June 24, 2010

"MARKDOWNS ON men's shorts. UPDATE: A reader emails: 'Don't tell Ann Althouse.' Heh."

Glenn Reynolds does one of his inimitable pants-on-sale posts and my name comes up.

And, by the way, you can show your love for the Althouse blog by buying things pointed at by Althouse links. I don't begrudge Glenn his pants-flogging. But I can flog pants too, you know. And you will get far more pleasure from Althouse-flogged pants. Here, I will even give an official Althouse endorsement to a pair of shorts (applicable mainly if you show the love and buy from that link).

63 comments:

t-man/wurly/henry buck said...

$135 for a pair of shorts?

Althouse approves of shorts for the rich only.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I couldn't help but think of Althouse when I saw a video yesterday of Obama golfing in shorts. See what you've done to me?

Scott M said...

If you try and use the German website translation everything mysteriously turns into brats and lederhosen.

Fred4Pres said...

The fashion disease turns into a pandemic.

John Richardson said...

$135 for a pair of shorts and they are not even leather? (with apologies to "Working Girl".)

Or pink leather in Scott Brown's case.

al said...

$11.00 ice cream and now $135.00 shorts. Wow - not too out of touch with the real world.

K said...

Hey Ann...why don't you and Glen do a Bloggingheads some time?

Moose said...

Oddly enough that wasn't me that sent that to Insty...

Ron said...

I'd need my name above the title on the poster of a Wes Anderson movie to be able to afford or be willing to wear shorts like those!

Hoosier Daddy said...

Where is Meade been? Or is he recovering from having his pants flogged too much?

/ducks

John said...

Ann if you didn't live somewhere just slightly warmer than Siberia, you would have a different view of men's shorts. Why don't you spend a summer in Austin or New Orleans sometime wearing only long pants. No dresses or skirts. Just long pants. After you do that, come back and tell us about the evils of men in shorts.

edutcher said...

Ann Althouse said...

I can flog pants too, you know. And you will get far more pleasure from Althouse-flogged pants.

Most men would kill for a pair of Althouse-flogged pants.

Bushman of the Kohlrabi said...

I couldn't help but think of Althouse when I saw a video yesterday of Obama golfing in shorts. See what you've done to me?

It's those chicken legs of his.

Ann Althouse said...

"$135 for a pair of shorts?"

The point of those Amazon links is that the blogger gets a percentage. A percentage of $135 is better than a percentage of, say, $25. Some of the readers here do buy more expensive shorts, and if they'd be so kind as to use my link, they'd be helping support my work here and benefiting all of us. And they'd have the pleasure of knowing I approved of their shorts, which is worth a LOT.

Moose said...

Good lord - those are exceedingly gay shorts, Ann...

Michael Hasenstab said...

Pffft. I just bought a pair of very nice cotton cargo shorts at Wal-Mart for $14, plus tax. They look better than the shorts Althouse is flogging.

$135 for a pair of shorts? Ah, nope.

And skinny jeans with fakey wear marks for $165. Ha ha ha ha. You make me laugh, Althouse. A nice pair of Dickies is less than $25 at Farm and Fleet. And they won't be out of style by next Wednesday.

Original Mike said...

So I had to go look at the $135 shorts. They're shorts. I don't get it.

Original Mike said...

Seriously. Someone please explain.

Hoosier Daddy said...

Seriously. Someone please explain.

Those are shorts for people who have too much fucking money. Same reason when you flip through a GQ magaznine and the model is wearing some Italian made t-shirt that costs $450. It's all about bragging rights and people who actually give a shit about fashion labels.

I am still wearing cargo shorts I bought at Kohls for $20 from 4 years ago and yes, I am stunning in them ;-)

Hoosier Daddy said...

Obviously Meade is out clothes shopping at Nordstroms.

Meade said...

"And they'd have the pleasure of knowing I approved of their shorts, which is worth a LOT."

HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA HA!

Original Mike said...

"Those are shorts for people who have too much fucking money."

Then give it to charity. That's just stupid.

t-man/wurly/henry buck said...

Hey,

If its all about the percentage, maybe a reader out there is in the market for a diamond necklace!

Trooper York said...

I don't want to go into a long disertation on why clothes cost the way they do. Just to say when you buy cheap clothing you are getting stuff made in China for pennies and putting hard working illegal immigrants here in the United States out of work. The price is a reflection of several factors including the fabric, how it is sewn (single needle vs overlock), the overhead of the merchant, his advertising budget and market niche that they are going for. The buying power and the ability to put things on sale for ridiculusly low prices is great for the consumer but for the merchant not so much. Just sayn'

Meade said...

Look, guys: Buy the $15 Dickies. Of course. But then send a percentage of the &135. Is that so hard? She has expensive ice cream habits that are difficult for me to keep up with on my gardener/caretaker's salary.

Plus there's all that acid-dropping.

C'mon... help a brother out!

Ann Althouse said...

Just adding to what Trooper said... though it's true that some cheap stuff (eg jeans) can be great (sturdy and beautiful) and some expensive stuff really is junk, there are many things that are more expensive and worth it. I bought a sweater a couple years ago and paid $300 for it and was a little concerned that I was being an idiot. But it was so wonderful. The cut turned out to be perfect in some way I could never match in another sweater and the cashmere wool felt beautiful. If I could go back, I would buy 5 of those sweaters if they had them at the time in my size, because I wore that one that I bought so much that the elbows wore through. I still wear it, even as the elbow holes grow. I will probably wear it until the holes go all the way around and the lower sleeves detach entirely. I love that sweater!

Ann Althouse said...

Meade's PayPal link didn't work so you'll have to find the PayPal button in the sidebar to follow his suggestion.

Big Mike said...

You endorsed those shorts?!?!

Original Mike said...

A sweater I can see. But shorts???

"Just to say when you buy cheap clothing you are getting stuff made in China for pennies and putting hard working illegal immigrants here in the United States out of work."

Well, when you put it that way ...

Meade said...

"I wore that one that I bought so much that the elbows wore through. I still wear it, even as the elbow holes grow. I will probably wear it until the holes go all the way around and the lower sleeves detach entirely."

Shabby chic at its chicest shabbiness!

Trooper York said...

It is generally true that you get what you pay for. The costs associated with many garments are totally out of whack. But sometimes you are paying for the designers name. We have been manufacturing a lot of our own clothing and I have been delving into the process. I have been approached by Chinese factories who offer great deals. Unbelievable deals. But I prefer to keep my manufacturing here in the good old USA. It cost more but I have more quality control and can tweak it so it fits perfectly.

As an aside to what the professor said....I have many customers who buy several garments in the same style in differnet colors. Because most of what we are doing is exclusive...it sometimes costs a little more but you get what you pay for especially in plus sizes.

One example is our custom belts in various leathers. Trust me, I think $150 is a lot for a belt but it is 1005% leather and not "stretch" which is very unusual in plus sizes. When women try them on in the store they buy them two and three at a time. They last forever and can make many different outfits work. What Not to Wear has chosen one just about every time they come to the store. Gabby Shide took two when we dressed her for Saturday Night Live. But most of the time it is just regular people who want something that fits properly and looks great in accessorizing an outfit.

In the end you get what you pay for.

Trooper York said...

That's 100% leather.

Ann Althouse said...

Yeah, if I find something looks and fits great, I will buy it in other colors too. I like to buy 2 or 3 of the same thing if it hits that zone of rightness.

Big Mike said...

I understand about the sweater, but have you considered suede patches on the elbows? Turn elbow patches from the mark of an old, fuddy-duddy, male professor to a fashion statement for a young(ish) and stylish female professor.

Original Mike said...

"In the end you get what you pay for."

I understand and agree with that completely. You should see my camping gear.

But $135 shorts???

(i'll stop now)

Trooper York said...

What we like to do is market it that way. For example we created our Fabulus Franny Wrap cardigan in Black, White, Teal, Berry and Fushcia.

We market it as part of a "look" along with a camisole and a skirt which we have also started manufacturing. But we are so busy that we haven't had time to put the skirts on-line so people are emailing us to buy the "tulip" skirt before it even gets on the website. Typically, a customer will get a black and a white and one other color for arm coverage.

The two things women say the most"
1. I don't show my arms.
2. Does it come in black?

lyssalovelyredhead said...

At first glance, I said "hey, my husband has a couple pairs that look just like that!" and was kind of pleased that AA might approve of my husband's shorts. Then I saw the price. He got his at Banana Republic, and full price was something like $60, which I thought was outrageous. The second pair looks almost exactly the same, but came from Old Navy, and cost 35-40. (they feel a little cheaper, but they've held up fine for a while now.)

I get it for something nice, like a sweater (or a blazer, or nice slacks, or a really nice belt), but shorts?

- Lyssa

Big Mike said...

The point of those Amazon links is that the blogger gets a percentage. A percentage of $135 is better than a percentage of, say, $25.

This is why law professors -- and I'm thinking of one who sits behind the "Resolute" desk when he's not playing golf -- should stay away from economics. Unless the percentage changes as a function of the dollar cost of the item, you'll find it a lot easier to sell six $25 shorts than one $135 pair -- and more remunerative.

Trooper York said...

We are just gingerly getting into making pants for the fall. Shorts will be just too difficult to do. If you want them to fit right that is.

Sometimes it takes twenty to thirty sessions to make sure that a pattern is right. The ones they sell at Old Navy are done on the computer in about an hour. I have seen it done.

It's the difference between eating at Mickey D's and a mom and pop diner. The burger at Mickey D's is great for what it is. Consistent but disposable. But a burger at your favorite restaurant is a lot more satisfying. Just sayn'

Brian said...

In a related story, Al Gore's masseuse has opened a clothing store. All male customers will have their shorts 50% off.
/ba dum dum.

John Richardson said...

@ Trooper York

If I'm going to pay over $100 for a leather belt, it will be one like this

http://www.usgalco.com/HolsterP3.asp?ProductID=1621&CatalogID=255

And it is made in the good ol' USA.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Trooper, not to be rude, but that Fabulous Franny Wrap you linked to just screams middle aged school teacher with a cat calender.

rhhardin said...

These babies, as a year-round shorts wearer, are the best I've found.

Wait until they're on sale at $12.95 though.

They last a long time.

British Tan is less aggressive.

Trooper York said...

You're not being rude lyssa. Everybody has a niche market. We know our customers and what they need.

We work to serve the market between 25 and 55 who work in an office environment and can't be trendy in the latest Lady Gaga wear. Just yesterday I had a social worker who had a dress code in the hospital where she worked and had to wear stockings or pants and sleeves at all times. She wasn’t allowed to wear sleeveless dresses. The Franny worked just great for her.

It is also very popular with a lot of the lawyers and judges who are praticing on Court St.

Perhaps someday when you get a job as a lawyer you will understand that you can't wear your bikini top and thong to the office. You might even have to give up on the Daisy Dukes. Unless of course you are going to clerk for Al Gore.

Taste is all a matter of personal preference. Especially in plus sizes. Being anorexic gives you more options.

All the best, your pal Trooper.

edutcher said...

I agree with Troop that you need to be willing to pay for value. Don't know if I'd go 3 Bens for a sweater, but I'll always pay extra for a leather belt instead of cowhide.

I also agree with Ann that getting a shirt or pants that looks good in a couple of other colors is good practice (and you can get a few bucks off, sometimes).

PS Yes, I'm a sucker for a nice silver buckle to go with the belt.

Scott said...

I'm overweight. Nothing fits right. :(

The most comfortable footwear I have is a pair of black suede Mexican botines. Pointed toes but roomy where they need to be. They have a good solid arch and feel comfortable all day.

Sandals: Quicksilver's flipflops have a good arch too. Just bought my second pair, this one through Amazon.

One of my college jobs was selling shoes at a department store in Minneapolis. Owning a footwear store with a solid niche would be an appealing thing for me. There is no Red Wing Shoe outlet in NYC. Maybe if I win a chunk of money in the lottery...

Trooper York said...

I only wear Red Wings and that would be a great idea.

I have to get them when I am in Florida.

Trooper York said...

The problem with a shoe store is the back stock. Plus most company's don't let you place an "open stock" order where you buy only the sizes that sell really well. They force the small stores to buy every size. So you are left with a lot of dead sizes that you can't sell. That's why there are so few independant shoes stores and you have to go to the big chains like DSW.

Scott said...

@TY: I looked on the Red Wing site. They say they don't sell franchises, they sell "dealerships,". I wonder what the difference is?

Jack Spade (Kate's fictional brother)has some interesting man purses that you see more and more guys in the city shouldering. I like the style, but $375 for a canvas computer bag is a little rich for me.

Scott said...

Yeah, you have to buy shoes in their case runs, and move the stock quickly. But with a company that rarely changes its styles (like Red Wing) you might not have that problem.

You know, if your soles wear out on a pair of Red Wings, the dealer can send them back to Minnesota to have them resoled on the line.

Trooper York said...

Well I think a dealership means that your entire store does not have to be devouted to Red Wing Shoes. So you have them on hand but can carry other stuff. Generally a franchise agreement means you can only carry product from the franchisor. Like in McDonalds you can only sell McDonald produced food. You can't even sell candy or chips or some other item that they don't even produce.

Trooper York said...

The big problem with a shoe store is space for the inventory. I mean in a suburban setting you can have enough of a backroom to hold all of the sizes. But in a mall or an urban setting the premium price for space makes it prohibitive to sell shoes at a discounted rate unless you are part of a chain.

Michael Hasenstab said...

Red Wing boots, worth every penny, as are Allen Edmonds shoes.

I might reconsider my aversion to click-through purchasing of overpriced shorts if the proceeds went to a worthwhile cause like The Fund To Buy Meade A Truck.

lyssalovelyredhead said...

Trooper, is it hard to convince yourself that everyone who isn't fat is anorexic, or are you repeating it so much that it just comes naturally? When you see healthy-sized people eat, do you just switch over to "Oh, I really meant bulimic, the whole time" or just ignore the cognitive dissidence?

Do the women who beg you for body shapers and live by rules of black clothing and "I don't show my arms" really believe that men prefer them over healthy-sized girls(at least, as long as they have body shapers and clothes that hide everything anyone might want to see), and that the fact that men constantly ignore them in favor of healthy-sized girls means nothing, or do you all recognize that it's a big, uncomfortable, lots of special clothing-requiring lie?

Fantasy worlds have always intrigued me.

And who wears sleeveless dresses to work? Seriously, they make them with sleeves, you know.

Trooper York said...

Well lyssa you really said a mouthful. Probably the first mouthful of anything you have had in a long time. I especially like how you use the term “healthy-sized girls” as though that can be only one size measured by your BMI index. Genetics and body type play into what is “healthy” for any person and to buy into the standards promulgated by snobs such as you seem to revel in has brought anguish to many, many people. You know the ones you like to make fun of with snide comments and a condescending attitude. You should realize that there are a lot of people who don’t buy into what you size Nazi’s are selling. Many people are just naturally a 12 or 14 or even a 22. And they are perfectly happy people with loving relationships. Sorry to burst your bubble there sweetie.

Most of the lawyers who shop with me love our sleeveless Lulu dress because they can wear it under a blazer and not be stifling hot in a closed courtroom. Sometimes both the DA and the Legal Aide attorney are wearing one at the same time. They have to coordinate so as not to look ridiculous. Also quite a few doctors and nurses like them because they are perfect for a splash of color under a lab coat. So perhaps they are the ones who wear sleeveless dress to work.

Many men prefer a healthy sized woman with some tits and ass. Not a stick like figure that is the beau ideal of the snotty bitches and gay men who dominate the fashion industry. We encourage woman to get away from wearing only black by having vibrant colors and patterns as well as helping them find a shape by emphazing the smallest part of their body to create an hourglass effect. And we always encourage them to do what makes them comfortable. If they want to cover their arms I want to over them alternatives. It isn’t always a weight issue by the way. These days a lot of girls have tats that they want to cover at work. But you have to have a real job to know about that kind of stuff.

You see I don’t live in a fantasy world. I live in the real world where a girl is the size she is right now. Maybe she wants to lose weight. Maybe she doesn’t. But she still has to look good today at the office or going to that party or wedding. In our humble way we try to help them as best we can. It is not a “lots of special clothing-requiring lie?” but a chance to get an outfit that fits their body today, not in some “fantasy world.”

Oh and by the way, the skinny bitches that come in the store are the ones most adamant about getting Spanx because they are afraid of a bulge here are an inch there. They get indigent when I don’t carry their size. You see weight issues are not confined to “plus” girls. We all have them. They just manifest themselves in different ways.

So why not take it easy and worry about yourself and leave the rest of the girls alone to find their own ways. You don’t really care about them and they don’t really need your input. I am sure you have better ways to spend you time. I mean being a lawyer means you will have to study up on how to cheat and victimize so many people that you will come in contact with during your future professional career. We fatties are just fine doing our own thing.

All the best, your pal Trooper.

Trooper York said...

Oh and lyssa?

No hard feelings.
Just please don't hurt the bunny!

Scott said...

Speaking about back stock: The coolest shoe store I've ever been in is Friedman's Shoes in Atlanta. They specialize in flashy luxury designer shoes for people with big feet (and they carry the regular sizes too). It's a very popular destination for NBA stars. Size 17 in a Mezlan loafer? No problem! The store is not very flashy, but the stock is huge, and you can go through the shelves yourself and look for something that appeals to you. Definitely worth a side trip if you're in the city.

Palladian said...

Trooper York, that's gonna leave a mark...

Dust Bunny Queen said...

Red Wing boots, worth every penny, as are Allen Edmonds shoes.

My husband buys Wal-Mart boots at $25.00 a pop. He is plumber and on his hands and knees quite a bit in his job. He is either in the dirt or on concrete so the tops of the toes always wear out way before the soles have a chance.

You can screw up a pair of $150 Red Wings just as fast as a pair of $25 Wal-Mart Specials.

In addition the crap (literally) that he often steps in, it is just worth it to be able to throw the boots away without feeling wasteful. Or when they get wet have a several other pairs to rotate.

Shoes for me------------->

Zappos FTW. Lots of selections in my sizes, free shipping. Best customer service evah!!

george said...

Those pants cost $115 more dollars than they are worth. They might be worth it if Althouse gets half of that... but she better come through with the flogging she promised for that amount. And the oral sex (Monte Python reference).

Seriously, who is going to pay that much when you can get the exact same thing at Wal-mart for $20? I swear to God, my entire clothing budget for a year is not $135.

What's next? $300 sweaters?

My wife comes home with $135 pants one of two things is going to happen. She is going to get a job or she is going to get a hijab and a nice black sack to go with it.

kimsch said...

Moose said...

Oddly enough that wasn't me that sent that to Insty...


That's because it was me. I saw the markdown on men's shorts and knowing of Ann's aversion to men in shorts...

Most of the time I agree with her completely. But if a pair of shorts shows off a nice, tanned, well-muscled calf...

Now don't get me started on men's bare or sandaled feet. Some of those toes...

wv: prodras - professional Madras shorts?

jaed said...

Hmmm. Here I was about to agree with Lyssa about that cardigan, and she had to go and lose me completely by referring to thin women as "healthy-sized girls". Aesthetics and fashion should not be confused with health, and certainly not for the purpose of sticking one's nose in the air. What an ugly thing to say.

DaveW said...

But that's not even a tasteful pair of men's shorts! They're not even pleated! They're ugly!

Original Mike said...

"But that's not even a tasteful pair of men's shorts! They're not even pleated!"

Pleats will cost you extra.