Singer (kind of) turned fashion designer Victoria will launch a new, more ‘affordable’ line called Victoria by Victoria Beckham due for fashion delivery in Spring 2012.
She told Women’s Wear Daily this collection could have been influenced by her pregnancy and the fact that she’s to have a girl as these pieces are more playful and girly than her Victoria Beckham line, now in its sixth season.
 |
| Dress from the Spring 2012 range |
When Victoria says affordable she means prices will retail around the £345 ($550) and £560($900) range which, when you consider her mainline dresses cost anything from £900 to £4,000, we suppose it’s a lot kinder to the wallet.
 |
| F/W 2011 dresses |
Victoria said: “I’m opening these designs to women and girls of all different shapes and sizes, people who maybe want something less tight and clingy and structured. It also makes it more comfortable for during the day. You can wear them with a pair of flats or a pair of heels and they look great. I take it (the price) into account when I’m designing the other line as well."
"Simply having a pocket — there are repercussions. Even with a handbag that costs thousands and thousands and thousands of pounds, I’m not going crazy. I’m still aware of how much the hardware costs exactly, exactly what the skin costs, how much the lining costs. At no point do I ever say it’s one of those one-off
showpieces.”
The Victoria Beckham range (which includes denim, bags and eyewear) is a commercial success – the brand made $8 million last year and celebrities and fashion editors love to be seen wearing it.
 |
| Was £135, now £60 |
 |
| Was £220, now £87 |
A lot has been made of the fact that she has brought this collection out while being pregnant with baby number 4. While taking nothing away from her, let’s not forget that she is a millionaire with an army of staff to take care of her every need or want, it’s not like she’s knee deep in Fairy liquid and ironing!
We do like the fact that unlike a lot of celebrities, most recently Mariah Carey who should have known better, she didn’t do a tacky half naked ‘look-at-my-pregnant-belly-everyone’ magazine cover.
She said of the offer: “I’m not really one of these people that likes to go out and pose and flaunt being pregnant. Not like there’s anything wrong in that. I’m so proud to be pregnant and I feel so blessed and so happy, I really do. But I’m just not that kind of person. So, no, I won’t be taking my clothes off. I don’t think anyone needs to see that, other than my husband. Absolutely not.’ We wholeheartedly agree. Do it if you want, but keep it to yourself!
or Gampl certainly stood rather quickly that it must be the 
