054. Worst Quality Ever

Remember When Clothes Didn't Suck?

I recently came across an experiment carried out on Levi’s 501 jeans by a group of Dutch students. When comparing the quality and durability of a pair manufactured by the brand between 1985 and 2000 and a pair from 2018, they found that the vintage pair was thicker, stronger, and less likely to tear despite being at least 18 years older. Levi’s is one of many brands people resent for not being what it once was. More and more customers would rather spend time hunting down a vintage pair even if it means paying a premium for it.

Not a day goes by when I don’t come across a conversation being had on the internet about the quality of fashion not being what it used to be. It’s evident in the way garments are constructed - unraveling seams, irregular stitches, puckering, loose buttons - and in the fabrics being used - synthetic, thin, see-though, and fragile. Customers sometimes notice changes overnight. You might repurchase something and find that it is now made of noticeably flimsier fabric and wears off faster. The decline in the quality of fashion is so significant that customers as young as Gen Z have noticed it in their lifetime. At dinner this week, a friend of mine said she’s resorted to only ever shops from vintage or charity shop, ‘In my twenties, I shopped there out of necessity. Now, I shop there because it’s the best quality I can get my hands on’.

For this week’s letter, I interviewed close friends of mine who work on the product side of the industry to get some insights. I wanted to understand why this is happening and specifically why it seems to have gotten worse in the past ten years. At the end of this letter, I introduce a new column I am launching this month to help you find the best quality items amongst what you’re shopping for.

I wanted this newsletter to be free for everyone to read. If you’re able to share it far and wide, it would mean the world to me.

See you in the comments.

Love, L x

---

Fashion historians would argue the quality of clothing has been in decline ever since the inception of ready-to-wear (mid-19th century). Industrial revolutions, the invention of synthetic fiber, and the offshoring of clothing manufacturing have enabled fashion to be produced for increasingly lesser costs and in much higher volumes. In the early '90s, Fast Fashion makes fashion accessible to all and lowers our standards in the same swift motion (this 1989 New York Times article about the arrival of Zara in Manhattan uses the phrase fast fashion for the very first time). Since, even the worst quality brands have somehow continued to deteriorate. Predictably, this linked to the consequences of multiple recessions, inflation, trends acceleration, and, in some cases as many like to angrily comment, greed.

First, I spoke to a friend who has been a designer for over fifteen years. She has worked for some of the largest heritage luxury brands in the world. We collaborated on a few collections in recent years and became close. We’ll call her Ava. Then, I spoke to the Head of Womenswear Product Development for a well-known brand in the accessible luxury segment who happens to be one of my oldest friends. I was particularly keen to get her insights as she has worked for the same brand since 2013. We’ll call her Emma.

The Cost of Making Clothes Has Increased

No surprise here, both report that the cost of making clothes has gone up significantly. Product teams see inflation affect every level of their supply chain, from the raw material used to make the fabric to transport, electricity, and factory worker’s pay.

‘We produce our tailoring in Eastern Europe. When I joined the company ten years ago, we paid our factory between €32 and €35 for a jacket. Today, we pay €50 for the same jacket. This is only to get it made and doesn’t include the cost of material, trims, or transport’.

Ava says ‘We’re under pressure to maintain our margins without increasing our selling price. Customers, because they are themselves enduring the cost-of-living crisis but also because they have come to accept the price of fast fashion as the base price for fashion, aren’t willing to pay more. This leaves us with only one option and that’s to lower our product costs with direct implications to both the quality of the fabric and the craftmanship’. Emma agrees and adds ‘It is undeniable. Decisions are made on every collection with the goal of doing just that (reducing product cost). We effectively discuss what we can get away with’.

We ask ourselves “Will the consumer really notice the difference between a basic topstitch and a French seam?”.

We then take this to our factory and ask “Which option would cost less? This one? Let’s go ahead with this then”.

I tell them that as a consumer what irks me the most is the amount of synthetics on the market and how difficult it has become to avoid them. Last Christmas, my grandmother gave me an old jacket of hers. It is lined in silk. Today, finding jackets and coats lined in silk is near impossible since silk is one of the most costly fibers for brands to use. Other consumers complain that clothes are now made with fabric so thin it is see-through and tears easily. When I am shopping for softs (dresses, blouses, shirts, and other lightweight garments), I notice fabrics being used that really should have only been used for lining and definitely not as the main fabric. I ask Emma about this, ‘I can’t comment on the synthetics aspect, we mainly use natural fibers and when we add elastane blends, it is only as a matter of ensuring comfort. As for intentionally using increasingly lighter fabrics, yes that is something we do to reduce the cost of making the garment’. She goes to share another explanation.

Fashion Changed. Now Consumers Want Something Different

‘Ten years ago, consumers wanted clothes that were structured or fitted, tailored, and form-fitting. We had one or two pieces in the range with an oversized fit. Tailored pieces were made using thicker fabrics and stiffer trims so they were a lot less fragile by design.

Today, consumers want to wear oversized clothing. They also want fluid, flowy, and comfortable. Ten years ago, this was not the case. Fluid and flowy means lighter and thinner fabrics. These rip more easily and wear faster’.

I check what the top trends were in 2013; peplum, camouflage prints (on canvas or twill - some of the thickest, strongest weaves), and bomber jackets. The year before that we were pining over bandage dresses. Yeah, that tracks.

Emma continues ‘Another trend that continues to gain in popularity is the loveworn vintage look’. Think distressed washed denim, faded prints, bohemian frocks, or the distressed leather jackets everyone wanted last fall. ‘When brands process fabric, wash it with enzymes to give it a softer feel, or mechanically wear in the garment before selling it, it’s going to affect its longevity. A garment like this will wear out faster’.

On Longevity - ‘There’s Nothing In It For Us’

As Emma puts it, every company, from the small sustainable brand to the large luxury conglomerate ‘exists to survive and grow’.

We want to sell. I’d be lying if i told you that brands prioritise the longevity and durability of garments above all else. We do want our customer to keep her clothes for a long time but we also want her to come back for more.

‘Hermès, doesn’t worry about the customer coming back. A leather jacket sells for the cost of a manager-level yearly salary. Zara doesn’t put any effort into making jeans that last as their customers comes back the following month for more. We’re somewhere in the middle. On one hand, we pride ourselves in having some the best silk garments on the market and we do a lot of testing (which are very costly) to maintain that promise. On the other, we know that fashion evolves increasingly fast, bringing consumers to shop more often. If we don’t produce newness fast enough, they’ll go buy it next door. We have to capitalise on the revenue trends drive’. It is well documented that Gen Z and millennial consumers demand fashion that is slow and sustainable but don’t put their money where their mouth is. Emma tells me ‘ We make these beautiful pieces handsewn by artisans in South America. By the time they deliver, we’re three seasons behind the trend and the customer doesn’t want them anymore’.

Fast fashion had already disrupted the traditional fashion calendar and social media encouraged the life cycle of trends to become even shorter. In the TikTok era, we started talking about ‘micro-trends’. I spoke about this with fashion expert Silvy Vignola. [Silvy is a writer and casting director. For AW24, she cast the runway of brands like Tove, Molly Goddard, and Dolce Gabbana. She writes the newsletter

Girl Moss

which I recommend you subscribe to. Start with her essay ‘Has Quiet Luxury Killed Creativity?’]. She says ‘The influencer economy has contributed to the pressure brands feel to churn products out faster. The minute an image hits social media, it starts becoming old. The sense of urgency that customers feel to participate in trends is also felt by brands who know that trends are short lived’.

Emma adds something that also explains why it’s increasingly difficult to find unique fashion. Interesting details are sacrificed for the sake of speed:

To keep up with trends, we are forced to produce fast and to produce fast means simplifying the product. The customer wants something now, so details get sacrificed. The factory needs an extra week for to stitch buttonholes. To hell with buttons.

Over several years, these shortcuts brands are collectively taking affect how fashion appears visually.

The conclusion is that brands knowingly produce worse quality and it is clear why they do it. Fast fashion gave us a taste of something we can’t walk away from and we collectively aren’t able or willing to pay more. We are not willing to wait longer either, we shop for the trends of here and now.

Helping You Discern The Good From The Bad

If you’re reading this newsletter, you’re already sold on the concept of buying less and buying better. You also probably favour vintage shopping, although that comes with its own sets of challenges. Not being size-inclusive being one of them. The last few years have proved that we can’t rely on the quality of any brand to remain stable over time. Even the most consistent ones have sometimes surprised me (in a bad way). For discerning consumers, shopping has become tedious.

To help the subscribers of Every Body Gets Dressed navigate a dire situation, I am launching a new column. Every month, I will be taking a seasonally relevant item and reviewing (IRL) five to ten versions from different brands at different price points. I will rely on my personal product experience - and enlist the help of some of my industry peers - to help you tell the products that are well-made from the ones that aren’t. The first edition of this column is coming in two weeks. It is a review of eight pairs of minimalist sandals from eight popular brands - the black flat sandals with skinny straps that have appeared in the summer collection of every shoe brand. I have written it with the help of one of my best friends who’s a shoemaker.

If there are items you want me to compare and review in prospective editions of this column, let me know in the comments.