Social Question

msh's avatar

Are shoes clothing?

Asked by msh (4270points) September 22nd, 2015 from iPhone

Since clothes are charged by the size, shouldn’t shoes have the same set up to rake in more bucks for their industry?

Observing members: 0 Composing members: 0

14 Answers

josie's avatar

I don’t understand the premise in the details.
But on the face of it, when people budget for “clothing” they usually include shoes.
But ask somebody who does not have shoes and it is winter.

Love_my_doggie's avatar

Could you explain what you mean by “the same set up to rake in more bucks”? I’m not being facetious, and I don’t want to seem rude; I’m simply trying to understand your question.

Pied_Pfeffer's avatar

Yes, shoes fall under the clothing category. Shoes, just like any other article of clothing, may cost more based upon less common sizes, quality of material, quality of design, and/or based upon brand name recognition.

Berserker's avatar

Footwear.

elbanditoroso's avatar

@msh, explain what you mean. Are you saying that people who wear size 15 shoes should pay more than people who wear size 10?

From personal experience, I can say big and tall people pay significantly more for clothing and shoes than normal size people.

msh's avatar

Exactly.elbanditoroso!
Why are we allowing the clothing industry charge more on sizing for clothing ( upwards of $5 on up for mere inches of cloth) ???????????
Love_my_doggie- no offense taken. Bless you.

Do consumers realize that the size-shaming has gone on in retail for a long time? I didn’t realize until***** two different prices + two same outfit= different costs!!!!

If shoes cost by size- will people then take notice? When they experience it themselves???
:0

dxs's avatar

That’s funny, whenever I look on the clearance racks at stores, it’s always just shoes that are like size 13+.

Tropical_Willie's avatar

@dxs Works for me. LOL

zenvelo's avatar

Where do you buy clothes that price by size? Where I go, slacks that are 30 waist 30 length are the sam price as the 44 waist 36 inch length. And a small shirt is the same as an XXL.

DrasticDreamer's avatar

@zenvelo Old Navy recently came under fire for charging more for women’s (not men’s clothing, as well, so there’s more than one issue here) plus size clothing.

msh's avatar

Look at LLBean, and Eddie Bauer:

Men’s / Women’s price differences on same items
then
Women / Sizing = double retail whammy prices!
>:| Really?

wsxwh111's avatar

I think it’s not the point whether shoes can be included in the definition of clothes, it’s that whether they can do that to charge more depends on if it is reasonable to do so.
In other words, different sizes, different cost of original materials, are the differences enough to charge differently?

wsxwh111's avatar

@elbanditoroso As a 193cm male in a country of which the average male height is 172cm, I just wanna say I pay more not because they are larger, but because they are difficult to find.

ucme's avatar

No, they’re covers for feet, bit like a wigwam only less big & as far as I know, no one has sticks for toes.

Answer this question

Login

or

Join

to answer.
Your answer will be saved while you login or join.

Have a question? Ask Fluther!

What do you know more about?
or
Knowledge Networking @ Fluther