Sooo... My mum was thinking we'd maybe descend on the cousins and go to Jamaica at Christmas (I know, that's aeons from now!). And I had the thought that maybe I'd buy a pair of white Gucci loafers if we did that, which idea I've been toying with.

And then it occurred to me I'd probably be more likely to be spendy on white Mr. Roarke loafers from Gucci than something of unmockable cool and equivalent price from Rag & Bone. I think it might have something to do with being able to get the same darn item decade after decade... after decade.

I'm wondering if I have a problem. For a trendy person, I can be awfully stodgy. Like I'm stuck in a decade I wasn't even alive in.

Anyways, if you had a $2000 and you had to spend it on something designer - would you go for a new label or an old one? Why?