Rachel Zoe Spoils Infant Son With $87,000 Nursery
Credit: John Shearer/Getty
Rachel Zoe has spared no expense when it comes to dressing her four-month-old son Skyler in the latest designer fashions.
PHOTOS: Rachel Zoe's fashionable pregnancy
During a Wednesday appearance on Nightline, the 39-year-old stylist took ABC's Juju Chang on a tour of her son's luxe walk-in closet. Zoe proudly showed off Skyler's $1,160 Gucci bomber jacket, as well as his $3,700 shoe collection. Though the infant is too young to walk, his footwear options include a $150 pair of Tod's loafers (among several other high-end labels). Skyler's shoes are kept in an Oeuf mini-library, which retails for $650.
PHOTOS: Hollywood's trendiest tots
Skyler also owns a $1,400 Hermes blanket (with two matching $522 cushions) in his $914 crib. Should Skyler want to sleep somewhere else, he also has a $1,000 wooden bassinet.
Other pricey items in Skyler's nursery include a giant stuffed giraffe ($163), a silver piggy bank ($1,355) and $78,000 worth of designer clothing, according to estimates by The Daily Mail.
VIDEO: Rachel discusses her fears about motherhood
Not everything in Skyler's nursery was hand-picked by Zoe, who welcomed Skyler in March with husband Rodger Berman: the infant was gifted with three pieces of knitwear by his mother's friend, designer Margherita Missoni.
Tell Us: Is baby Skyler's nursery too over-the-top?
Tell Us What You Think
55first.. who the he** is rachael zoe? second... 87k for a nursery?
i hate that if you have lots of mula you are expected from 50% of the worlds population to donate it, and if you spend it on yourself or your family your being selfish. lots of people includeing HERSELF, donate to charity. i bet billions of people to and dont.
She's a stylist. Obviously she adores designer clothing and shoes, and would want her kid to be the most fabulously dressed kid on the block. If she has that kind of money, let her spend it the way she wants to.
This is great!!! You should give your kids everything and spoil them!! I love Rachel Zoe.
You don't have to be smart to be famous. This screams STUPIDITY. Nothing else to it. She should be embarassed, not willing, to share this info.
"..spoils infant son..?" Spoils herself, in truth. She could have had a luxurious nursery for $3,000, then donated the $84,000 to feed less fortunate children.
Who's Rachel Zoe???
btw....it's one thing to spend your money if you want to do so lavishly - but quite another to EARN more money by publicizing it in such a crass way. But...to each his own. If they can live with themselves being so crass - that is them. Thank goodness, it's not most people and what does NOT matter in the end....as we will ALL be faced with that day - one day -- and see.
When I come across stories like this - No Joke - I PRAISE GOD I do not have that kind of money. I would never want to be someone who spends that kind of money so frivolously. I do fine with what I have, and am honestly VERY happy with what I have. The more I see this kind of thing - the more I NEVER want to have money that is put to such waste. If I am ever rich - I want to give to amazing causes and charities and NEVER spend that kind of money on something like clothes....never! Thank you LORD for a life lived for YOU! God Bless everyone...and peace! :))))
It's her money and her first baby, so it's her right. From what I understand she does a lot of charity work, so it's not like she's ignoring people in need.
If I had the money it would be cool to do the same.
Hey Heather, here's a thought, why don't YOU direct all of your money to poverty-stricken kids?! First of all, as I said before, when Americans shop, Americans KEEP JOBS. Second, how do you know that these celebrities DON'T give to children? Someone down below pointed out that Rachel ask that guests to her baby shower buy for a charity instead of getting her a gift. She also does a lot of charity work. But, of course, if she talked about that YOU people would accuse her of BRAGGING. Jesus H. Christ! Quit being judgmental a-holes and start giving your OWN time and money instead of expecting celebrities to give all of theirs.
yeah, you think?! Why don't they redirect SOME of that money to better use like helping the unfortunate KIDS in our OWN backyard who are sick with cancer, homeless, etc!!!???
All of you who are complaining about how she should have donated ALL of her OWN money (money she rightfully earned and spent on her son, she didn't just cut it up and throw it out the window), I wonder how much you all actually volunteer your time and donate money? Once during Christmas, perhaps. Maybe Thanksgiving? For MOST of you, that's all you do, so get off your high horses. Besides, it may be worth 87,000, but like Ellie said, most celebrities don't pay full price, because designers/sellers want to get the word out about their merchandise. And it's a nursery, it's not like they are going to burn it down when he turns 4 or whatever age,they'll probably just redecorate it a little bit.
I agree with Ellie Swanson.
seriously that is the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard of. Babies are starving to death and dying of famine...seriously instead of spending that much on a nursery HE WILL GROW OUT OF ,donate to someone who needs that $ for food and shelter, raise you boy right, not on $ you FOOLSSSS
Most people think that a baby needs $100,000 worth of crap; so not true. We live in a materialistic world and that is what is destroying the world. Look at the mass production of crap that the USA orders from China. When we completely self destruct as a human race what will we leave behind? Just a catastrophe of junk and stuff that people think they need. I would normally say boycott these corporations but since the USA is at the very brink of the 12th hour of a complete debt collapse we don't have that option. WAKE UP PEOPLE! Geez.
Stupid. Why not get your kid an $87,000 savings bond or CD? Most of the rubbish she bought for the nursery isn't going to last and the baby isn't going to care about it. All babies care about are: Milk, love and a clean diaper. Mom's don't even have to be perfect for their babies to love them. So spending that kind of money on more crap that the environment doesn't need only says: Stupid.
Before you get all worked up, consider this: Rachel Zoe gets paid by her celebrity clients to find them and their kids the best designer clothes. Designers do everything in their power to get her to choose their clothes for her clients. I would be very surprised if she's paid even $500 of her own money for all the things in that nursery. So don't get all mad at her for spending money that you don't have - it's not her responsibility to feed every hungry child in this country and clothe every poor kid in the world. She's just using her perks, which is something nearly all of us would do. If you want to blame anyone, blame the designers who make regular people like us pay these exorbitant prices for their clothes, while giving them away for free to people like Rachel Zoe who could afford to pay for themselves.
Hey, as long as she's buying things, people keep their jobs. Whatever makes her happy. It's her money to spend.