Progressive Pricing For Clothing Sizes

[AoWW]

 

Encouraging people to wear clothes that are too small for them is never a good idea.

[notnow john]

I'd always imagined you as svelte like!

[AoWW]

I'd always imagined you as svelte like!

 

 

I imagine myself as svelte like too! 

[Captain...]

The real costs in retail is mainly operational as opposed to material costs,

 

It will take the same time and cost the same amount to manufacture package and deliver an S or an XL, the difference in material will be largely negligible. Then the actual admin time to factor in prices based on true cost values and maintain each price per Sales Unit. If everything comes in S, M, L, XL, then you are quadrupling all that effort, not to mention creating shop signs detailing the individual pricing on a range and then combining that with sales promotions and statistical analysis over a range of products the amount of extra time needed to maintain such a pricing strategy across all clothing shops would force operating costs to increase and thus initiate a price increase, or eat into profits. Seeing as any such pricing strategy would drive away the fatties and encourage the skinny runts to shop, you are appealing to a smaller demographic whilst simultaneously alienating a much larger (in both ways) and growing demographic.

 

But you didn't think about that did you, you just thought fat people are cvnts.

[MooseBreath]

According to Google material costs are about 50-60% of the overall price of typical clothes, so there goes that theory.

[davieG]

Presumably take up more space in storage transportation and sales floor space.

 

 

in my days of doing and managing product design albeit in engineering we put massive efforts into minimising the eventual price of materials.

[leicsmac]

60% is fabric cost, one third of that the raw materials, apparently. What's the other two-thirds? Processing costs for the raw material, I wonder?

 

Either way, the OP did just want to rag on fatter people and tried to choose a justification for doing so - let's not pretend otherwise.

[Charl91]

Why would any clothing company charge more for fatter people? Considering how many people are over-weight in britain, it would be a PR disaster a stupid mistake financially for any who tried it - they'd all just buy clothes at the place which didn't charge more for being fat. Not to mention the hassle of having to sort out numerous different prices for every object.

 

I'm not particularly supportive of fat peoples rights, but this is a ridiculous idea, which would end up being bad PR and more hassle then it's worth logistically for any company.

[Webbo]

According to Google material costs are about 50-60% of the overall price of typical clothes, so there goes that theory.

But the difference in cost between medium and X large probably isn't much.

 

I'm sure clothes companies could charge more if they wanted to,it probably isn't worth the hassle and bad customer relationship to do so.

[Rincewind]

Isn't there already VAT on clothing? Adult sizes. I don't buy childrens but I thought they were zero. I stand to be corrected.

[Captain...]

But the difference in cost between medium and X large probably isn't much.

 

I'm sure clothes companies could charge more if they wanted to,it probably isn't worth the hassle and bad customer relationship to do so.

 

I wouldn't like to speculate but it wouldn't actually surprise me if the actual raw material usage is the same for all sizes, especially in mass produced clothes, they start with the same amount of fabric, the only difference is that they leave more waste in cutting it down to smaller sizes.

 

I've also edited my original post, in retail the actual material costs are nothing, it is largely operational overheads, so retail space, wages, VAT etc.

 

This example:

 

 

So the material cost is small compared to the actual retail price, and the difference in material amount between sizes makes it negligible. I am actually surprised it is such a high amount of the manufacturing cost, but then in this example it is a Bangladeshi sweat house, so I would expect labour and overheads to be higher in more reputable factories that don't fall down.

[Captain...]

Presumably take up more space in storage transportation and sales floor space.

 

 

in my days of doing and managing product design albeit in engineering we put massive efforts into minimising the eventual price of materials.

 

In terms of sales floor space, each size would take up the same space which is more dictated by the size of the hanger rather than the size of the shirt.

 

Warehousing and transportation it would make a very small difference.

[Rincewind]

When I was in the sock warehouse each operation had a different price for the worker. A XL pair was paid more even though we did the same thing. Think it was the stretching the hands an inch further apart when matching twoo socks and they took more space up on the counter. There were different prices for cotton and wool socks and baby socks. That industry has gone now. All the operations are done by women. Mending, pairing carding and bagging but the money paid to the worker is calculated as one process so not as much as all added together.

[Trav Le Bleu]

I don't see why anorexics should pay less than anyone else!

[MooseBreath]

Warehousing and transportation it would make a very small difference.

Pure guesswork on your part again. An XXL in comparison to say an S is going to be about twice the size. That means it's going to take twice as many shipping containers, twice as much on loading and off loading, twice as much warehouse space and twice asmuch final leg ttransportation to get the same number of items to the shop floor.

We've already established that material is 60% of the cost and transport and warehousing is another 20%. You don't need me to tell you that that's 80% of the total cost which is heavily affected by sizing. I'm looking at my calculator here and it's giving me a swing of up to £4 or £5 on the retail price of a typical high street t-shirt assuming the retailer wants the same profit on each.

Like it or not this is a very real issue we have here.

[davieG]

One pays more for a bigger tent why shouldn't someone have to pay more for a bigger tent like dress?

[Rincewind]

I don't see why anorexics should pay less than anyone else!

That is the problem it nay encourage under-eating and discourage over-eating but some people are naturally small or big as well.

 

Is that you matt on RL?

[Rincewind]

With regards to socs we got about 100 boxes of baby socks in a carton and about 30 of the XL. The van collecting them still held the same amount of cartons though.

[Mike Oxlong]

If this were brought in it would be the death of chebs. Breast reductions carnage. So I'm against.

[Rincewind]

If this were brought in it would be the death of chebs. Breast reductions carnage. So I'm against.

Yes I'm also leaning against breast reductions.

[MPH]

Three is progressive pricing in the states. Up to XL is considered normal pricing anything above that is usually a couple of dollars more.

[Rincewind]

Unusual big size shoes are more expensive above 12 I think. Probably because they are rarer and some have to be specially made. A workmate at the hosiery factory was over 6ft and took size 14 He was big but not 'fat' He used to do press ups every morning. Died at age 65. Had to give up work because he developed an illness of some sort. So much for his body building.

When that shop in town that sells old City shirts have sales it is mainly the XXL size so they can get rid of the surplus stock.

[howlinmadmurfdoc]

All a bit judgemental aren't you?

[Guest]

Yes I'm also leaning against breast reductions.

Does she mind?

[BlueKnob]

I don't see why anorexics should pay less than anyone else!

 

Makes me sick!