To wonder why clothes aren't more expensive in bigger sizes

[mrsfoof]

If you buy children's clothes, you'll have probably noticed that you have to pay a good few quid more for a T-shirt in age 12 than you would for the exact same T-shirt in age 5. Fair enough, the bigger size uses a lot more fabric.

Why then, is a size 24 ladies' T-shirt the same price as the same T-shirt in a size 6, despite it using a lot more - maybe even twice as much - fabric?

Would people be more motivated to stay a healthy weight if they had to pay more for bigger clothes? Why don't we charge more for bigger clothes? Are the prices based on the average amount of fabric used - so skinny people pay more and very large people pay less than they should do based on the resources used to make their clothes?

FWIW I'm marginally overweight and wouldn't have a problem paying more for my size 14 than a 6. I think it would motivate me to lose some weight if the size 10 was cheaper though!

I think it just comes down to demand. How many bigger sizes are in demand? I've noticed that during sales it's always the L, XL, etc that are left or available. I'm a size 8/S/Petite - you won't find these sizes a few days after a sale. Otoh Petite clothing is more expensive- demand again.

No

Yes kids grow, but it could still be seen as discrimination against taller kids (the 6 year old who is the height of a 9 year old) or fat kids (the chubby 3 year old who has to have an age 5 skirt because the age 3 is too tight).

Yet nobody complains about that.

I agree with you OP, it’s nothing to do with fat shaming it’s to do with the amount of fabric used, more fabric costs more money? You wouldn’t expect to pay the same for 12 eggs as you would 6? you wouldn’t expect to pay the same for a pack of 12 toilet rolls as you would a pack of 6?

But hey, we can’t see this in real life as it’s fat shaming and unfair to make larger or taller people pay more for clothes made out of more fabric.

So if a larger person wants to go camping should they be able to buy a bigger tent to sleep in for the same price as a smaller tent?

I know I’m going to get bashed here but I do get OP’s point.

Oh look you ignored everything else in my post and only want to address the kids clothing AGAIN. As other PP have already pointed out to you it is also about VAT.

I find kids clothes are generally the same price as adults which given kids clothes are VAT free suggests it's nowt todo with amount of fabric.
Also not all shops increase price according to age of child, mountain warehouse has a standard price regardless of buying size 3-4 or 11-12.
Some clothes shops do charge more for larger sizes, often these are then sold at the same price as smaller sizes in the sales.

Completely agree. Things that cost per volume should be charged by volume. No idea why you get an extra 5 kg of body weight free but have to pay for baggage. Combined weight IMHO

Sorry. Completely forgot to mention whilst flying

You seem to have missed aLl the comments relating to height. Tall people are usually bigger than short people. A tall healthy person could easily be a 14. Very unlikely to be a 6. Tall people can't help being tall. If you charged more due to this it would be a form of discrimination. It would be the same as charging more for say darker toned foundations than lighter ones in the UK as more light foundations are sold so the unit price would be cheaper. Or charging taller (so heavier) people in planes. Do you know what discrimination is?

Do one what?

Given the great strides the fashion industry has taken to distance itself from glamourising eating disorders, I can't see there being a rush of manufacturers wanting to be seen to incentivise being as small as possible.

The costs lie in things like pattern making, design, energy costs and logistics as well as the actual fabric, which is often pennies.

You missed bin bag. 😂

Larger sizes use more cloth for sure, but perhaps with less wastage of cloth. Very highly qualified people with access to very specialised software and design systems may be better placed to answer the cost question. But here's another question. Given that the (by a mile) sizes of 'remaindered' clothes -sold off at outlets/eBay are smaller sizes, what does that tell you about waste and cost?

If you think it's either necessary or such a good idea, OP, then yes, why aren't they more expensive? Could it be that retailers understand the market far better than you and know it doesn't make commercial sense to charge bigger people more?

The cost of the fabric is negligible compared to the other costs. I assume they charge more for older kids just because they want to.

And no it's a horrible idea. I doubt anyone is overweight or obese because they have too much money. You come across as fat shaming and as if you want a medal for being a fairly standard size (even if overweight..)

I'm sure the OP knows whether, or not, she is overweight. I'd definitely be overweight if I was a 14.

Feel free to suggest to vendors then to charge a few pence more for larger items (as the fabric cost won't be that much) but also ask them to offer a discount based on demand, reduced complexity and wastage for larger sizes.

Agree wholeheartedly with you pixie…let’s get on the scales at the airport!!

Bone structure can affect clothes size. I have two children who are identical in height and we can see both of their hip bones, but they wear different size clothes because one has broader hips and shoulders.

They can just about share shirts, but only if they're baggy on the narrower one, and they can't share trousers or skirts -- ones that fit the broader one falls off the other. They're just very different shapes.

That's kinda the thing - two people can be the same height and a similar healthy weight and still be wearing different size clothes (before getting into how clothes size varies) entirely on body type. My husband and older son are about the same height, one has a long torso and short legs, the other is the other way around so they'd need entirely different clothes, whatever they weigh - their skeletons are very different.

Part of all of this is 'because companies decided it worked best for them'. With industrialization as it's developed, the components stopped being the biggest factor in this a long time ago. Tax on adult clothes, corporate wants and image are a bigger contributor to price. However, there are a lot of factors in clothes sizes and cost to manufacture beyond what someone's BMI is. I have shirts I bought when I was 25 kilos lighter (very underweight at the time) that still fit because of how I carry weight. Having clothes be cheaper when I was underweight wouldn't really have done much for me to healthy...

Same old shit on these types of threads. Let's make life as difficult as possible for these lazy obese people who are a drain on the NHS and make thrm feel more shit than they already probably do. . That will motivate them to lose weight. Well no it will probably have the reverse effect.
Fuck off. I am currently a size 20. I don't want to be a size 20 but I am suffering from depression and low mood due to external factors.When things were more stable and I wasn't so stressed. Anxious and depressed I lost weight. Still overweight just. Yet since lockdown my kids MH has taken a nosedive with inverse correlation with my weight.
I have been spectacularly let down by the NHS prescribing wrong meds leaving me with months of unnecessary pain. I have had diddly squat help with my low mood but my size 10 friend was automatically given drugs. So much prejudice in NHS with obesity. Excuse of a GP who funked up my meds seemed quite disappointed I wasn't diabetic and than suggested I fo a little exercise. Is 56KM continuous not enough for for you?
Same GP was convinced bloods were wrong or it must be down to meds when DH came out as pre diabetic. He is the one who needs to actually do a little exercise but as far as they know he is normal weight so must be ok. OK he is only that weight because he only eats one meal
Per day and no fruit or veg in sight.

Do you think being a size 4 is healthier that a 12?

I was speaking for myself (I'm overweight) when I said maybe it would be motivating. I genuinely think that I would be more motivated to lose weight if clothes were a few £ cheaper in smaller sizes, or if I could get cheaper seats on a plane or whatever. I appreciate not everyone would feel the same.

’Incentivising’ people to lose weight doesn’t work. Obese people already know that society looks down on them, and have to put up with all sorts of crap because of their size. They know that they’d have a much easier time and probably be treated far more kindly by many people if they were slimmer. They also already know that their health might be better (in some cases, not all) if they weren’t overweight. Those are two pretty big incentives to lose weight. But sure, the possibility of saving a couple of quid on a t-shirt is what’s finally going to motivate people to do it.

There are many many reasons why someone might be overweight and why they might not be actively losing weight at any given time, but a lack of ‘incentives’ is not one of them.