Cultural Connotation Of Luxury Goods

"

Extravagant accessories: a thing that is expensive and enjoyable but not essential; Cambridge high level dictionary so interpreted: something, not, thing;

Although the Chinese interpretation of "wasting money and excessive pursuit of enjoyment" generally contains these three characteristics, but in terms of expression, English is obviously neutral and not too negative.

But even the explanation in English is not a good explanation.

Good, expensive and non essential three are relative concepts. It may be OK to explain nouns, but it is not possible to do some rigorous academic discussions.

Perhaps we can use the 80/20 rule to define that the best 20% products of the same kind of products are expensive and non essential products for 80% people. Maybe we can call them luxuries.

Of course, 80/20 is just a casual saying, and we can further refine it, such as using 90/10 and luxury goods.

Of these three concepts, the best way to deal with it is non essential.

As for the concept of good, it is relatively difficult.

It is sometimes a subjective question to put flowers into every eye.

For example, the design of a great master, you like it very much, say very well, he is extremely disgusted, saying it is very bad, whether it is good or bad, there is no conclusion.

For such a problem, you may say that you can get the master's advice through public selection, but I like a simpler approach - choosing as objective as a good and bad standard to judge.

For example, in terms of cloth, 200 pieces are better than 100. This is a relatively objective comparison. A piece of leather without defects is better than blemishes. This is also an objective criterion. If we try to use these objective things to judge the quality of a product, it will bring defects, such as ignoring the humanized things such as creativity and art, but the benefits are obvious. That is, the judgment results will not vary from person to person. The most obvious point is that diamonds, "good" of diamonds, are measured through a series of guest standards, and there is no subjective element.

Finally, it is expensive and expensive. This is a very easy thing to judge. But in my opinion, the price itself is not enough, even if it is the real paction price rather than the unreasonable price of no paction.

In my opinion, luxury goods should be expensive, not expensive, or expensive.

What does that mean? For example, designer clothes designed by some designers are often expensive, and a large part of it is the design fees charged by the master.

But this is a fixed cost, and the high design cost does not naturally lead to high cost. It only costs a lot of production to make the cost thinning. In fact, the cooperation between many cheap clothing brands and big brand design began in the year before, for example, Matthew Williamson helped Debemhams, Philip Treacy helped Mark & Spencer design clothes to prove this.

Nowadays, many famous brand clothes are selling very high. It is very important to take the initiative to narrow down the target customers and achieve profits through the strategy of high profits and low sales.

In my opinion, such a high price can not be regarded as "expensive" of luxury goods.

The price of luxury goods should not only be reflected in the high cost of average cost, but also in the marginal cost.

For example, why custom tailored suits and customized leather shoes are undoubtedly luxury goods, because they are naturally expensive.

Besides the materials, the key of these products is the craft of the masters of making and making shoes, and the technology is not mass produced. The marginal cost of each product is roughly close to his average cost (of course, the fixed cost of enterprise operation and promotion), and such a product is the real luxury.

I always think that the first thing to make luxury goods expensive is material, the second is technology, and the last is design.

The more important things are, the more scarce and impossible to produce, the good raw materials, the good technology, but the design is not necessarily so.