Whenever I post a link to a suit or sport coat, many people respond in shock bc of the price. Let's break down why tailored clothing costs so much money. 🧵
For this, I'm going to assume that the suit was made in the United States, largely because I'm relying on information given to me by a friend who works at a high level in the US suit manufacturing industry. These are simplified numbers but are generally reflective of reality.
The first thing to understand is that suits and sport coats are not made like casualwear. They are built up from many layers of haircloth, canvassing, and padding, which are carefully sewn together using either specialized machines or human hands (needle and thread)
Let's break down the cost of making a suit.
A garment worker at a US suit factory makes about $15/hr. The total number of minutes spent on making that suit (in terms of actual operations) will be about 260 mins.
The factory also has to pay for worker benefits, which, spread across the total production, adds about $23 per suit. And then there's the cost of overhead (e.g., warehousing, administration, etc.). That adds an additional $26 per suit.
So now we have spent $114.
There is also the cost of materials. A factory may spend about $30/meter for fabric. They need 3.5 meters to make a suit, which brings the price per suit to $105. Now add $30 worth of trims (haircloth, padding, canvas, buttons, and such).
So now we have a total cost of $249.
$249 is how much it costs the factory to make a suit. To make a profit, they do a gross margin markup of 40%. That means they sell it to a brand for $415. The brand has to pay for a bunch of other expenses (e.g., marketing, administration, etc).
The brand also has to make a profit. So they sell the suit to a store at a gross margin markup of 60%. (This store, too, has its own expenses, such as sales staff, warehousing, marketing, etc.).
Now, we have a retail price of $1,037.
The above is a rough sketch of what it would cost to make a fully machine-made, fully canvassed suit in the United States. The price could go up on a host of factors. The factory could spend more on nicer fabric. Or they can include some hand-tailoring details.
Alternatively, the price can go down. The suit could be made in China, where the avg garment worker in a suit factory makes just under $4/hr. They could buy cheaper fabric. Or they can do a fully fused or half-canvassed construction, which may be less durable or not hang as well.
One of the ways to cut costs is in the patternmaking stage. Remember, a suit is made from many layers of material. Each of these layers has to be cut according to a pattern, which is a term for the architectural blueprint for the garment.
If a factory is taking the time and care to make a good suit, they will draft the pattern a little larger than what they need, then lay those internal pieces—haircloth, canvas, padding—on and carefully stitch. Then, they trim away the excess material—trim, adjust, trim, adjust.
However, if they're trying to cut costs, the components of the suit are cut exactly as they're supposed to be, laid on top of each other, and just sewn. There is no trimming or basting, you just sew everything together and hope for the best.
The problem is, cloth moves and linings shift. So things, sometimes, these lower-end garments don't come out quite right. Everyone along the stage is trying to maximize money, so the garment goes out to the sales floor as-is, and you hope a customer doesn't notice.
However, even at the lowest level—garment made in China, cheaper fabrics (but still natural fibers), fully fused or half-canvassed construction, no trimming or adjusting during the manufacturing process, etc.—you are looking at a retail price of about $500.
So, the answer to the original question: Why are suits expensive? They are more complicated to make than casualwear. They often require more expensive fabrics. If they are made in the UK, Italy, or the US, there are wage and labor laws.
There are many ways to look good; you don't have to buy tailored clothing. But tailoring is a beautiful thing, and the price paid goes towards supporting workers who are skilled in a special area of manufacturing. You can also end up with a garment you love and look good in.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The first and most obvious is that taste is a social construct shaped by forces such as cultural and financial capital. As Pierre Bourdieu pointed out in his book Distinction, our notions of "Good Taste" is often nothing more than the preferences and habits of the ruling class.
In this sense, judgements of taste tend to be path dependent. Dress shirts are considered to be in "good taste" when they're white or light blue for no other reason than the fact that's what elites wore. Black dress shirts are associated with the lower, sometimes criminal classes
Like a lot of stuff in classic men's dress, the rule of "no white after Labor Day" is rooted in class dynamics during the early 20th century. Many questions can be answered by "what is the aesthetic?" and "who set the rules?" 🧵
During the early 20th century, men's dress was governed by TPO (time, place, and occasion). In England, where we get many of our rules, men did business in London while wearing navy suits and black oxfords. But when in the country, they wore brown tweeds and grained derbies.
This is where we get the rule "no brown in town." The idea was that you were not supposed to wear brown tweeds and brown grained derbies while doing business in London (a rule that held pretty firmly until relatively recently, at least for sectors like finance).
When people think of menswear crafted with a high-degree of workmanship, they think of places such as France, Italy, and the UK. Some may think of Japan. But few will think of India, even though some of the most incredible workmanship is happening there now. Let me show you. 🧵
This thread starts with a premise: quality workmanship speaks for itself regardless of where it's done. Often, people's view of "quality" is colored by where a garment was made. Robert Schooler showed this in a 1965 paper published in Journal of Marketing Research.
As you read this thread, I want you to keep in mind the stories you may have read about European craftsmanship. These stories inspire awe because they're about skilled labor and dedication to one's trade. We should be in no less awe when the same craft happens in India.
The first person who comes to mind is Yashwant Rao Holkar II (full name Maharajadhiraj Raj Rajeshwar Sawai Shri Sir Yeshwant Rao II Holkar XIV Bahadur), who was the Maharaja of Indore. He occasionally wore beautiful garb that I can only assume is traditional to Indian culture.
Unfortunately, I don't know much about non-Western forms of dress, so I can only speak to the Western forms of attire that he wore. Here he is in white tie. Everything here is impeccably tailored—collar hugs neck, no divots, perfect peak lapel and gorge.
I understand the sentiment, but respectfully disagree. I don't think dress codes do much to improve aesthetics, largely because they don't change what has caused a decline in aesthetics. It is not about lack of personal pride but rather shifts in our commercial system. 🧵
First, I should say at the outset that I don't think dress reflects someone's deeper, more important qualities. Coaches will not coach better if they wear a suit. So for me, this is fundamentally just about aesthetics.
Let's review some coach outfits through the years.
Apologies if I get some of these wrong—I'm not an expert on basketball history. I pulled these photos from searching "basketball coach [decade]." So I'm counting that these are mostly correct.
Have you ever felt a film scene was particularly memorable or beautiful? To be sure, much of this is about cinematography and acting, but I want to show how outfits also contribute to this impression. Hopefully, this thread will give you some ideas on how to dress better. 🧵
Fit and silhouette are the two most important qualities of any outfit. Even when Vittorio De Sica portrayed this poor family searching for a stolen bike in post-war Italy, the dad looked great bc the coat broadened his shoulders and flowed over his hips. The son also wore layers.
We see this same effect in The Linguini Incident (1991). In this scene, there is barely any color aside from the cotton candy. Yet, all the outfits are beautiful bc they turn the ppl into shapes. The hats, scarves, and outerwear give the people distinctive silhouettes.