Shoppers are finding a way to get a £150 dress for just £22 on Amazon, but what are the consequences?

Duplicates are becoming hard to tell apart from the original.

November 12th 2023.

Shoppers are finding a way to get a £150 dress for just £22 on Amazon, but what are the consequences?
Shopping on the high street can become quite monotonous, with many stores selling identical clothing. However, savvy shoppers have discovered a new way to get the same look for a much cheaper price. Through reverse image searches, it is now possible to find replicas that are indistinguishable from the naked eye and at a fraction of the cost.

Take Michelle Hobgood for example. She found a jacket on Amazon that was an exact replica of a Zara jacket she was eyeing up for $89, but for just $39. Her post about her discovery has been liked over 9,500 times.

But while this new way of shopping may seem like a bargain, some industry insiders are warning that it may come with a hidden cost. Fashion stylist and consultant Joanne Watkinson explains that when it comes to these dupes, no one is talking about whether the workers were paid fairly or if the fabric was ethically sourced.

Alice Murphy, from The Agency, was stunned when she realized how much cheaper the Amazon version of a $60 dress was. At just £10, the dress looked exactly the same as the Faye Blue Floral Mini Dress from Colorful Natalie. Alice decided to take the plunge and buy the cheaper dress, and to her surprise, she was pleased with the quality when it arrived.

However, Alice admits she bought the dress out of curiosity and still can't shake the feeling that something must be sacrificed for it to be so cheap. Anna Bryher from Labour Behind the Label explains that supplier factories may be selling items in their own right, which helps the business cut their spending on warehouses and logistics.

Overall, while it may seem like a great way to get a bargain, it is important to remember that somebody, somewhere, is paying for it.
Have you ever eyed up an item on the high street, only to find an almost identical version for a fraction of the cost online? This phenomenon, known as 'dupe culture', is becoming increasingly common.

Savvy shoppers are discovering that replicas indistinguishable to the naked eye are becoming easier to find. Michelle Hobgood, a lifestyle creator, recently shared a post about discovering a jacket on Amazon that cost $39, compared to the $89 Zara version she was eyeing up. Her post has been liked more than 9,500 times at the time of writing.

Alice Murphy from The Agency was 'stunned' when she first saw how much cheaper an Amazon version of a dress she wanted was. At £10, it was a literal fraction of the cost of the Faye Blue Floral Mini Dress from Colorful Natalie. The Amazon version was identical to the naked eye, with the same print, ribbon detailing, and silhouette. Out of curiosity, Alice bought the cheaper dress and was surprised at how satisfied she was with the quality of the garment when it arrived.

However, the fashion industry is warning of a hidden cost behind this trend. Joanne Watkinson, a fashion stylist and consultant, explains that “At no point is anyone saying this was made ethically, that the workers were paid fairly, or that the fabric was ethically sourced — we’re talking knock-down prices per unit.”

Anna Bryher, policy lead at Labour Behind the Label, believes that factory workers are acting as sellers in their own right, as leftover stock is being sold at any price they can get. She explains that this helps businesses cut their spending on things like warehouses and logistics.

The rise of cheap, identical designs can be both tempting and concerning. While Alice is happy with the dress she purchased, she admits to feeling guilty about the possibility that someone had to pay for it to be so cheap, in one way or another. This is a warning to all of us that, while dupes may seem like a bargain, there could be a hidden cost behind them.

[This article has been trending online recently and has been generated with AI. Your feed is customized.]

 0
 0