Gwyneth Paltrow hits out at 'exorbitantly expensive' designer clothes while selling a $1,195 coat on her website Goop

The range is anything but cheap 

Sarah Young
Tuesday 25 October 2016 12:15 BST
Comments
(Getty Images for goop)

Support truly
independent journalism

Our mission is to deliver unbiased, fact-based reporting that holds power to account and exposes the truth.

Whether $5 or $50, every contribution counts.

Support us to deliver journalism without an agenda.

Louise Thomas

Louise Thomas

Editor

Actress Gwyneth Paltrow has slammed designers for selling overpriced clothes - while selling a $1,195 coat on her own website.

In a recent interview with Fast Company, she said: "I find, as a consumer, that the price points of some of my favourite designer clothing is so exorbitantly expensive."

She went on to tout her company Goop's 'direct-to-consumer' model where high-quality products are sold for smaller mark-ups.

Goop Label's Gwyneth Soft Crombie Coat will set you back $1,195
Goop Label's Gwyneth Soft Crombie Coat will set you back $1,195

But the website's line-up is far from cheap - with a $1,195 crombie coat, $595 dress and $695 blazer.

Gwyneth says that Goop Label clothing is made in the same Italian factories that manufacture for high-end brands like Proenza Schouler and Dries Van Noten.

Goop Label's Classic G.Tote is a steep $285
Goop Label's Classic G.Tote is a steep $285

The line is being released as a monthly capsule collection, with up to five items being introduced at a time.

Despite the high cost, the capsule collections have proven popular, selling out within a matter of hours.

In the interview, Gwyneth was also keen to deal with the rumour that she would be distancing herself from the lifestyle brand.

Speaking to the 2016 Sage Summit earlier this year she said: “'In order to build the brand I want to build, its scalability is limited if I connect it to the brand.”

The Altieri Shawl Collar Dress costs $595
The Altieri Shawl Collar Dress costs $595

“So I always think how can I grow the brand, how can I separate myself from the brand and I think it's going to be more its own brand.”

She claims that her comment was misunderstood and meant that: “When I think about true scale, the less the brand has to leverage me, the more it can achieve true scale by itself,” she says. “Somehow that became that I was leaving.”

Join our commenting forum

Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies

Comments

Thank you for registering

Please refresh the page or navigate to another page on the site to be automatically logged inPlease refresh your browser to be logged in