i had a thought.

[lauralh]

At a burrito hut I saw that you could buy a shirt with the place's logo on it. Which made me think, "Gee, they make you PAY to wear a shirt with THEIR logo on it? You pay for advertising them? How fucked up is that?"

Which of course let me to think of Nike and Calvin Klein etc, and then I came up with a new theory. Stuff with logos on it should be about half the price of stuff without it. I mean companies spend millions of dollars to advertise, and then they charge you $60 for clothes that cost them $2 to make, just because it has a big honking logo that I don't even want on it, which is basically ME PAYING to advertise the fucking company?

Comments

[greywanderer.livejournal.com]

In my entire life, I've never bought clothing with a logo on it. Since I was old enough to pick out my own clothes I've refused to wear that shit.

(underwear doesn't count because you can't really find any that doesn't have the brand name on the waistband anymore.)

also

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

No one sees your underwear, kiddo.

;)

Re: also

[greywanderer.livejournal.com]

smartass. :-P the ones I'm wearing now say Structure, btw.

suuuure they do

[herbaliser.livejournal.com]

I think we need a pic to prove it.

Re: suuuure they do

[greywanderer.livejournal.com]

alas I have no digital camera and probably won't get one this year. so I can't help you out there.

[grimmlin.livejournal.com]

A nice suggestion, but on the flip side, as long as people are stupid enough to pay 60 dollars to be a walking advertisment, why on earth would a company ever stop?

[jumper42.livejournal.com]

the reason why the stuff is so expensive now is due to the fact that the kids working in the mexican sweat shop that make these clothes just got a raise to a $1.58 an hour, before taxes of course. the company has to make up their profit somewhere.

[dfrahlic.livejournal.com]

Sometimes, I go into major department stores, and fling bleech all over their clothes to protest designer labels. OK no I don't.

[xkisses.livejournal.com]

Damn. There's a Calvin and Hobbes strip about that somewhere, but I can't find it.

whys and wherefores

[(Anonymous)]

fashion designs can't be copyrighted, since any jerk can cut cloth any way he wants and there's no trade secrets involved, but logos can be protected, and anyone making a bootleg shirt with a logo on it is breaking a law and can be sued; at this point a cheap t-shirt with the CK (calvin klein) logo on it is just as "elite" as a 2000$ dress and of course, much cheaper to make. while jumper's post is (probably,) facetious it is true to some extent for most companies.