The Case for Buying Less

The Case for Buying Less

We release two collections a year. Not four, not six. Within each, the range is narrow — a handful of trousers, a few shirts, one or two dresses, a short run of outerwear. This is intentional, and it costs us sales.

The fashion industry runs on novelty. A constant supply of new silhouettes and colours keeps a customer returning, even when their wardrobe is already full. We understand why this works. We have simply chosen not to build a business on it.

Instead, we ask a smaller question: what does a considered wardrobe actually require? Not many things, it turns out. A few well-cut trousers. Shirts that work loose or tucked. A jacket for the in-between weather that makes up most of the year. Layering pieces that do not compete with each other.

Making fewer things allows us to make each one properly. We can spend longer on a pattern, choose a better fabric, pay a fair price for construction that takes real time. A trend-driven collection cannot afford this. It has to move fast, which means somewhere along the line, corners get cut — usually in fabric, or in the hands that made it.

There is also a simpler argument, one about clutter. A wardrobe of forty considered pieces is easier to dress from than one of two hundred. Getting dressed becomes a smaller decision, because most of what you own actually works.

We are not against fashion changing. We are against changing it for its own sake. Buying less, and choosing carefully, is not a sacrifice. For most people, it is a relief.