>>8511873But they're ugly as HELL. I legitimately think they're the ugliest collector toy in existence. Significantly worse than Funkos, even. If you're going to make an expensive, special product why not make it... look good? So many luxury products are all about style over substance, which is fine. But stuff like bearbrick has NEITHER. I don't understand why people would pay money for something that's expensive, poorly made, looks awful and has little actual use.
Hell, even Supreme makes more sense. Sure the designs are simple, but the stuff they make at least looks somewhat good, and you can wear most of their products, which is part of the whole point of a status symbol. Something like bearbrick, you don't even have anyone to show it off to. It will look out of place in photography shoots because of its proportions and the general designs, so you can't really do that to share online.
I just don't understand. It goes against every reason why people buy things, aside from one reason: exclusivity. [But once again, what's the point of rare and limited things if you can't flaunt them? Just to look at them and think "wow I spent a lot of money before other people got the chance"]
