Dresses - help dating, pricing etc. ?????

  • Thread starter Thread starter seven****
  • Start date Start date
S

seven****

Guest
Hi Everyone,
I was senior-sitting my 100 year old buddy almost 24/7 for the last while and I'm just starting to get some pictures done (and I'm sure I'll have more questions in the coming days/weeks). I think these two dresses are early sixties, but your thoughts on this et al will be greatly appreciated.
The beige cotton tea flower dress with puff pouch (Murray Bowen & Co., Mtl) has me stumped as far as how it would have been tied at the back. I've given the url at the bottom where you can see all the variations I've tried. At the bottom of the spagetti straps at the back it has two loops; so I'm assuming they were meant to thread the halter-ties in some fashion. (Belt did not come with dress, it should probably have rectangle buckle).
The pink/fushia Cole of California seems to have been repaired at the back and I'm wondering if that is how those flaps should look at the back - they are only sewn at the zipper which is probably where they should be sewn, but they just don't seem to fall properly.
What would be reasonable reserves or starting bids or BIN's. I haven't a clue. I only know I am emotionally attached to the Cole of Califorinia dress and therefore would probably charge far too much!

As always, thanks!

Deborah

<a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d30/alamov/dresses/Dresses-01.jpg" border="0" alt="Image hosting by Photobucket"></a><a href="http://photobucket.com" target="_blank"><img src="http://i32.photobucket.com/albums/d30/alamov/dresses/Dresses-12.jpg" border="0" alt="Image hosting by Photobucket"></a>

Other pics may be found at:
http://photobucket.com/albums/d30/alamov/dresses/
 
Wow - two very lovely dresses! I have no definite answer as to how the Murray Bowen dress should be tied, but I do like the ties as a halter hanging straight around the back of the neck, and also the criss cross effect. I'd probably show those two as examples, and make a deal of it being adjustable to suit!

As to pricing, I was discussing this last night. I've not sold at a fixed price for quite literally years, as I've become so used to auction formats. After sitting and pricing up accessories for 3 hours yesterday I have finally got a kind of price structure in place that I can refer to now.. but I haven't got to dresses yet and am dreading doing them! as with the Cole of California one, I am usually tempted to auction things with repairs/flaws as you may end up with more than you would have felt comfortable asking for at fixed price.

I know full well (as you say) that if I am attached to something I will very possibly price it slightly higher than another garment of - on paper - equal merit, on the grounds that I don't want to turn around after it's sold and think 'actually I'd rather have kept it than received x amount of cash!'. I do wish sometimes that I didn't feel quite so personal about my dresses (I would have no trouble pricing up garden tools, or car parts for example!) as it would make selling them on so much easier. Usually an almighty utility bill helps cut some ties for me, but even then it's hard!

Sorry - what a ramble. No help at all and I've failed to clean the kitchen! I'm sure someone more structured and organised than me will be along shortly to offer more sage advice ;)
 
I love the ties criss-crossed on the first one! But wonder if they are supposed to be loosely looped or knotted up once threaded thru the loops? Can't describe what I mean--it's like the way scarves or midriff tops in teh 50's were tied, then the scarf ends left wide at the bottom. I don't mean tie them together.... I'm probably not making sense!

The fuschia--could the back have been ruched at one time, then the zipper replaced or pulled out & restitched, & the gathers not stitched back in? Something isn't right there, but hard to tell what! Looks like too much fabric with some kind of construction detail missing!

Have no idea what to price at--I've been so hit or miss lately! But I had a sundress of about the same age as the top one last year, started it at $24.99 and if I remember, sold around $45. But it was a "no name" & yours is branded. Depends on size, too. .. To me, the first is more unusual, thus I would pay more for it, but really, who knows? Depends on who sees it, what they're looking for, and how much they want it! The longer I do this, and the more comfortable I get with my starting prices, the less sure I am of what things will actually end up selling for!
 
Thanks for all your input Harriet & Anne.

"Sorry - what a ramble. No help at all and I've failed to clean the kitchen!" - that made my morning and a mouth full of coffee nearly splattered my computer screen!!!

Am I in the ballpark with early 60s? Keep in mind the mannequin is 5'10" and these were worn by a short woman and would have ended up mid-calf or below. In fact I have a long length of about 3" wide of extra material from the beige tea-rose one (ie, the owner hemmed) and whoever buys it could easily add 2" to the length with the current hem allowance of 2-3/4".
The Cole of California label is like the one in label thread that says 50s - so could this one be late 50's?
I dunno...

Thanks
TTFN

Deborah

PS - It the kitchen clean?
 
Actually, Deborah, though I'm not real good at dating, I'd have put the top one at 50's--the print and the skirt style (along with the little pouch pocket) all look 50s to me. The bottom looks 60's (though I haven't checked the label resource on Cole). I had, and have seen quite a few of those print dresses with the "bathing suit" look bodice, and they have mostly been from the mid 60's. What fabric is it? From the photos it looks nylon?

Oh, BTW, what size is the top one? I am short & am always looking for vintage dresses that have been hemmed up! I usually cannot wear them at their "supposed-to-be" length!
 
Thanks, Anne!

The Cole is either cotton or cotton/poly blend. The body of the dress seems to have been treated to make the fabric shimmery, but the floating panels have not been treated, they're light and breezy and almost transparent. I don't know enough yet, but there were two reasons why I thought it may be late 50's - the treatment of the bust area and the floral pattern - I seem to remember a dress I had with that type of floral design when I was very little. But I'll trust your better judgement.

The first one is a 36" bust - 33" snug right underneath the breasts and a good three inches - or a C cup for the breasts. The waist is 32" snug. I'll have to check what that is close to today - 14/16?

Thanks again!

Deborah
 
Alas, the first one is too small in the bust....

The Cole could be 50's, with that glazed or polished cotton. I honestly don't know. If it was a nylon or acetate knit, I'd be pretty sure of 60's, but I think polished cotton and glazed cotton chintz could indeed be 50's! So, back to square one, I'm afraid! Whatever its age, it's lovely!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top