Dupe mania is in overdrive as consumers continue to seek out affordable versions of expensive cosmetics, apparel, footwear, handbags, jewelry, and other goods. One need not look further than the success of companies like Quince, which offers up a selection of “inexpensive expensive things,” such as Jenni Kayne-esque sweaters, boots that mirror those from Ugg, bags that are dead-ringers for Bottega Veneta’s, and footwear that riffs on those hot-selling Ganni buckled ballerina flats, etc. Quince’s recent raise of $120 million in a Series C funding round is a clear indication of the success of the San Francisco-based company’s model and the steadfast demand for its dupes.
The signs that dupes – or products that replicate the look of high(er)-priced goods sans any legally-protectable elements – are surging in popularity are not limited to the growth of Quince and similarly-situated companies, of course. Consider, for example, the upward momentum of searches for the word “dupe,” according to Google data, which suggests that consumers across the globe are increasingly looking for alternatives to more costly goods.
At the same time, there are additional factors that make for a perfect storm for dupes. Economic uncertainties in key luxury markets are worth noting, as they are causing consumers, particularly younger generations, to exercise caution about discretionary purchases and de-prioritize luxury goods purchases. Beyond that, there are the enduring price increases being implemented in the luxury segment, which are, in some cases, being met with consumer complaints about how the price increases are not being met with a corresponding increase in product quality.
Still yet, there is the undeniable backlash that some luxury companies have received in response to reports about the “particularly disadvantageous working conditions” in which their “luxury” goods are being made; Armani and Dior have made headlines on this front.
But there may be more at play when it comes to consumers’ unwavering appetite for dupes than pure economics; for a long time, companies’ trademarks and the goodwill embedded in those marks is what drew in consumers and prompted them to pay a premium for luxury products (and to be fair, that is still the case for many shoppers). However, how do we reconcile consumers’ well-established penchant for luxury logos (and other indicators of source) with the hold that dupes have on a growing pool of shoppers, particularly those in younger demographics?
The Lowdown on Luxury Heritage
The reality may be that luxury brands’ heritage – which has been heavily instilled in and communicated via their trademarks – is not all that important to younger cohorts of dupe-seeking consumers. “In the luxury market, where consumers value authenticity, heritage provides a brand with a sense of genuineness that is otherwise hard to replicate,” Borro by Luxury Asset Capital’s Richard Shults stated in a note this summer. “By emphasizing tradition and history, luxury brands can create a sense of exclusivity and prestige, making them desirable to the discerning consumers.” In other words, “Heritage is an inextricable part of a luxury brand’s identity. It sets the brand apart from its competitors and helps in crafting a unique brand narrative.”
Shults elaborates, “A brand’s heritage is reflected in various aspects of its identity – its logo, its product design, its marketing communications, and even in its business philosophy. This consistent reflection of heritage across all aspects of a brand helps to create a strong, cohesive, and recognizable brand identity” – and robust pricing power as a result.
While heritage has long proven a valuable selling point for luxury goods brands, it may not be as strong a driver for younger consumers as it once was. Brand protection leaders at luxury goods companies, including Louis Vuitton, Moët Hennessy, Ralph Lauren, and Moncler, appear to have indicated as much in connection with a recent study of the counterfeit market. “These managers confirmed that most of their customers have low knowledge in the domain of fashion and high-end luxury goods. They are aware only of the prestige of the brands they are purchasing and are not real connoisseurs of the brands’ history, heritage, and craftsmanship,” Ludovica Cesareo, assistant professor of marketing in the Lehigh University College of Business, asserted.
This could be a risky reality for luxury brands when it comes to demand for counterfeit goods and dupes, alike, particularly as companies’ histories and heritage have been touted as critical aspects that “cannot be copied” and as things that will potentially enable them to differentiate themselves from – and fend off – the unending supply of counterfeit goods.
A Lack of Loyalty
Another critical element in this equation is brand loyalty – and the potential lack of it. “Gen-Zers are fickle, flippant, [and] less loyal to brands than their Gen Y counterparts,” according to Canvas8, a consumer insights consultancy. As such, “Much of the anxiety around marketing” – and selling – “to Gen-Zers is that their consumption habits reveal a complete lack of loyalty – they are 22 percent more likely to say they have stopped following a brand online in the past month.” This presents “a number of challenges for luxury brands,” including a shakier relationship with these consumers many of whom are shopping for/participating in the look of a product, as opposed to shopping based on a sense of connection with the brand behind the product.
> Put another way, these consumers are happy to trade a logo (and the values that come with and are communicated via that branding) for a better deal assuming they are getting the same general look and feel of a product – and there is no well-established loyalty to a brand to hold them back.
This may be because younger consumers have grown up in a competitive market that is so thoroughly inundated with brands; consider the arguments to this effect put forth by Tapestry and Capri in an effort to save their merger. It may also be the result of an influx of information about the workings of brands – and their corporatization by conglomerates, making it so that consumers do not “feel badly” getting a deal on a copycat product.
The bottom line of all of this? Heritage marketing and the appeal of source indicators may have carried companies for decades and do still work to a meaningful extent. But in a fluid market, where consumers are less willing to be loyal to companies, there is also room for dupes to thrive.
TLDR: The rise of dupes across the board suggests that consumers might not care so much about heritage, which could be a risky reality for luxury brands.
Share
