Is burberry pattern effay? It's been only about half a

>>10861743
>I realized how much I like this pattern
>Is burberry pattern effay?
Why the fuck do you care if you like it

>>10861743
chav/10

It will always be a classic pattern easily recognized by anyone who knows anything about fashion. It's not gonna win you any awards, but it's always safe.

I'd say if you're gonna buy a something with the pattern, try for it to be low profile.

Like, everytime I see a friend wearing those hideous boots with the pattern covering them 100%, I cringe hard.

>>10862046
The pattern hasn't had the chav association for a while now, every since Christopher Bailey came on the scene. Nicer as a lining than an outer pattern.

Although if it's classic English handbags you're after, for that price, I'd go Mulberry.

Yeah it can definitely still be /fa/
as anon said the chav affiliation has subsided.

Just don't overdo it - as with anything.

an allover pattern scarf with an otherwise muted/patternless fit could look really effay, as could catching a flash of it as the lining on a coat

You seem to have fair and legitimate restraint in your ideas about it so follow your heart and you'll do fine <3

every single person working on wall street has the fucking burberry scarf

ok obviously not everyone but an absurdly disproportionate number

>>10863809
it's a classic

I've always liked it and i still do.

Its the symbol of a fashion victim. One of the reasons I would never buy one of their trench coats is the fact that you turn into a walking billboard. When I wear clothes, I dont want people to know what I am wearing. I dont want to advertise a brand day in day out.

The pattern itself is bland and boring. However, Burberry used to sell a lot of interesting color combinations which made it appear more interesting.

>>10863809
I highly doubt that. Burberry scarves are almost exclusively worn by poor people. Why? Because its one of the very few 'luxury' items they can afford. The scarf also has a ridiculous level of brand recognition and gets them 'acknowledgement' by their friends.

If you work at Wallstreet you make more than enough money to buy a proper scarf. Burberry scarves are ridiculously overpriced for what they are.

>>10864484
drop trip

Obviously it has a few pieces that are 'branded' in burberry's own way.

However they do have a few nice jackets (not tench coats), I especially like this green wool they use every now and then.

Don't see why people shit on it for not being obscure enough, it's as if they think nobody knows where their paint drip sneakers come from.

File: second.jpg (67KB, 625x468px) Image search: [Google]

67KB, 625x468px

>>10864487
Second.

I'd buy this pattern from Zara or any other cheap house if they had it, why should I give a fuck about the brand? There are people that would say: If you can't afford a brand, don't buy it at all. How fucked up is that thinking? I like the design god damn it, not the brand, why should I not get me something that makes me happy because a couple of degenerates will comment behind my back?

>>10861743
Burberry might not be youthfully cool but as far as fashion houses go it's a very progressive entity and totally worth buying if it's your thing.

That being said, that pattern is pretty much a logo for Burberry at this point, so think of it as being as close to the LV Damier print as Burberry gets. Not a bad thing, just the reality.

>>10864484
Half the people in my office have that scarf. Half of my clients have that scarf. I see it 5+ times a day walking the 2 blocks from the subway to my office.

Not everyone autistically categorizes things I to effay and fashion victim and shit.

Burberry is luxury.