This is topic Is Swarovski considered a luxury good? in forum Books, Films, Food and Culture at Hatrack River Forum.


To visit this topic, use this URL:
http://www.hatrack.com/ubb/main/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=051038

Posted by Gecko (Member # 8160) on :
 
I want to get my significant other a swarovski braclet and necklace, but I don't know what reputation this company has with the general public, could someone please tell me if they are considered good quality?
 
Posted by Javert Hugo (Member # 3980) on :
 
Yes, they are. I have a necklace and earrings set and I love them.
 
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
 
Yes, definitely.
 
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
 
The great thing about Swarovski is that there is something for every price range. I have a gorgeous pair of earrings from them that only cost me $30 at a high end department store. Those earrings were sitting right next to a $400 tiara.
 
Posted by Tante Shvester (Member # 8202) on :
 
quote:
Is Swarovski considered a luxury good?
For some definition of luxury.
 
Posted by cmc (Member # 9549) on :
 
I don't know if Swarovski is considered 'luxury' by the majority - but I do know that when I walk into the store there are sparkles, the feeling is nice and the view is pretty. That's quality to me, regardless of 'luxury to the majority' status. Plus... when you get up close you can actually see the care that went into each one. According to my 1981 Webster (3b) - luxury is "something adding to pleasure or comfort but not absolutely necessary", when used as an adjective.

I'd say that Swararvski counts as luxury. ; )
 
Posted by erosomniac (Member # 6834) on :
 
When I think of "luxury," I don't think of Swarovski. If, however, you're asking if Swarovski is reputed to produce high quality products at relatively reasonable prices, then the answer is "yes."
 
Posted by Valentine014 (Member # 5981) on :
 
Reasonable? Yikes.
 
Posted by Kama (Member # 3022) on :
 
quote:
For some definition of luxury.
LOL.

I liked the crystal champaigne/wine glasses they have, but most things are too sparkly for me.
 
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
 
I work as a Fine Jewelry manager, and they are top quality crystals, the best being sold right now, so I would say they are a luxury item. They add value to any item with them .

[Smile]
 
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
 
It is precisely because Swarovski crystals are glued to cheap crap to somehow increase that crap's perceived value that I have some difficulty thinking of Swarovski as a "luxury" manufacturer. I think of them like Godiva or Tiffany and Co.: a once-exclusive brand that now really markets to the shopping mall set, but trades on the luster remaining in their name.
 
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
 
Well, I love swarovski crystals and beads, and for bead making and crafts they are the best crystals out there. That said, they are very expensive for that sort of project, so depending on the project, I'll buy knock-offs.

Example: I've made t-shirts for my daughter in her high school colors. I buy a cheap t-shirt, then applique letters in contrasting material, then hotfix rhinestones around the letters to make them sparkle. I was using swarovski crystals, but they were waaaay too expensive when I began getting requests from other girls for shirts. 10 gross of swarovski rhinestones were around $85. 10 gross of hotfix crystals that are NOT swarovski are $18-20. Big difference. And yet, I can hotfix a swarovski next to a cheap version and no one can tell, even if they're side by side.

In beads though, I find the swarovski are FAR superior to knock-offs. For beading, when I want crystals, swarovski is the only one I use.
 
Posted by The Genuine (Member # 11446) on :
 
Swarovski crystals are not gemstones.

However, it seems to still be an attrative gift to those attracted to shiny things. I find that girlfriends prefer the small Swarovski animals hidden in Easter eggs to, say, a mini Milky Way bar. A Mily Way bar is very matte, albeit tasty.
 
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
 
I'd much rather have Swarovski crystals than diamonds, personally.
 
Posted by The Genuine (Member # 11446) on :
 
Why? (I don't understand the appeal of either.)
 
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
 
'Cause they're shiny and fun without being so expensive that I would be really upset if something happened to them (other than sentimental reasons, the person who gave it to me), and things happen to my stuff a lot with little ones in the house, and also, you know, the whole blood diamond thing.
 
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
 
^ Yup. Exactly.
 
Posted by aspectre (Member # 2222) on :
 
What with grow-your-own 300carat flawless diamonds removing most of the scarcity value, one would have to be daft to purchase natural diamonds for more than a small fraction of current prices.
 
Posted by pooka (Member # 5003) on :
 
I've never heard of Swarovski before. But I'm not a very luxurious type of person as far as that type of thing goes. I find refrigeration and indoor plumbing (hot water especially) to be luxurious, though.
 


Copyright © 2008 Hatrack River Enterprises Inc. All rights reserved.
Reproduction in whole or in part without permission is prohibited.


Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classic™ 6.7.2