|
Post by **GypsyGirl** on Jun 16, 2022 1:48:32 GMT
So if it is fabric and time, then petites should cost less. But you can’t find petite sizes in stores anymore. Nordstrom no longer has a petite section. Some Macys are doing away with theirs. Many others sell it online only. I want to touch and try it on before I buy it. But I see your logic that it should be cheaper than regular sized clothes! The problem with that logic is that like plus sizes, petites cannot just be chopped off at the hem and/or sleeve and called a petite. Petites are also about proportion. The waist, bustline, hipline are in different places. Shoulders are narrower, as are sleeves (width and length). If all that is done is shortening the leg length, then the knee is in the wrong place, as is the crotch. Same with the elbows. Shorten the arm piece only and the elbow is in the wrong spot. It requires a totally new pattern drafted to have a true petite sized item of clothing. So while petites do use less fabric, they take more time to draft patterns and separate assembly lines for cutting and sewing. I am coming from the position of having a BS in Clothing & Textiles. I've studied the industry.
|
|
|
Post by maryland on Jun 16, 2022 3:16:33 GMT
If the amount of material/cost to sew is what makes larger sizes cost more, then it sounds like men's clothes should cost more than women's. I will start buying some men's clothes if they are cheaper than women's. I am cheap and I won't pay a lot for clothes. My husband has much more expensive taste in clothes than I do! I was the opposite when I growing up through when I had my first child. I was so into fashion and make up back then. Men’s clothes ARE more cheaper than women’s generally, especially for basic stuff. I stopped buying women’s sweatshirt hoodies and now will only get them from the men’s department. Not only do I like how they fit (overall looser but especially in the arms so I can more comfortably wear a t-shirt underneath) but they are always less expensive too. I buy the men's sweatshirts at Costco for myself and my three daughters. They love them, the oversize sweatshirts are becoming popular. My college daughters say the guys on their floor always want to wear their Costco sweatshirts! I do love the way men's clothes have the looser fit.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 16, 2022 3:27:51 GMT
So if it is fabric and time, then petites should cost less. But you can’t find petite sizes in stores anymore. Nordstrom no longer has a petite section. Some Macys are doing away with theirs. Many others sell it online only. I want to touch and try it on before I buy it. But I see your logic that it should be cheaper than regular sized clothes! The problem with that logic is that like plus sizes, petites cannot just be chopped off at the hem and/or sleeve and called a petite. Petites are also about proportion. The waist, bustline, hipline are in different places. Shoulders are narrower, as are sleeves (width and length). If all that is done is shortening the leg length, then the knee is in the wrong place, as is the crotch. Same with the elbows. Shorted the arm piece only and the elbow is in the wrong spot. It requires a totally new pattern drafted to have a true petite sized item of clothing. So while petites do use less fabric, they take more time to draft patterns and separate assembly lines for cutting and sewing. I am coming from the position of having a BS in Clothing & Textiles. I've studied the industry. Yes, and since they don’t make or sell nearly as many petite-sized clothes as they do regular-sized 0 to 12/14’s, they have to charge at least the same amount of $ to recoup the costs of designing the specialized-fitted pattern and running the line to cut the pieces of the petite-sized items.
|
|
|
Post by **GypsyGirl** on Jun 16, 2022 3:40:39 GMT
Yes, and since they don’t make or sell nearly as many petite-sized clothes as they do regular-sized 0 to 12/14’s, they have to charge at least the same amount of $ to recoup the costs of designing the specialized-fitted pattern and running the line to cut the pieces of the petite-sized items. Definitely economy of scale plays into the pricing as well.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Jun 16, 2022 12:41:49 GMT
My uneducated guess would be that they do factor that in across sizes, but it is in two categories—regular and plus. Okay, but the difference between a size 0 and size 12 is much larger than the difference between size 12 and size 14. And I agree with the other poster, then petites should cost less. I agree with those that say it is because they can because of lack of suitable options. My post was referring to the previous list that said they should factor all sizes and average the cost to make them when determining a price. I was agreeing with that, except that they have two categories that they have two categories. So, they would average the cost of 0-14 and then average the cost of 16 on up. I don’t know if that is accurate or not, but it seems logical to me. In regards to kids clothes, I don’t think they are the same price across all sizes. I haven’t bought small kids sizes for a little while (my youngest is 10) but there were different sections of the store based on size or age group. Except maybe at Gymboree. I didn’t shop there much. But as kids get older there is definitely a change in cost of their clothes vs when they are toddlers.
|
|
|
Post by crazy4scraps on Jun 16, 2022 13:55:54 GMT
Okay, but the difference between a size 0 and size 12 is much larger than the difference between size 12 and size 14. And I agree with the other poster, then petites should cost less. I agree with those that say it is because they can because of lack of suitable options. My post was referring to the previous list that said they should factor all sizes and average the cost to make them when determining a price. I was agreeing with that, except that they have two categories that they have two categories. So, they would average the cost of 0-14 and then average the cost of 16 on up. I don’t know if that is accurate or not, but it seems logical to me. In regards to kids clothes, I don’t think they are the same price across all sizes. I haven’t bought small kids sizes for a little while (my youngest is 10) but there were different sections of the store based on size or age group. Except maybe at Gymboree. I didn’t shop there much. But as kids get older there is definitely a change in cost of their clothes vs when they are toddlers. I just looked on Carters.com for kicks and giggles, and looked for something that would be available in all sizes from baby through size 14 so I picked girl’s leggings. Baby and toddler sizes had the same retail price ($14.00). Little and big girl sizes were a little more, but the same price ($16.00). Patter brought up an interesting point about the time to actually sew the garments. As someone who has made every size from tiny dollhouse doll clothes up to stuff in men’s size 3X, I think it’s actually easier to sew bigger things which means it could be done faster. (Of course, a lot depends on the actual item and how detailed it is.) The smaller something is, the smaller the pieces are and the more fiddly the details become. So while it may use much less fabric to make a pair of leggings for a baby, it’s actually easier to sew the same leggings for a 12 year old. So it all kind of averages out.
|
|
|
Post by auntkelly on Jun 16, 2022 14:11:12 GMT
So if it is fabric and time, then petites should cost less. But you can’t find petite sizes in stores anymore. Nordstrom no longer has a petite section. Some Macys are doing away with theirs. Many others sell it online only. I want to touch and try it on before I buy it. But I see your logic that it should be cheaper than regular sized clothes! The problem with that logic is that like plus sizes, petites cannot just be chopped off at the hem and/or sleeve and called a petite. Petites are also about proportion. The waist, bustline, hipline are in different places. Shoulders are narrower, as are sleeves (width and length). If all that is done is shortening the leg length, then the knee is in the wrong place, as is the crotch. Same with the elbows. Shorten the arm piece only and the elbow is in the wrong spot. It requires a totally new pattern drafted to have a true petite sized item of clothing. So while petites do use less fabric, they take more time to draft patterns and separate assembly lines for cutting and sewing. I am coming from the position of having a BS in Clothing & Textiles. I've studied the industry. I agree w/ you **GypsyGirl**. Talbot’s offers more sizing options than any other store I am aware of. In most items, for example, they offer a 16 petite, a 16 misses (regular) a 16 womens (plus) and a 16 womens petite. All four items are a size 16, but they are all modified to fit similarly sized, but differently proportioned bodies. I would assume the market for 16 womens petite jeans is much smaller than a regular sized 16 jeans so it seems understandable that a sized 16 womens petite jean is going to cost more per item to manufacture and therefore cost more per item retail.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 16, 2022 14:15:26 GMT
The problem with that logic is that like plus sizes, petites cannot just be chopped off at the hem and/or sleeve and called a petite. Petites are also about proportion. The waist, bustline, hipline are in different places. Shoulders are narrower, as are sleeves (width and length). If all that is done is shortening the leg length, then the knee is in the wrong place, as is the crotch. Same with the elbows. Shorten the arm piece only and the elbow is in the wrong spot. It requires a totally new pattern drafted to have a true petite sized item of clothing. So while petites do use less fabric, they take more time to draft patterns and separate assembly lines for cutting and sewing. I am coming from the position of having a BS in Clothing & Textiles. I've studied the industry. I agree w/ you **GypsyGirl**. Talbot’s offers more sizing options than any other store I am aware of. In most items, for example, they offer a 16 petite, a 16 misses (regular) a 16 womens (plus) and a 16 womens petite. All four items are a size 16, but they are all modified to fit similarly sized, but differently proportioned bodies. I would assume the market for 16 womens petite jeans is much smaller than a regular sized 16 jeans so it seems understandable that a sized 16 womens petite jean is going to cost more per item to manufacture and therefore cost more per item retail. Just had a look at the Talbots website. It appears that petite sizes are priced like standard sizes, but plus sizes run as much as $20 more per item.
|
|
|
Post by Restless Spirit on Jun 16, 2022 14:34:26 GMT
I’m in the “because they can” camp. I’ve been doing a lot of clothes shopping for summer lately (hate shopping for clothes - ugh). I’m a size 10 for shorts and jeans but sometimes a jr size 11, depending on the cut. A size 10 is in the “regular” clothes section, but 11/12 is in the plus size and always at least $5-7 more. Many brands I’ve held them up next to each other and low and behold the difference in the sizes between a 10 and 12 is minuscule. So annoying.
It’s the same with tops, particularly T-shirts. I’m a 32F, so mostly buy size large because I like my tops loose and not tight. I’ve seen the price between medium and large be as much as $10 more in one department store. When asked, the checkout clerk said it was because the large is a Plus size and gave the “extra fabric” explanation.
This past winter I wanted some thermal waffle weave long sleeve shirts. I ended up buying 2 men’s shirts and saved $10 per shirt. They were longer than the Women’s size, but since I was tucking them in the extra length was a positive instead of a negative.
|
|
|
Post by silverlining on Jun 16, 2022 15:06:00 GMT
I think we desperately want to find some logic as to why prices are high for certain things, but sometimes there just isn't. Unfortunately, sometimes it's just a way a company initially set their pricing years ago, based on what they thought people would be willing to pay, and then consumers got used to the idea that X always costs more than Y.
A few years ago, reporters in a city with very high gas (for cars) prices did a thorough investigation into why gas prices were higher than another city two hours away. They found it had nothing to do with distance from a refinery or taxes or anything logical. Basically people in one city had always paid more and complained about it, but they still needed to buy gas so they did.
|
|
|
Post by auntkelly on Jun 16, 2022 17:39:45 GMT
I agree w/ you **GypsyGirl** . Talbot’s offers more sizing options than any other store I am aware of. In most items, for example, they offer a 16 petite, a 16 misses (regular) a 16 womens (plus) and a 16 womens petite. All four items are a size 16, but they are all modified to fit similarly sized, but differently proportioned bodies. I would assume the market for 16 womens petite jeans is much smaller than a regular sized 16 jeans so it seems understandable that a sized 16 womens petite jean is going to cost more per item to manufacture and therefore cost more per item retail. Just had a look at the Talbots website. It appears that petite sizes are priced like standard sizes, but plus sizes run as much as $20 more per item. I really don't know, but I'm guessing that Talbot's sells a lot more regular and petite size clothing than plus and plus petite size clothing and therefore their cost per item is cheaper for regular and petite sized clothing. Based on my shopping experience, all of their brick and mortar stores seem to carry regular and petite sizes, but only a few carry plus and plus petite sizes, which makes me assume they sell a lot more regular and petite size clothing than plus and plus size petite clothing. Also, Talbots has been selling petite clothing since I started shopping there 40 years' ago. It's been in the last 15 years or so that they started selling plus sized clothing, so I'm sure there were a lot of start up costs involved w/ that venture. However, it could be that plus sized people are willing to pay more for quality clothing in their sizes and Talbot's is taking advantage of that fact. I know I'm willing to pay extra for a pair of plus size petite jeans that fit me just right. Very few brands make true plus sized petite clothing. I'm just glad that Talbots is making clothes for a broad sector of the population.
|
|
|
Post by Spongemom Scrappants on Jun 16, 2022 18:51:10 GMT
I don't know about the pricing differential, but I'm annoyed on the regular about sizing differentials. It's crazy how inconsistently sized women's clothing is - even within the same brands. My weight fluctuates very little, but I still can't generally pull anything off the rack and know it will fit.
|
|
|
Post by katlady on Jun 16, 2022 19:01:01 GMT
I don't know about the pricing differential, but I'm annoyed on the regular about sizing differentials. It's crazy how inconsistently sized women's clothing is - even within the same brands. My weight fluctuates very little, but I still can't generally pull anything off the rack and know it will fit. This is why I don’t like to order clothes on-line, especially pants. And this goes for shoes too. I wish women sizing was standardized!
|
|
|
Post by Mel on Jun 16, 2022 19:20:21 GMT
It does seem they should factor that in and apply an average price across all sizes. I didn’t realize plus sizes cost more. Odd because I dont think a size 12 costs more than a size 2 normally. Because if a size 2 cost more than a size 0, people (ok, Karens) would throw a fit about size discrimination. However, larger people are just supposed to get over it, they are bigger and they should pay more. *I* am a plus size and sometimes it is so frustrating to not find "cute" styles or patterns any higher than an 18 or XL (if that).
|
|
inkedup
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,837
Jun 26, 2014 5:00:26 GMT
|
Post by inkedup on Jun 16, 2022 21:17:09 GMT
So if it is fabric and time, then petites should cost less. This is so silly. I assume most retailers order based on averages. And yeah, yeah. The average American woman is a size 14 to 16. I know. I'm extremely short but I also have a really big butt and chest. 4'11". I have to tailor most clothing, even if I purchase petite sizes. When I was younger (and skinnier), I wore junior size pants. But now, my body is basically a fat child's body with big boobs and butt. I understand that clothing is usually manufactured and priced based on a range of typical body types. My body falls outside of that range. I saw someone complaining that a certain retailer "only" went up to a size 30. 0 to 30 seems like a huge range of sizes, IMO. I don't think it's realistic to expect every retailer to cater to every single possible body type. It's just not possible. I don't sew much, but it is really not as simple as using more or less fabric when talking about making clothing.
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 16, 2022 23:01:25 GMT
Why do Tall sizes cost more?
That is what I buy whenever possible, and always pay more, even if Old Navy.
I’m only asking tongue-in-cheek, because I fully understand why & because it has nothing to do with the pennies-more cost in fabric.
Whenever you are a size outside-of-average, you may expect to pay higher clothing costs for a variety of reasons. It sucks, but is reality.
I can lose enough weight so that I look like a high fashion model, but that won’t make my inseam fall within the realm of “average.” I still have to pay extra $ for “tall” clothing regardless whether I weigh 120 or 170.
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Jun 19, 2022 0:51:07 GMT
I don’t buy the more fabric thing because a size 14 does not typically cost more than a size 0. They average the cost of materials and labor for all sizes out instead. I think there just has to be a cut off somewhere. I can buy kids clothes in a size 4 or a size 12 and the size difference is substantial, but because that particular store bunches those sizes together as one department, then those sizes in any one item costs the same. But then cross the aisle to the "big kid" area, and the size 14 shirt costs more than the size 12. (Or even more odd is when the kid sizes go to 16/18, and they are cheaper than a men's small, which can actually be smaller than the 16/18. ) I do agree that not everyone does it this way, but thankfully not everyone charges like the earlier bathing suit example, either, since that sounds complicated. (Just to give perspective on my perspective, I do wear plus size clothing, myself. )
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jun 19, 2022 2:17:20 GMT
I don’t buy the more fabric thing because a size 14 does not typically cost more than a size 0. They average the cost of materials and labor for all sizes out instead. I think there just has to be a cut off somewhere. I can buy kids clothes in a size 4 or a size 12 and the size difference is substantial, but because that particular store bunches those sizes together as one department, then those sizes in any one item costs the same. But then cross the aisle to the "big kid" area, and the size 14 shirt costs more than the size 12. (Or even more odd is when the kid sizes go to 16/18, and they are cheaper than a men's small, which can actually be smaller than the 16/18. ) I do agree that not everyone does it this way, but thankfully not everyone charges like the earlier bathing suit example, either, since that sounds complicated. (Just to give perspective on my perspective, I do wear plus size clothing, myself. ) Why does there have to be a cutoff somewhere? I get that we’ve come to accept this, but it seems to me that companies could adopt the practice of spreading the cost of a garment out over all the sizes they make it in. With kids, I can see that to some parents if very young kids, they’re willing to pay only so much because the kids outgrow the clothes so fast. But for adult sizes? Please. It’s plain discrimination because they can. Plus size women have come to accept that they “deserve” to pay more than straight size women. Petites and tall sizes are not usually penalized because they can’t help their height, but larger size women? They deserve to bear a disproportionate amount of the cost of producing this garment when spread across all size ranges. 🙄
|
|
theshyone
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,423
Jun 26, 2014 12:50:12 GMT
|
Post by theshyone on Jun 19, 2022 8:57:18 GMT
Why do Tall sizes cost more? That is what I buy whenever possible, and always pay more, even if Old Navy. I’m only asking tongue-in-cheek, because I fully understand why & because it has nothing to do with the pennies-more cost in fabric. Whenever you are a size outside-of-average, you may expect to pay higher clothing costs for a variety of reasons. It sucks, but is reality. I can lose enough weight so that I look like a high fashion model, but that won’t make my inseam fall within the realm of “average.” I still have to pay extra $ for “tall” clothing regardless whether I weigh 120 or 170. My daughter is 6’4 can you recommend some stores that sell tall? It tall plus?
|
|
|
Post by elaine on Jun 20, 2022 14:27:53 GMT
Why do Tall sizes cost more? That is what I buy whenever possible, and always pay more, even if Old Navy. I’m only asking tongue-in-cheek, because I fully understand why & because it has nothing to do with the pennies-more cost in fabric. Whenever you are a size outside-of-average, you may expect to pay higher clothing costs for a variety of reasons. It sucks, but is reality. I can lose enough weight so that I look like a high fashion model, but that won’t make my inseam fall within the realm of “average.” I still have to pay extra $ for “tall” clothing regardless whether I weigh 120 or 170. My daughter is 6’4 can you recommend some stores that sell tall? It tall plus? I don’t know about plus sizes, but I buy Talls at Old Navy, Athleta, NYDJ, and Lands End, off the top of my head. I think that Torrid has plus tall sizes.
|
|
|
Post by tyra on Jun 20, 2022 14:49:33 GMT
So, so true and extremely frustrating. I was just discussing with my sister that I wish there was a country wide requirement regarding sizing. For example...anything that is a woman's XL must be so many inches wide and the sleeves must be so many inches in diameter or something like that. This. 100% this. This is my own frustration and major complaint, especially regarding jeans. Why can't woman's jeans be sold like men's? Waist/length. Easy. It obviously can be done! I am right between needing talls and being able to wear standard length. Drives me absolutely batsh!t crazy trying to find jeans that I don't need to alter. Not to mention "vanity" sizing. I am a size 12. In some jeans I need a size 10, or even 8. Other jeans I am a size 14. Makes ZERO sense. Old Navy is particularly bad. It depends on the factory that makes the jeans for that on what size you are getting. A size 12 will fit perfect made in one factory, but a size 12 will be too small or too big made in another factory, even the same style and color. Uggggggg.... And kid pants! Our son is built like his daddy, tall with a long torso, short legs. He has zero pants that I don't have to hem. Even some shorts are stupid long on him. Why do they assume all woman's and kid's bodies are shaped the same way?
|
|
|
Post by melanell on Jun 23, 2022 14:05:24 GMT
So, so true and extremely frustrating. I was just discussing with my sister that I wish there was a country wide requirement regarding sizing. For example...anything that is a woman's XL must be so many inches wide and the sleeves must be so many inches in diameter or something like that. This. 100% this. This is my own frustration and major complaint, especially regarding jeans. Why can't woman's jeans be sold like men's? Waist/length. Easy. It obviously can be done! Lately, though DH has been finding that even with men's supposedly straight forward sizing, he still can't simply go into a store and buy his size. Some brands he needs one size and other brands he needs another. Which is crazy to me.
|
|