

It usually takes too long to find something good and by then, it's still too expensive, ie this gorgeous Prada clutch.

But we logged on today, clicked on YSL and found this bag. You know, the one Lily Allen carted everywhere just a month ago and the one Kate Moss has been carrying for at least a week.

We always thought the products on Bluefly ended up on there because no one was buying them, and even then, not less than a year after they leave actual stores. Are we wrong?

The good news is, if you want Kate's bag for less than retail, you don't have to wait for it to go on sale.

The bad news? It's still $1,500.00 - and you know Kate paid $1,500.00 less than that.

There's been plenty of talk about the actual building Zaha Hadid constructed for Chanel's two year Mobile Art Tour.

But IHT finally sent someone inside to tell everyone who can't hop, skip and jump to Hong Kong exactly what happens when 20 international artists are challenged to interpret Chanel's 2.55 bag.

The author says it "feels like a very elaborate Chanel commercial." While most chose to render a physical interpretation of the iconic handbag, the Japanese artist Tabaimo created a well in which the viewer looks down on walls covered in "floating objects, representing the dreams of Chanel customers."

We're very curious as to what the dreams of Chanel customers look like. Do they involve Karl? Are they littered with double 'C' rhinestone earrings? Do visions of 2.55 bags wearing tweed jackets dance in their head?

Guess we'll have to wait for the exhibit to hit New York in September.

In the meantime, we might stop by the Chanel store after work and see if anything comes to us.

I love Givenchy.

Their Fall '08 collection was one of my favorites and their Spring '08 Couture still pops up in my dreams.

But I cannot forgive them for putting open toe boots on the runway. Or maybe I should say I can't forgive mass-market brands for attempting to make this trend affordable so that even people who don't worship at the altar of Riccardo Tisci can walk around in open toe boots.

My mom used to say that the four inch wooden platforms with white, cherry splattered canvas that I ran around in the summer before high school were the most impractical shoes ever made. But she'd never seen open-toe booties.

In New York, it's pretty much either cold and rainy, in which case your poor toes would fall off; or, it's hot and sweaty, in which case your calves would probably melt from being stuck in a leather chamber all day.

Either way, you're miserably uncomfortable. Someone please explain - why would anyone wear these off the runway?

"As a destination for fashion insiders and the people who wish to dress like them, this may be the most influential place in retail at the moment," wrote Eric Wilson of Opening Ceremony in The New York Times this morning.

Really?

We think it's more like this: Opening Ceremony has only become well known, outside the fashion clique, by making brands like Topshop and Target accessible to New Yorkers.

But as far as directly influencing the fashion industry, and even the retail industry, our immediate thought was, "What about Barneys?" Isn't Barneys the store powerful enough to propel unknown kids to style icon status, like Proenza? Isn't Barneys to blame for the national influx of "Goyard" stamped canvas bags? How many stores can claim a Creative Director with an internationally recognized face, like Simon Doonan?

Even if you don't agree that Barneys is the "most influential store" out there, it seems like quite a stretch to bestow the honor upon Opening Ceremony - a store that is apparently now taking notes from Target with their new celebrity clothing line.

While we usually love most of their clothes, nothing about the store appears revolutionary - not to mention that our readers repeatedly express their disappointment with Opening Ceremony in our comments section.

"Most Influential" is a pretty hefty title; on which store would you bestow the label?

We know Louis Vuitton is the king of putting their logo on everything under the sun, but this one takes the gâteau -

In honor of White Day in Japan (kind of like Valentine's Day, except you can only give gifts that are white,) Louis Vuitton is offering white fabric roses - with the LV logo printed on a petal.

We're not sure if they're trying to take credit for having designed the roses (we're pretty sure the shape of these was a no-brainer,) or if they think the logo somehow makes them LV-approved, but we can't imagine anyone foolish enough to part with $39 for each one of these things when white bunny-shaped marshmallows from Kraft are so readily available these days.

To us, this makes about as much sense as a double C-monogrammed ice cream cone or D&G fake nails.

Can anyone please explain?

A very well dressed man stepped in front of us while we were walking to the subway last night. He wore a fitted suit, cropped and cuffed trousers and black loafers with grey socks.

Then we noticed he'd folded his scarf to display a huge "THOM BROWNE" label across his back.

We were surprised that someone dressed so elegantly would feel compelled to advertise. In-your-face branding comes off as so awkward, especially juxtaposed with such a classic outfit.

Most people won't wear a t-shirt scrawled with a brand name, yet don't hesitate to carry the most popular (read: recognizable) YSL bag or Marc by Marc accessories weighed down by the designer's nameplate, which is essentially the same thing. It makes us uncomfortable when people ask us where we bought our dress, or our shoes, or our bag - we can't imagine wanting to scream the answer down the street, let alone walk around with a stylized version of the brand tag on the outside of whatever we're wearing.

Do you feel comfortable functioning as a walking advertisement for a brand? What about if it's your favorite one?

PS. The dapper man turned out to be Thom Browne himself. And, well, if we had our own brand we'd probably be OK advertising that.

John Galliano kicked off Couture week in Paris yesterday with a spectacular-as-always show for Dior, while the rest of the world mourned the crashing stock market and slowing economy.

Meanwhile, Jimmy Choo, the British luxury shoe brand, announced that while most retail outlets continue to suffer, their profits reached record highs last year. And last week, WWD reported that 2007 was Chanel's most profitable couture year ever.

We've noticed this trend over the last year, luxury sales growing, or at least not dropping, while the rest of the industry suffers. While analysts often attribute it to the rich getting richer, and being generally unaffected by minor economic trends, we wonder if it has something to do with the recent push to bring luxury to the masses.

We know, or at least hope, that the average fashion fan isn't saving for a couture gown, but we also know plenty of girls who skip meals for weeks to buy $600 Jimmy Choos, or pay rent late to afford $300 Tom Ford sunglasses, foregoing weeks of retail therapy at mid-range stores in lieu of one major luxury item.

If more people put their money toward a piece of the luxury market, do the levels of retail directly below suffer?

Tuesday's launch of Armani's first beauty line for men has us thinking - who buys this stuff?

It's been our experience (ahem), that men tend to just borrow their girlfriends' products, often times a surreptitious act while in the shower.

But we keep reading about beauty lines intended specifically for men, especially by non-drugstore companies.

Clinique, Frederic Fekkai and Bliss are just a few beauty brands with products intended specifically "for men." But we've never known any guys to actually buy themselves men's beauty products. In fact, when we have seen guys buy skin care/hair stuff, we've seen them in Duane Reade, buying gender neutral options like Neutrogena.

We don't know if this is an embarrassment of doing something "girly," or if men's products are sort of pointless, as if men's skin and hair is really so much different from women's, for whom most beauty products are made.

Do you buy men's beauty products, either for yourself, or for a boyfriend? Or does it strike you as the same stuff but in darker packaging?