My SIL doesn’t want pockets, but she is wealthy and into style. I think some of the women who don’t want pockets are into style and/or looking wealthy enough to not need pockets.
Women who are pragmatic want pockets.
I’ve been ripping open pockets and sewing more fabric onto them making them big.
I would wager that the companies that stand to gain or lose money has this data. Or you have the opportunity of a lifetime to start a company that would cater to a black hole of demand. I know what i’m betting on.
Those companies also make handbags, which are substantially more profitable than pants with pockets as long as those companies keep handbags in fashion
Is the hypothesis that companies have their customers’ best interests in mind? /shrug I’m just going to base my worldview on the only data I could find rather than “I remember reading a comment.” At least until I run across new data.
Planned obsolescence, subscription degradation, ad creep, landfills full of cheap crap… It’s in their interests to sell the least useful thing for the highest price. If it costs more to put in pockets, they’ll spend a surprising amount of money trying to convince people they don’t want pockets. Or better yet, just buy up every competitor until there are only a few players and decide amongst yourselves not to make better stuff. I’m not saying that’s what happened, necessarily, it’s just not a foregone conclusion that pockets are scarce because demand is scarce.
Public perception can function like any other externality, meaning you can offload costs onto it. This is regularly done, but it’d be foolish to claim that’s the case here without more information. As it would be foolish to assume the hand of the market is gently guiding us to a better world.
I really don’t understand what you are trying to argue here. Who has said that the hand of the market is guiding us to a better world? I believe i said that companies work in their own interests. Their own interests is to sell more to maximize profit. They have, without question, tested products with pockets for women, because they aren’t stupid. If there was a market for it, then they would sell it. Its not like copyright or trademark is stopping them like in other types of industries.
I became aware of this once in the office where a woman brought up the fact that guys were lucky to have functional pockets. Most pockets on womans clothing are either fake or are sewn shut and for looks.
I asked why? And she explained it ruins the “Pants Chi”. I guess it gets in the way of showing off the figure somehow.
So you’ve got a very vocal market calling out their demand for a product that is more or less trivial to manufacture, and yet not a single entrepreneur has successfully brought the product to market. Why would that be?
There are retailers who have pockets in women‘s clothing by default but it does have some marginal cost. In a world of fast fashion, if they can get away with it, they will.
It takes significantly more time in shopping. Online, the normal look at 25 items to find one that matches my style preferences and is available in my size, then add clicking through all the product detail tabs to try to figure out if it has pockets, 80% of them don’t, and of the ones that do it’s mostly hope that they aren’t poorly designed where everything falls out of them upon sitting down.
I appreciate that, with a multiple of the shopping time investment required by men or women who don’t value pockets, and some fallout in unusable pockets, women’s clothing with pockets is available. But I sure wish it was more available.
I remember reading a comment saying that women don’t actually want pockets. The manufacturers and retailers have data on this.
What’s happening is the women who do want them are in online bubbles that give them the impression that most women want pockets.
It’s like how most gamers don’t give a shit about DRM, so those of us who know better are stuck with it anyway.
My SIL doesn’t want pockets, but she is wealthy and into style. I think some of the women who don’t want pockets are into style and/or looking wealthy enough to not need pockets.
Women who are pragmatic want pockets.
I’ve been ripping open pockets and sewing more fabric onto them making them big.
The only data I could find suggests women do want pockets, particularly in pants.
It suggests that young women from the UK want pockets, yes.
I would wager that the companies that stand to gain or lose money has this data. Or you have the opportunity of a lifetime to start a company that would cater to a black hole of demand. I know what i’m betting on.
Those companies also make handbags, which are substantially more profitable than pants with pockets as long as those companies keep handbags in fashion
Is the hypothesis that companies have their customers’ best interests in mind? /shrug I’m just going to base my worldview on the only data I could find rather than “I remember reading a comment.” At least until I run across new data.
Not at all. They have their own interests in mind. It isn’t in their interest to make shit that wont sell 🤷
That data would be business critical for them so you can bet your fucking ass they have something like it.
Planned obsolescence, subscription degradation, ad creep, landfills full of cheap crap… It’s in their interests to sell the least useful thing for the highest price. If it costs more to put in pockets, they’ll spend a surprising amount of money trying to convince people they don’t want pockets. Or better yet, just buy up every competitor until there are only a few players and decide amongst yourselves not to make better stuff. I’m not saying that’s what happened, necessarily, it’s just not a foregone conclusion that pockets are scarce because demand is scarce.
Tin foil engaged.
Public perception can function like any other externality, meaning you can offload costs onto it. This is regularly done, but it’d be foolish to claim that’s the case here without more information. As it would be foolish to assume the hand of the market is gently guiding us to a better world.
I really don’t understand what you are trying to argue here. Who has said that the hand of the market is guiding us to a better world? I believe i said that companies work in their own interests. Their own interests is to sell more to maximize profit. They have, without question, tested products with pockets for women, because they aren’t stupid. If there was a market for it, then they would sell it. Its not like copyright or trademark is stopping them like in other types of industries.
I became aware of this once in the office where a woman brought up the fact that guys were lucky to have functional pockets. Most pockets on womans clothing are either fake or are sewn shut and for looks.
I asked why? And she explained it ruins the “Pants Chi”. I guess it gets in the way of showing off the figure somehow.
There is often a difference between “consumer wants” and “we will not profit enough to bother”
So you’ve got a very vocal market calling out their demand for a product that is more or less trivial to manufacture, and yet not a single entrepreneur has successfully brought the product to market. Why would that be?
There are retailers who have pockets in women‘s clothing by default but it does have some marginal cost. In a world of fast fashion, if they can get away with it, they will.
A quick search confirms that women’s clothing with pockets does in fact exist, so the niche is getting served.
It takes significantly more time in shopping. Online, the normal look at 25 items to find one that matches my style preferences and is available in my size, then add clicking through all the product detail tabs to try to figure out if it has pockets, 80% of them don’t, and of the ones that do it’s mostly hope that they aren’t poorly designed where everything falls out of them upon sitting down.
I appreciate that, with a multiple of the shopping time investment required by men or women who don’t value pockets, and some fallout in unusable pockets, women’s clothing with pockets is available. But I sure wish it was more available.
the lack of pockets is symbolic of sexism… it’s not about packing them full of things.