[Closed] The North Face have really lost the plot...

Supreme/TNF for the ultimate in gnarr mountain urban ****tery

[url= http://www.supremenewyork.com/news/659/images?image=0 ]Urban survival [/url]

for the ultimate in gnarr mountain urban ****tery

Because you don't understand something it doesn't mean those that do are ****s.

Supreme/TNF for the ultimate in gnarr mountain urban ****tery

Who is the bigger fashion victim - someone who buys an item because of the label, regardless of intended usage, or someone who declines to buy a item because of the label, regardless of it being suitable for the intended usage

Gary_M - Member
for the ultimate in gnarr mountain urban ****tery
Because you don't understand something it doesn't mean those that do are ****.

Would you go to Waitrose dressed like that?

I go to Waitrose in my Rab jacket. Because sometimes it's raining and I only have one waterproof off the bike, and it's for both walking and everyday.

Interesting - I'd always thought Jöttnar was Norwegian or Scandinavian at least (although I knew about the UK connection with the ex-Marine chappies).

Best piece of advice I've received was from a guy who worked in Mountain Rescue. He said they wouldn't send folk out to save others in shit kit. He recommended the high level Keela stuff, and between that and Paramo I've never looked back.

My Keela Soft-Shell is the best jacket I've ever owned - 9 years old now...

I really like Keela stuff. I have the Munro and Saxon jackets as well as Scuffer trousers and a windshirt I can't remember the name of. Well made gear for reasonable prices (always available cheaper elsewhere than their own website).

I see a lot of people out shopping or in the pub wearing arcteryx. Quite often the clothes are filthy from constant and heavy use. I'm just posting this so that I can tell people that I live in the Yukon. Yesterday my Big Coat wasn't big enough for a trip to the shop. I literally felt like is was wandering about in the nuddie! It is even colder today.

Edit- TNF is popular, too.

I see a lot of people out shopping or in the pub wearing arcteryx. Quite often the clothes are filthy from constant and heavy use

Yes, £/$ conversion is always suspect. Without being a bore, the UK price does include the VAT while the US or Canadian price won't.

I was just looking for the uk price of the Atom AR jacket (I was looking at one yesterday), but couldn't find one to compare.

Without being a bore, the UK price does include the VAT while the US or Canadian price won't.

Yeah but sales tax is what, 3% ish, whereas here VAT is 20%.

5% in YT (IT is a whopping 12% in BC), but that is the point I was trying to making regarding the price. Coming from a town where outdoor clothing was primarily worn socially it always makes me happy to see people in gear that has been through the ringer.

On the whole, Canada isn't a cheap place to live and it is almost impossible to get Canadian Cheddar! Amusingly, if I wanted a Bird frame, and I do, it would cost me as much as buying a Transition or a Santa Cruz.

I'm off for a ride!

Weren't people saying the same thing about North Face stuff in the 1990s?

I seem to remember swerving their stuff because they were getting a bit like Timberland.

Still wear my 1990s karrimor fleece and mountain equipment goretex jacket regularly. The colours have kind of come back in now.

DrJ - Member
Who is the bigger fashion victim - someone who buys an item because of the label, regardless of intended usage, or someone who declines to buy a item because of the label, regardless of it being suitable for the intended usage

A switch in focus to fashion raises doubts as to whether what you are looking at is truly suitable for outdoor use.

Honest labelling would sort it though. Call the fashionista stuff something like Urban Adventurer or somesuch.

You'll not appreciate discovering you've bought the wrong item on a mountain top in sleet and wind....

If Arc’teryx gear was cheaper, on a par with Rab, say, I’m sure more people would wear it.

It’s always heavily discounted somewhere though. I’ve got a fair bit and never paid more than 50% RRP.

And on the subject of outdoors gear generally, I'd say it's never been better for consumers in terms of availability of decent technical garments at affordable prices.

Well OK, maybe just before the Brexit vote...

I have a feeling the real issue is the original TNF consumer demographic not wanting to share their aspirational brand with people that they don’t aspire to be.

Jottnar are based in Cardiff, good kit, cheaper than much of the better known gear.

Their top-end waterproof jacket retails for £495. Am I missing something?

A switch in focus to fashion raises doubts as to whether what you are looking at is truly suitable for outdoor use.

Can't you tell by the specs and looking at the gear?

Most manufacturers make everyday stuff and hardcore stuff. Quite rightly so.

Weren't people saying the same thing about North Face stuff in the 1990s?

I bought their Expedition system Jacket and sallopettes in the 90s and got a good 10+ years hard work out of it doing all my ML / MIC courses / training. Awesome kit. Spent weeks in the Cairngorms using it day in day out in winter. Very 90s colours mind....

Me on the left....

[url= https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8532/8453596549_d26f2b65b8_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8532/8453596549_d26f2b65b8_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/dT1TJD ]Myself and Ian MacNab on Aonach Mor[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/ ]Ben Freeman[/url], on Flickr

I'd be far happier to buy outdoors gear that ain't covered in logo.

molgrips - Member
'A switch in focus to fashion raises doubts as to whether what you are looking at is truly suitable for outdoor use.'
Can't you tell by the specs and looking at the gear?

It's bit like the way some manufacturers used to do a specced down model for the big box stores, eg lower spec BB, cables etc. Not obvious to the unwary. Look how quickly some decent bike brands became regarded as little better than BSOs.

I could make an informed guess by doing that and still get it wrong. It's the hidden details where the shortcuts are usually made. Hence it's an issue of trust.

Not sure why creating a leisure clothing range implies that corners are being cut in the serious range?

I have a feeling the real issue is the original TNF consumer demographic not wanting to share their aspirational brand with people that they don’t aspire to be.

[b]Their top-end waterproof[/b] jacket retails for £495. Am I missing something?

I'd be far happier to buy outdoors gear that ain't covered in logo.

You’re in luck as most just have one small logo.

I'd be far happier to buy outdoors gear that ain't covered in logo.

Like TNF then:

[img] https://images.thenorthface.com/is/image/TheNorthFaceEU/2TVI_44A_hero?$638x745$ [/img]

Most of their proper outdoor gear seems to have the same small chest logo. Got any examples?

This thread came to mind yesterday when I was skiing at Lake Louise. The temperature varied with -23C at the base and -32C at the top. With windchill that was below -40C. Every employee (liftie, instructor, ski patrol) wearing TNF kit. Now I'm sure there is a commercial agreement in there somewhere but I'm also sure that at that temperature it's not just fashion wear.

Now I'm sure there is a commercial agreement in there somewhere but I'm also sure that at that temperature it's not just fashion wear

Yeah - there's a commercial agreement in place and the clothing frequently remains the property of the ski hill company: Staff aren't really allowed to deviate from the designated uniform (although some allowance is occasionally made for trousers)

RCR staff used to be Helly Hanson for lifties, tech crew and instructors with the Pro Patrol wearing Arc'Teryx, but I think everyone is on Helly Hanson now.

I guess since RCR/Charlie Locke sold and re-aquired Lake Louise a couple of years ago they've now done a 'gold partner' deal with TNF.

But you're right - it isn't 'fashion wear', but then it isn't necessarily always the first choice of the people who are wearing it either.

Same situation when someone is a 'brand ambassador' or sponsored by a tyre company etc .

Yeah - there's a commercial agreement in place

But the question is wether or not the staff were comfortable and happy with their clothes.

But the question is wether or not the staff were comfortable and happy with their clothes.

With windchill below -40C you are going to be cold pretty much whatever you are wearing ...

A friend of mine used be a TNF brand ambassador - he always rated their Summit Series kit quite highly. The top end technical clothing is developed and tweaked with feedback from the brand ambassadors.

However the lifties on the ski hill will often be wearing the 'hand-me-downs' from the previous season ...

I always think Peter Storm might sell a lot more if it didn't have that logo on it !

Probably Karrimor could drop the label as well nowadays...

FYI, if you work for TNF you get 50% discount on everything and also Timberland and Van's.

I’ll bet an equivalent Arc’teryx would be a couple of hundred quid more.

Alpha SV is pretty much the equivalent. £600 rrp and I’ll bet I could get a better discount on that than I could on the jottnar direct sales model.

Neither are cheap, stop pretending the jottnar stuff is.

I just went riding in my TNF Apex jacket which is brilliant and has lasted many years. But then any stretch light softshell jacket would be the same I guess.

I thing the fabric manufacturers deserve a lot more credit than the clothing manufacturers TBH.

I thing the fabric manufacturers deserve a lot more credit than the clothing manufacturers TBH

Well to be fair I bought a Gore One GTX jacket last year and both the fabric, manufacturing and attention to detail is pretty impressive! 8)

he always rated their Summit Series kit quite highly

Deservedly so, it is very good kit. Branding is also pretty subtle. My Summit Series GTX-pro shell is one of the best GTX shells I've owned (and I've got through a fair few over the last 25 years).

[url= https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5529/30157180435_19fd81d2f7_z.jp g" target="_blank">https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5529/30157180435_19fd81d2f7_z.jp g"/> [/img][/url][url= https://flic.kr/p/MWTr5P ]IMG_0570[/url] by [url= https://www.flickr.com/photos/brf/ ]Ben Freeman[/url], on Flickr

I’ll bet an equivalent Arc’teryx would be a couple of hundred quid more.

About a hundred quid more for an Alpha SV, but I'm not sure that makes Jottnar stuff 'cheaper than much of the better known gear' it just makes it pretty much as expensive as other premium outdoor brands. Not that it matters much, I can't afford either of them :-/

I'd be far happier to buy outdoors gear that ain't covered in logo.

You’re in luck as most just have one small logo.

Most of their proper outdoor gear seems to have the same small chest logo.

No, TNF are not the worst for over-logoing, I'd prefer their jackets without the branding however.

I’ll bet an equivalent Arc’teryx would be a couple of hundred quid more.

All the premium brands seem around the same price points these days. Luckily you can get most of them half price on Sports Pursuit. I wouldn't pay £600 for a GTX shell.

Neither are cheap, stop pretending the jottnar stuff is.

Still don't know that you 'need' a £1000 jacket for very cold conditions tbh. Insulation is cheap like I said. And normal goretex works better in very cold weather than it does here.

What's the actual difference between a £1000 jacket and a £300 one?

If it's substantially sub zero you don't need GTX at all, a Pertex shelled down jacket is a better bet - it will breath better and keep the wind out.

30+ years ago when I was sailing and skippering offshore and ocean in a professional capacity, one of the go to brands for weatherproof attire was Musto. I bit the big one and bought myself their Ocean jacket and bottoms for an eye watering £400, or thereabouts - it was a long time ago - and they lasted for the next 8 or so years with pretty much everyday use. I didn't care about the logo, as a professional wearer with daily use, I cared more about their effectiveness.

I dare say that if I were sailing full time now, my approach would be the same.

[img] [/img]

Outfit of choice on the grime scene 😆

What's the actual difference between a £1000 jacket and a £300 one?

Depends on the jacket. High spec fabrics and components like zips etc, more R&D, esoteric manufacturing techniques, in the case of Arc'teryx, sometimes Canadian rather than far eastern manufacture, smaller production runs with decreased economies of scale. You're effectively buying a sort of limited edition.

Is it worth it? In most cases, not really. If you were off on some extreme, super-alpine mission in appropriate conditions then yes, arguably, but for the vast majority of us, not really, particularly if you assume that a £300 shell should be pretty good to start off with.

My experience of Arc'teryx is the top-end stuff is seriously durable too, but again, for most users, that's probably not a big factor. I doubt most non-professional hill-users genuinely wear out much kit.

If you were off on some extreme, super-alpine mission in appropriate conditions then yes, arguably,

I'd be interested to know exactly what real actual difference there is in alpine conditions.

I suspect not a fat lot. Out of your list I'd imagine you are paying the most for non-far eastern manufacturing and brand name. You might be able to move a bit more comfortably in a more heavily designed jacket, but a £400 jacket should be pretty good at that too.

molgrips - Member

Still don't know that you 'need' a £1000 jacket for very cold conditions tbh. Insulation is cheap like I said. And normal goretex works better in very cold weather than it does here.

What's the actual difference between a £1000 jacket and a £300 one?

To put this in perspective someone who doesn't know anything about bikes might ask 'What's the actual difference between a £1000 bike and a £3000 one'? As we know the differences will seem pretty subtle/unimportant to someone who is ignorant of bikes (the cheapest suspension fork and chainset do exactly the same job as ones that cost x20, [b]if[/b] you don't know what you are looking at). I usually try and explain it by using the analogy of a Ferrari Vs a Ford fiesta. Both will get you to the shops, but the Ferrari will do much more and is built to go much faster, should you want to. Just because you are ignorant of the differences doesn't mean there aren't any.

As with everything else though, diminishing returns and all that.

[quote=wallop ]
Outfit of choice on the grime scene

Aye, just saw that ad pop up on my instagram too.

I thought only BBC New reporters wore TNF stuff... doing the 10 o'clock live report from somewhere cold-ish?

Much more of a quechua man myself.
I "aspire" to even pay their prices most times! 🙂

What's the actual difference between a £1000 jacket and a £300 one?

Very little if anything. They'll both be using GTX-pro fabric from the same mill, so fabric will perform the same. Market segmentation / branding accounts for the £700 difference...

I suspect not a fat lot. Out of your list I'd imagine you are paying the most for non-far eastern manufacturing and brand name. You might be able to move a bit more comfortably in a more heavily designed jacket, but a £400 jacket should be pretty good at that too.

It's quite hard to find a £1,000 technical shell jacket - I'm not even sure one exists, link? The most expensive Arc'teryx shell is £600, so the real world difference in cost you're talking about is arguably £300 and most top end waterproofs are around £350-£400 for Gore-Tex Pro. Second, £300 is still a shedload of money for a waterproof shell jacket, so you'd expect it to be bloody good, so...

For most of us, a more relevant question would be how does a £400 waterproof shell compare to a £150 one.

It's like any other manufactured good. You tend to get diminishing returns as the price rises. What extra benefit do you get from a £100,000 sports car compared to a £40,000 one?

I'm not arguing that it's worth shelling out huge amounts for a very expensive jacket, I'm just trying to explain why top-end jackets cost more. If you want an extreme example, ME used to produce a £600-ish shel, some £200 of which was the cost of the insane waterproof zips. You may not believe it, but mad spec Velcro or 3D flexible zippers or bespoke versions of Gore-Tex wth ultra abrasion-resistant face fabrics do cost more than lower spec equivalents.

High end expensive kit is well worth the money if you're using it for what it was designed for i.e. Alpine, Himalayan climbing.

I'd be interested to know exactly what real actual difference there is in alpine conditions.

From my perspective it's things like attention to detail and using different technical fabrics for different areas depending on intended use:

For example:
Harder wearing fabrics in areas such as shoulders and waist where a heavy backpack can rub
Harness compatability
Breathability/venting
Hoods & cuffs
Lightweight materials if weight is relevant.
Well thoughtout pockets

It's quite hard to find a £1,000 technical shell jacket - I'm not even sure one exists, link? The most expensive Arc'teryx shell is £600

^^^ exactly ... not sure where this idea that top end technical jackets retail @£1000 came from ...

I bought an Arc'teryx Sabre Jacket 9 years ago. It's too heavy & bulky for splitboard touring but it has survived multiple mini-seasons featuring numerous close encounters with tree branches, ice, rocks, & burred snowboard edges etc and pretty much every type of weather from high alpine to mud and ice 'commando exits' - and it's still going strong as I will be wearing again this season as I head off to Canada again.

This is the reason I buy the higher end jackets as previous to the Sabre I was buying a new £200ish snowboard jacket almost every season - as they would end up falling apart.

Harder wearing fabrics in areas such as shoulders and waist where a heavy backpack can rub
Harness compatability
Breathability/venting
Hoods & cuff
Lightweight materials if weight is relevant.

But you get those on £3-400 jackets. These are what I am talking about btw - so the difference IN USE between say £350 and £600 is what I'm not sure about. So say you and I half way up a gulley in 50mph winds and it's -20, what's the difference?

In jackets, not a lot I reckon.

And anyway I reckon UK conditions are harder for a jacket to cope with than Alpine ones. Although the consequences are less severe.

Hah.. Most expensive item under men's clothing on Cotswold Outdoor is a Fjallraven Parker for £1500!

Justify that! It's not even waterproof.

Most expensive waterproofs seem to be £750

I have a TNF Summit Series jacket from 2002. Used it fairly regularly in that time. Still works amazingly well and has been fantastic value at £/year. It’s proven it’s worth the money and has kept me warm and dry from Wales to Norway down to -35.

I also have a triclimate TNF snowboarding jacket I picked up about [s]7[/s] 8 or 9 years ago in a sale. That too has been fantastic - although I’m not sure it would be amazing if i actually used it for its declared purpose, it is very, very warm but probably too bulky.

. So say you and I half way up a gulley in 50mph winds and it's -20, what's the difference?

You may well be right and if both jackets were brand new then the difference might be negligible ... but what about after 5 years of heavy use? I want a jacket that costs twice as much to last twice as long ... otherwise I will be looking elsewhere!

Hah.. Most expensive item under men's clothing on Cotswold Outdoor is a Fjallraven Parker for £1500!

Justify that! It's not even waterproof.

Most expensive waterproofs seem to be £750

I can't justify it ... and I wouldn't pay it as I don't see it as value for money. However for some folks that isn't the reason the buy stuff!

Out of interest, I can't think of many of the Pro or Semi Pro Winter Sports people that I know who use the 'ultra' top end gear - whether it's skis or boards or clothing - with the possible exception of those who get everything for free/are paid to use it or wear it.

molgrips - Member

Hah.. Most expensive item under men's clothing on Cotswold Outdoor is a Fjallraven Parker for £1500!

Justify that! It's not even waterproof.

You know this is the same as some non-biker going into a bike shop looking at the £5K bike and saying, 'you could buy a car for that', right?

Not really. I'm not a non-climber. I've climbed a few mountains and been out in a variety of cold conditions. And I'm wearing £350 jackets which I would say are the equivalent of a £3k bike. So we are discussing 'needing' a £7k bike over a £3k one...

Although I was just thinking - insulation is cheap, but down is not, and I can see benefits to down, so in terms of insulation then yes, money does buy you good down. But I still think that £1500 is way too much.

Justify that! It's not even waterproof.

It wasn't designed to be waterproof. Like a fat bike wasn't designed for time trialing :D.

It wasn't designed to be waterproof.

Of course not. But point is that the most expensive jacket doesn't have every possible feature, so you can't use that to justify the cost.

And anyway I reckon UK conditions are harder for a jacket to cope with than Alpine ones. Although the consequences are less severe.

Not 'harder' just different. We tend towards humid but cold conditions with added wind, but generally on smaller hills which you can bail from more easily. We also have a hardcore outdoor culture where people are prepared to go out in quite bad conditions. It's why the Swiss army has been known to train in Scotland in winter.

High mountain conditions tend to be significantly and consistently colder, but drier. When things go bad, they do really, really bad. And while these days you can often be choppered out fast in the Alps, distances are greater and - in bad conditions - it's harder to chip out. If you're in the Andes, Himalaya or similar, the chances of outside rescue are low.

It's the reason some Brits still use Bulffalo-type pile-Pertex and Paramo which other nationalities just laugh at - dealing with damp cold is more difficult than dry cold. It's also the reason that my lightweight expedition bag which feels cosy at -25?C in the Andes, works significantly less well at -10?C in Scotland. Damp air transmits heat faster, so insulation, which is really trapped, warmed air, is less efficient.

That Fjällräven parka? Niche, generally expensive Scandinavian brand with limited technical credentials. Really high loft down is rare and expensive - just ask PHD who use 1000+ fill power in their K-Series kit - put lots of it in a polar-friendly jacket also made from expensive fabrics and add a fashionista premium and you end up with a super expensive jacket.

Going back to where this started, the North Face L6 Belay Parka costs £440 and is - I've tried one - like wearing an expedition sleeping bag. It is ridiculously warm, stupidly heavy for a down jacket, and actually well designed for what's it's designed for. In most UK conditions it would be a ridiculous slice of overkill pie, but it's very good at what it's designed for, which is sitting about belaying climbers in extremely cold environments.

I'm not sure what the point of all this is. It's like everything in our consumerist world. Some expensive things are very good. Some expensive things are very good but not that much better than slightly less expensive things. Some expensive things work well only in certain conditions. Some expensive things exist mostly to be expensive.

The sadness of it all is that the outdoors industry and the media seem hell-bent on convincing us all that you need really expensive kit just to go for a common or garden hill walk. And the Duke of Edinburgh scheme seems determined to show young people that the outdoors is some sort of SAS-style endurance ordeal carrying huge packs.

It's like the mentality that tells you it's essential to have a 6"-travel full susser to go for a ride in the Peak District when all kit and gear and clothing is, is a facilitator that makes it easier and safer to get out and do things. And getting out and doing stuff is what it's actually all about.

And the Duke of Edinburgh scheme seems determined to show young people that the outdoors is some sort of SAS-style endurance ordeal carrying huge packs.

Not much to add to everything else, but I couldn't believe the size of the pack my nephew was expected to carry. He could barely stand up!

dealing with damp cold is more difficult than dry cold

That's what I said.

And the Duke of Edinburgh scheme seems determined to show young people that the outdoors is some sort of SAS-style endurance ordeal carrying huge packs.

Not much to add to everything else, but I couldn't believe the size of the pack my nephew was expected to carry. He could barely stand up!

Been vaguely following this thread and this is the most-interesting point raised. Now I really wanna know: [i]Why do[/i] DoE students have such massive ****ing backpacks?

Been vaguely following this thread and this is the most-interesting point raised. Now I really wanna know: Why do DoE students have such massive **** backpacks?

They have a colossal and often unnecessary list of mandatory kit that they have to carry with them. Add in the fact that mostly they'll be using budget gear, which is bulkier and less effective than top-end expensive stuff and you end up with those huge packs.

I get that it's well intentioned and the people behind it are thinking about safety, but the whole thing seems calculated to put young people off going into the outdoors for the rest of their lives... Why not get them out mountain biking and scrambling and trail running and doing shorter, more fun walks with a pre-prepared evening campsite with a barbecue and beer, oh, maybe not beer, but make it enjoyable and memorable.

Take them bothying. And wild camping. And bivvying. Get them out wild swimming and pack-rafting. Use their tech saviness to let them navigate with apps and GPS units. Teach them the rudiments of outdoor photography. Make it fun. Make it something that they'll fall in love with. Something that'll inspire them.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's great that older folk are out walking and enjoying the hills, but as it is, the DofE feels like a huge missed opportunity.

And it'd be nice not to feel sorry for them...

In my youth I worked in an outdoor shop and The North Face Mountain jacket was the aspirational GoreTex jacket at the time. It oozed cool and was one of the "go to" jackets for keeping the rain at bay for climbers/mountaineers. That was back in the early 90s, in my more impressionable teenage years 🙂 . It wasn't long after that that The North Face logo became a fashion "must have".

They stopped being an aspirational brand (for me) a long time ago.

I get that it's well intentioned and the people behind it are thinking about safety, but the whole thing seems calculated to put young people off going into the outdoors for the rest of their lives...

I've met plenty of DoE groups on their expedition camp and they never seem overly burdened by their packs. Always seem to be enjoying themselves.....

Been vaguely following this thread and this is the most-interesting point raised. Now I really wanna know: Why do DoE students have such massive **** backpacks?

Best one I had was a group who hid from me the fact they had portable DVD player with them...

I've met plenty of DoE groups on their expedition camp and they never seem overly burdened by their packs. Always seem to be enjoying themselves.....

I'm sure. I did on mine, and the massive pack was part of the fun. Give your mates a gentle shove and watch them pile into the hedge 2 or three paces later, unable to stop themselves! 😀

They have a colossal and often unnecessary list of mandatory kit that they have to carry with them.

I'll add myself to the list of people finding this the most interesting part of the thread. So what's on the list? Are all of them effectively self-sufficient even though they're walking in groups (to a campsite)

We see them out on the Surrey Hills regularly

Just, well, because...

I doubt most non-professional hill-users genuinely wear out much kit.

As regards the wrong/excessive equipment, I believe the Expedition module of the MBLA still mandates the use of a trailer 😆

molgrips - Member

Hah.. Most expensive item under men's clothing on Cotswold Outdoor is a Fjallraven Parker for £1500!

Justify that! It's not even waterproof.

You know this is the same as some non-biker going into a bike shop looking at the £5K bike and saying, 'you could buy a car for that', right?

Or someone going into an Audi dealership, looking at the price of a new A4, and saying I could run an old Passat for 1/20th the cost of that...

molgrips - Member

It wasn't designed to be waterproof.

Of course not. But point is that the most expensive jacket doesn't have every possible feature, so you can't use that to justify the cost.

That's okay, because I wasn't. 🙄
😉 😕

Or someone going into an Audi dealership, looking at the price of a new A4, and saying I could run an old Passat for 1/20th the cost of that...

Or a really old Prius.

Just going to leave this here:

http://www.selfridges.com/GB/en/cat/junya-watanabe-junya-watanabe-x-the-north-face-shell-jacket_423-2000022-WTJ111051/?previewAttribute=Yellow