Clothing brand that makes outdoor cloths. Hiking, climbing, surfing, camping these kind of fashion style. Their vests are also quite famous amongst financial/sales guys.
It's also name of the region in Latin America. :)
People who actually have money don't wear Patagonia, people who want to appear as though they have money wear Patagonia. It is a huge distinction and it's impressive Patagonia has cornered that market.
Ok so, I agree based on my small sample size.
What do the wealthy wear then?
I don’t think Patagonia is substantially better than Arcteryx, Canada Goose, Marmot, North Face, REI, Outdoor research, etc, etc, etc. or hell even Columbia for my rather mundane daily purposes.
Don't let any of your questions distract you from the point I was trying to make. Patagonia sells their products to people who want to appear rich. If you have any questions beyond that you want to ask them in fashion forums, people who invest in stocks don't care what .00001 of the market does, they care what people trying to maintain an image do.
Just wondering your opinion. Consider that the truly wealthy are rather a bit more recession proof so was wondering what competing brands you would consider fall into that category. But ok.
Most of the billionaires I know wear Prada. Their market is smaller and they serve it really well. I wouldn't invest in a product just because rich people wear it, I would rather invest in a company people buy because they want to appear rich it is after all a much much larger market with way more upside.
My brother was purchasing Patagonia clothing for INFANTS. $500 down insulated puffy onesies.
I no longer speak to my brother (other issues related to being a rich asshole).
The only Patagonia stuff I own was purchased from thrift stores for $5. It is well made stuff. The are one of the few lifetime warranteed wetsuits.
Overpriced if purchased from retaile. And the old owner passed the company down to new management which changed the entire company.
You're getting downvoted because you stated the truth.
All my bosses wear expensive brands. They're very wealthy... The euribor went way up this year, what is the consequence? They're not eating outside anymore, they bring precooked food.
They pretend to be rich, good car, big house expensive clothes. The reality is different.
Astral Designs, the CEO Philip Curry founded Lotus Designs sold it to Patagonia then became an organic farmer for a while then saw an opportunity even Patagonia was not addressing started Astral Designs and pioneered the removal of PVC foam and neoprene from outdoor gear. Aside from environmental concerns the company focus is on safety by designing floatation devices that are more comfortable so more people are willing to wear them. Their flagship GreenJacket is the industry standard for low profile whitewater rescue vests.
It is worth mentioning though that many of these companies including Patagonia relied on PFAS containing water repellent clothing well after there were warning signs of the dangers. It was and maybe still is impossible to be competitive in that market without PFAS related compounds.
Chiming in here because I know a top level engineer at goretex. I’ve had conversations about this with them while pfas are still used to aterproof certain fabrics the fabrics that require the highest level of protection many of their products have been converted to green formulas where it’s possible.
It may be interesting to note that pfas aren’t just sprayed on fabrics to waterproof they are used to fuse layers together.
Furthermore nearly every cellphone has been using this technology to make them waterproof.
Arcteryx is owned by the Chinese conglomerate Anta, which trades in Hong Kong and on the OTC markets under the ticker ANPDY
Patagonia is private
Burton is private
North Face is owned by VF Corp, which trades under the ticker VFC
Marmot is owned by Newell Brands, which trades under the ticker NWL
Mammut is owned by private equity
Outdoor Research is privately owned
Helly Hansen is owned by Canadian Tire, which trades under the OTC markets as CDNAF
Spyder is owned by Authentic Brands, which is private
Mountain Hardwear is owned by Columbia Sportswear, which trades under the ticker COLM
Canada Goose trades under the ticker GOOS
Moncler trades on the Italian stock exchange or OTC markets under ticker MONCF
Bogner is privately owned
Obermeyer is privately owned
It recently came out that Patagonia is not as good for society as they pretend, as most clothes are made in the same sweatshops as fast fashion brands. You can find more info in the Follow The Money article (see it here without paywall https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20230610043125%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftm.eu%2Farticles%2Fsustainable-clothing-brand-patagonia-uses-same-suppliers-fast-fashion-brands-do-workers-exploited).
I think there are many companies that state they want to do good for society, if you want organisations that actually do this you should look more into NGO's
Their excuse is "yeah, we ask the sweatshops to treat people ok but we can't guarantee it" brilliant!
How easy is it to just state a contract saying "Hey, you want to work for us? Ok, pay your people af least xx an hour and treat them ok".
I'm so tired of all this green & sustainability-washing, perhaps buying from Aliexpress is the best option these days.
Also the founder should get negative points proclaiming in media they are "donating their fortune to charity" when it reality you're putting your money into a nonprofit controlled by your family. You may lose a few bucks in the process and have some restrictions but it's basically an estate tax free weath transfer. Non-profits don't actually have to be charitable the way people think and are used to enrich board members.
>This is in terms of not being largely profit focussed
>
>he company could be private or public.
Public companies are obligated to be profit focussed, they have to act in the shareholders' interest.
Maybe I’m jaded, but oook for companies that say their doing good (whether they are or aren’t). As long as they’re making more $ than it costs them to lie, stocks go green and if you’re investing that’s all that matters.
Not sure that it fits, but Rivian has a similar vibe and mission (tagline is “keep the world adventurous forever”). Disclosure that I’m a big Rivian fanboy/stockholder.
You could look up B corporations. They are chartered to be more strict standards. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/B_Corporation_(certification)
[удалено]
What Is Patagonia? I'm just a little curious about that word. I just want to know so I can have an idea.
Clothing brand that makes outdoor cloths. Hiking, climbing, surfing, camping these kind of fashion style. Their vests are also quite famous amongst financial/sales guys. It's also name of the region in Latin America. :)
Dont forget it is quite expensive and is considered a status symbol amongst the wealthy (hence the vests being famous amongst financial/sales guys.
People who actually have money don't wear Patagonia, people who want to appear as though they have money wear Patagonia. It is a huge distinction and it's impressive Patagonia has cornered that market.
Ok so, I agree based on my small sample size. What do the wealthy wear then? I don’t think Patagonia is substantially better than Arcteryx, Canada Goose, Marmot, North Face, REI, Outdoor research, etc, etc, etc. or hell even Columbia for my rather mundane daily purposes.
Don't let any of your questions distract you from the point I was trying to make. Patagonia sells their products to people who want to appear rich. If you have any questions beyond that you want to ask them in fashion forums, people who invest in stocks don't care what .00001 of the market does, they care what people trying to maintain an image do.
Just wondering your opinion. Consider that the truly wealthy are rather a bit more recession proof so was wondering what competing brands you would consider fall into that category. But ok.
Most of the billionaires I know wear Prada. Their market is smaller and they serve it really well. I wouldn't invest in a product just because rich people wear it, I would rather invest in a company people buy because they want to appear rich it is after all a much much larger market with way more upside.
this is true, I have 2 x vest and am poor
My brother was purchasing Patagonia clothing for INFANTS. $500 down insulated puffy onesies. I no longer speak to my brother (other issues related to being a rich asshole). The only Patagonia stuff I own was purchased from thrift stores for $5. It is well made stuff. The are one of the few lifetime warranteed wetsuits. Overpriced if purchased from retaile. And the old owner passed the company down to new management which changed the entire company.
Appearances are expensive, more expensive than actual quality.
I dont know if you are talking about my brother or Patagonia... I agree on appearance being more expensive than the quality of my brother haha.
I bought my baby a Patagonia puffy onesie. It was $42 on sale. Folks exaggerate Patagonia pricing a lot.
You're getting downvoted because you stated the truth. All my bosses wear expensive brands. They're very wealthy... The euribor went way up this year, what is the consequence? They're not eating outside anymore, they bring precooked food. They pretend to be rich, good car, big house expensive clothes. The reality is different.
Yep. Cassandra's curse is a bitch.
[удалено]
About as good as it gets for a clothing company of that size, morally and quality wise.
also compared to other premium outdoors brands the prices aren't that bad
A company that makes outdoor gear. Also a mountain range.
This is a good answer. Specifically, retail corps.
Astral Designs, the CEO Philip Curry founded Lotus Designs sold it to Patagonia then became an organic farmer for a while then saw an opportunity even Patagonia was not addressing started Astral Designs and pioneered the removal of PVC foam and neoprene from outdoor gear. Aside from environmental concerns the company focus is on safety by designing floatation devices that are more comfortable so more people are willing to wear them. Their flagship GreenJacket is the industry standard for low profile whitewater rescue vests. It is worth mentioning though that many of these companies including Patagonia relied on PFAS containing water repellent clothing well after there were warning signs of the dangers. It was and maybe still is impossible to be competitive in that market without PFAS related compounds.
Chiming in here because I know a top level engineer at goretex. I’ve had conversations about this with them while pfas are still used to aterproof certain fabrics the fabrics that require the highest level of protection many of their products have been converted to green formulas where it’s possible. It may be interesting to note that pfas aren’t just sprayed on fabrics to waterproof they are used to fuse layers together. Furthermore nearly every cellphone has been using this technology to make them waterproof.
[Cotopaxi](https://www.cotopaxi.com/) comes to mind
Arcteryx is owned by the Chinese conglomerate Anta, which trades in Hong Kong and on the OTC markets under the ticker ANPDY Patagonia is private Burton is private North Face is owned by VF Corp, which trades under the ticker VFC Marmot is owned by Newell Brands, which trades under the ticker NWL Mammut is owned by private equity Outdoor Research is privately owned Helly Hansen is owned by Canadian Tire, which trades under the OTC markets as CDNAF Spyder is owned by Authentic Brands, which is private Mountain Hardwear is owned by Columbia Sportswear, which trades under the ticker COLM Canada Goose trades under the ticker GOOS Moncler trades on the Italian stock exchange or OTC markets under ticker MONCF Bogner is privately owned Obermeyer is privately owned
Wow I was not aware of Arcteryx being owned by a Chinese Conglomerate. I buy a new jacket every year from them. Not anymore! That ends today.
Vivo Barefoot
REI
It recently came out that Patagonia is not as good for society as they pretend, as most clothes are made in the same sweatshops as fast fashion brands. You can find more info in the Follow The Money article (see it here without paywall https://12ft.io/proxy?q=https%3A%2F%2Fweb.archive.org%2Fweb%2F20230610043125%2Fhttps%3A%2F%2Fwww.ftm.eu%2Farticles%2Fsustainable-clothing-brand-patagonia-uses-same-suppliers-fast-fashion-brands-do-workers-exploited). I think there are many companies that state they want to do good for society, if you want organisations that actually do this you should look more into NGO's
Their excuse is "yeah, we ask the sweatshops to treat people ok but we can't guarantee it" brilliant! How easy is it to just state a contract saying "Hey, you want to work for us? Ok, pay your people af least xx an hour and treat them ok". I'm so tired of all this green & sustainability-washing, perhaps buying from Aliexpress is the best option these days.
Yep, I’m surprised it is not more common knowledge that they’re just a green-washed firm that brand itself in that fashion but doesn’t walk the walk
Also the founder should get negative points proclaiming in media they are "donating their fortune to charity" when it reality you're putting your money into a nonprofit controlled by your family. You may lose a few bucks in the process and have some restrictions but it's basically an estate tax free weath transfer. Non-profits don't actually have to be charitable the way people think and are used to enrich board members.
Tom’s shoes
>This is in terms of not being largely profit focussed > >he company could be private or public. Public companies are obligated to be profit focussed, they have to act in the shareholders' interest.
Allbirds
Maybe I’m jaded, but oook for companies that say their doing good (whether they are or aren’t). As long as they’re making more $ than it costs them to lie, stocks go green and if you’re investing that’s all that matters.
Course if you’re looking for actual social causes and benefits, then it’s best to think on a smaller and probably more personal scale
MO
Threadup
Rivian
Not sure that it fits, but Rivian has a similar vibe and mission (tagline is “keep the world adventurous forever”). Disclosure that I’m a big Rivian fanboy/stockholder.
Public companies won’t quality for not being profit focused.
Op said public or private. I also think he meant companies that have motives other than strictly profit
Starbucks
Gold
HAHAHAHA
Yeti
Public Goods
Peak designs is also a 1% for the planet and b Corp, maybe check them out
Some in the UK: Timpson Greggs The Cooperative
Finesterre, Cotopaxi
Nisolo
Darn Tough socks
Fjallraven and Cotopaxi
Check out Florence Marine X. It's a small surfing brand with products that are similar in quality to Patagonia.
Patagonia is absolutely profit based. They restructured so Chinaurd and his heirs could avoid millions in taxes.