Labels on Fashion Clothing

No, Amber you cannot list the item. It must have a label.

I have to head on out the door but we can continue the discussion tomorrow.

Carol

 

That's too bad Carol. You just cut a huge percentage of beautifully manufactured garments sold in the 50's and 60's out of the picture.

 

Hi Carol--late to this thread, but I've been a RL dealer for several years.

I've always admired RL's determination to maintain high standards, and, in the vintage clothing offerings, to really try to keep non-vintage stuff off the site. But...

Your policy as stated really has some elements that strike me as incredibly wrongheaded...

If you insist that something originally sold with a paper tag still be sold with that tag, you are essentially requiring vintage clothing to either be labelled or deadstock. That puts unrealistic constraints on your sellers (vintage labels are quaint, often quirky, and fun in and of themselves, and deadstock is great to find, but both are only a fraction of what's out there). And it also drastically curtails the shopping opportunities for RL customers, who will have to go elsewhere to find the full range of wonderful vintage clothing available to them at this point in time--just as they have to go elsewhere for their vintage swimsuits... ';)

If you insist that only labelled or hangtagged post 1945 clothing can be proved authentically vintage, despite the ability of every dealer in the VFG to point out telltale characteristics of construction, style, etc that help to date vintage clothing--even without the benefit of consulting the hundreds of label examples in the VFG Label Resource--then why don't you impose the same constraints on post 1945 costume jewelry, which often does not bear a manufacturer mark and must be IDed/dated through dealer expertise rather than through what's been stamped on a cartouche? (Also, to extend the analogy, just as labels originally present on vintage clothing detach or fade, so too manufacturer imprints on vintage costume jewelry can become so worn they're just about illegible--but that doesn't make them unlistable on RL's jewelry lane).

How does one distinguish a vintage 50s rhinestone pin from a contemporary Made in China piece of junk, without benefit of a maker's mark to guide them? Well, even though a buyer unfamiliar with vintage jewelry may be stumped, it's not really a very tough call at all for an experienced dealer. And you seem to accept that fact in your vintage jewelry listing policy. In fact, you even have an article detailing how to correctly ID Delizza & Elster jewelry--which was originally sold only with a hangtag. Why not announce that D & E jewelry can't be sold on RL unless it retains the original hangtag? Well... because there's a ton of gorgeous D & E jewelry out there, almost none of it with the original hangtag, and you know that you would only be hurting your sellers, your customers, and your site by needlessly restricting its sale.

Same thing here. You're not protecting customers, you're depriving them, ensuring that they'll have to shop elsewhere. And you're irritating and alienating some of your most knowledgable, experienced, and ethical vintage clothing dealers as well, so that they feel they must sell elsewhere. Why on earth would you want to do that?

I really hope you'll find a way to incorporate the ton of excellent advice/feedback/info you have gotten from VFG members on this thread into your policy, before RL is irreparably hurt...

 

Thank you Carol for coming back and reporting what you are able to.
I appreciate it. I am not a member of the VFG as I am a general dealer and think like one.
A main problem I see with this to be honest is time.
Time will eventually force a change in this policy.
People want mainly what they played with, saw, wore, etc. on their mom, aunt etc. Clothes, toys etc.
1. Eventually pre 1945 clothing will wear out or be extremely rare with these guidelines I would expect.
2. Limited customer base for this time period.
Supply and demand.

Thank you again for your time. I would be more than willing to run items through the vintage experts here and on RL.

 

Carol, can you please tell me why all the labeled "vintage" Chanel clothing items currently listed on Ruby Lane were produced in 2000 and sooner? Chanel garments have very specific and easily read date and collection codes on their labels so there is no question about their age. This is a chronic problem on Ruby Lane --- not only with Chanel items, but many "vintage" designer accessories which are either date coded or collection specific. In the past, I have flagged these items until I am blue in the face without results. I would appreciate some attention to and consistency in Ruby Lane's policy in that arena as well.

 

Hello,

I wanted to add my opinion to this thread, although I am not a Ruby Lane seller. I agree with what many of the other VFG members have posted here, and I feel the Ruby Lane rules about labels on garments after 1945 are hurting the sellers, and RL itself. There is a vast sea of wonderful high quality vintage out there, and none of it will wind up on the RL site as a result of this rule. May I add 1 more thing?

Because of this rule, I will not be a Ruby Lane seller, and I surely would like to be. My specialty is hats and millinery and I have been doing this for over 30 years. Believe me, many of the finest and best vintage post 1945 hats I have ever seen, and which have fetched incredible high prices for me, have not had a label. So, I am unable to sell on Ruby Lane. As a millinery historian, I can tell a new hat from a vintage hat just by looking at a photo and seeing the materials, trims, style and workmanship. I know the same applies to clothing. Seasoned buyers can tell if a dress or hat is 1951 and not 1980 "doing the 50s".

Also, do the buyers know they are not getting the best that the Ruby Lane sellers have to offer? Are the buyers aware of this rule? I would think they, the customers of RL have a right to know and to voice their opinon as well.

Just my thoughts. If you ever change the rule, I will be first in line to open a hat shop on ruby Lane.

Thank you for allowing me to voice my opinion.

Sincerely, Barbara Troeller
Rue de la Paix

 

hello carol,

i'm glad you came back to continue this important discussion.

i too am baffled by ruby lane's decision. i've been collecting and wearing vintage clothing & accessories since the late 60s, and have been a dealer for over 10 years. many of the items in my own personal collection over that period of time, as well as many i've sold, have been post-1945, with no labels - many of them have been choice items, and have sold for well over the $100 mark. i will tell you frankly that this restriction would prevent me from opening a shop on ruby lane.

i don't understand why ruby lane is placing the entire onus of whether or not an item is vintage or not - or its value - on the presence of a label. as others have said, there are many other ways to tell if a garment is vintage or not, and from which decade, other than the label.

i agree that vintage clothing & accessories on ruby lane are being subjected to restrictions other items on the site are not. as a long-time devotee of vintage clothing, this strikes all of us as a very strange thing to do. i don't understand why ruby lane is not understanding just how strange this restriction is.

one last thing, can you please explain what this means?

this is very confusing. you've already stated an item must be 20+ years old to be listed in the vintage clothing & accessories lane. also, why specify available for retail purchase in the past year?

 

I have contacted Carol and she has stated she is going to try to come back to this thread tomorrow. She is quite swamped at the moment.
In advance I thank her for any information or help she can offer.
Sandy

 

I've been wanting to ask this question and so finally will. What is significant about 1945? How did this become the cut off date? And why? Many thanks.

 

1945 is a standard for some Antique Shows in the real world traditionally and for cars, guns, jewelry at some. 1970s is now accepted at most. Perhaps this is where RL is getting it from? Some little old ladies see (or used to see) the 1960s or 1970s stuff traditionally and think well I have this in my closet at home. The collecting of vintage clothing may be huge on this site but it is still not seen as a huge category. Still in its infancy IMHO. I practically got ran out of a show once as the only one showing vintage clothing. Many brick and mortar malls will not even carry vintage clothing. Some hats or purses perhaps. Certain areas of the map or location of course determines this and as popularity grows hopefully this will change. It really is the one area mall owners in real world from my experience hesitate on.
As RL has been around for a long time possibly this is the thinking. Just thinking out loud and IMHO.
Good ?

 

I'm still not understanding Foofoo -- which standard? Antiques? Wouldn't experienced show dealers abide by the 100 year 'import law' rule of thumb?

I've been following this discussion with interest -- and intrigued by the chosen point of focus (the label). An apple has a stem, and it's only one component. If it's missing it's stem, is it no longer an apple?

 

Ah, thank you Anne. I understand the idea behind the position now -- you explained it very well.

 

Fifth, traditional antiques—those that dominated the 1990s and early 2000s mall and show circuit—continue to disappear. The percentage of post-1945 material grows. Much of this merchandise falls outside categories appearing in antiques and collectibles price guides. Nostalgic and decorative focused material is king.
------------
This is a quote from Harry Rinker but it is a standard or norm in the general antiques field.
Vintage clothing is still a newer category as a whole to the antiques field. I again am and think as an antiques dealer. As an exclusive dealer on RL this is important to me as it limits me in this category. Odd as to me as it is just another category and should be held to the quality control as any category.
I would not knowingly dream of selling glass, pottery or clothing less than vintage.------and yes true Antiques are 100 years old with exception of autos.

 

Hi everyone,
I apologize for not being here to answer your questions. Let me read through the posts and I will reply to each one that requires a response.
Carol

 

No, I think it is comparing apple with oranges. Nasty clothing is totally different than a cracked cookie jar.

I want everyone to keep in mind I am not 'Ruby Lane' and I don't make policy or guideline decisions. I can only help you to interpret the guidelines, voice my opinion from a shop owners perspective when it is called for, and to assist you or anyone else selling online by providing tips on selling and marketing their goods. I work for the RL Marketing Department and my responsibilities primarily deal with Social Media. I am an editor, writer and take care of social marketing which includes discussions on forums. I am here to help you.

Carol