You Can Now Buy $1200 Dresses For Your Fashion-Conscious Toddler
Apr 27, 2012 11:58
For those of you who wouldn't dream about sending your kids to pre-school wearing hand-me-downs, don't fret. The NY Times has an exclusive about the rising phenomenon of designer children's wear:
Now, children are the new accessory, as once-snooty brands line up to please conservative-minded millennials while they use tiny garments to strengthen their brand power in regions like Asia. Last year, Burberry sold $91 million in clothing for children — from newborn, including diaper bags covered in Burberry's beige check, to early teens — for an increase of 23 percent over the previous year. Most of Burberry's 12 free-standing children's stores are in Asia and the Middle East.
Seemingly overnight, brands like Oscar de la Renta, Fendi, Marc Jacobs, Roberto Cavalli, Missoni, Milly and Phillip Lim moved into expanded children's areas of stores, like the new one at Bergdorf Goodman.
So what choices are available for your toddler to walk/crawl down the kindergarten red carpet? There's this Oscar de la Renta dress and bloomers set ($175); a little Marc Jacobs silk dress ($319); or maybe a one of those footie pajamas from Gucci ($195).
However, don't assume that these clothes are well made just because they come with a luxury brand tag. Here's what rag trade big shot Andrew Rosen and fashion production specialist Cindy Ferrara had to say about the wares:
Holding a $375 silk-print girl's dress by Gucci, Andrew Rosen, the respected founder of Theory and a catalyst behind several other brands, said, "This is talking to the 1 percent, or the less than 1 percent, of the population." He added, referring to luxury makers with children's lines: "I would believe that none of these guys are doing it to make money. It's all about being more relevant. You want to keep the customers engaged in your brand." [...]
Neither Ms. Ferrara nor Mr. Rosen was all that impressed with the Gucci dress. Pointing to a side seam, where the print didn't match up, he said, "On their main line, they would have never done something like this." Ms. Ferrara said, "This would have all matched." She noticed places on the inside where seams were puckered, known as roping. "The handling could be better," she said.
Kate Hudson may not have Kim Kardashian assets, but she's way attractive in a lot of many ways. For one: she's fit as a fiddle and that body looks crazy awesome. Check out more pictures of her below: Read more