I have lived in the USA for 10/11 of my life, yet I too find this discussion foreign. I buy things at what I think is a fair price for the quality and the time in the retail season (having done a bit of comparison shopping before I bought) and then I move on to the next item that needs replacing.
I don’t see the sticker price as an opening offer in a negotiation, I see it as the price per share, so to speak, and I think about whether or not I agree with the valuation. So to my way of thinking, if you bought the option to wear an article of clothing, decided not to excercise that option, returned it for full price back (which is already generous, some places have restocking fees) and then you bought a new option at a lower price, which could then also be returned at will (in full) that deal is already better than nearly any other type of tangible asset which one can possibly buy. What more can you ask?
Just yesterday, I nearly kept a Nordstrom blouse I’d ordered online, but I was concerned it might ride up, so I put it on with tags and went about business as usual (not eating or being messy, of course, just normal household tasks). And sure enough it popped up twice in half an hour. So back it went today. I was already concerned that the price was exceeding average for that level of quality, but I generally fancied it (it reminded me of both my grandmothers in a good way). The fact that it didn’t perform as expected was the turning point. I’m always very careful to lint roller everything and remove any deodorant smudges and fold neatly and so forth. I feel like if manufacturers are not willing to put in the time testing their clothing to work properly, then they essentially are paying me to do it for them, by offering free returns. If I’m wearing it longer, it’s to test performance, and not to see whether I like it. I like almost nothing, and of what I like maybe 1/3 fits, so it’s very obvious to me when I like something. Though I have to have a cooling off period to get over my initial crush, as I discussed in a previous long post.
Right now, I’m averaging about $70 for nicer clothing items (with a fair number of inexpensive summer things) and roughly twice that for shoes and very roughly 3X for better coats.
I’m having a hard time understanding how $240 is expensive for casual pants and yet $160 is reasonable. There are plenty of good options for pants at AT, Talbots, and even Nordstrom at the $70 price point, and occasionally less.
That being said, I haven’t done a head to head comparison of Everlane or Amour Vert etc (for favoring greener retail) vs EF in terms of longevity of the garments. These newer brands are definitely less expensive. I plan to attempt rounding out my fall/winter wardrobe from Everlane.
I’m not criticizing anyone who does get price adjustments. I’m just sort of in awe as to when people have the time to shop while looking in the rear view mirror so to speak. I’m not nearly as busy as most people, but I’m having a hard time imagining putting “check to see if the price for slightly overpriced casual pants has been reduced,” to my calendar for a date which is four weeks from when I bought an item. It seems like an exhausting way to live one’s retail life.... But then again, I don’t actually enjoy shopping. I just like having the nicest things I can afford at the lowest price I can find, at the moment I’m willing to buy them, and all with the least amount of effort. In other words, I see dressing as an optimization problem to be solved.
This is the kind of post that makes me wary about identifying information. I’m definitely trying to have an exchange of ideas, and I’m not judging anyone. Nonetheless, in my experience, in most venues, people would “bite my head off” for this kind of confrontational approach. I trust that I won’t get that reaction here.