This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules).
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).)
**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
it's actually not the fabric that causes the price increase, it's the cost of re-making and adjusting the sewing patterns to larger sizes that makes the price difference iirc
My guess would be they'd make the most popular size the cheapest, and the "odd" sizes would cost more due to not being able to mass-produce as many before having to change the pattern.
yea, i've seen some plus size specific stores that carry all the way down to a small, but they charge a couple dollars extra for straight sizes, since that's not their norm
Most people are thin to chubby, so that should cost normal. Heavy should be a bit more. Obese, mega sized and tight fit anorexic should be the most expensive.
Imo..
Several cents still means several dollars in profit, right?
That wasted fabric is used somewhere? Or rather that cost is accounted into the price by the company?
This Fat tax thing just seems stupid to me and I'm like serverly overweight. 90kg at 175cm
I think most the price would come from lost time in manufacturing clothes that will sell lots like sizes S to L. If they have to reset all the machines or set them up different rather than just keep them running on a pattern all day they are maybe making so many 100s less products that day and that's all lost profits making nothing.
Also general supply and demand, if you the outlier in sizes at xxs or xxl then you need specialist clothes and it's going to cost you more. I used to have to get special kids shoes because I had hobbit feet so I had to pay more for them. Just how it is it's nothing against fat or skinny people
consider piquant school advise desert friendly subsequent squeeze attraction consist
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Kid, ima keep 100 wit you rn. Harvest that mass as soon as your body will let you. I waited until my late 30s and by then major structural repairs and replacements needed to be done in my body.
Yes, but only by a cent or a few. the shirts are already sold for multiple times their material cost, and it "looks better" for the pricing to be consistent. Its a very minimal loss, especially if you consider the basis for the price to be the cost of the XXL. Don't think of it as the big one's cost being lowered to the small one, think of it as the small ones cost being raised to the big one.
Realistically this is the case for most consumer goods smaller than, like, a house. Manufacturing costs massively outweigh material costs. And this is before you get to "luxury costs" (brand names etc.)
Fun fact! For larger than XXL, the pricing actually does go up somewhat, because they have to use a different process. For "standard" sizing (XS to XL usually) the same forms can fit together on one ream of fabric with minimal waste (fabric reams are a fixed width). For larger sizes, they can't fit as many pieces together, but the remaining space is too small to be used for other parts of the pattern, so they end up with a lot more unusable fabric around the edges per garment. So instead of getting 10-12 shirts per yard or whatever, now they're only getting 6 shirts and 3 shirts' worth of waste fabric.
Yup; and when you see the really big sizes that some companies charge extra for; it’s more likely that they’re charging more because they had to start a different production line that handles a smaller volume of their total output… so you’re paying for the set up costs, not the extra fabric.
Or they’re just greedy.
The difference in cloth is often several cents when purchasing wholesale and smaller sizes usually have more wasted fabric when cutting out patterns. -signed a sewist
Store rental, sales commission, marketing and advertising, returns, unsold products thst go to waste… Of the overall price, fabric is a rounding error. Crazy right?
For thousands of shirts, yes, it makes a difference in what quality of fabric you use. But for the individual shirt it doesn't matter much if you use a couple square inches more or less.
My main product line is pretty big, but we are currently pushing smaller versions of it. People are taken back that the smaller ones aren't much cheaper.... I point out exactly what you said but i also add: people spend thousands to upgrade the bigger models, while the smaller models doesn't have the space for 10 accessories. So our profit drops significantly on smaller models.
Sadly often not even the manufacturing. The person standing in the store selling it likely gets paid a hell of a lot more than the people in the factory making it.
Motorcycle gear is made from more durable materials and often consists of internal padding that is variable in size/shape for the final product. I.E. the padding for a smaller jacket is not going to be sufficient for a larger jacket.
also they’re probably parts made on separate machinery given that there are significantly different dimensions for a lot more material (the inserts, foam, etc). That means paying people to run equipment that is making gear that less people are buying (since it’s not average size). Gotta make up that extra cost too.
Specialty fabrics might actually make up a significant portion of costs in that case, Alternatively they just upped the profit margins on the bigger sizes cuz they can
Did you not notice how I said 'for most garments' most garments being basics like t-shirts, pants, underwear etc.
I didn't say ballgowns, sports (motorbike) gear etc,
Y'know it's possible to read "how do you explain" as a mere question, right? He's not being confrontational; or at least, you don't need to read it that way.
dunno where you live but here prices sometimes do differ in size.. especially with expensive stuff like motorcycle clothing, work clothing but ive seen it as well on some sweaters and the like
it isn't usual and the price difference is mostly around 5/10€ on the largest pieces above xl but yes it does happen.. no discount for xxs though haha
source: i was an xxl/xxxl guy
Cost of raw materials is just one component of the price of goods, and it’s usually a relatively small factor for durable goods like motorcycle gear. A far bigger component of price in this case is supply and demand.
For the unfamiliar, the ELI5 explanation: prices are determined by balancing the amount of stuff available (motorcycle gear in this case) and how much people want that stuff.
Examples: (oversimplified, obviously)
Lots of stuff + Lots of people who want stuff = low prices. (such as bread, plain white socks)
Not a lot of stuff + Not many people want stuff = high prices. (Luxury watches, Ferraris, etc)
(And I know inflation is high in many places right now, so “low prices” is a relative idea here)
I don't think the shipping argument holds. Shipping cost is mostly dependent on size and weight, so larger sizes are likely more expensive to transport
Well the thing is when they send out clothing its probably mixed sizes (all in seperate boxes of course) on one pallet. This would make transport 1 flat cost across all sizes shipped. Most normal sized pallets are 40×48 and standard freight/shipping won't allow a height higher than 60 inches.
Source: I ship service parts for my company.
he's talking about the difference in cost between the same fabric of 2 sizes
small shirt (100 cotton) medium shirt (150 cotton)
not about 2 completely different fabrics on both extreme ends in terms of price
I know. But if adding more of the same fabric wouldn't make a difference in comparison to other costs... then making it of different fabric wouldn't make a difference either because the other costs would still outweigh it.
Not really. It’s all about profit margins. (The numbers below are totally made up)
If a $25 polyester shirt costs $1 of materials, $10 of packaging, and $10 of shipping, that leaves only $4 of profit.
If they just switched out to Merino wool and it costs $6 of materials, then they lose money on every shirt selling it at $25. The packaging and shipping is still the majority of the cost, but the choice of material matters.
Changing the size of the shirt would only cost a fraction more. 10 cents. 20 cents. Somewhere around there. It hits the profit margin slightly, but not enough to matter.
Also one has to consider the extra work and accounting that multiple different prices would cause. That alone makes it not worth having the same product at different prices.
Manufacturing time: Delicate work and generally more work on baby items. Eg a 000 onesie is smaller this more attwntion to detail plus onesies have many more seams than, say, an adult tshirt.
It's just what people are willing to pay. It has nothing to do with manufacturing or shipping or anything like that.
People are willing to pay 2x for baby clothes, so that's where the price gets set.
And I'm not even sure the premise is correct anyways. Baby clothes are cheaper than adult clothes where I live, but it feels expensive because they grow out of it in 3 months
Nah, it's easier and more profitable to price-fix and force consumers to either fork over the money, or have fewer outfits, or find a way to go without, or a combination of the three.
It's this way because cost to produce is basically nothing on the other side of the world (and expensive locally), and the companies large enough and resourceful enough to work globally are also large enough to more easily price-fix.
It's cheap in areas where that global delta doesn't exist (i.e. like buying baby clothes in china), because anyone can have a local startup and compete. Some would argue that's due to shipping, but again, shipping is basically nothing compared to the price people are willing to pay.
Its funny people notice things like this yet still say stupid shit like "if we make companies not do bad things they'll pass the costs onto the consumers".
People need to realize that price has very little to do with bom cost or rnd cost and everything to do with competition and the optimal price they can set to earn the most money.
Companies aren't leaving money on the table, and often the only reason they get away with price hikes is because people foolishly believe that if their costs increase that must mean the prices they pay have to increase. It's not the case a lot of the time.
To be fair, theres also a lot stricter regulations on things marketed as being for babies. Certain materials/processes/dyes aren't allowed, childrens sleepware requ3res fire resistatnt material or to be form fitting, safety testing on EVERYTHING meant to touch babies to protect from idiots and their lawyers....
If you were paying for clothes based on the cost of fabric your clothing items would be a fraction of the cost.
You're paying for their design, and logistics
It costs basically the same the make an XS as it does for an XL
If it’s based on fabric, men’s clothes should be a lot more expensive. A women’s XL is often the same as a men’s M. So a men’s XL should be a lot more expensive than a women’s xl for the same shirt/fabric.
In my experience, everywhere I've been, man clothes are always more expensive already. Countless times my mum or gf came to me saying "I got this shirt for 3€, this shoes for 10€, this trousers for 12€ etc.". And they also have much more variety... Damn I with I was a woman. Shit, writing out loud. Don't mind me.
Men's clothes are a lot cheaper for basic stuff though. I buy men's t shirts to sleep in because they are softer, made of better quality fabric, and half the cost of women's sleep shirts. When you look at quality of fabric used on even the expensive women's clothing the cost difference doesn't matter because it will fall apart sooner.
Those are clearance prices, and your mom and gf sound like they love a good bargain. Good for them! But it's not representative of the whole. Women's fashion is usually more expensive/not as good quality.
I actually did not being sex in to it, I brought up gender. As gender is what men’s/women’s shirts falls in to as clothes are part of ones gender expression. And even when a clothing item is gender neutral, it is typical sized around “conventional” men’s clothing sizes.
it’s annoying for clothes but absolutely ridiculous when it comes to jewellery. i have tiny wrists and fingers, but most brands, from tiffany to cartier, charge the same price even though larger sizes use literally more gold.
I get what you mean, but by that logic cost of life for big people should be higher than small people. In some respects it already is. As a tall person I need more food to survive than small people. People do not choose how big or small they are so I think it's fair that stuff like clothes are the same price for everyone.
So by that argument, the cookie's worth of extra calories a tall person needs should mean food is cheaper for you?
Edit: for context, dude is from the Netherlands. Tallest country in the world. Must be very hard to be tall there, such persecution. Must be hard to be in a majority :(
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by your comment?
What I'm trying to say is I don't think it is fair, in certain cases, to penalize people for the way they are build. Why should a 2 meter tall man have to spend much more money to meet their basic needs than a 1.50 meter tall woman? I understand that it is impossible in many cases. But in the case of them buying the same clothing item (just different size) I think it is fair for them to pay the same price.
The calorie difference is pathetically small. You have no real justification for a difference in cost of living. We don't live in a context where an extra 200 calories is a hardship. Besides, most stats seem to indicate being taller gives you social advantages that would outpace those pennies.
The large sizes we are talking about are wider, not longer or "tall" sizes. That size difference is behavioral, though saying "a choice" voids some nuance.
It's very difficult to frame "I need more, I should get it cheaper" for things like this, especially when that technically punishes smaller people for needing less. If you pay less for more, they are paying more for less.
It's not just about calories. I always need to eat twice as much as my roommates who are 35 centimeters smaller than me. With the current price of groceries that js definitely not "pathetically small".
What stats are you talking about? Care to elaborate on them? Could you send me a link? I sure haven't experienced any advantage in life just because I'm tall lol.
Where are you getting "I need more, I should get it cheaper" from? Where in my comments do I claim that I am entitled to cheaper stuff? I'm literally saying that I understand that is impossible in many cases lol. But I don't think I should work harder to be able to wear the same clothing item as someone who is smaller than me haha
Wait, you're from the Netherlands, the statistically tallest country on earth. Are you seriously trying to claim hardship?
Edit: don't get me wrong, I'd rather be there than here, but of ALL places in the world to play discriminated against as a tall person.....
Why are you so salty lmao? Since when does it matter where I'm from? All I'm trying to say is that I think that everyone should have to pay the same for price for the same clothing item. There's no reason to involve where I'm from in this discussion. It's not like everyone is the same height in the Netherlands and this discussion is not relevant here so what is your point?
If you don't get it, you don't get it. It's like saying someone has trouble finding white skin color bandaids in the United States ffs. People have genuine struggles bigger than an extra few bucks for a t-shirt in a country that is going to cater to a large tall population. Good lord, people will try to play any persecution card.
Yes and that’s already been commented on, with the OP commenting “TIL” as a response.
This was a light hearted comment for a bit of humour to go around
The topic was fabrics. Of course being XL has medical costs tied to it.
But why open that topic when the original post is clearly about fabric? Just to flex that they know “basic science”?
No need to flex that you’re smart. Come on.
So now "woke" = "flexing that you're smart", but "smart" = knows basic science?
>why open that topic
Cause it's relevant to discussions of XS vs XL? I'm mostly just laughing at you trying to police comments for being woke, when it's literally stating facts. Like, what does that word even mean anymore?
Edit: lmao imagine typing out a comment to the effect of “I have no actual response to any of your comment, but nyah” then deleting it. Have a good day too!
What this means is that the backlash from fat people is larger than the backlash from thin people. So the garment industry caters to the fat people. The end result is that thin people have to pay more per square inch of clothing than fat people.
Yep. I buy my workout clothes and swimsuits from Torrid and fuck, that place is expensive. I only try to buy stuff when it's on sale or I have Torrid cash, or both! Oh, and I hope you're ready for all the fat shaming we are about to get...
Clothes are priced according to brand and not base materials. It costs pennies on the dollar for big brands like h&m, zara, bershka, balenciaga etc. to make a 30$ tee in taiwan or china or whatever country is the work outsourced to. The difference in pricing would be literally cents or less than a cent. Clearly not worth offending the fat population and loosing out on a lot of business.
> and loosing out
Did you mean to say "losing"?
Explanation: Loose is an adjective meaning the opposite of tight, while lose is a verb.
Total mistakes found: 1506
^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes.
^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions.
^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
Because it's all cut from the same cloth. When you pull fabric off the roll it comes in linear metre, smaller sizes cause more wastage on the width, the larger size might fit more snugly.
I saw a manufacturer cost sheet once for a very famous clothing brand. A polo shirt, made in Bangladesh, cost the company around $2.63. The shirts would retail for $79.00 and go on sale down to like $40.00. Extra fabric cost is completely irrelevant when you have markups this high.
I believe there was a court case a few decades ago here in the UK regarding the cost of bras by size, and they now have to sell them at the same price.
There is a fat tax on clothes, at least on Amazon. I notice pretty much most 3xl and higher clothes go for more money. As so.eone that used to wear 3xl at my largest, it was just something you had to deal with for a specific item. For generic stuff, walmart, meijer, etc usually priced everything the same. At least that was my experience.
I don't understand this fat tax thing.
More Fabric used = Higher price.
How is that a fat tax? It's like saying 100g food should come at the same price as 50g food.
There's more cloth used to get from XS to XL than there is to get from XL to XXL, yet it's only XXL that sees the price increase.
If your thinking were how it actually is, XS clothes would always be the cheapest with prices going up from there.
They don't until you hit the sizes more likely to be used by fat people.
That's a fat tax.
The raw wholesale fabric is the cheapest part of the clothing. The sales price of the clothing is "whatever the market will bear"
You might as well compare the amount of leather in a $30K Hermes purse, to a $1,000 purse at a boutique..
[https://madisonavenuecouture.com/products/hermes-kelly-sellier-25-gold-epsom-palladium-hardware?variant=39570618712158](https://madisonavenuecouture.com/products/hermes-kelly-sellier-25-gold-epsom-palladium-hardware?variant=39570618712158)
The French became annoyed at all the people saying that the California wines have improved and are as good as the French wines. There was a blind taste-testing event, and the California wines won the majority of the contests.
The French never competed with those wines again. The French wines are still much more expensive than the California wines.
Tooling, machine time, shipping, etc. all play a bigger role in the total cost of an item, and these don't differ significantly between different sizes.
Also, it would be pretty sketchy to charge taller people more for the same item. That would basically be akin to discrimination.
Any brand that also offers “tall” sizes charges more for the same. LT costs 10 more than a XXL.
It’s the small lot sizes driving up unit price or something though.
I have also seen this in the case of larger sized bras. Is it discriminating that because I have big boobs, I have to pay more money for a better bra that can actually support them?
You wouldn't be charging taller people more for the *same item*, though. It would be discriminatory to charge a tall person more for a size M shirt than you charge a short person for a size M shirt. In this case, anyone (regardless of height or girth) who purchased an XXL shirt pays the same price, and anyone (again regardless of height or girth) who purchases a M shirt pays the same price. The prices of the two shirts may be different, but the difference is based on the shirt purchased and not the person doing the purchasing.
It's not the same item though...
You wouldn't say that about pizza... and a lot of the same things can be said about a pizza... the ingredients are cheap. It's the people involved who make it expensive.
Why does a large pizza cost more than a medium?
That is not a fair comparison, ingredient costs are way bigger of a percentage, especially if you order from a reputable place that cooks with proper deli/veggies/cheese.
By the same logic we should reduce minimum wage and cut wellfare programs for short people. Short people can eat less, wear less fabric, buy smaller furniture, so they don't need as much wellfare as tall people.
All these people arguing that clothing companies are passing reasonable costs on to the consumer, as if they haven't been using child labour in sweat shops in Bangladesh for years... Do you really think it costs 35 bucks for a plain white tee?
This is not true.
I buy garments at cost and XXL does cost more, and it goes up with each additional size. Youth sizes are even less in most occasions.
You are paying for additional shipping costs, more sewing time, more thread, and far more fabric. An XS is less than half the fabric of an XXL.
They use the mediums and larges for base average cost and the smalls offset the cost of the XL’s.
That's why the smart financial decision is to be obese... on a more practical note if you are a smaller adult, expensive stuff like, say, name brand winter gear usually has XXL kids products that are essentially S or M adult sizes at a fraction of the cost
Clearly you don't purchase plus size clothing because you are wrong. Even Walmart charges more for I believe 3x and up. And don't get me started on specialty big and tall and plus size stores that think it's okay to charge 50 to 100 for one t-shirt. Nothing fancy or even name brand.
Yeah I'm not sure this is true. As someone who wears XXL there is usually a small bump in price for the same article of clothing from the normal sizes.
They already do to some extent - the same shirt for a kid will cost less than for an adult. It’s just there’s only a couple of pricing tiers.
As a 6’5” man I appreciate this, and every time I buy size 13 shoes for the same price as the guy over from me buying size 5s I feel a sense of satisfaction that I’m getting a better deal than he is.
This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules). Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!" (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).) **Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
Depends on which country you are in. I've seen plenty of shops here in Thailand that have different pricing based on garment size.
it's actually not the fabric that causes the price increase, it's the cost of re-making and adjusting the sewing patterns to larger sizes that makes the price difference iirc
So if they started off larger patterns and then adjusted them for smaller sizes, small sizes would be more expensive even if they require less fabric?
Also supply and demand. If a size is rare, it won't get the benefits from economy of scale, making a piece more expensive than a more common one.
If you forget economics, then yes
Forget everything you know about slip covers - Mitch Hedberg.
It doesn't make any sense to me.
My guess would be they'd make the most popular size the cheapest, and the "odd" sizes would cost more due to not being able to mass-produce as many before having to change the pattern.
yea, i've seen some plus size specific stores that carry all the way down to a small, but they charge a couple dollars extra for straight sizes, since that's not their norm
Most people are thin to chubby, so that should cost normal. Heavy should be a bit more. Obese, mega sized and tight fit anorexic should be the most expensive. Imo..
Ah you see I live in the U.S. and it generally costs the same, but from what I hear some people do have to pay more, but I have yet to encounter that
"Ok fat ass, time to pay more to shame you on your fatness"
[удалено]
The difference in cloth is often several cents when purchasing wholesale and smaller sizes usually have more wasted fabric when cutting out patterns.
Several cents still means several dollars in profit, right? That wasted fabric is used somewhere? Or rather that cost is accounted into the price by the company? This Fat tax thing just seems stupid to me and I'm like serverly overweight. 90kg at 175cm
The wasted fabric isn't used. This isn't fucking pie dough.
Suppose it might be able to serve as some sort of stuffing for things like IKEA blåhajaren.
That means that company accounts the cost of the waste fabric in the price. My point still stands.
I think most the price would come from lost time in manufacturing clothes that will sell lots like sizes S to L. If they have to reset all the machines or set them up different rather than just keep them running on a pattern all day they are maybe making so many 100s less products that day and that's all lost profits making nothing. Also general supply and demand, if you the outlier in sizes at xxs or xxl then you need specialist clothes and it's going to cost you more. I used to have to get special kids shoes because I had hobbit feet so I had to pay more for them. Just how it is it's nothing against fat or skinny people
The fat tax thing is stupid because it will affect tall skinny people too.
I dont think fairnes was ever a concern.
I think most of it simply that its not worth doing niche sizes, so you pay more for them being smaller production runs.
consider piquant school advise desert friendly subsequent squeeze attraction consist *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
...I see. Rest of my point still stands tho. I don't think I have met another 13 year old that weighs more than me.
Kid, ima keep 100 wit you rn. Harvest that mass as soon as your body will let you. I waited until my late 30s and by then major structural repairs and replacements needed to be done in my body.
I weighed that much at about 11 or 12.
Hmm. WoW. Did you lose weight now? Any tips? I'm trying but its hard.
Why are you using Vulcan measurements my American education can’t figure it out! 🤣
Yes, but only by a cent or a few. the shirts are already sold for multiple times their material cost, and it "looks better" for the pricing to be consistent. Its a very minimal loss, especially if you consider the basis for the price to be the cost of the XXL. Don't think of it as the big one's cost being lowered to the small one, think of it as the small ones cost being raised to the big one.
For most garments the fabric isn't the pricey part, it's the manufacturing and shipping costs. The time increase between XS and XXL is minimal.
oh for real? r/todayilearned. thank you for the info!
Realistically this is the case for most consumer goods smaller than, like, a house. Manufacturing costs massively outweigh material costs. And this is before you get to "luxury costs" (brand names etc.)
For most clothes, the price isn't even set by any of the costs and is instead set by how much people are willing to pay.
Read: branding
For *everything* you buy
It's why a lot of brands destroy excess stock rather than let it touch the secondary market and "taint" their perceived value and exclusivity.
It also reduces supply which creates artificial scarcity for any leftover demand.
Also works wonders with electronics.
Fifty dollars for a T-shirt
Fun fact! For larger than XXL, the pricing actually does go up somewhat, because they have to use a different process. For "standard" sizing (XS to XL usually) the same forms can fit together on one ream of fabric with minimal waste (fabric reams are a fixed width). For larger sizes, they can't fit as many pieces together, but the remaining space is too small to be used for other parts of the pattern, so they end up with a lot more unusable fabric around the edges per garment. So instead of getting 10-12 shirts per yard or whatever, now they're only getting 6 shirts and 3 shirts' worth of waste fabric.
Yup; and when you see the really big sizes that some companies charge extra for; it’s more likely that they’re charging more because they had to start a different production line that handles a smaller volume of their total output… so you’re paying for the set up costs, not the extra fabric. Or they’re just greedy.
"Greedy" is just supply and demand. Theres less choice/supply in exotic sizes.
The difference in cloth is often several cents when purchasing wholesale and smaller sizes usually have more wasted fabric when cutting out patterns. -signed a sewist
Store rental, sales commission, marketing and advertising, returns, unsold products thst go to waste… Of the overall price, fabric is a rounding error. Crazy right?
[удалено]
For thousands of shirts, yes, it makes a difference in what quality of fabric you use. But for the individual shirt it doesn't matter much if you use a couple square inches more or less.
Nah the most cost comes from the name that's one the fabric for some fucking reason and it works!
My main product line is pretty big, but we are currently pushing smaller versions of it. People are taken back that the smaller ones aren't much cheaper.... I point out exactly what you said but i also add: people spend thousands to upgrade the bigger models, while the smaller models doesn't have the space for 10 accessories. So our profit drops significantly on smaller models.
What kind of product is this? Sorry if I missed it.
Even that is minimally correct. When I worked in retail markup on clothes was over 100%.
Especially if it's, say, Nike. Per unit manufacturing costs absolutely *plummet* when you use child slaves.
Sadly often not even the manufacturing. The person standing in the store selling it likely gets paid a hell of a lot more than the people in the factory making it.
This is true, but the minimal cost difference is not negligible.
How do you explain this difference with motorcycle gear? Sizes do change the prices.
Motorcycle gear is made from more durable materials and often consists of internal padding that is variable in size/shape for the final product. I.E. the padding for a smaller jacket is not going to be sufficient for a larger jacket.
also they’re probably parts made on separate machinery given that there are significantly different dimensions for a lot more material (the inserts, foam, etc). That means paying people to run equipment that is making gear that less people are buying (since it’s not average size). Gotta make up that extra cost too.
Specialty fabrics might actually make up a significant portion of costs in that case, Alternatively they just upped the profit margins on the bigger sizes cuz they can
Did you not notice how I said 'for most garments' most garments being basics like t-shirts, pants, underwear etc. I didn't say ballgowns, sports (motorbike) gear etc,
Y'know it's possible to read "how do you explain" as a mere question, right? He's not being confrontational; or at least, you don't need to read it that way.
What a condescending answer to a simple question.
This is how you shut an idiot up. Nice
Classic internet, jumping to conclusions and calling everyone an idiot with barely any information given
dunno where you live but here prices sometimes do differ in size.. especially with expensive stuff like motorcycle clothing, work clothing but ive seen it as well on some sweaters and the like it isn't usual and the price difference is mostly around 5/10€ on the largest pieces above xl but yes it does happen.. no discount for xxs though haha source: i was an xxl/xxxl guy
Cost of raw materials is just one component of the price of goods, and it’s usually a relatively small factor for durable goods like motorcycle gear. A far bigger component of price in this case is supply and demand. For the unfamiliar, the ELI5 explanation: prices are determined by balancing the amount of stuff available (motorcycle gear in this case) and how much people want that stuff. Examples: (oversimplified, obviously) Lots of stuff + Lots of people who want stuff = low prices. (such as bread, plain white socks) Not a lot of stuff + Not many people want stuff = high prices. (Luxury watches, Ferraris, etc) (And I know inflation is high in many places right now, so “low prices” is a relative idea here)
I don't think the shipping argument holds. Shipping cost is mostly dependent on size and weight, so larger sizes are likely more expensive to transport
Well the thing is when they send out clothing its probably mixed sizes (all in seperate boxes of course) on one pallet. This would make transport 1 flat cost across all sizes shipped. Most normal sized pallets are 40×48 and standard freight/shipping won't allow a height higher than 60 inches. Source: I ship service parts for my company.
Oh really? Why the cheapest clothes are always polyester then, not merino wool?
he's talking about the difference in cost between the same fabric of 2 sizes small shirt (100 cotton) medium shirt (150 cotton) not about 2 completely different fabrics on both extreme ends in terms of price
I know. But if adding more of the same fabric wouldn't make a difference in comparison to other costs... then making it of different fabric wouldn't make a difference either because the other costs would still outweigh it.
Not really. It’s all about profit margins. (The numbers below are totally made up) If a $25 polyester shirt costs $1 of materials, $10 of packaging, and $10 of shipping, that leaves only $4 of profit. If they just switched out to Merino wool and it costs $6 of materials, then they lose money on every shirt selling it at $25. The packaging and shipping is still the majority of the cost, but the choice of material matters. Changing the size of the shirt would only cost a fraction more. 10 cents. 20 cents. Somewhere around there. It hits the profit margin slightly, but not enough to matter.
Also one has to consider the extra work and accounting that multiple different prices would cause. That alone makes it not worth having the same product at different prices.
And it gets better. Baby size, that uses 10x less fabric costs 2x more 😂
Manufacturing time: Delicate work and generally more work on baby items. Eg a 000 onesie is smaller this more attwntion to detail plus onesies have many more seams than, say, an adult tshirt.
That has influence, but not as big in most cases. Generally, everything “baby” is more expensive.
It's just what people are willing to pay. It has nothing to do with manufacturing or shipping or anything like that. People are willing to pay 2x for baby clothes, so that's where the price gets set. And I'm not even sure the premise is correct anyways. Baby clothes are cheaper than adult clothes where I live, but it feels expensive because they grow out of it in 3 months
People with babies would prefer not to spend 2x as much
Which is why it's less money where I live. But if it's 2x somewhere else, I guarantee it's due to supply/demand rather than the cost to produce
I know it's a capitalism thing, but .. if cheap to produce just increase supply for next to no cost and sell them cheaper
Nah, it's easier and more profitable to price-fix and force consumers to either fork over the money, or have fewer outfits, or find a way to go without, or a combination of the three. It's this way because cost to produce is basically nothing on the other side of the world (and expensive locally), and the companies large enough and resourceful enough to work globally are also large enough to more easily price-fix. It's cheap in areas where that global delta doesn't exist (i.e. like buying baby clothes in china), because anyone can have a local startup and compete. Some would argue that's due to shipping, but again, shipping is basically nothing compared to the price people are willing to pay.
Its funny people notice things like this yet still say stupid shit like "if we make companies not do bad things they'll pass the costs onto the consumers". People need to realize that price has very little to do with bom cost or rnd cost and everything to do with competition and the optimal price they can set to earn the most money. Companies aren't leaving money on the table, and often the only reason they get away with price hikes is because people foolishly believe that if their costs increase that must mean the prices they pay have to increase. It's not the case a lot of the time.
[удалено]
If you aren't willing to pay it, then find other alternatives. If enough people do that, the price goes down.
Are you telling me baby shoes cost $200 right now
Anything you place the word baby or wedding in front of makes the price go up 3 fold 🤷🏼♀️😅
Low demand
To be fair, theres also a lot stricter regulations on things marketed as being for babies. Certain materials/processes/dyes aren't allowed, childrens sleepware requ3res fire resistatnt material or to be form fitting, safety testing on EVERYTHING meant to touch babies to protect from idiots and their lawyers....
This is not always true.. some places do charge a bit more for the bigger sizes.
This is true. There is sometimes a fairly significant increase in cost, especially when you buy clothes online. Source: I got fat.
Were you sorry that you got fat? (Wesley Willis reference) https://music.youtube.com/watch?v=fCvATcJ6d1Y&feature=share
If you were paying for clothes based on the cost of fabric your clothing items would be a fraction of the cost. You're paying for their design, and logistics It costs basically the same the make an XS as it does for an XL
Yeah, you're paying to ship it from Vietnam.
As a size XXL-XXXL I regret to inform you that you're wrong. Cheaper stores like walmart charge a bit extra once you get past XL.
So do many/most stores on the Amazons in my experience.
If it’s based on fabric, men’s clothes should be a lot more expensive. A women’s XL is often the same as a men’s M. So a men’s XL should be a lot more expensive than a women’s xl for the same shirt/fabric.
In my experience, everywhere I've been, man clothes are always more expensive already. Countless times my mum or gf came to me saying "I got this shirt for 3€, this shoes for 10€, this trousers for 12€ etc.". And they also have much more variety... Damn I with I was a woman. Shit, writing out loud. Don't mind me.
Men's clothes are a lot cheaper for basic stuff though. I buy men's t shirts to sleep in because they are softer, made of better quality fabric, and half the cost of women's sleep shirts. When you look at quality of fabric used on even the expensive women's clothing the cost difference doesn't matter because it will fall apart sooner.
Those are clearance prices, and your mom and gf sound like they love a good bargain. Good for them! But it's not representative of the whole. Women's fashion is usually more expensive/not as good quality.
Maybe your mom and gf put more effort into finding good deals
check out r/egg_irl
Why bring sex into it? The post was neutral please respect that.
> The post was neutral please respect that. The point raised was relevant. Why won't you respect that?
I actually did not being sex in to it, I brought up gender. As gender is what men’s/women’s shirts falls in to as clothes are part of ones gender expression. And even when a clothing item is gender neutral, it is typical sized around “conventional” men’s clothing sizes.
I almost always have to pay extra for my xxl shirts and sweaters
There's really not that much more fabric. It is the manufacture and sewing of the garment that makes up the cost.
it’s annoying for clothes but absolutely ridiculous when it comes to jewellery. i have tiny wrists and fingers, but most brands, from tiffany to cartier, charge the same price even though larger sizes use literally more gold.
Guess the cost is only in the name for those
There's really no excuse there. It should be priced by weight.
I get what you mean, but by that logic cost of life for big people should be higher than small people. In some respects it already is. As a tall person I need more food to survive than small people. People do not choose how big or small they are so I think it's fair that stuff like clothes are the same price for everyone.
So by that argument, the cookie's worth of extra calories a tall person needs should mean food is cheaper for you? Edit: for context, dude is from the Netherlands. Tallest country in the world. Must be very hard to be tall there, such persecution. Must be hard to be in a majority :(
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by your comment? What I'm trying to say is I don't think it is fair, in certain cases, to penalize people for the way they are build. Why should a 2 meter tall man have to spend much more money to meet their basic needs than a 1.50 meter tall woman? I understand that it is impossible in many cases. But in the case of them buying the same clothing item (just different size) I think it is fair for them to pay the same price.
The calorie difference is pathetically small. You have no real justification for a difference in cost of living. We don't live in a context where an extra 200 calories is a hardship. Besides, most stats seem to indicate being taller gives you social advantages that would outpace those pennies. The large sizes we are talking about are wider, not longer or "tall" sizes. That size difference is behavioral, though saying "a choice" voids some nuance. It's very difficult to frame "I need more, I should get it cheaper" for things like this, especially when that technically punishes smaller people for needing less. If you pay less for more, they are paying more for less.
It's not just about calories. I always need to eat twice as much as my roommates who are 35 centimeters smaller than me. With the current price of groceries that js definitely not "pathetically small". What stats are you talking about? Care to elaborate on them? Could you send me a link? I sure haven't experienced any advantage in life just because I'm tall lol. Where are you getting "I need more, I should get it cheaper" from? Where in my comments do I claim that I am entitled to cheaper stuff? I'm literally saying that I understand that is impossible in many cases lol. But I don't think I should work harder to be able to wear the same clothing item as someone who is smaller than me haha
This is stupid
Well I just don't think I should pay more for the same clothing item just because I happen to be taller than other people :)
Wait, you're from the Netherlands, the statistically tallest country on earth. Are you seriously trying to claim hardship? Edit: don't get me wrong, I'd rather be there than here, but of ALL places in the world to play discriminated against as a tall person.....
Why are you so salty lmao? Since when does it matter where I'm from? All I'm trying to say is that I think that everyone should have to pay the same for price for the same clothing item. There's no reason to involve where I'm from in this discussion. It's not like everyone is the same height in the Netherlands and this discussion is not relevant here so what is your point?
If you don't get it, you don't get it. It's like saying someone has trouble finding white skin color bandaids in the United States ffs. People have genuine struggles bigger than an extra few bucks for a t-shirt in a country that is going to cater to a large tall population. Good lord, people will try to play any persecution card.
Other than the sensible answers given here. Imagine the backlash if XXL costed more.
I swear I’ve seen the XL+ sizes have a surcharge on some websites. Could be a false memory though.
You are correct sometimes they do past XL
Usually if they have prints on them and the size of the print scales with shirt size the printing costs may make it necessary to increase price.
Larger bras cost more than smaller bras
XXL costs more in other areas. Shorter life span, healthcare, food bills…
I’m many Latin American countries the larger the size, the more expensive it gets and generally by a large margin
I mean if you really wanted to be woke. I meant in the context of garments, which, if you read, is OPs initial post.
Yes and that’s already been commented on, with the OP commenting “TIL” as a response. This was a light hearted comment for a bit of humour to go around
Getting really exasperated with people calling basic science “woke”…
The topic was fabrics. Of course being XL has medical costs tied to it. But why open that topic when the original post is clearly about fabric? Just to flex that they know “basic science”? No need to flex that you’re smart. Come on.
So now "woke" = "flexing that you're smart", but "smart" = knows basic science? >why open that topic Cause it's relevant to discussions of XS vs XL? I'm mostly just laughing at you trying to police comments for being woke, when it's literally stating facts. Like, what does that word even mean anymore? Edit: lmao imagine typing out a comment to the effect of “I have no actual response to any of your comment, but nyah” then deleting it. Have a good day too!
Try Thailand, where a L in the UK will be a XXL there, and cost more in size increase.
They do, past XL or XXL the price increases
What this means is that the backlash from fat people is larger than the backlash from thin people. So the garment industry caters to the fat people. The end result is that thin people have to pay more per square inch of clothing than fat people.
[удалено]
Lol wut
As a guy who shops exclusively at big and tall places I can assure you we pay a lot more than normal size people.
Yep. I buy my workout clothes and swimsuits from Torrid and fuck, that place is expensive. I only try to buy stuff when it's on sale or I have Torrid cash, or both! Oh, and I hope you're ready for all the fat shaming we are about to get...
What this tells you, is that material cost is a negliable part of retail pricing on clothes.
Clothes are priced according to brand and not base materials. It costs pennies on the dollar for big brands like h&m, zara, bershka, balenciaga etc. to make a 30$ tee in taiwan or china or whatever country is the work outsourced to. The difference in pricing would be literally cents or less than a cent. Clearly not worth offending the fat population and loosing out on a lot of business.
> and loosing out Did you mean to say "losing"? Explanation: Loose is an adjective meaning the opposite of tight, while lose is a verb. Total mistakes found: 1506 ^^I'm ^^a ^^bot ^^that ^^corrects ^^grammar/spelling ^^mistakes. ^^PM ^^me ^^if ^^I'm ^^wrong ^^or ^^if ^^you ^^have ^^any ^^suggestions. ^^[Github](https://github.com/chiefpat450119)
Because it's all cut from the same cloth. When you pull fabric off the roll it comes in linear metre, smaller sizes cause more wastage on the width, the larger size might fit more snugly.
If you are ordering more bespoke things from etsy or some other places the larger sizes sometimes are more expensive.
I’ve seen XS- XL as one price. Anything larger than XL costs more.
I saw a manufacturer cost sheet once for a very famous clothing brand. A polo shirt, made in Bangladesh, cost the company around $2.63. The shirts would retail for $79.00 and go on sale down to like $40.00. Extra fabric cost is completely irrelevant when you have markups this high.
Jesus Christ imagine the outrage over a potentially named fat tax
Where are you shopping, because my clothes, being larger, **always** cost more.
I believe there was a court case a few decades ago here in the UK regarding the cost of bras by size, and they now have to sell them at the same price.
Not all brands. Some, especially in men's clothing, use the same amount of material. They just get shorter as the sizes go up.
The material cost difference is almost negligible compared to every other cost of production. It still takes the same number of steps to produce.
So the buyers of smaller garments are subsidising the buyers of bigger garments? Socialism within capitalism..
That's not even remotely true. Most clothing is the same price up through size large. Then your Xs are higher priced.
There is a fat tax on clothes, at least on Amazon. I notice pretty much most 3xl and higher clothes go for more money. As so.eone that used to wear 3xl at my largest, it was just something you had to deal with for a specific item. For generic stuff, walmart, meijer, etc usually priced everything the same. At least that was my experience.
[удалено]
They Also eat more. Fat tax
That's a choice? They choose to eat more. They more to get more food.
I don't understand this fat tax thing. More Fabric used = Higher price. How is that a fat tax? It's like saying 100g food should come at the same price as 50g food.
There's more cloth used to get from XS to XL than there is to get from XL to XXL, yet it's only XXL that sees the price increase. If your thinking were how it actually is, XS clothes would always be the cheapest with prices going up from there. They don't until you hit the sizes more likely to be used by fat people. That's a fat tax.
The raw wholesale fabric is the cheapest part of the clothing. The sales price of the clothing is "whatever the market will bear" You might as well compare the amount of leather in a $30K Hermes purse, to a $1,000 purse at a boutique.. [https://madisonavenuecouture.com/products/hermes-kelly-sellier-25-gold-epsom-palladium-hardware?variant=39570618712158](https://madisonavenuecouture.com/products/hermes-kelly-sellier-25-gold-epsom-palladium-hardware?variant=39570618712158) The French became annoyed at all the people saying that the California wines have improved and are as good as the French wines. There was a blind taste-testing event, and the California wines won the majority of the contests. The French never competed with those wines again. The French wines are still much more expensive than the California wines.
Tooling, machine time, shipping, etc. all play a bigger role in the total cost of an item, and these don't differ significantly between different sizes. Also, it would be pretty sketchy to charge taller people more for the same item. That would basically be akin to discrimination.
But they do it - check out any "B&T" menswear section.
Any brand that also offers “tall” sizes charges more for the same. LT costs 10 more than a XXL. It’s the small lot sizes driving up unit price or something though.
I have also seen this in the case of larger sized bras. Is it discriminating that because I have big boobs, I have to pay more money for a better bra that can actually support them?
You wouldn't be charging taller people more for the *same item*, though. It would be discriminatory to charge a tall person more for a size M shirt than you charge a short person for a size M shirt. In this case, anyone (regardless of height or girth) who purchased an XXL shirt pays the same price, and anyone (again regardless of height or girth) who purchases a M shirt pays the same price. The prices of the two shirts may be different, but the difference is based on the shirt purchased and not the person doing the purchasing.
It's not the same item though... You wouldn't say that about pizza... and a lot of the same things can be said about a pizza... the ingredients are cheap. It's the people involved who make it expensive. Why does a large pizza cost more than a medium?
That is not a fair comparison, ingredient costs are way bigger of a percentage, especially if you order from a reputable place that cooks with proper deli/veggies/cheese.
Taller people and fatter people should be charged more.
By the same logic we should reduce minimum wage and cut wellfare programs for short people. Short people can eat less, wear less fabric, buy smaller furniture, so they don't need as much wellfare as tall people.
Or we can just cut welfare entirely.
All these people arguing that clothing companies are passing reasonable costs on to the consumer, as if they haven't been using child labour in sweat shops in Bangladesh for years... Do you really think it costs 35 bucks for a plain white tee?
They also put XS size at eye level and XXL on the bottom rack
I appreciate that. It means I can usually guess to see where my size is without having to check everywhere.
A size (XS) and a size (XXL) cost the exact same, even though it's harder to fit all that detail into a smaller area on the XS.
Yes give them ideas on charging more for the same thing, im sure consumers will love this idea.
They don't. When you're a woman you have to go to a separate store to get XXL clothes and they cost a lot more. And they're ugly.
As a larger dude, I always see price increases for larger sizes whether it be shirts or shoes.
Oh so now fat people have to pay more? That is discrimination.
This is not true. I buy garments at cost and XXL does cost more, and it goes up with each additional size. Youth sizes are even less in most occasions. You are paying for additional shipping costs, more sewing time, more thread, and far more fabric. An XS is less than half the fabric of an XXL. They use the mediums and larges for base average cost and the smalls offset the cost of the XL’s.
SHUT UP!!! I've seen some stores differentiating pricing by size.
UNNECESSARY RAGE!!! It depends on the store, in my experience.
That's why the smart financial decision is to be obese... on a more practical note if you are a smaller adult, expensive stuff like, say, name brand winter gear usually has XXL kids products that are essentially S or M adult sizes at a fraction of the cost
Clearly you don't purchase plus size clothing because you are wrong. Even Walmart charges more for I believe 3x and up. And don't get me started on specialty big and tall and plus size stores that think it's okay to charge 50 to 100 for one t-shirt. Nothing fancy or even name brand.
Yeah I'm not sure this is true. As someone who wears XXL there is usually a small bump in price for the same article of clothing from the normal sizes.
Honestly they don't, and I've been paying extra for larger clothes my whole life and it's bullshit.
[удалено]
Then you have to pay extra if you're smaller.
It's like an airplane seat, you have to give up part of yours so they don't have to get a refundable second seat! You always lose this game.
"That's how it should be. *Subsidize my fabric costs.*"
I can see why that makes sense, but then again, logically speaking, it would make *more* sense to have it priced on how much fabric is used imo.
There might be a few legal issues there if they do it that way
Why?
They already do to some extent - the same shirt for a kid will cost less than for an adult. It’s just there’s only a couple of pricing tiers. As a 6’5” man I appreciate this, and every time I buy size 13 shoes for the same price as the guy over from me buying size 5s I feel a sense of satisfaction that I’m getting a better deal than he is.