I'm watching the finale of "Top Chef" and I feel bad that I didn't watch the whole series, but that Padma chick really turned me off. I just read in her bio that she's written cookbooks and hosted her own show on the Food Network, but honestly listening and watching that woman was such a big, big turnoff! And those outfits .... she makes Nigella Lawson look like a puritan.
Whatever I'm sure she's there just to get guys to watch.
Wednesday, January 31, 2007
Friday, January 26, 2007
I'm thinking Nordstrom is going through the same financial issues as The Gap, only we don't know about it because Nordstrom is a private company. I was a loyal Nordstrom shopper for years, until I couldn't find anything in natural fibers anymore. Nordstrom started carrying polyester stylish but cheap looking clothes. Yes, they were fashionable but in a throw away fashion kind of way, not in a fashionable classic way.
Even my standby store Talbots is failing me. I can't find anything in there that I like anymore. Macy's is becoming my store of choice. Maybe bankruptcy did well for them because all of sudden, their clothes got better.
I mean, I don't think my fashion sense has changed other than I'm probably not as conservative as I used to be. I'm actually trying to be just a bit more trendy and broke down and bought a pair of DKNY Soho jeans with wide boot legs. Boot leg jeans just look better on me now than straight leg jeans and they feel fashionable. The DKNY jeans were also stretchy and I normally hate stretchy jeans, but these jeans didn't feel so polyster. In truth, I only bought them because I still can't see myself paying over $50 for a pair of jeans and these were only $48. They fit too and were so comfortable. One of these days I guess I'll have to see if a $150 pair of jeans really makes a difference.
I was in Beverly Hills over the weekend wearing my new DKNY stretchy widelegged jeans, my new brown suede boots, a brown cashmere sweater, and grey lacy camisole top topped with a vintage pearl necklace I bought at Gallery of Jewels on Union Street a few years back, and I felt fairly fashionable. Talk about strange because I've only ever felt dowdy looking ni LA, and this was the first time I've ever felt fashionable there.
I love the new jeans now because they don't sit at your waist. I've never had the kind of body, even at my thinnest, where I was narrow in the waist. I've always been straight up and down, and most jeans now sit below the waist which is so nice. I also have a short rise and could only wear certain brands, now I actually fit into most brands.
I mean at my thinnest in college, the only jeans that ever really fit me properly were mens jeans. Mens jeans fit my waist, butt and my legs back then, and women's jeans fit in the waist and were way too baggy every where else. I still remember the pair of YSL jeans I constantly wore when I was 19 years old; they were men's size 28 and were so comfortable and perfect.
Even my standby store Talbots is failing me. I can't find anything in there that I like anymore. Macy's is becoming my store of choice. Maybe bankruptcy did well for them because all of sudden, their clothes got better.
I mean, I don't think my fashion sense has changed other than I'm probably not as conservative as I used to be. I'm actually trying to be just a bit more trendy and broke down and bought a pair of DKNY Soho jeans with wide boot legs. Boot leg jeans just look better on me now than straight leg jeans and they feel fashionable. The DKNY jeans were also stretchy and I normally hate stretchy jeans, but these jeans didn't feel so polyster. In truth, I only bought them because I still can't see myself paying over $50 for a pair of jeans and these were only $48. They fit too and were so comfortable. One of these days I guess I'll have to see if a $150 pair of jeans really makes a difference.
I was in Beverly Hills over the weekend wearing my new DKNY stretchy widelegged jeans, my new brown suede boots, a brown cashmere sweater, and grey lacy camisole top topped with a vintage pearl necklace I bought at Gallery of Jewels on Union Street a few years back, and I felt fairly fashionable. Talk about strange because I've only ever felt dowdy looking ni LA, and this was the first time I've ever felt fashionable there.
I love the new jeans now because they don't sit at your waist. I've never had the kind of body, even at my thinnest, where I was narrow in the waist. I've always been straight up and down, and most jeans now sit below the waist which is so nice. I also have a short rise and could only wear certain brands, now I actually fit into most brands.
I mean at my thinnest in college, the only jeans that ever really fit me properly were mens jeans. Mens jeans fit my waist, butt and my legs back then, and women's jeans fit in the waist and were way too baggy every where else. I still remember the pair of YSL jeans I constantly wore when I was 19 years old; they were men's size 28 and were so comfortable and perfect.
The media has recently been bemoaning the fact that Gap has lost touch with its core base, and I'm like "Hello!" That was like fairly obvious a few years ago when the Gap's market share started to drop, but nobody thought to write about it back then.
You gotto love how the Gap won't even admit to the fact that they might have made a mistake.
<<"We've never veered from the core brand essence of Gap," insisted Stacy MacLean, a spokeswoman for the company. "We certainly think the brand has staying power."
On the other hand, she acknowledged that Gap made a point of going after customers ages 18 to 25, and that this strategy might not have worked out as planned. "We're re-examining our strategy, our tactics, everything," MacLean said. "We're definitely at a crossroads." >>
Ding dongs! Just admit your strategy to chase the younger crowd failed! Or maybe The Gap is taking a play out of Slick Willy's playbook and this is their version of saying "I did not have sex with that woman." Hell yes, your strategy failed and now you are on the selling block.
I think this is what The Gap was after - from the NY Times "stores like Primark are leaders in the quick-growing “fast fashion” industry, selling cheap garments that can be used and discarded without a second thought. Consumers, especially teenagers, love the concept, pioneered also by stores like H&M internationally and by Old Navy and Target in the United States, since it allows them to shift styles with speed on a low budget. " The problem is what worked for Old Navy did not work for The Gap's main stores. The NY Times observed that teenagers change their styles every six months, and The Gap just couldn't keep up.
You gotto love how the Gap won't even admit to the fact that they might have made a mistake.
<<"We've never veered from the core brand essence of Gap," insisted Stacy MacLean, a spokeswoman for the company. "We certainly think the brand has staying power."
On the other hand, she acknowledged that Gap made a point of going after customers ages 18 to 25, and that this strategy might not have worked out as planned. "We're re-examining our strategy, our tactics, everything," MacLean said. "We're definitely at a crossroads." >>
Ding dongs! Just admit your strategy to chase the younger crowd failed! Or maybe The Gap is taking a play out of Slick Willy's playbook and this is their version of saying "I did not have sex with that woman." Hell yes, your strategy failed and now you are on the selling block.
I think this is what The Gap was after - from the NY Times "stores like Primark are leaders in the quick-growing “fast fashion” industry, selling cheap garments that can be used and discarded without a second thought. Consumers, especially teenagers, love the concept, pioneered also by stores like H&M internationally and by Old Navy and Target in the United States, since it allows them to shift styles with speed on a low budget. " The problem is what worked for Old Navy did not work for The Gap's main stores. The NY Times observed that teenagers change their styles every six months, and The Gap just couldn't keep up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)