|
fav jean company (pg. 5)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
seriously tho you get all uppidity if you spend less than $100 on a pair of jeans? i mean, what if the jeans were originally $100 and for some weird reason macy's or whatever was having like a 50% sale or something, and so the pants were now $50....would you feel like durty or cheap trailer trash for buying $50 jeans?:tongue2
this is turning into that femme jean thread from CQ....real quick. lol |
Not at all. Jeans on sale for $50 when they were originally $100, doesn't make them $50 jeans. They are still $100 jeans, but you got them on sale for $50. :p |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
If they were 50% off and $50 I still wouldn't be buying them because generally even $100 jeans suck.  |
:wtf: jeezus how big is your ass? |
|
|
| UWM |
| We're talking huge. Epicly huge. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by gehzumteufel
Not at all. Jeans on sale for $50 when they were originally $100, doesn't make them $50 jeans. They are still $100 jeans, but you got them on sale for $50. :p |
what if you didn't know they were on sale? you just saw a pricetag for $50....but further down the rack you saw one for $100 .... would you discard the 50 for the 100? (assuming you didn't look at labels yet) or even if you did see the labels, would you think there was something wrong w/ the 50 vs the 100? would you even try it on?
i'm not trying to sound like a dick, i'm just trying understand the rationality behind spending more on a pair of jeans than my gas and electric bill combined :wtf::conf: |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
We're talking huge. Epicly huge. |
:stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue: :stongue:
 |
|
|
| UWM |
1. I don't get the whole 'fat ass' joke.
2. Cheap jeans fit like . They look like . They don't last as long. Why throw away money on ? |
|
|
| UWM |
| I also don't buy cheap shirts. That fit like . I probably shouldn't tell you how much I spend in that department or you'll really get on my case. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
1. I don't get the whole 'fat ass' joke.
2. Cheap jeans fit like . They look like . They don't last as long. Why throw away money on ? |
but why spend $100+ on a pair of jeans that have been "weathered" or whatever that are already splitting apart anyways? you walk into abercrombie or where ever and see jeans that already have holes in the back pockets or near the front ones, or are "stonewashed" so much that they're already thin enough to not last long....yet they cost over 70 bucks (+)? i mean, wtf? |
|
|
| gehzumteufel |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
If they were 50% off and $50 I still wouldn't be buying them because generally even $100 jeans suck. |
not all, but yes most.
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
what if you didn't know they were on sale? you just saw a pricetag for $50....but further down the rack you saw one for $100 .... would you discard the 50 for the 100? (assuming you didn't look at labels yet) or even if you did see the labels, would you think there was something wrong w/ the 50 vs the 100? would you even try it on?
i'm not trying to sound like a dick, i'm just trying understand the rationality behind spending more on a pair of jeans than my gas and electric bill combined :wtf::conf: |
well, just to clarify, $100 jeans are never on sale for $50. If they are on sale, it's for like $80 or $85. Also, I'm not a label whore, but if you really feel the way the material feels, the way the pants fit, the style of cut, and the wash styles, the more expensive jeans will be much better. |
|
|
| UWM |
| quote: | Originally posted by tubularbills
but why spend $100+ on a pair of jeans that have been "weathered" or whatever that are already splitting apart anyways? you walk into abercrombie or where ever and see jeans that already have holes in the back pockets or near the front ones, or are "stonewashed" so much that they're already thin enough to not last long....yet they cost over 50 bucks? i mean, wtf? |
LOL I wouldn't buy jeans at Abercrombie if you gave me the money to cover the cost.
Also, I don't buy jeans that are beat to and torn apart. |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
I also don't buy cheap shirts. That fit like . I probably shouldn't tell you how much I spend in that department or you'll really get on my case. |
shirts i've spent more money on, because they seem to stand out more than pants. i mean, jeans all look kind of similar (generally speaking); whereas shirts have more styles/prints/etc... on them, you know what i mean? |
|
|
| tubularbills |
| quote: | Originally posted by UWM
Also, I don't buy jeans that are beat to and torn apart. |
ok good! |
|
|
|
|
