Okay so what's the deal with Abercrombie & Fitch anyway? Don't get me wrong--I shop there as much as possible (i.e. maybe 2 times per year because the closest store is over 50 miles away, plus it's pretty expensive) but there is a fierce loyalty that seems to go hand-in-hand with Abercrombie shoppers. Some refuse to shop at A&F's "little sister", Hollister, because they feel like the clothes there are cheaply made.
In reality, much of the apparel found at Abercrombie & Fitch stores is nearly identical to the clothes at Hollister, except that Hollister's prices, on average, are up to $20 less. Take for example, A&F's Christine polo ($50) and Hollister's Point Vicente polo ($30). They come in similar shades, are both made of almost the same materials and are otherwise indistinguishable...except for their logos. Is a little moose in the upper lefthand corner worth $20 more than a seagull in the exact same spot? In my opinion, definitely not.
I don't mind buying something from Abercrombie and Fitch if it is unique from anything found at Hollister, but I refuse to waste my money on something that is virtually the same. I would rather buy the Point Vicente polo, and spend the 20 bucks I saved on a cute tank top or flip-flops.
Don't be afraid to shout it out...leave your comments about this post! You can agree with me, disagree or not take a stance, it doesn't matter to me. I just want to know what people think about this "controversial" issue.
I like moose, but not twenty bucks worth!
ReplyDelete