# Lanvin Blazer



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

I have a Lanvin Blazer that I am likely going to sell. But, I am totally unfamiliar with the brand. It looks like high quality. It has patch pockets and pick stitching and expensive looking buttons. Anyone know anything about Lanvin?

Also, I'm not sure of the size. It has no tag. But, here are the measurements:

22 P2P 
18 shoulder 
25.5 Sleeve 
30.5 BOC

At first I thought it might be a 42 because of the P2P measurement. But, 18 seems a little small for a 42. More like a 40. The 25.5 sleeve makes me think it's a long, but 30.5 seems more like Regular.

Any ideas?


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> I have a Lanvin Blazer that I am likely going to sell. But, I am totally unfamiliar with the brand. It looks like high quality. It has patch pockets and pick stitching and expensive looking buttons. Anyone know anything about Lanvin?
> 
> Also, I'm not sure of the size. It has no tag. But, here are the measurements:
> 
> ...


That's a 42R in my book.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

I think Lanvin is one of those designer lines that primarily makes clothing for women, but, like Dior et al, subcontracts for some men's wear. Generally I think of that kind of thing as overpriced department store ware.


----------



## alkydrinker (Apr 24, 2012)

As a 42 Long myself, I am pretty familiar with this measurement range. 30.5 length definitely makes it a Regular. The 25.5 sleeves may be slightly long for a Regular (not excessively), but it isn't uncommon for sleeves to be a bit long OTR with the understanding they are easy to shorten. 

If it is truly 22" pit-to-pit, that is more like a 40-41R. 23" pit-to-pit is the gold standard for a size 42 jacket. Over 23" is a little full for size 42, under 23" becomes slim for a 42. 

As a frequent eBay buyer, I find that people most commonly understate measurements, rather than go over. To get the measurement that matches the specified measurement in the manufacturer's pattern, the jacket should be held very taut and measured from furthest tip of fabric to the other furthest tip. However, the garment should not be not forcibly stretched nor should the shape of the jacket be distorted. Whenever I have bought a garment from a company that provides actual measurements, they are always dead-on what I measure them at, so I am confident in my technique.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> That's a 42R in my book.


I put the wrong picture up. Here is the correct one:


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

alkydrinker said:


> As a 42 Long myself, I am pretty familiar with this measurement range. 30.5 length definitely makes it a Regular. The 25.5 sleeves may be slightly long for a Regular (not excessively), but it isn't uncommon for sleeves to be a bit long OTR with the understanding they are easy to shorten.
> 
> If it is truly 22" pit-to-pit, that is more like a 40-41R. 23" pit-to-pit is the gold standard for a size 42 jacket. Over 23" is a little full for size 42, under 23" becomes slim for a 42.
> 
> As a frequent eBay buyer, I find that people most commonly understate measurements, rather than go over. To get the measurement that matches the specified measurement in the manufacturer's pattern, the jacket should be held very taut and measured from furthest tip of fabric to the other furthest tip. However, the garment should not be not forcibly stretched nor should the shape of the jacket be distorted. Whenever I have bought a garment from a company that provides actual measurements, they are always dead-on what I measure them at, so I am confident in my technique.


That's how I measure the P2P also. I wonder if I should just say 40-42R. The 18 shoulder is what is throwing me off.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Lanvin is a French design and couture house with a long tradition, but as mentioned before, primarily a women's fashion brand. 

However, simply approach it as though it is a navy blazer. It's likely not super high quality, but at the same time not crap either. 

As for the sizing, I would just be honest about it and state the measurements you indicated and allow the prospective buyer to ask for additional measurements. Just state that you're unable to locate the off-the-peg sizing on any of the tags.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

I wouldn't say 23" ptp is gold standard for a size 42. Mostly because I'm a 43-44" chest by the tape and I wear 23" ptp.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

My jackets mostly are 42R and the pit measurements vary a little. Most are at 22", which feels and looks slim, but I have a couple at 23" that feel a little more relaxed. I've tried 44R where the p2p has been more like 24, and that always feels like too much room in a jacket (although oddly feels right for sweaters).


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Of course, we all know that tagged size means absolutely nothing. As for Lanvin, it depends on the logo. Most is licensed you-know-what. But they make some stuff themselves that is very good and sought after and rare. Research the logo on the label and you'll see what I mean.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

It actually does not look bad in the photo, although that dart through the chest pocket is weird to me.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Duvel said:


> It actually does not look bad in the photo, although that dart through the chest pocket is weird to me.


Its actually like a pleat almost. hard to describe.



here is one of the other pockets



Here's the buttons. Sort of a cool basktweave?


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Duvel said:


> I think Lanvin is one of those designer lines that primarily makes clothing for women, but, like Dior et al, subcontracts for some men's wear. Generally I think of that kind of thing as overpriced department store ware.


Yes, I recall Syms carrying overstock Lanvin in the 90s. Still as 32 R&R says this one might be a real one. Check the collar and sleeves to see if they are hand sewn.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

Nobleprofessor said:


> Here's the buttons. Sort of a cool basktweave?


Lol... that is not a basketweave. It is actually Lanvin's "L" logo.


----------



## alkydrinker (Apr 24, 2012)

Nobleprofessor said:


> That's how I measure the P2P also. I wonder if I should just say 40-42R. The 18 shoulder is what is throwing me off.


I missed the 18" shoulder measurement on first read...18" is narrow for a 42 and further reinforces my belief that jacket best matches a 40-41R. Most 42's have 18.5-19.5 shoulder.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Okay. Here's another size question: 

I have an HSM overcoat with no tag. Now, overcoats are always over sized or generously sized however you want to say it. That makes sense they are designed to wear over a suit coat. 

This one measures as 

P2P 25" 
Sleeve 27" 
Shoulder 19.5
(its long so it measures 46.5 BOC

Would this be about a 42 or 44?


----------



## alkydrinker (Apr 24, 2012)

^^ yeah, I think your are correct in calling it either a 42 or 44...I'd also call it a Long with 27" sleeves.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

I am thinking more along the lines of 44L-46L.


----------



## colorvision (Aug 7, 2014)

For what it's worth, my impression is that Lanvin commands a premium at LA thrift stores, similar to YSL or Givenchy. Maybe not quite as much as the rare Prada or Gucci, but more than Brooks Brothers, Orvis, Zanella, etc.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

colorvision said:


> For what it's worth, my impression is that Lanvin commands a premium at LA thrift stores, similar to YSL or Givenchy. Maybe not quite as much as the rare Prada or Gucci, but more than Brooks Brothers, Orvis, Zanella, etc.


That may be true, but, again, genuine non-licensed Lanvin is rare. I found a couple of geometric ties recently at SA, both hideous, and picked them up simply because they are not licensed Lanvin (and they were cheap). Thrift stores often make mistakes, and that might account for high prices in your area. Licensed Lanvin is worth about the same as licensed RL. Go by eBay completed listings, not what thrift stores charge.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

If it is a natural shoulder jacket, an 18" shoulder on a 42r is perfectly acceptable. But then again, some people like a fuller chest than the AAKC standard. I measure a 42 chest but I like jackets that are closer to a 44 with very narrow shoulders. Like 46" pit to pit, but 18.5 shoulder. Tough to find. Some 42's are cut like that, but others

But 19.5" shoulder on a 42? Not unless you're going for the real squared off Roman look.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> That may be true, but, again, genuine non-licensed Lanvin is rare. I found a couple of geometric ties recently at SA, both hideous, and picked them up simply because they are not licensed Lanvin (and they were cheap). Thrift stores often make mistakes, and that might account for high prices in your area. Licensed Lanvin is worth about the same as licensed RL. Go by eBay completed listings, not what thrift stores charge.


how would I know which one I have?


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> how would I know which one I have?


You want this tag:

Not this one: https://griffengarb.com/ebay31/lanvinSUIT5B.jpg


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> You want this tag:
> 
> Not this one: https://griffengarb.com/ebay31/lanvinSUIT5B.jpg


this one says Lanvin Paris New York


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> this one says Lanvin Paris New York


Forget what it says, what does it look like? It's the logo that matters. It does have a logo, doesn't it?


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

here:


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> here:


Licensed.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

Yeah, but it's made in Paris, New York.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Duvel said:


> Yeah, but it's made in Paris, New York.


Ok. Dude. I get it. You don't know like designer clothes. Between the comments on the Armani coat and this and others, message received.


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

Okay, my apologies. Bad form on my part, but I meant no harm. I was just poking fun at how these companies do this, try to make something look elegant by adding the Paris or New York thing to the label. You are right that I don't like designer clothes, and given that this is a trad forum, well, I guess it is okay that I am predisposed to that dislike. But I will refrain in the future from any knocking of the products. (Backing slowly away...)


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Duvel said:


> Okay, my apologies. I meant no harm. I was just poking at how these companies do this, try to make something look elegant by adding the Paris or New York thing to the label. You are right that I don't like designer clothes, and given that this is a trad forum, well, I guess it is okay that I am predisposed to that dislike. But I will refrain in the future from any knocking of the products. (Backing slowly away...)


I'm not suggesting that you should like it. But, in this specific case, it seemed unnecessary. This is a blue blazer. It has fairly natural shoulders (thought not quite as minimal as say a Norman Hilton), but its just a blue blazer. It is not a skinny suit, or a overly padded European suit with a super low gorge like from the 80's. It is a fairly simple cut wool blazer that has some interesting features. You are right, it is not TRAD in the typical, traditional, narrow, Ivy, exclusionist sort of way. But, I think a lot of folks on here either wear or at least can appreciate some things that do not fit into the narrow TNSIL definition.

By the way "designer" has a pretty broad definition. Isn't Norman Hilton a designer?


----------



## Duvel (Mar 16, 2014)

Okay. Again, my apologies.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Norman Hilton was a manufacturer. Big difference.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Duvel said:


> Okay. Again, my apologies.


Accepted and dropped. Sorry, I got a little fired up.


----------



## colorvision (Aug 7, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> You want this tag: Not this one: https://griffengarb.com/ebay31/lanvinSUIT5B.jpg


 Thank you for this clarification.


----------



## alkydrinker (Apr 24, 2012)

Now that Nobleprofessor updated the pic, I realized that I have that same exact blazer. I bought it on eBay when I first starting out although it turns out mine is too big for me (I realized this once I got a better understanding for fit). The weird thing is I have seen others post pics of this exact Lanvin blazer the forums at least 2 other times...somehow, this blazer seems to be common on the thrift scene.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

alkydrinker said:


> Now that Nobleprofessor updated the pic, I realized that I have that same exact blazer. I bought it on eBay when I first starting out although it turns out mine is too big for me (I realized this once I got a better understanding for fit). The weird thing is I have seen others post pics of this exact Lanvin blazer the forums at least 2 other times...somehow, this blazer seems to be common on the thrift scene.


It is common on the thrift scene because there was a lot of it sold new. Plus, the difference between licensed and "genuine" isn't as well known as is the case with, say, RL, so buyers (and before that sellers) buy it thinking that they're getting some rare French designer goods. Kind of like Christian Dior. 99.9999 percent of it is licensed, but people keep making the same mistake.

There's an object lesson here. Don't worry so much about labels as the quality of construction. It is easy to tell the difference between licensed Lanvin and the real deal--canvassing, handwork, quality of fabric, etc.--just as it is easy to tell the difference between Chaps and Purple Label, even without any labels at all.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> It is common on the thrift scene because there was a lot of it sold new. Plus, the difference between licensed and "genuine" isn't as well known as is the case with, say, RL, so buyers (and before that sellers) buy it thinking that they're getting some rare French designer goods. Kind of like Christian Dior. 99.9999 percent of it is licensed, but people keep making the same mistake.
> 
> There's an object lesson here. Don't worry so much about labels as the quality of construction. It is easy to tell the difference between licensed Lanvin and the real deal--canvassing, handwork, quality of fabric, etc.--just as it is easy to tell the difference between Chaps and Purple Label, even without any labels at all.


I didn't buy it because of the name. Frankly, I had never heard of Lanvin before this. I bought it because it looked like a nice blue blazer. I liked the fact that it had pick stitching, the fabric looked nice and I liked the little pleats (or whatever they are called) on the pockets. AND, it was $4.

There are a few brands that I will buy just because of the name. Not because I want them for myself, but because I know they sell. Such as Ferragamo, Oxxford, Armani (the real thing not AX), Alden, Purple Label Ralph Lauren, Canali, Zegna, Burberry (although this is, I admit, a little trickier), Gucci, Brioni, Robert Graham, etc.

If I'm just looking at quality, its probably going to be a purchase for me to keep -- not to sell.

BUT, I do thank you for finding the labels and providing them so I know in the future if I find the old one, I should buy it. But, there again that would be a case where I WOULD buy it just because of the label.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

^^

There are a myriad of factors, as you point out. Some of the labels you cite are not automatics in my book, though. They were once, but, without going into details, some labels are not slam dunks, even though they may be rare where you thrift. They certainly are rare in the stores I frequent, but you have to remember that they are not necessarily rare in Chicago or LA or other big cities, Birmingham excepted. I used to snap up everything by BB, for instance. Now, I know better.

More and more, I go by what I would wear myself and leave the rest. Today was a good example. Against my better judgment, I purchased a mint Pendleton shacket. Never seen one like it before, and I've seen a lot of Pendleton. It's wool (navy) on the outside, chamois cloth on the inside with satin-lined sleeves and a corduroy collar. Really a beautiful piece. It just needs the right owner to appreciate it. Will I find one? I don't know. If push comes to shove, I'll end up keeping it, which won't be a disaster--as I say, I bought it because I would wear it myself.

Your Lanvin blazer may or may not get love. But, would you wear it yourself? If not, I think that's a reason to pause and consider. It isn't the money so much as the closet space, at least in my house. That's why I have gotten pickier over the years. It's no fun to make that haul of shame back to the thrift store to re-donate stuff that proved a mistake.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> ^^
> 
> There are a myriad of factors, as you point out. Some of the labels you cite are not automatics in my book, though. They were once, but, without going into details, some labels are not slam dunks, even though they may be rare where you thrift. They certainly are rare in the stores I frequent, but you have to remember that they are not necessarily rare in Chicago or LA or other big cities, Birmingham excepted. I used to snap up everything by BB, for instance. Now, I know better.
> 
> ...


If it is 100% wool Pendleton, it would be an automatic purchase for me. I think your advice about not just buying something because of the label is sound advice for a novice thrifter. Your example of Christian Dior is probably the best example. 99.9999% of the time a Christian Dior labelled item at a thrift store is crap. But, there are those very rare exceptions. My wife bought a Christian Dior vintage penior set. She knew it was vintage. After some research, she discovered it was from 1940. It sold for MANY hundreds.

I agree with you about BB. When I found a BB suit years ago, I was very excited. But, I have learned there are vast differences in BB. There is also a limited market on ebay.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> If it is 100% wool Pendleton, it would be an automatic purchase for me. I think your advice about not just buying something because of the label is sound advice for a novice thrifter. Your example of Christian Dior is probably the best example. 99.9999% of the time a Christian Dior labelled item at a thrift store is crap. But, there are those very rare exceptions. My wife bought a Christian Dior vintage penior set. She knew it was vintage. After some research, she discovered it was from 1940. It sold for MANY hundreds.
> 
> I agree with you about BB. When I found a BB suit years ago, I was very excited. But, I have learned there are vast differences in BB. There is also a limited market on ebay.


Pendleton, too, can prove a finicky market. Certain things are automatic pickups, yeah, but if the collar points are too long on a shirt or if it's a sport coat or an overcoat, they can be tough flips. It's one of the hardest things to do, walk away from a quality garment because it doesn't fit and has no flip value. But you have to do it.

I can't emphasize it enough: Labels are only the beginning. You really do have to know clothing. Novices go by labels because they don't know clothing. That's something you learn from experience. Check out Nordstrom Rack. You'll see tons and tons of discounted stuff by Burberry. That right there tells you that Burberry isn't an automatic pickup. It has become ubiquitous. Certain things, such as a Burberry trenches, yes. But most Burberry shirts are passes. Ebay completed listings don't lie. A lot of brands that were once iconic are no longer iconic, and they sell for next to nothing if they sell at all. Shopping by label is a recipe for closets overstuffed by stuff you can't move.

Disagree strongly about eBay being a limited market. It is the single best resource to determine what something--be it clothing, used motorcycle parts or record albums--is worth. The hard truth is, the online market is flooded with used clothing and a lot of stuff that you and I wish and believe should fetch more simply doesn't fetch anything.


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

It's probably worth your time to check out these two threads on StyleForum. There's a lot of fluff to dig through but it's well worth it for even a semi-serious seller:

https://www.styleforum.net/t/9006/the-official-thrift-discount-store-bragging-thread/0_50

https://www.styleforum.net/t/309281/buying-and-selling-on-ebay-tips-tricks-problems-questions/0_50


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

32rollandrock said:


> Pendleton, too, can prove a finicky market. Certain things are automatic pickups, yeah, but if the collar points are too long on a shirt or if it's a sport coat or an overcoat, they can be tough flips. It's one of the hardest things to do, walk away from a quality garment because it doesn't fit and has no flip value. But you have to do it.
> 
> I can't emphasize it enough: Labels are only the beginning. You really do have to know clothing. Novices go by labels because they don't know clothing. That's something you learn from experience. Check out Nordstrom Rack. You'll see tons and tons of discounted stuff by Burberry. That right there tells you that Burberry isn't an automatic pickup. It has become ubiquitous. Certain things, such as a Burberry trenches, yes. But most Burberry shirts are passes. Ebay completed listings don't lie. A lot of brands that were once iconic are no longer iconic, and they sell for next to nothing if they sell at all. Shopping by label is a recipe for closets overstuffed by stuff you can't move.
> 
> Disagree strongly about eBay being a limited market. It is the single best resource to determine what something--be it clothing, used motorcycle parts or record albums--is worth. The hard truth is, the online market is flooded with used clothing and a lot of stuff that you and I wish and believe should fetch more simply doesn't fetch anything.


you misunderstood what I meant about a limited market. I was referring to Brooks Brothers on eBay. BB just doesn't sell very well because there is a limited number of people who know its value. I'm not talking about whether it sells. BB sells on eBay, but not for very much. The limited number of people who want a 3/2 sack will bid like crazy for one. But, most don't even know what it means. Things like that sell on here. Obviously there are exceptions.

for example a new Brooks OCBD would attract lots of attention on this forum. But, on eBay? It's going to sell about as well as any other moderately expensive shirt. If I'm buying just to sell, I'd rather find a Robert Graham and sell it for $50-90, instead of a BB that I sell for $30.

I was definitely not saying ebay itself is limited. It's practicaly the largest "market" in the world. I sell everything on but except in the very rare exceptions that I sell or trade on here.

Also, I think your statement about Burberry is overbroad. Classic burberry items sell for good money. Ordinary Burberry doesn't sell for much UNLESS (and this is the important difference) it has a large burberry logo or it is the Nova check. I just sold 5 very nice burberry dress shirts on eBay. Nice shirts. Really. In a good size. They sold for $61. But, a little while ago, I sold a cheaply made Burberry polo with the logo for $59 in the first hour it was listed. Right before that I sold boring Green burberry dress shirt WITH THE NOVA CHECK on the collar, the pocket, and the cuffs for over $100. People want other people to know they are wearing Burberry. So, I don't agree that the average ebay buyer who buys burberry gives a crap about quality. As long as it looks like they spent a lot of money on it they are happy.


----------



## 32rollandrock (May 1, 2008)

Nobleprofessor said:


> you misunderstood what I meant about a limited market. I was referring to Brooks Brothers on eBay. BB just doesn't sell very well because there is a limited number of people who know its value. I'm not talking about whether it sells. BB sells on eBay, but not for very much. The limited number of people who want a 3/2 sack will bid like crazy for one. But, most don't even know what it means. Things like that sell on here. Obviously there are exceptions.
> 
> for example a new Brooks OCBD would attract lots of attention on this forum. But, on eBay? It's going to sell about as well as any other moderately expensive shirt. If I'm buying just to sell, I'd rather find a Robert Graham and sell it for $50-90, instead of a BB that I sell for $30.
> 
> ...


Still not sure that I agree. I suspect that a new BB must-iron OCBD would fetch more on eBay than it would on the Exchange. In fact, I'm hard-pressed to think of anything, properly listed and described, that would fetch more on the Exchange than it would on eBay--well, I'll amend that. Certain rare unlined-collar BB OCBD's might, just might, be an exception. But there are just so many more buyers on eBay than there are here. Plus, it is much easier on eBay to get alerts when something is listed that buyers are interested in--I don't think that there is an equivalent alert here, although I might be mistaken. Plus, eBay has a feed that helps spur sales.

I almost always list here first for significantly less than what I'd charge on eBay, and it seems that it has gotten harder and harder to find buyers. Case in point: I twice listed a Pendleton blazer here for $25 or so recently, it was up for more than a month and got zero interest before going to the bay, where a bidding war erupted and it ended up selling for $50. I'm not complaining. It is what it is, although I'd much rather sell stuff here than on eBay. It's a hobby, not a business, and if the IRS ever comes calling, it will be easy to show that I actually lose money when mileage is considered. I try not to get addicted to the thrill of flipping, which can be hard, and I've probably left stuff in recent months that I should have grabbed. I now err on the side of leaving, if that makes sense.

Speaking of Burberry, I found a made-in-England overcoat by Burberry a couple months ago that is astonishingly gorgeous. I'm 99.99 percent sure that the fur around the collar is sheared beaver--at least, it feels exactly the same as the sheared beaver on my Orvis ambassador's hat, and I'll eventually show it to a furrier to confirm. It was $10, but it would be half-off the next day, and I stood there for at least five minutes debating whether I should buy it or come back the next day. I ended up pulling the trigger, and in retrospect, I can't believe I had any doubt. I have a formal event tomorrow and I'll be wearing it over my rig presuming the weather is--cross fingers--cold enough. It is so, so pimp, and yet so classic, a thick charcoal twill wool with a big-ass fur collar that, flipped up, would cover the top of your ears. The sort of thing that would be a tough flip whilst lesser Burberry flies out the window. I'll post a photo soon.


----------



## Nobleprofessor (Jul 18, 2014)

Do I have these sizes about right?

HT SC 40-41R ?

*P2P -- 22.5"*

*SLEEVE 26" *

*SHOULDER 18.25"*

*BOC 31.75"

Another HT SC -- 39 - 40R ?

*
P2P - 21"

SLEEVE 24.5

SHOULDER 17.5"

BOC 31"

Last HT SC 41-42R ?

P2P 23"

SLEEVE 24.5"

SHOULDER 18.5"

BOC 31"


----------



## Reuben (Aug 28, 2013)

Top one's more of a 42-43 ML in my opinion.


----------

