Big Box Store, Boutique Price: Target's Designer Collaborations

Designer Collabs: A recession-inspired sartorial phenomenon; reasonably priced access to iconic designers we'd otherwise never be able to afford. In theory, that is.

The price points of Target's in-house stuff might be reasonable, but whenever the chain partners with a fashion bigwig, something funny happens: Its perception of what constitutes cheap tends to shift, and not in the consumer's favor either. A designer slaps their name on a "collection" sold in the same place as Mossimo and Merona, and POOF! Suddenly, the tags are more boutique than big box. Weird.

Target puts the jay in Tar-jay with two designer collabs lines: GO International provides "affordable fashion created by emerging designers," and Designer Collaborations features well-established designers who "draw inspiration from a collaborative partner, muse or creative element." (Fashion is DEEP, people.)

The goal of both fast fashion initiatives? "To deliver the latest styles to contemporary female guests at the prices they expect from Target" (my italics).

Anyone who's ever fallen for Target's six-dollar tri-blend tanks (i.e. me) knows their lifespan to be approximately six laundry cycles long. While an uber cheap price tag doesn't excuse subpar quality, it certainly makes it more palatable. Therein lies the trade-off.

In between shopping for toiletries and cleaning products, I expect the opportunity for a quick fashion fix that won't break the bank. I expect to be able to get a few months of wear out of something fun, fab and monetarily inconsequential to my pittance of a shopping budget. I expect trendy and affordable to not be mutually exclusive terms.

I do not expect to see the number $139.99 on a jacket (real leather or no). Especially when I don't even know who the eff Tracy Feith is.

I understand the allure of snagging a bitchin' designer goodie for less. My hunch is that the quality of a given Designer X for Chain Store Y item isn't reminiscent of his or her Ready-To-Wear line: It's on par with the store's in-house merch. I'm willing to pay a bit more for a fashion bigwig's name, but triple, quadruple the amount of what the chain charges for its non-collabs stuff? Beotch please -- it's not like someone's sitting around hand-sewing the goods.

In a vacuum, Alexander McQueen priced at $69.99 isn't entirely offensive. But we don't live in a vacuum, reasonably priced is all relative, and paying that much for one item of clothing at Target is fucking insane.

I've never purchased anything GO International or Designer Collabs, so I can't honestly speak to whether or not it wears better than the store's in-house stuff. If higher cost denotes nicer quality, fine -- that's not my issue here. My beef is with Target's newfangled exclusivity.

Maybe I'm lusting after images of Anna Sui's Gossip Girl line now. But when I see the collection up close this September, the following will probs ensue: I'll try on some dresses, find one I'm nuts about, waffle for a bit, and ultimately deem dropping $80 on one piece from Target a bad idea. I won't leave the store feeling smart and responsible. I'll leave feeling unfulfilled, poor and pissed off... just like I do whenever I browse Barneys.

Target used to be a store where finding something we liked was akin to finding something we could afford; a medium that liberated its shoppers from the ickiness inherent in wanting what we can't have.

Now? It's just another place that enables fashion and its designer deities to do what they do best: Rip us off.

Follow Alexandra Sinderbrand on Twitter: www.twitter.com/cheapjap

Comments

[SLehman]

I agree with everything you have stated. But, that is the Corporate way of making you think they are doing us a favor by bringing in designer items for "less." When really they are mass produced like everything else Target offers.

Dont get me wrong I love Target, i just will not purchase their so called "designer" clothes.

[usedtoliveinLA]

Alexandra - try washing your $6 tee shirts on delicate with less soap from now on and hang them up to dry. They'll last a couple of years. I guarantee it! I've bought many shirts on the sale rack at Target and have at least 2 seasons worth of wear from them. I have noticed that Target's prices have risen in the last year or so, and I am in agreement that designer labels are not worth the extra bucks - unless they are on sale.

[jade7243]

Some of the best jeans I ever bought came from Target, on the 75% off rack which made them a steal. They're over 3 years old and have been washed more than 6 times. I've bought plenty of other cute things at Target which I planned to throw away after a season, but dang if they're not still cute, wearable and heck, yeah! fashionable when that season rolls around again.

Maybe you just have an acute case of "expensive designeritis," where if the piece of clothing or equipment does have double C's, intwined G's, hooked up LV's or some name you know, you don't want it. Good for you. More fun shopping at Target, and TJ Maxx and Ross for me and the millions of other women immune to designeritis.

[psychrn]

Must disagree with your premise that Target offerings are so cheaply constructed that they fall apart after 6 washings. Have pants and tops that I purchased in 1995 to wear while making home health nursing visits. While they are not particularly fashionable and have some signs of use, I still wear them when I do patient care in less than optimal conditions. And still manage to receive compliments on my appearance.