At what point do designer shoes become 'vintage' from a seller/buyer's point of view? [photos]

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Am planning to eBay (or Vestiaire?) some Gucci boots bought in early 2000's (let's say 2002) that have been sitting under my bed for about 15 years. At what point do you classify them as vintage? Should I even do that? Feel a bit bad putting boots up that are so old and people may think they're more recent. Could it even be a selling point?

They're in pretty good nick (very minor scuffs), due to buying them in the sale and being too small. (Have 'delightful' memories of a particularly painful sightseeing weekend in Paris ).

Also have no idea of price to put them up for Buy Now. Am wary of going straight to auction.

[FleeceDetective]

Ooh they’re sexy boots! Nothing more useful to add sorry.

[HundredMilesAnHour]

Vintage is considered to be anything 20 years old and above, up to 100 years (when it becomes 'antique' rather than 'vintage). But the term is widely abused and so many people call something 'vintage' when really it's just secondhand and older than last season.

[OnASwissRoll]

I'd use the term 'retro' rather than vintage

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Thanks so much for your quick input. So I think we now know:

1. They could be construed as 'sexy' (thanks fleesedetective!)
2. They don't qualify for the 20 years plus vintage tag (thank you hundredmile)
3. Retro is a potential descriptor (aka Britney Spears at her height retro). Thanks Swiss roll.

Am wondering how many people are selling 17 year old Gucci boots - do they describe them as retro or just gloss over that and post them as simply 'used'?

[ILikeyourHairyHands]

As a matter of interest OP, what size are they and what price were you thinking?

Am in the market for a pair exactly like that!

[Methe]

Nice boots! What size are they?

[SweatyFretty]

I'd list them as Gucci 2002 A/W Collection or whatever.

[ILikeyourHairyHands]

I saw them first Methe!

[InterstellarSleepingElla]

Love those boots!

[WeeM]

They are lovely! Perhaps you’d have better luck on a Facebook selling group-there’s some good ones for designer stuff

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Haha...this could be a serendipitous moment many Mumsnetters! They are 38.5 aka 5.5. And depending on your height - I'm 5.4 and they come just under my knees.

During the 2002 A/W collection (love that sweaty - thank you ), I was a 6-8 and managed to tuck my bootleg jeans into them. Now at size 10+ there is no room (but I've always had what people call 'shapely' calves so bigger than normal people of my size).

[botemp]

2002 means it was Gucci under Tom Ford IIRC so definitely stick that in the title, his work is definitely coming under renewed attention so will have people looking for that era and prices will reflect that.

I'd suggest going with Vestiaire, they give suggested prices on the basis of what similar items sold for and specific buyers for that are more likely to be there.

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Botemp, thank you - that's very interesting about Tom Ford and does make you think it could possibly be worth holding onto these kind of items for longer. Although to be fair it could be like trying to sell unboxed and used Dr Who memorabilia.

Which I must add, I got them re-soled and re-heeled as the original ones were very fine.

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Oh and hairyhands, I've no idea about price I'm afraid. I need someone to tell what they're worth - have no idea!

[ILikeyourHairyHands]

Gah! Unfortunately I'm a 7, lovely boots though. Second Versitare rather than eBay for resale.

[ILikeyourHairyHands]

Vestiaire!

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Oh shame. I'm a 7 too (or 6.5 on a good day), which is why they didn't fit in the first place . Thanks for you input anyway hairy and I hope you find your perfect pair of knee high brown leather boots.

[TeacupDrama]

vintage is 60-70's maybe 80's at a push, like someone else said not old enough for antique but older than second hand / from the range of a few years ago
technically i think vintage is 25 years old minimum so 1993 at the earliest, however I think clothes might be a bit less maybe 15 years

for instance Art Nouveau stuff at the moment is Antique and Art Deco is Vintage however within the next 2-3 years early Art Deco will become antiques

[StellaRockafella]

I believe clothing (and accessories) has to be at least 25 years old to be considered vintage. Furniture much older.

However, there are exceptions. Particular labels/collections from the past 20 years are considered highly desirable - all of Tom Ford for Gucci, Alexander McQueen and Galliano's early work, and the Prada lipstick pleated skirt to name a just a few examples, and these are sold as vintage and can demand high prices.

Your boots are nice but nothing special. Sorry. They don't scream Gucci or were featured in their ad campaigns (these items can also demand high prices). Sell them for what you'd pay for them if you were buying secondhand. You'll probably make more money on eBay than Vestiaire.

PS. I think it's Patsy in Ab Fab who made a crack about what we wore last will be considered vintage. Or something like that!

[BettyCrook]

to me 30 years+

[BettyCrook]

I would not use retro or vintage just state the year 2002

[Racecardriver]

20 years plus is vintage. 100 years plus is antique.

[heartshapedpositnotes]

Thank you to recent posters, I really appreciate your input. And Stella, I agree, have always considered them as nice but not outstanding- so that's really useful advice, thank you.

[MarcieBluebell]

They aren't vintage. I would sell without even stating their age. 2002 has just misses the 90's so I think 2002 just makes them seem outdated. I know I sound harsh but don't think the boots actually look outdated.

[jellybeans44]

Oh my god I love them!! Post the link when you put them up!