The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

New Look reviews clothing prices amid 'fat tax' row

After facing backlash, high street fashion chain New Look have stated it will be reviewing its prices after an outcry that some larger-sized clothes were more expensive than those in smaller sizes.

The High Street retailer said it was hoping to "ensure pricing differences like these" did not happen in future.

While some suggest plus size clothes require more fabric, many have pointed out that tall and maternity clothes aren't more expensive.

You can read more on the story here.

What do you make of this? Is it fair that larger sizes are more expensive? Have you ever experienced difference in costing for your clothes?

Scroll to see replies

Is that not just common sense? as a design student if something needs more material the cost of manufacture will go up it's common sense. Obviously larger sizes will cost more as they need more material to make, same with shoes, chairs, anything.
Reply 2
Avatar for 3121
3121
21
Fatter = bigger size, bigger size = more fabric and materials, more fabric and materials = higher costs. Why shouldn't those costs be passed directly onto the consumer rather than all consumers subsiding it through higher average prices across all sizes?

It would be unfair to tall people since being tall isn't a choice, as for maternity clothing - you can imagine the backlash they'd face if they were to discriminate. But someone has to cover these costs, I dont see a problem with those wanting bigger sizes paying more. If I want a Large Coke I gotta pay 50p more than If I wanted a regular.
(edited 5 years ago)
Original post by CoolCavy
Is that not just common sense? as a design student if something needs more material the cost of manufacture will go up it's common sense. Obviously larger sizes will cost more as they need more material to make, same with shoes, chairs, anything.


That's probably the case if you're an individual bespoke tailor like yourself, but brands like New Look can get bulk discounts on fabric etc. If using more fabric sent the price up that far, they'd also charge less for petite, more for tall and more for maternity.
Original post by Langerhan
That's probably the case if you're an individual bespoke tailor like yourself, but brands like New Look can get bulk discounts on fabric etc. If using more fabric sent the price up that far, they'd also charge less for petite, more for tall and more for maternity.


Im not an individual bespoke tailor lol.
It's not just the fabric it's the dies and everything that have to be changed when making multiple variations of the same product. It increases cost, idk why people are annoyed about spending more on something that is larger, if you had a larger cake or anything you would expect to pay more.
Reply 5
Avatar for Joleee
Joleee
19
i don't think retainers are dumb. i think they take the average cost of fabric (or above-average) to get their price point, so everyone pays 'average', meaning thinner women end up paying more for smaller clothing.

(btw this is not me complaining; just stating the obvious.)
Should be.
Reply 7
Avatar for ThomH97
ThomH97
21
Original post by Danny Dorito
After facing backlash, high street fashion chain New Look have stated it will be reviewing its prices after an outcry that some larger-sized clothes were more expensive than those in smaller sizes.

The High Street retailer said it was hoping to "ensure pricing differences like these" did not happen in future.

While some suggest plus size clothes require more fabric, many have pointed out that tall and maternity clothes aren't more expensive.

You can read more on the story here.

What do you make of this? Is it fair that larger sizes are more expensive? Have you ever experienced difference in costing for your clothes?


News just in: More stuff costs more money!

The other part of this is that there are enough fat people in Britain to pressure retailers into getting healthy people to subsidise their poor eating habits.

Regarding the 'tall' and maternity ranges not being more expensive, these tend to have less choice, so the margin for profit doesn't need to be as high. If you could convince everyone to buy one design only, then those black trousers wouldn't need to be priced very high.
Original post by CoolCavy
Im not an individual bespoke tailor lol.
It's not just the fabric it's the dies and everything that have to be changed when making multiple variations of the same product. It increases cost, idk why people are annoyed about spending more on something that is larger, if you had a larger cake or anything you would expect to pay more.


Haha well, you're a design student, so close enough!

However, capitalism works by charging what the companies think people will pay - not the raw cost of materials. If they were charging for materials and labour, clothes for shortarses like myself would be cheaper than clothes for tall people. Why aren't they?
Original post by Langerhan
Haha well, you're a design student, so close enough!

However, capitalism works by charging what the companies think people will pay - not the raw cost of materials. If they were charging for materials and labour, clothes for shortarses like myself would be cheaper than clothes for tall people. Why aren't they?


Not really there are loads of branches of design.
Well obviously people want a profit. I don't see what's wrong with that considering they have gone to the trouble of making it. Hey are going to raise the price on stuff that took more material to make otherwise their profit margin would be lower.
It's fair enough. Why should a skinny person have to subsidise the fat person?
Original post by CoolCavy
Is that not just common sense? as a design student if something needs more material the cost of manufacture will go up it's common sense. Obviously larger sizes will cost more as they need more material to make, same with shoes, chairs, anything.


Too ****ing right lmao. More material is more cost. Then more weight due to more material. Then greater average shipping cost due to greater weight. What these fat ****s want is for normal size people to bear this pseudo tax for them.

I can make the argument baby clothes are cheaper than adult clothes. Companies are engaging in ageism against me. I too will make a complaint 🙄
Original post by somemightsay888
Too ****ing right lmao. More material is more cost. Then more weight due to more material. Then greater average shipping cost due to greater weight. What these fat ****s want is for normal size people to bear this pseudo tax for them.

I can make the argument baby clothes are cheaper than adult clothes. Companies are engaging in ageism against me. I too will make a complaint 🙄


That is true, didn't think about the weight of transportation, larger stuff also costs more to store cos space is money in a warehouse. Thing is I'm not thin, I don't agree with the other posts people have made that being fat is necessarily a choice, a lot of medical things have contributed to my pudginess and is not like I haven't tried to lose weight, however I don't expect larger clothes to be the same price as smaller clothes, is just common sense that more stuff = more money
More money spent on clothes means less money to spend on food.

So it's great for fatties that wish to lose weight. Sadly most have no genuine desire to slim down.
I often see XXL clothing with higher prices. This isn't news to me. It would makes sense, as a varient of an item of clothing twice the size of a regular would cost a little extra due to it using more fabric and dye, taking longer to stitch, being bulkier, etc. "Tall" varients just have an extra couple of inches of fabric. We pay for bigger things all the time. Fatties are happy to pay more to supersize their burgers, so they should accept having to pay more to supersize their clothing too
Original post by CoolCavy
That is true, didn't think about the weight of transportation, larger stuff also costs more to store cos space is money in a warehouse. Thing is I'm not thin, I don't agree with the other posts people have made that being fat is necessarily a choice, a lot of medical things have contributed to my pudginess and is not like I haven't tried to lose weight, however I don't expect larger clothes to be the same price as smaller clothes, is just common sense that more stuff = more money


Yeah, I agree there are external contributing factors. No doubt. Hopefully you're still plugging away and that 🙂 I do feel though the woman complaining is not one who has any medical issue. She's just fat, cheap and entitled. Also, New Look are in financial trouble, so I doubt they have any room to move with this. Lower the price and you're making small margins. Increase the price of normal sizes and they'll head towards administration.
Reply 16
Avatar for 8472
8472
21
The main cost of clothing comes in the stitching. As such that's why children's clothing is often expensive because it requires more intricate skilled stitching. XL and beyond require more of the same type as other adult clothing has. As such should be more expensive (in addition to extra materials, transport and space used).. I have larger feet than a women so expect my 3-4 size bigger shoes to cost more. The government doesn't subsidize people who are 6"5'+ with money so they can eat the higher calorie amount they need... so why should clothing be the same cost. As long as stores aren't exploring a price increase by size shifting.. it's fine to price larger items more.
Well it’s bigger so surely costs more to make?
Original post by CoolCavy
Is that not just common sense? as a design student if something needs more material the cost of manufacture will go up it's common sense. Obviously larger sizes will cost more as they need more material to make, same with shoes, chairs, anything.


Well not really. If you go swimming for 20 minutes, you pay the same as someone who swims for an hour. If you dine in a restaurant but only eat half of your dish, you don't pay less. If you hire a car, but return it a day early, you don't pay less. It may well sound like common sense, but since when was it common sense to discriminate against a third of your potential market?
Original post by ByEeek
Well not really. If you go swimming for 20 minutes, you pay the same as someone who swims for an hour. If you dine in a restaurant but only eat half of your dish, you don't pay less. If you hire a car, but return it a day early, you don't pay less. It may well sound like common sense, but since when was it common sense to discriminate against a third of your potential market?


That's not really the same since if i ordered dinner and didnt eat it all its still the same amount of dinner ordered as someone who did. Same with a car its still the same car regarldless of how long you use it for. With clothes they are different sizes/shapes it's not the same product.

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you