The word ‘dupe’ has two meanings: duplicate, and someone who is deceived (derived from a particularly gullible type of bird. Yes, seriously.)
That dual meaning has always had a certain elegance to it. After all, consumers are duped by dupes. They are made in an attempt to emulate well-known originals and trick consumers – or at least convince them they offer a comparable experience.
Or so the story has always gone.
The modern reality of dupes, however, is far more nuanced. We’ve come a long way from back alley pairs of ‘Niike’ trainers that disintegrate on contact with pavement.
Numerous high-profile companies now operate openly with entire product ranges ‘inspired by’ higher-end brand offerings. Some brands like e.l.f have founded their entire business model on it. Others, like Aldi, have increasingly embraced dupes as part of their identity.
While in the consumer packaged goods market store-brand or private label mimics have existed for decades, duping this explicit and on this scale in fashion, homeware, and fragrances is something new. Even the term ‘dupe’ itself has gained a certain cachet, frequently searched for and sought on purpose. Dupes have gone mainstream.
Brands are half-reacting to and half-shaping an extreme change in consumer attitudes – specifically how they feel and react to the inauthentic. For many, good dupes are no longer seen as settling for something less than the original, but smart shopping.
What that looks like in practical terms is that one third of US adults now admit to intentionally buying dupes. And the younger you look, the more willingness you’ll find – that rises to almost half among Gen Z. One UK study showed that from 2016 to 2024, willingness among consumers to purchase a luxury fake rose from 12% to 47% – effectively quadrupling in less than a decade.
But why? What can brands do about it? And what opportunities could it open up?
The first thing to consider with any economic shift is the economic climate as a whole. It’s basic, but when cost pressures are high, consumers are driven to seek cheaper alternatives.
In much of the world, inflation, cost of living increases, and wage stagnation have left many relatively out of pocket. These, combined with preferences or expectations formed in better economic conditions, create a potent driving force to specifically seek imitations.
Rocketing inflation has affected consumers worldwide (Credit: OECD)
Influencers on social media allow for even small producers to rapidly amplify their reach in ways that would never have been possible in the past. Take the hashtag #dupes on TikTok, which shot from 3.5 billion views in 2023 to 6.3 billion views in 2024.
This is more than just raw economics, there are cultural and performative aspects at play. Such social media output communicates a message that fakes can be socially acceptable, even desirable – effectively normalising them.
Influencers cater to the burgeoning market for dupes (Credit: Rachel Cook Reviews)
The mental image of fakes being only dropshipped goods with misspelled logos in flimsy packaging is long out of date. Many now come from the same factories or use the same materials as their authentic cousins. An entire cottage industry of independent sellers in China and elsewhere sell lookalikes or deadstock direct to individuals.
A typical /r/fashionreps haul. (Credit: /u/Sara_SAdams)
Legitimate retailers and brands that specialise in ‘inspired by’ dupes have also sprung up. Never crossing legal lines themselves, they allow influencers to draw explicit comparisons on their behalf. They are lightyears away from Temu or Aliexpress, offering high quality imitations – with slick marketing, packaging, and brands of their own, even gaining loyal fanbases of their own.
Perfume especially has seen high-quality imitations (Credit: Palermo Perfumes)
Trust is a hard commodity to come by these days, with many institutions registering new lows in trust levels year after year. Brands are no exception. At the bottom end, only 28% of Gen Z consumers trust the brands they do business with. Opaque supply chains and pricing strategies breed cynicism about motives and trustworthiness.
These concerns over company greed and ethics drive many into the hands of smaller businesses where there is a greater perception of transparency. Where once such alternatives were hard to find, the boom of D2C retail has given challenger brands more latitude to operate – including duping specialists.
Some of the brands producing dupes, ironically, are seen as more transparent and trustworthy than those they copy. By being open about duping, they are in their own way, honest. And by offering what is seen as better value, they not only build trust but reinforce the perception that the brands they are copying have artificially overinflated prices.
On news and social media, stories of corporate greed proliferate. (Credit: edgenieuk)
If there are ways your dupes can’t match your product, consider how those aspects can be stressed in your proposition. Typical routes include material quality and craftsmanship. But there are numerous other ways in: Dyson focuses on their proprietary technology, Scotch whiskys play up their unique provenance, Patagonia their commitment to sustainability.
Haircare specialist Olaplex has a narrow product range that is expensive for its space – making them ideal targets to be duped or mimicked by other brands, which they often are. To combat this, they have chosen to lean on the scientific backing of their product, with marketing that highlights their patented science and proven results.
Olaplex opts to put their molecular bond science front and centre. (Credit: Olaplex)
When trust in brands deteriorates, loyalty does too. We make jokes about two-timing on our favourite brands, but they speak to a genuine consumer trait. If we have positive associations and perceptions of a brand, we tend to develop loyalty over time and become reluctant to change. The reverse is equally true. Nearly 90% of consumers say they would be inclined to swap to a brand that shares their values.
Brands that have remained consistent and explicit in their mission – especially ethical, values-led missions, tend to reap the rewards. Dr. Bronner’s soap is a U.S. institution and one of the oldest sustainability-focused brands around. Despite their formula being public knowledge and reproducible, they have continually seen double-digit growth year on year. Much of that can be traced to their devoted fanbase and positive public image.
Dr. Bronner’s dense, eccentric labels are legendary. (Credit: Dr Bronner’s)
Perhaps the most interesting tactic is to play along. Lululemon are one of the recognisable names in athleisure, and as a result, one of the most duped. And while they still deploy lawsuits from time to time, they also find mileage in rolling with the punches. In one case, they offered a “dupe swap” event where consumers could trade dupes of their products for the real deal – letting their product do the talking and generating a buzz in the process.
Taking a combative, litigious approach can have unpredictable consequences and costs (as Adidas recently found vs Thom Browne.) In another case, fashion brand Telfar’s tote bags had a moment, and were quickly imitated by Guess. Winning a lawsuit was far from guaranteed, and so Telfar chose to lean into the bag’s popularity and upped supply to meet demand rather than sue. Ultimately, social media backlash caused Guess to withdraw their bag of their own free will – another fringe benefit of having a dedicated following.
Close, but not necessarily close enough to prove copyright infringement. (Credit: Telfar/Guess)
If you know your biscuit history like we do, you may know of Oreo as one of the few dupes that overshadowed what it imitated. However, such examples are rare, and in most cases, imitators that become more successful were differentiated in meaningful ways, and not solely piggybacking on the reputation of another.
This makes sense, as dupes marketed as being ‘inspired’ by another are capped to a fraction of the demand for the original. But there is no rule saying that dupe brands must stick to pure recreations. There is a great deal of unexplored space for successful imitators to offer creative reinterpretations and variations of iconic products. What if you could access multiple different explorations of your favourite perfume? Or new colourways of a designer lamp not offered by the original brand?
At some point, we are likely to see a successful imitator get ambitious enough to start remixing dupes of iconic products, or even attempt to improve upon them – and one will in all likelihood outshine the original. And then, the duper may well become the duped.
Even enemies can become friends if opportunity beckons. It will not be the greatest leap of logic for a brand suffering from a dupe problem to flip the problem on its head. Official cooperation would grant benefits for both sides: dupe brands can gain elevated legitimacy and be shielded from legal issues, while offering original brands would gain access to customer segments they are otherwise unable to reach.
There also exists an even more curious possibility. If duping continues to rise, brands may well look to bring duping in-house. By acquiring or operating companies that make dupes of their own products, they gain both market share and control of the balance of power. In-housing dupes would both defang the threat and create a playground to test variations on iconic products without harming the prestige of the original brand – the best of both worlds.
Dupes are no longer about deception.
Dupe brands are rarely trying to deceive consumers – they offer a genuine value proposition.
Don’t underestimate community.
Affection and trust are one of the key defenses brands have that are still effective against duping.
‘Prestige’ has lost its edge.
It’s no longer enough to dismiss a dupe just for being a dupe. You must be able to justify the value of the authentic article.
Iconic products become platforms for dupes.
Nearly every company must now prepare to be duped – and plan for ways to mitigate or harness it.
Dupes can outmanoeuvre you.
‘Inspired by’ lines don’t just skirt regulation. They allow dupe brands to innovate on your portfolio and succeed independently.
135 W 41st St 5th Floor
New York NY 10036
+1 (212) 518-3444
Buspace
London
W10 5AP
