Across nine markets, 65% of affluent and high net worth respondents say too many luxury brands have raised prices without improving quality. Most buyers nevertheless rate their chosen brand as good value, while some consumers report shifting spending to lower-priced premium alternatives.
Across nine markets in TrendLens Wave 1 2026, 65% of affluent and high net worth respondents agree that too many luxury brands have raised prices without improving quality. Yet 87% of fashion clothing buyers say the brand they most recently bought offers good value.
Among jewellery buyers, 89% say their chosen brand offers good value, and among wines and spirits buyers, 90% say their chosen brand offers good value.
The complaint is not a blanket rejection of luxury value. Across the full sample, 82% agree that luxury brands are still delivering value for the prices they charge. Respondents can object to price increases without dismissing what luxury brands offer at the current price.
The broader question asks respondents to think about luxury brands they currently buy, while the good-value question names the brand most recently purchased. The survey does not identify which brands respondents believe raised prices without improving quality.
Japan’s buyers question chosen-brand prices
In Japan, 81% of respondents agree that too many luxury brands have raised prices without improving quality.
The criticism also appears in a minority of the judgements about recently purchased brands: 6% of Japanese fashion clothing buyers call their chosen brand overpriced, and 7% of Japanese jewellery buyers call their chosen brand overpriced. Japan is the only surveyed market above 5% on either measure.
Even in Japan, 90% of fashion clothing buyers say their chosen brand offers good value, and 89% of jewellery buyers say their chosen brand offers good value.
The market warrants attention because some recent buyers explicitly question their chosen brand’s price, not because most buyers reject the value it offers.
Good value is not a spending commitment
A brand-value rating comes from someone who has already chosen the brand.
That is useful evidence about a purchase relationship, but it does not describe the people who considered the brand and decided against buying it. Nor does a positive rating establish a commitment to keep future spending with the brand.
Across the full sample, 23% say that in the past 12 months they have actively shifted some spending to lower-priced, high-quality premium alternatives to luxury brands they felt had become too expensive. A further 42% report trying those alternatives while continuing to buy traditional luxury.
Trying a premium alternative alongside luxury is different from shifting spending away. These responses report purchases and spending decisions, not revenue lost by any particular brand. A favourable judgement of the brand most recently bought can coexist with spending on alternatives.
For luxury pricing and customer leaders, the next test is whether favourable value ratings accompany repeat purchases and retained spending. Track customers who stop buying as well as recent purchasers, and distinguish trial of alternatives from substitution.
The commercial risk is losing a share of the customer’s spending while mistaking approval of the brand’s value for a commitment to buy again.