Which brand has more prestige - IZOD or Chaps?

[Pink Jazz]

Note that this is not a thread to discuss your personal preference, but what brand do you think has more prestige?

IZOD and Chaps are two competing brands of mid-range preppy-styled sportswear. IZOD is owned by PVH, while Chaps is owned by Ralph Lauren Corporation. IZOD was once partnered with Lacoste until the early 1990s, while Chaps used to be known as Ralph Lauren Chaps until sometime in the 1990s when the "Ralph Lauren" branding was dropped (even though they are still owned by RL).

I wonder, which brand do you think has the greater prestige? Does Chaps' association with Ralph Lauren help or hurt the brand? Chaps is the lowest brand in the Ralph Lauren portfolio. IZOD on the other hand is owned by PVH as part of their Heritage Brands division, even though PVH also owns Tommy Hilfiger which has a comparable preppy style to IZOD. IZOD does have a larger retail presence in the United States than Chaps and I think has greater annual sales.

 

[Judge]

"Prestige" is a relative term. Especially in the competitive world of fashion. Something that might be arguably defined by any number of business and finance metrics. Not to mention the perspective of consumers versus industry insiders.

I can only cite that in terms of simple name recognition, personally I'd think of Izod Lacoste long before Ralph Lauren's Chaps would even come to mind.

Does that alone translate into a manifestation of prestige? -Beats me.

 

[Pink Jazz]

"Prestige" is a relative term. Especially in the competitive world of fashion. Something that might be arguably defined by any number of business and finance metrics. Not to mention the perspective of consumers versus industry insiders.

I can only cite that in terms of simple name recognition, personally I'd think of Izod Lacoste long before Ralph Lauren's Chaps would even come to mind.

Does that alone translate into a manifestation of prestige? -Beats me.

I know IZOD once had its partnership with Lacoste, but do people still associate the IZOD brand with Lacoste? IZOD hasn't used the crocodile logo in years. The brand is no longer considered upscale, but mid-range.

 

[Judge]

I know IZOD once had its partnership with Lacoste, but do people still associate the IZOD brand with Lacoste? IZOD hasn't used the crocodile logo in years. The brand is no longer considered upscale, but mid-range.

Longevity of a company matters. So does their marketing. Product lines inevitably change, but hopefully not who and what they are.

So does longevity of their customers...people who may go way back, and with long memories. Return customers are good. Old and loyal customers are better.

Like I said, prestige is relative. If I like the products, I'll stick with the brand name regardless of whether someone considers them "mid-range" or "upscale".

 

[Pink Jazz]

Longevity of a company matters. Product lines inevitably change, but hopefully not who and what they are.

So does longevity of their customers...people who may go way back, and with long memories.

Ownership changes as well. IZOD was bought by PVH in the mid-1990s. I know IZOD tends to be more popular with the over-40 crowd, although PVH has been trying their best to attract younger audiences with the brand. I know they have increased the number of slim fit offerings last year while not making it default like other fashion companies have done. I presume they don't want to alienate their core buyers.

 

[Judge]

Ownership changes as well. IZOD was bought by PVH in the mid-1990s. I know IZOD tends to be more popular with the over-40 crowd, although PVH has been trying their best to attract younger audiences with the brand. I know they have increased the number of slim fit offerings last year while not making it default like other fashion companies have done. I presume they don't want to alienate their core buyers.

You solicited a response and you got one. Just not the one you were apparently fishing for.

In an industry that can change so capriciously based on fashion trends and all their target markets, it's a pretty big deal to look back on any brand that can stand the test of time, cycles of economic turmoil and elastic demand.

 

[Mary Terry]

Why obsess over fashion and brands? Just wear what you like. I favor quality over style. I want 100% cotton, pure silk, pure wool, etc. I despise any clothing made with petroleum byproducts such as rayon or polyester. And I refuse to buy clothes with logos such as Izod. Why would I pay money to provide free advertising to a seller? It never made sense to me.

 

[Juliettaa]

Note that this is not a thread to discuss your personal preference, but what brand do you think has more prestige?

Neither.

 

[Butterfly88]

I have always perceived IZOD to be higher end versus Chaps. But that's just me.

 

[Pink Jazz]

Well, IZOD did actually once have a more upscale IZOD Luxury Sport (aka LX) line that was exclusive to Macy's. This line was never very popular, and I think after PVH acquired Tommy Hilfiger there was less of a need for the line. You can find some of the IZOD LX products on eBay.

 

[Judge]

Tier considerations of what is upscale or downscale, as well as perceived popularity are relatively meaningless benchmarks to me personally when it comes to clothing.

My only real focus is what I like, what it costs, and most of all whether it fits well or not. Over the years I've gravitated mostly to specific brands that consistently fit well.

I like what I like and what works. Not what any market or person implies or tells me. In my world, the concept of what is "En Vogue" simply doesn't exist. A point of view which not surprisingly spills over into a number of interests and concerns.

I suppose I'm just another Aspie who for better or worse, marches to the beat of their own drum.

 

[Pink Jazz]

Tier considerations of what is upscale or downscale, as well as perceived popularity are relatively meaningless benchmarks to me personally when it comes to clothing.

My only real focus is what I like, what it costs, and most of all whether it fits well or not. Over the years I've gravitated mostly to specific brands that consistently fit well.

I like what I like and what works. Not what any market or person implies or tells me. In my world, the concept of what is "En Vogue" simply doesn't exist.

I agree with your statement. Many of the higher end brands have poor fits (one exception is Nautica). IZOD has a fit that I like.

I just wonder if Chaps is viewed as lower-end than IZOD because it is Ralph Lauren's lowest brand. Not a lot of people know that IZOD and Tommy Hilfiger are now owned by the same company, so people don't make the same connection.

 

[Judge]

I agree with your statement. Many of the higher end brands have poor fits (one exception is Nautica). IZOD has a fit that I like.

Good point. That's one dynamic in the clothing industry that really baffles me. That you can find clothing that may fit immaculately or not at all, and all across the spectrum of clothing lines both expensive and inexpensive. It really defies that axiom that "you get what you pay for". Even in what is perceived to be the high end of clothing.

Though it's the sort of dynamic that has forced me to reel back from purchasing anything really expensive. Pondering that I might find equal or even better value at a lower price. Not always the case, but it keeps me looking at times. Have to agree about Nautica though. Can't say I've run into anything in their line that was ill-fitting.

In other consumer products such a contradiction can certainly skew the reputation- and prestige of a prominent brand. Something I think a lot with certain automobile manufacturers. When they produce an entire line of "masterpieces" and then have a single "turkey" in the lineup, you have to wonder. So much for prestige.

In much of any competitive market, when a manufacturer succeeds in fulfilling high expectations, the worst thing they can do is "sit on their laurels". When you get to the "top of the pyramid", the only direction left is down.

 

[tducey]

Chaps for me.