Brands I Refuse to Buy New (And Why You Might Reconsider Them Too)
I prefer thrifting, but when buying new, certain brands are off-limits for me personally. Whether it’s due to questionable ethics, declining quality, or greenwashing concerns, I choose not to support them financially. This isn’t judgment if you shop there – it’s my perspective based on research into brands like Sézane, Pretty Little Thing, Savage X Fenty, and Lululemon. I share my reasons hoping it encourages thoughtful consumption, but ultimately, you decide what aligns with your values. Remember, finding these brands secondhand is a different story!
The Shocking Decline of Sézane Quality: Proof from Real Buyers
Sézane captured my attention with its effortless French-girl chic, promising accessible luxury. However, scrolling through online communities reveals a troubling pattern: buyers reporting items arriving with holes, poor stitching, and materials that don’t match the premium price tag. People compare new purchases unfavorably to older Sézane pieces, showcasing a stark decline. For $150+, receiving H&M-level quality is unacceptable. While some experiences are positive, the risk of disappointment and poor craftsmanship makes me unwilling to spend my money there.
Pretty Little Thing’s “Quiet Luxury” Rebrand is a Joke (Here’s Why)
Imagine Shein’s stepsister trying to convince you she’s suddenly Chanel. That’s Pretty Little Thing (PLT) attempting a “quiet luxury” rebrand. It’s laughable because quiet luxury is built on high-quality materials, craftsmanship, and longevity – the exact opposite of PLT’s plastic-filled, disposable fast-fashion model. Seeing $13 tops and constant 50% off sales while they mimic high-end aesthetics exposes the absurdity. It’s a hollow trend-chasing facade, completely detached from the actual values of quality and timelessness that define genuine quiet luxury.
Worse Than Shein? The Troubling Ethics Behind Savage X Fenty
Hearing Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty scored lower than Shein on Remake’s 2024 Fashion Accountability Report (a shocking 4/100 vs. Shein’s 6) was jarring. A brand celebrated for championing inclusivity and diversity in its marketing apparently fails miserably behind the scenes. It suggests the progressive image doesn’t extend to fair labor practices or environmental responsibility. While we love Rihanna, this low score raises serious questions about the brand’s actual commitment to ethics beyond its forward-facing campaigns, making it a brand I refuse to support financially.
Lululemon’s Founder Problem: Why His Controversies Still Matter Today
Chip Wilson may not run Lululemon day-to-day, but the problematic foundation he built lingers. His past comments supporting child labor, body-shaming customers (“some women’s bodies just don’t work” for the leggings), and recent criticisms of DEI initiatives and plus-size models reveal troubling core values. Even with new leadership, a founder’s initial ideology often shapes company culture long-term. Recent lawsuits alleging Lululemon’s DEI program raised ethical concerns suggest his shadow may still influence the brand’s practices, making me avoid supporting them.
Why I Thrift Brands Like Sézane & Lululemon (But REFUSE to Buy Them New)
My stance is nuanced: I avoid financially supporting certain brands when buying new, but finding them secondhand? That’s fair game! For Sézane, thrifting bypasses the risk of paying premium prices for potentially subpar new quality. For Lululemon, it means acquiring the item without directly funding a company whose founder has expressed deeply problematic views. Secondhand shopping allows me to engage with the item itself, separated from the potentially disappointing or ethically questionable aspects of buying it directly from the brand.
Sézane’s B Corp Status vs. Reality: Is it Greenwashing? (Good On You Rating)
Sézane proudly displays its B Corp certification, suggesting strong ethical and sustainable practices. However, digging deeper raises flags. Independent rating platform Good On You gives Sézane a “Not Good Enough” score, their second-lowest rating. This discrepancy suggests the B Corp status might not paint the full picture, potentially serving as a form of greenwashing. While some effort is better than none, relying solely on certifications without transparent proof makes me skeptical of their true commitment beyond marketing.
Unpacking Pretty Little Thing’s Laughable Attempt at High-End Aesthetics
Pretty Little Thing draping itself in “quiet luxury” is like putting lipstick on a landfill. Their core business is churning out ultra-cheap clothes made from plastic, destined for disposal after a few wears. Trying to mimic an aesthetic defined by quality fabrics, timeless design, and ethical production is fundamentally dishonest. It’s pure aesthetic co-option without any substance, highlighting the absurdity of fast fashion attempting to cosplay as something it fundamentally opposes: lasting value and craftsmanship.
Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty: Inclusive Marketing Hiding Ethical Failures?
Savage X Fenty burst onto the scene, lauded for its groundbreaking inclusivity and diversity in casting and sizing – a refreshing change. However, this progressive image seems skin-deep. Shockingly low scores on ethical fashion reports (Remake, Good On You’s lowest “We Avoid” rating) suggest major failures in supply chain transparency, worker treatment, and sustainability. It paints a picture of a brand leveraging inclusive marketing while potentially neglecting ethical responsibilities behind the scenes, a disconnect I can’t support.
Lululemon Founder Chip Wilson’s Most Problematic Comments (Child Labor, Body Shaming)
Lululemon’s founder, Chip Wilson, has a history of deeply concerning statements. In his book, he essentially endorsed child labor as “excellent training.” Infamously, he responded to complaints about leggings pilling by blaming women whose thighs touch, stating their bodies “don’t work” for the pants. More recently, he criticized the company’s diversity efforts and called plus-size models in ads “unhealthy” and “sickly.” These comments reflect discriminatory and offensive viewpoints that make supporting the brand he founded untenable for me.
The Truth About “Accessible Luxury”: When Brands Like Sézane Disappoint
Brands like Sézane initially promised a sweet spot: chic design with better-than-fast-fashion quality, at prices below high-end luxury. However, widespread customer reports of declining quality – holes, poor stitching, cheap materials – shatter this “accessible luxury” illusion. When you’re paying
150−150-150−
200 for an item that reportedly falls apart like fast fashion, the value proposition collapses. It reveals that the label can be misleading, and quality isn’t guaranteed just because the price is higher than Zara.
Fast Fashion Trying to Be Classy: Why PLT’s Rebrand Fails
Pretty Little Thing’s attempt to adopt a “quiet luxury” aesthetic is doomed because it misunderstands the concept entirely. Quiet luxury isn’t just about neutral colors and simple silhouettes; it’s fundamentally about quality, craftsmanship, longevity, and often, ethical production. PLT’s business model – built on cheap synthetics, rapid trends, and disposable items – is the antithesis of these values. Simply changing the visual style without altering the core business practices makes the rebrand a hollow, unconvincing failure.
Savage X Fenty’s Embarrassing Score on the Remake Fashion Report
Context matters when evaluating brand ethics. Remake’s 2024 Fashion Accountability Report gave Rihanna’s Savage X Fenty a dismal score of 4 out of 100. To put that in perspective, notorious ultra-fast fashion giant Shein scored a 6. Being rated ethically worse than Shein is a truly embarrassing benchmark for a brand helmed by a globally influential figure and marketed on progressive values. This score highlights severe deficiencies in transparency, worker welfare, and environmental practices.
Is Lululemon’s Culture Still Toxic? DEI Lawsuit & Founder’s Influence
Despite founder Chip Wilson’s reduced role, concerns about Lululemon’s culture persist. His vocal criticism of the company’s DEI efforts and plus-size models in early 2024 echoes his past problematic views. Adding fuel to the fire, a lawsuit filed just months prior alleged the company’s DEI initiatives were “misguided” and raised “ethical concerns.” These recent events suggest that the founder’s controversial ideology might still permeate the company’s leadership and practices, hindering genuine progress on inclusivity and ethics.
Don’t Fall for the Hype: Brands Overpriced for Their Quality (Sézane Example)
Sézane perfectly illustrates how influencer hype and curated social media feeds can create a perception of luxury that doesn’t always match reality. People are drawn in by the beautiful aesthetic, only to potentially receive items with quality issues more aligned with fast fashion – but at a significantly higher price point. It’s a cautionary tale: don’t assume popularity or a higher price tag automatically equals superior quality. Researching real customer reviews is crucial to avoid overpaying for disappointing goods.
Quiet Luxury on a Budget? Why Thrifting Beats Buying PLT Dupes
Want that sophisticated, timeless “quiet luxury” look without the hefty price tag? Forget cheap fast-fashion knockoffs from brands like Pretty Little Thing. Their versions lack the essential quality and longevity. The real budget-friendly and sustainable path is secondhand shopping. By patiently thrifting, you can find genuinely well-made pieces in quality natural fabrics (wool, silk, cashmere) with classic silhouettes – the true essence of quiet luxury – often for less than a new PLT plastic garment.
Holding Billionaire Brands Accountable: The Savage X Fenty Case
When a brand is fronted by a beloved billionaire icon like Rihanna, it’s easy to overlook potential issues. However, Savage X Fenty’s extremely low ethical scores demonstrate why accountability matters, regardless of star power. We must look beyond celebrity endorsements and inclusive marketing to scrutinize actual business practices concerning worker rights and environmental impact. Holding these powerful, high-profile brands to the same ethical standards as any other company is crucial for driving meaningful change in the fashion industry.
“Some Women’s Bodies Don’t Work”: Why Lululemon’s Past Haunts Them
This infamous quote from Lululemon’s founder, blaming leggings pilling on women whose thighs rub together, encapsulates a deeply problematic and exclusionary attitude baked into the brand’s origins. It wasn’t just a slip-up; it reflected a mindset that alienated potential customers based on body type. Even though he’s less involved now, such comments created lasting damage to the brand’s reputation regarding body positivity and continue to resurface, reminding consumers of its non-inclusive roots.
Brands I Avoid Like the Plague (Unless Found Secondhand)
This sums up my personal boundary: there’s a specific list of brands – Sézane, Pretty Little Thing, Savage X Fenty, Lululemon included – that I actively choose not to purchase from when buying new items. My reasons range from documented quality decline and questionable ethics to problematic founder histories. However, my boycott applies only to giving them my money directly. If I happen upon an item from these brands while thrifting that meets my needs, I see it differently – enjoying the item without endorsing the company’s practices.
Sézane Subreddit Deep Dive: Real Customer Quality Complaints
Forget the curated Instagram feed; the Sézane subreddit tells a different story. For years, members have shared frustrating experiences: sweaters arriving with holes, stitching unraveling after minimal wear, fabric quality feeling cheap despite high prices, and inconsistencies compared to previously purchased items. Posts often include photos comparing old vs. new versions, visually demonstrating the alleged decline. This crowdsourced evidence from actual buyers paints a picture of quality control issues and unmet expectations that makes me hesitant to risk buying new.
The Environmental Cost of Pretty Little Thing’s Plastic Clothes
Pretty Little Thing epitomizes the environmental problems of ultra-fast fashion. Their business model relies heavily on producing massive quantities of clothing from cheap, petroleum-based synthetic fabrics like polyester and acrylic. These plastics shed microfibers when washed, take centuries to decompose in landfills, and require significant energy and resources to produce. Combined with the brand’s encouragement of disposable consumption through constant sales and rapid trend cycles, their environmental footprint is undeniably significant and deeply concerning.
Transparency Fail: Why Savage X Fenty’s Sustainability Claims Fall Flat
While Savage X Fenty has a dedicated sustainability section on its website mentioning carbon neutrality and responsible manufacturing, it lacks substance. True sustainability requires transparency: detailed information about factories, materials sourcing, measurable emissions data, clear goals, and progress reports. Savage X Fenty provides vague claims without verifiable proof or specific metrics. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to assess their actual impact and raises suspicions that their sustainability efforts are more marketing rhetoric than meaningful action.
Lululemon Leggings: Overpriced Hype or Worth the Investment? (My Take)
The debate around Lululemon’s price tag ($100+ for leggings) is ongoing. Fans swear by the fit and quality. However, given the founder’s problematic history and recent controversies surrounding the company culture, I personally question the value. Are they truly superior enough to justify the cost, or is much of it brand hype and status? Having seen them secondhand, the quality seems decent, but not revolutionary enough to make me overlook the ethical baggage and pay full price when comparable options exist.
Influencer Marketing vs. Product Reality: The Sézane Phenomenon
Sézane excels at influencer marketing, flooding social media with images of effortlessly chic individuals wearing their clothes (often gifted or sponsored). This creates a powerful aspirational image. However, this curated perfection often clashes with the reality reported by non-sponsored customers experiencing quality issues. It highlights a critical disconnect: the image projected through paid partnerships might not accurately reflect the typical customer experience or the actual quality of the garments being sold at premium prices.
Can Fast Fashion Ever Be “Quiet Luxury”? Analyzing PLT’s Strategy
No. Pretty Little Thing attempting a “quiet luxury” rebrand exposes a fundamental misunderstanding. Quiet luxury is an ethos prioritizing subtle design, exceptional quality materials, meticulous craftsmanship, longevity, and often, ethical production. Fast fashion, embodied by PLT, is the polar opposite: chasing fleeting trends, using cheap materials, prioritizing speed and low cost over quality, and encouraging disposability. Simply adopting minimalist aesthetics cannot bridge this vast chasm in values and practices. It’s merely surface-level mimicry.
Savage X Fenty vs. Shein: Which Brand is Ethically Worse?
It’s a race to the bottom, apparently. According to Remake’s 2024 Fashion Accountability report, Savage X Fenty scored an abysmal 4/100, while Shein scored a slightly less terrible 6/100. Both scores are incredibly poor, indicating severe deficiencies in transparency, environmental practices, and worker welfare. That Rihanna’s brand performed even worse than the notoriously criticized Shein is deeply concerning and challenges the positive public image cultivated through its marketing, suggesting significant ethical issues within its operations.
The Lingering Shadow of a Problematic Founder (Lululemon Case Study)
Lululemon illustrates how a founder’s controversial views can cast a long shadow, even after they step back from daily operations. Chip Wilson’s history of offensive comments regarding bodies, child labor, and diversity seems to echo in ongoing company issues, like recent DEI lawsuits and his continued public criticisms. It suggests that foundational values, even problematic ones, can become deeply ingrained in corporate culture, making it difficult for the brand to fully distance itself or enact genuine change.
Why Paying $150 for H&M Quality Isn’t Okay (Sézane Critique)
The core frustration voiced by many disillusioned Sézane customers boils down to value. They are drawn in by the brand’s premium image and price point (e.g.,
150−150-150−
200 for sweaters or blouses), expecting high-quality materials and construction. However, reports of receiving items with quality comparable to much cheaper fast fashion retailers like H&M (holes, poor stitching, cheap fabrics) lead to intense disappointment. Paying a premium price for basic quality feels deceptive and unacceptable.
The Ethics of 50% Off Everything: Who Pays the Price for PLT’s Sales?
Pretty Little Thing’s website perpetually screams “50% OFF!” or similar deep discounts. While appealing to bargain hunters, it raises serious ethical questions. How can a company constantly sell items for $13 or $25, often at half price, and still turn a profit? The unavoidable conclusion is that the true cost is being externalized. This likely means extremely low wages and poor conditions for garment workers, environmentally damaging production methods, and reliance on cheap, unsustainable materials. Someone, somewhere, pays dearly.
Brands Built on Inclusivity That Fail Their Workers (Savage X Fenty Concerns)
Savage X Fenty built its empire championing body positivity and racial diversity in its campaigns – a laudable public stance. However, ethical fashion demands inclusivity extends throughout the entire supply chain. Reports giving the brand rock-bottom scores for labor practices and transparency suggest a stark disconnect. It raises the uncomfortable possibility that the brand leverages progressive marketing while potentially neglecting the rights and fair treatment of the (likely female, POC) garment workers actually making the products.
Lululemon Founder Criticizing Plus-Size Models: The 2024 Controversy
Chip Wilson proved his controversial views haven’t mellowed with time. In early 2024, he publicly criticized Lululemon’s efforts towards inclusivity, specifically targeting ads featuring plus-size individuals. He described the models as looking “unhealthy,” “sickly,” and “not inspirational.” These comments, made decades after similar body-shaming remarks, reinforce concerns about the discriminatory attitudes underpinning the brand he founded and raise questions about the company’s genuine commitment to diversity despite his reduced role.
My Personal Brand Boycott List (And the Reasons Behind It)
This isn’t about judging others’ choices, but sharing my personal boundaries for buying new clothes. Based on research into quality decline (Sézane), ethical red flags (Savage X Fenty, PLT), or problematic foundations (Lululemon), these specific brands land on my “refuse to buy new” list. Each decision stems from aligning my purchasing power with my values regarding quality, sustainability, and corporate ethics. Thrifting them is different, but directly funding them is something I choose to avoid.
Sézane Quality Control Issues: Holes, Bad Stitching & More
Beyond vague “declining quality,” specific issues plague Sézane customers, frequently documented online. Common complaints include garments arriving with actual holes, seams unraveling after only one or two wears, inconsistent sizing, buttons falling off immediately, and fabrics feeling significantly cheaper or thinner than expected for the price. These aren’t isolated incidents but recurring themes suggesting potential systemic problems with quality control during manufacturing or material sourcing.
Spotting Greenwashing: How Brands Use Certifications Like B Corp (Sézane)
Sustainability certifications like B Corp can be meaningful, but they aren’t foolproof shields against criticism. Sézane highlights its B Corp status, yet independent platforms like Good On You give it low ethical ratings. This suggests brands might achieve certification by meeting minimum requirements in some areas while lagging significantly in others (like supply chain transparency or labor practices). It’s crucial to look beyond the certification itself and investigate a brand’s overall performance using multiple sources to spot potential greenwashing.
Is Pretty Little Thing Just Shein in Disguise?
While distinct companies (PLT owned by Boohoo Group), their core business models share troubling similarities with Shein: ultra-fast fashion cycles, rock-bottom prices suggestive of exploitative labor, heavy reliance on synthetic materials, trend-driven designs encouraging disposability, and opaque supply chains. Both prioritize speed and profit over ethical production and sustainability. So, while not literally the same entity, PLT operates within the same ethically questionable, environmentally damaging ultra-fast fashion paradigm as Shein.
The Disappointment of Savage X Fenty: When Idols’ Brands Fall Short
There’s a unique sting when a brand founded by a widely admired figure like Rihanna fails to meet ethical expectations. Fans projected their admiration for her onto the brand, anticipating it would reflect progressive values not just in marketing but in practice. Learning about Savage X Fenty’s extremely low ethical scores feels like a betrayal of that implicit promise. It’s a stark reminder that celebrity association doesn’t guarantee ethical operations and highlights the disappointment when idols’ ventures fall short.
Beyond the Founder: Examining Lululemon’s Company Culture Today
While Chip Wilson’s controversial past is significant, assessing Lululemon now requires looking at current actions. Are they genuinely moving beyond his shadow? Recent events raise doubts. A 2023 lawsuit targeted the company’s DEI program structure for alleged ethical issues. Wilson himself continued making offensive remarks about inclusivity efforts in 2024. These incidents suggest that fully reforming a culture potentially influenced by problematic founding values is complex, and genuine change may still be lagging behind stated commitments.
Why I Trust “Good On You” Ratings Over Brand Marketing (Sézane Example)
Brands control their own marketing, naturally presenting themselves in the best possible light (like Sézane highlighting B Corp status). Independent rating platforms like Good On You offer a crucial counter-narrative. They aggregate data from various reports, certifications, and investigations to provide a more holistic and objective assessment of a brand’s impact on people, planet, and animals. When Good On You gives Sézane a low “Not Good Enough” rating, I trust that assessment more than the brand’s curated self-promotion.
The Problem with Brands Co-opting Aesthetics Without Values (PLT Quiet Luxury)
Pretty Little Thing adopting a “quiet luxury” look exemplifies a problematic trend: brands mimicking the superficial aesthetics of a movement without embracing its core values. Quiet luxury emphasizes quality, craftsmanship, timelessness, and mindful consumption. PLT embodies the opposite: disposable trends, cheap production, and environmental disregard. This co-option is purely surface-level, using the style to seem sophisticated while completely ignoring the underlying principles, ultimately cheapening the aesthetic itself.
Savage X Fenty’s “We Avoid” Rating on Good On You: What It Means
Receiving Good On You’s lowest possible rating, “We Avoid,” is a major red flag for any brand, especially one like Savage X Fenty marketed on progressive values. This rating signifies that based on publicly available information and independent assessments, the brand demonstrates insufficient action or transparency across critical areas like labor rights, environmental impact, and animal welfare. It strongly advises consumers concerned about ethics and sustainability to steer clear of supporting the brand financially.
Does Lululemon Still Embody Its Founder’s Controversial Views?
It’s the crucial question. While Chip Wilson isn’t CEO, his status as founder and significant shareholder means his influence isn’t zero. His recent (2024) public comments slamming DEI and plus-size models mirror his past rhetoric. Combined with lawsuits questioning the effectiveness and ethics of Lululemon’s current DEI programs, it creates a compelling argument that the exclusionary or problematic attitudes he championed might still persist within the company’s culture and strategic direction, despite official statements to the contrary.
Avoiding Buyer’s Remorse: Why I Research Brands Before Buying New
To prevent disappointment and ensure my money aligns with my values when buying new, I make research a priority. Before purchasing, I look into reported product quality (checking reviews, forums like Reddit) and investigate the brand’s ethical standing using resources like Good On You or Remake. This proactive approach helps me avoid spending premium prices on potentially subpar goods (like reported Sézane issues) or unknowingly supporting companies with questionable practices (like Savage X Fenty or Lululemon’s controversies).
The Risk of Bad Quality When Shopping Popular Online Brands (Sézane)
Just because a brand is popular online and heavily promoted by influencers doesn’t guarantee quality. Sézane serves as a prime example. Despite its chic image and strong social media presence, numerous customer reports detail receiving poorly made items. This highlights the inherent risk when shopping online, especially from brands prioritizing marketing over consistent quality control. You might receive a gem, or you might receive something with holes – it seems to be a gamble.
Achieving “Quiet Luxury” Sustainably Through Secondhand Shopping
The true spirit of quiet luxury – valuing quality, timelessness, and craftsmanship – aligns perfectly with sustainable practices. Instead of buying fast fashion dupes (like PLT) or even new items, the most authentic and eco-conscious way to embrace this aesthetic is through secondhand shopping. Thrifting allows you to find high-quality pieces made from natural fibers (wool, silk, linen, cashmere) with classic designs at affordable prices, extending garment lifespans and rejecting disposable consumption.
Why Rihanna Needs to Step Up on Savage X Fenty’s Ethics
As the founder and face of Savage X Fenty, Rihanna holds immense influence. The brand’s shockingly low ethical scores (worse than Shein!) directly conflict with her powerful image built on empowerment and inclusivity. For the brand’s reputation and ethical standing to improve, she arguably needs to leverage her position, demand transparency, invest in fair labor practices, and ensure the progressive values projected in marketing are reflected in the actual operations. Her leadership is key to addressing these serious concerns.
Lululemon’s Price Point: Justified Quality or Inflated Brand Value?
Lululemon charges premium prices, often over $100 for leggings. Is this cost truly justified by superior materials, construction, and performance? Or are consumers primarily paying for the brand’s aspirational image, status symbol appeal, and extensive marketing? While some users attest to the quality, the founder’s problematic history and ongoing cultural concerns make me question if the high price reflects genuine product value or if it’s significantly inflated due to brand perception and hype alone.
Brands Whose Actions Don’t Match Their Marketing Promises
A recurring theme across the discussed brands (Sézane, PLT, Savage X Fenty, Lululemon) is a disconnect between their projected image and reality. Sézane promises quality but reportedly delivers inconsistency. PLT mimics luxury while being disposable fast fashion. Savage X Fenty markets inclusivity but scores poorly on ethics. Lululemon promotes wellness while grappling with a controversial founder and DEI issues. This highlights the importance of looking beyond marketing narratives to scrutinize a brand’s actual practices, quality, and values.
Navigating Brand Reputation: Personal Values vs. Popular Opinion
Choosing which brands to support often involves navigating conflicting information. A brand might be hugely popular and aesthetically pleasing (like Sézane or Lululemon), yet have documented quality issues or ethical concerns. This requires weighing popular opinion and marketing against independent research and your own personal values. Do you prioritize trendiness and peer approval, or quality, longevity, and ethical production? Deciding where your boundaries lie is key to conscious consumption.
The Importance of Behind-the-Scenes Ethics in Fashion (Savage X Fenty)
Savage X Fenty exemplifies why we must look beyond glossy ad campaigns. A brand can feature diverse models and preach empowerment, yet still score abysmally on reports assessing actual factory conditions, worker wages, environmental policies, and supply chain transparency. True ethical fashion requires accountability throughout the entire production process, not just in consumer-facing marketing. Scrutinizing these behind-the-scenes practices is essential to determine if a brand’s values are genuine or merely performative.
My Non-Negotiables: Why Quality & Ethics Trump Trends When Buying New
When I occasionally choose to buy a new garment instead of thrifting, my priorities are clear. Fleeting trends and brand hype take a backseat to fundamental non-negotiables: lasting quality (good materials, solid construction) ensuring longevity, and ethical production (fair labor, sustainable practices) as verified by independent sources. I’d rather invest in a well-made, ethically sound piece from a lesser-known brand than chase a popular item from a company known for poor quality or questionable practices.