jeff bertolotti

The Price of Nothing: On Luxury and Sign Value

Through the ad man and our royal families, the fat cat will never run out of treats.

Thanks for reading “The Land of Make Believe” Newsletter! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.Subscribed

I’m forever fascinated by the addiction to brands in this country, whether burgers, handbags, or political tribes, it seems the Westerner will always gladly drain the warm blood from his/her body to cling onto a cold Brand that speaks to the rest of his/her flock, or the population in general. It’s as though life itself is replaced by these artificial desires instilled in us by the corporate fat cats. Here are just a few of the items that show just how demented we have become over the years.

Highest-Markup Luxury Consumer Items in the U.S.

1. Designer Handbags

• Brands: Hermès (esp. Birkin & Kelly), Chanel, Louis Vuitton
• Markups: Up to 1,000% or more
• Why: Exclusivity, craftsmanship mystique, waitlists, and celebrity endorsement.

2. Luxury Watches

• Brands: Rolex, Patek Philippe, Audemars Piguet
• Markups: 300–900%, even more on resale
• Why: Brand legacy, limited production, collector hype.

3. Cosmetics and Skincare

• Brands: La Mer, Sisley Paris, Clé de Peau
• Markups: Up to 1,500%+
• Why: Small quantities, emotional appeal, marketing around luxury ingredients (many of which are inexpensive).

4. Designer Clothing

• Brands: Gucci, Balenciaga, Prada
• Markups: Often 400–800%
• Why: Brand cachet, seasonal exclusivity, runway relevance.

5. High-End Eyewear

• Brands: Cartier, Tom Ford, Oliver Peoples
• Markups: 1,000% or more
• Why: Controlled supply chains, licensing, and brand premiums.

6. Fine Jewelry

• Brands: Tiffany & Co., Cartier, Van Cleef & Arpels
• Markups: 500–1,000%
• Why: High emotional value, markups on both materials and branding.

7. Luxury Spirits & Wines

• Examples: Louis XIII Cognac, Screaming Eagle Wine
• Markups: 500%+
• Why: Limited release, prestige, presentation, and aging mythology.

8. Luxury Perfumes

• Brands: Roja Parfums, Clive Christian, Creed
• Markups: 800–1,200%
• Why: Often only a few drops of rare ingredients with extreme branding.

9. High-End Sneakers & Streetwear (Hype Items)

• Brands: Yeezy (in its prime), Off-White, Nike x Travis Scott
• Markups: 500–1,000%+ on resale
• Why: Artificial scarcity and resale culture.

10. Luxury Cars (Low Volume Editions)

• Brands: Bugatti, Rolls-Royce, Ferrari limited editions
• Markups: Factory markups can be 2x cost, dealer markups even higher for rare models.

---

“The system of objects is a system of signs, in which the consumption of goods is not directed toward the satisfaction of needs, but rather toward the production of difference.”
— Jean Baudrillard, “The System of Objects”

This speaks directly to the reality of luxury goods. When a handbag is marked up 1,000%, it’s not because the bag carries your stuff better—it’s because it signifies difference, status, and symbolic capital. The object becomes valuable not for what it is, but for what it means.

In Baudrillard’s view, consumption is no longer about utility or even beauty—it’s about managing signs in a social code. Buying a Hermès Birkin or a bottle of Louis XIII isn’t about the leather or the cognac—it’s about inserting yourself into the system of prestige, even if you’re doing it unconsciously.

In Baudrillard’s theory of simulacra, objects (and experiences) pass through four stages:

Consumption is a reflection of a profound simulated reality

The luxury watch tells time, like most watches do.

The $50,000 watch is not about craftsmanship, history, or family legacy.

Nobody really cares if the watch tells time—it’s a social flex, a fetish.

It bears no relation to any reality whatever past telling time: it is its own pure simulacrum.

The luxury watch as pure symbol. A Richard Mille on the wrist becomes a cipher—its price, complexity, and scarcity simulate meaning, but it means nothing by itself. It’s a hologram of value.

I believe Baudrillard would say that the $10,000 handbag or $2,000 cream isn’t overpriced because it’s disconnected from utility. It’s overpriced because pricing itself becomes the symbol of desire. The markup isn’t a bug—it’s the whole point. The consumer is no longer buying an item; they’re buying into the illusion of difference, of superiority, of immortality in a symbolic order.

“We live in a world where there is more and more information, and less and less meaning.”
— Baudrillard, “Simulacra and Simulation”

So the luxury object becomes a floating signifier, detached from material ground, orbiting in the galaxy of simulation. The Birkin bag doesn’t “carry”—it signifies carrying, and thus supersedes the actual need.

A Patek Philippe might wrap itself in the language of craftsmanship and family legacy but we know it’s true value.

A seductive aesthetic mythology. The object doesn’t need to be those things—it only needs to signify them convincingly enough for the market to fall under its spell.

In truth, the sign of craftsmanship has replaced craftsmanship.

A $1,000 watch made in Switzerland and a $10 replica from Shenzhen can look almost identical. But the meaning—the symbolic charge—is completely different. The aura of the “real” luxury watch isn’t grounded in its mechanics or artistry. It’s grounded in its price, exclusivity, and narrative. It may be about those things… or it may just be a simulacrum that simulates the values of craftsmanship without requiring them at all.

“Consumption is not a material practice, it’s a system of meaning.“
— Jean Baudrillard, “Consumer Society: Myths and Structures”

“Luxury is no longer a matter of wealth, it is a matter of sign value.”
— Baudrillard, paraphrased from “For a Critique of the Political Economy of the Sign”

In the world Baudrillard maps out, to wear a $10,000 watch isn’t to possess wealth, but to circulate a sign—a code, a declaration in the semiotic marketplace.

And the real twist? Even those who can’t afford the luxury item are drawn into its orbit. They desire not the thing, but the symbol—and often consume cheaper simulations (knockoffs, influencers, aspirational marketing) to play along in the symbolic economy.

Baudrillard tells us that luxury is no longer wealth, but sign value. That in the marketplace of images, it is not ownership but visibility that defines meaning. A handbag, a watch, a scent—these are no longer goods but codes in circulation.

But to stop there is to risk an even deeper alienation. Baudrillard maps the territory of simulation with genius precision, but he leaves us stranded in the desert of signs. What is missing is the person—not as consumer, but as valuer.

If Max Scheler were to interrupt, he might say: “No, luxury is not the simulation of value—it is the misplacement of value. It is the confusion of the lower material sphere with the higher realm of the spirit.” The luxury good does not only simulate meaning—it displaces the very structure of values, placing status where dignity should be, display where depth might live.

And Kierkegaard would press even further: “Despair is the sickness unto death”—and what is the luxury economy if not a desperate attempt to escape the despair of becoming a self?

***

There is another path—not through the accumulation of signs, but through an orientation toward value. Not prestige, but presence.

---

In short: Luxury isn’t about owning—it’s about broadcasting.