The Cost of copycats - Chasing aesthetics, losing integrity
In today’s world, it feels like the furniture industry is under siege from a wave of lookalike manufacturers. Copycat brands are replicating popular designs at speed, undercutting original designs by offering visually near-identical products at significantly lower prices and even retailing them under the marketing of best selling ‘dupes’. While the appeal to consumers is obvious (offering high-end aesthetics without the price tag), the long-term consequences are far more damaging for independent designers, ethical manufacturers, and the creative ecosystem as a whole.
Social media platforms like Instagram and Pinterest have become modern-day catalogues for interior design inspiration and imitation. As soon as a product gains visibility, copycats spring into action, reproducing the design with cheaper materials and skipping the costly processes of prototyping, testing, and development. These replicas, often manufactured in regions with lax IP enforcement, quickly saturate online marketplaces and are priced at a fraction of the original.
By bypassing the costs associated with R&D, design royalties, and quality materials, these companies position themselves as affordable alternatives. But their aggressive underpricing strategy does more than appeal to budget-conscious consumers. It actively undermines the companies that invest in creating the designs in the first place… and as a designer myself trying to combat this, it’s exhausting!
Social media influencers, intentionally or not, are also becoming powerful amplifiers of misinformation around design and value. A recent post by an account named @renovatewithellie went viral after questioning the pricing structures of high-end homeware brands.
The post stated: “Ever paused to wonder where that £950 ‘artisan’ lamp or £1,200 ‘designer’ throw actually came from? A lot of so-called luxury products in the UK are made in the same Chinese factories as high-street brands: same materials, similar craftsmanship, sometimes even the exact same product minus the branding. Yet after some clever styling and showroom lighting, the prices skyrocket.”
While these claims seem compelling, they paint an overly simplistic picture. I responded to the post with my own take - ’Just because a product appears on Alibaba doesn’t mean the supplier actually made it. Many vendors steal imagery from high-end brands like Soho Home or Restoration Hardware. When you place an order, they attempt to replicate it, often with subpar materials and none of the quality. The result rarely matches the original’.
This distinction is crucial. While it is true that many factories in China produce excellent quality goods, including for luxury brands, it is a mistake to assume that similar appearance equals identical quality, craftsmanship, or ethical sourcing. Assuming all luxury pricing is unjustified ignores the investment that goes into design, durability, and accountability. And just because you can find a matching image of a product from a high-end retailer on Alibaba for 1/4 of the price, it doesn’t mean that factory is or has ever produced it. It’s the furniture world’s version of ‘cat fishing’.
The real inspiration for this blog post came just this morning, as I received a promotional email from Sklum announcing the launch of their new ‘Jolie’ collection.
Curious, I clicked through and was immediately struck by the resemblance to Kave Home’s not long launched ’Granite’ range.
The similarities extend to material finishes, color combinations, and even product styling. This is not coincidental; it is a calculated reproduction and honestly, for me was very disheartening, as when Kave Home first launched Granite, I remember thinking it was a lovely collection that resonated with the trends but felt timeless in its aesthetic.
While I completely understand the need for more affordable furniture, especially in the current economic climate, achieving “the look” at a drastically lower price often involves cutting corners on quality. That trade-off shortens the product’s lifespan and contributes directly to the growing issue of fast furniture. This is a design economy that encourages rapid consumption and disposal, with devastating environmental consequences.
As a designer, it is disheartening to watch a product’s essence, its thoughtful proportions, materials, and ethos be reduced to a superficial aesthetic cover, which is stripped of durability, quality and integrity. Taking a closer look at the products online in comparison it’s clear that Kave Homes Granite range comes out on top, with premium density foams and internal structures built to last.
Even more frustrating is when the copied design is your own. I not long ago discovered that several major retailers, including Maze Furniture, Beliani, and UK outdoor furniture giant B&Q, were (and some of them still are) selling carbon-copy replicas of an outdoor furniture range I originally designed for Danetti back in 2017. These designs are now being sold at a fraction of the original price, undercutting Danetti significantly. Whilst its not the first time this has happened on a personal basis, this range is one I worked on for a significant amount of time and poured alot of effort into launching, so its hard to see it copied and sold as something which will probably be in landfill within the next 5 years.
For independent designers and the brands that support them, trying to keep up this fight feels impossible. There is little protection, few consequences for imitators, and a system that too often rewards speed over substance. It is not just about financial loss. It is about the erosion of creative integrity and the ultimate suppression of original thinkers.
While knock-offs might seem like smart, affordable buy, they often fall short in both performance and durability. These products are usually made with inferior materials, minimal oversight, and little to no aftercare support. More troubling is the ethical blind spot: many of these factories operate with poor worker conditions and no regard for environmental sustainability. A good example of poor knock off quality is when cheaper outdoor furniture uses inferior materials that rust or break within a year’s use. But in a saturated market full of polished adverts and low prices, it’s hard to show customers what they’re really getting. Copycat outdoor furniture may look the part but more often then not, it doesnt stand the test of time.
How Can We Change This?
Solving the copycat problem requires systemic change and a cultural shift, which isn’t easy. It starts with educating consumers to look beyond the price tag and question why something is so cheap, by digging into sourcing, materials, and whether the design has been ethically produced. We need to support the slow design movement by investing in fewer, better-quality pieces that are made to last. At the same time, the industry must rethink what affordability means, exploring smarter ways to reduce costs, such as modular design, sustainable materials, or local manufacturing, without compromising quality. Retailers also have a role to play by taking responsibility for what they sell, carefully vetting their supply chains, and supporting original creators instead of imitators. Copycat culture might offer short-term savings, but it creates long-term damage to creativity, the environment, and the true value of thoughtful design.