I think the bra's at Victoria Secret are overrated - yes, they're pretty, but they're not all that welll designed.
Every pair of calvin kline underwear I've ever owned somehow dismantled.
I bought shoes at Aldos and my feet got messed up!
etc....please share.
2007-01-11 13:27:44 · 16 answers · asked by Krysta 2 in Beauty & Style ➔ Fashion & Accessories
victoria's secret is definitely way over rated!!! it is nice, but too expensive. we all know they are pulling in the profit on every purchase...
i HATE aeropostale. their clothes fall apart... and wash up terribly...
i agree upon the sheer ugliness of tommy hilfiger... and i am going to be slammed on this one, but i think coach & dooney & bourke purses are hideous as well.
by the way, shop echo, south pole, etc at macy's-- they have some great deals on their clearance racks for kids & young men. i got an echo button-up shirt for my hubby for $6 the other day... yeah...
2007-01-11 13:32:16 · answer #1 · answered by christy 6 · 6⤊ 0⤋
Great question! I agree with VS being overrated. I have to add American Eagle to the mix. I've found 'some' cute items there but the majority of their clothing looks like something I pulled out of a dusty attic (faded ripped and shapeless).
2007-01-11 13:38:48 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i recognize its likely a cliche element to assert, yet bypass to Harajuku. heavily i have been right here for 3 months. issues there are more low-cost, you are able to likely mix up your style in case you're for it. There are branch shops around the substantial street. And each thing isn't frilly lolita or gothic goth. There are some "widespread" outfits there to boot. someone suggested Shibuya 109, that's a good shop to bypass to yet you're wallet will pay the cost. in the Shibuya section close to 109 is likewise OIOI JAM (enunciated 'maru-e, maru-e), its a mall with astounding admired outfits to boot. I also advise roaming around the sidestreets of Shibuya because there are hidden boutiques and different clothings shops. have relaxing!
2016-10-30 21:12:12 · answer #3 · answered by canevazzi 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Most of the high fashion pieces seen in magazines are ugly to me. Being a poor college student I find cute clothes at Walmart, Catos, Old Navy (clearance), Value City, and AJ Wright.
2007-01-11 14:00:29 · answer #4 · answered by CharW 1 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I agree that Victoria Secrets isn't all that great...I can by a look-a-like at Kohls on sale. Also I think DKNY, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger aren't all that great. They never seem to change their styles...
2007-01-11 13:35:43 · answer #5 · answered by L.M.L 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
7 jeans. i paid 97 dollars for a pair at christmas, and they riped! there was like small distress marks on them and i caught on on something and pulled a 3 inch tear in them.
also i think people pay too much for logos. it seems like every actor actress rapper and everyone has their own clothing line. my brother wanted some shirt for his birthday i forget who it was make by, maybe 50 cent or someone, and it was like 69 bucks! for a white shirt with a small logo on the back
2007-01-11 13:32:53 · answer #6 · answered by amana5 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The tee shirts at American egle are way cheap. They rip soooo easily. I have two shirts from there that got holes in them after only a couple of months and I didn't even catch it on anything :(
2007-01-11 13:36:22 · answer #7 · answered by love2figureskate 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Lip Service.
2007-01-11 13:35:23 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
i agree with victoria secret bras and there panties too....Way too much for the quality of them. I also think south pole is pretty overrated even though my son loves it...I just think the prices are too overrated for it.
2007-01-11 13:32:48 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 0⤋
i agree w/ camille m: uggs suck!
and:
-american eagle clothes rip too easily (my friend has a shirt from there that has 16 holes in it)
-abercrombie is too expensive and i am so not a follower (everyone wears abercrombie @ my school)
2007-01-11 13:52:00 · answer #10 · answered by jelly_donut_ninja 2 · 2⤊ 0⤋