FashBlog.com

Were any of you aware of some stores’ new policy of charging extra for certain colors, or not putting other colored items on sale as quickly as those considered unattractive?

This was something I found out some time back, but it’s only been recently that I’ve been noticing it more in the stores found in most malls. What do you think about the practice? I’m still on the fence about it. I think that it’s probably good business sense to want the grays and beiges to move out once spring is on its way, so if it takes marking them down more, why not? On the other hand, as a consumer, if in June I see that a navy top costs more than a green one, when both are summer colors, I tend to feel a little annoyed that the shop owner wants to profit from the fact that more women prefer navy over green.

The phenomenon is often seen in inexpensive establishments; places like Kmart and Target are notorious for ordering the exact same style of top throughout the year, but in seasonal hues. About a month before a season officially ends, the old colors get drastically marked down. If your daughter doesn’t mind wearing baby blue in June (and most kids don’t) you can score a fairly good deal. It makes me wonder just how programmed we are in terms of what colors are supposed to be used and worn at what times.

It obviously all goes back to nature. In the fall, the oranges, browns, and gold of the leaves and autumn harvests dictate those warm color choices, and the burgeoning spring blossoms set the tone for Easter pastels. The bright and vivid summer blooms are reflected in the strong palette of summer fashion, while subdued and dark colors seem more appropriate for the long days and artificial lighting of winter. Looking at it that way, we’ll probably always be slaves to certain colors of clothing throughout the year.

Knowing this public penchant to prefer certain colors is now a ploy of other salesmen, and I have a real problem there. Take a cell phone company that offer free, fairly fancy phones with a new contract. The ad states the phone can be in “the color of your choice”. Well, that’s true if your choice is blue, pink or black. Some guys don’t like pink or blue, and want something different than black. How about a nice, sporty red? That will be another $100… even though it has exactly the same inner workings as the pink and blue and black ones. Am I the only one who thinks that’s a bit smarmy?

This can make consumers crazy because it clearly seems that we are being manipulated. If a store buyer may have purchased too many colors that proved to be unpopular and now want to unload them, why not go about it in a less obvious way? I knew of one store that tried to be a bit less apparent. They had their various tops folded in miscellaneous piles on a display table, with a sign indicating they were all marked down, clearance items-but with no mention of price. Glancing through them, I noticed that the original prices were lined out and the new ones written in, but fairly unobtrusively. Since there didn’t appear to be rhyme or reason with their sizing or colors, a shopper just had to muddle through the heaps. I found a colored top (I don’t remember what color it was) and a black one, both the same style and size, but the colored one was discounted much more than the black one. Thinking there had been a mistake by whoever had done the re-pricing, I asked the sales girl which cost was correct, and she answered that they were both right. In a secretive tone, she said that “they” were going to price clothes differently, depending on what color was going fastest. In this case, since the owner figured black would be more in demand since it’s more on a year-round color, he was going to price it higher. It’s smart; it’s savvy, but it still rubs me just a bit the wrong way-how about you?