08/13/07
8:47 a.m.
Maybe it's just me, but I think perhaps a life-saving rescue is worth a little more. I'd be demanding a stint at a private boarding school in Switzerland.
Kid saves dad's life, kid wants PS3 in return
You can't shoot for the stars unless you aim higher, kid.
8:59
Okay, so I'm officially an idiot:
Update: iPhone surgery story a hoax
It was just too sweet not to believe . . .
11:51 a.m.
Something that has perplexed me for years is how designers will knock themselves out to make near exquisite collections for women, but when it comes to the men? Fuggedaboutit.
Case in point: Comme des Garcons' Spring 2008 collection
This is some kind of joke, right? Even if it is, I would assume that the corporate headquarters isn't feeling particularly amused.
While women's fashion is a global powerhouse to the tune of billions of dollars in profits, sales for men's high-design items lag behind, which may partly explain why so many designers throw their garbage down the catwalks during their menswear shows.
But this strikes me as more a Catch-22 situation -- menswear isn't as profitable, so designers pay less attention to it which only ensures that it remain much less profitable. It's a mistake that design houses are all too eager to make, but they're overlooking the potential for a growth industry that's right under their noses. Again, I'll use the example of DSquared2, a recent entry into the high-end fashion market that originally focused exclusively on apparel for men. Debuting in 1995, they've seen profits explode as men enthusiastically dig into a line of designer goods that caters to what men might actually wear rather than some abstract theory of color and structure that looks good on paper but is arguably ridiculous on the actual male body.
After the page jump are some side by side comparisons of DSquared2's Spring 2008 collection and Comme des Garcons' Spring 2008 collection (DSquared2 on the right, Comme des Garcons on the left) that I believe fully illustrate why DSquared2 is a growing commodity that generates retail excitement and ever increasing profits while Comme des Garcons pretty much spins its wheels as far as sales of its menswear is concerned.
Color can be bold without being embarrassing.
One suit infantilizes while the other empowers.
The line between clown and stud isn't really a fine one.
Why be a Stable Boy when you can be Lad of the Manor?
One says nervous breakdown, the other says weekend at the shore.
Willy Wonka vs. Steve McQueen.
Pink can be wimpy or sexy -- depends entirely on the designer.
Virgin Geek Forever or I Got Laid Again Tonight -- you decide.
Something is deeply wrong at Comme De Garcons. Where they once used to be innovative, now they're just absurd, and it's a mystery to me why any design house would deliberately turn its back on a consumer group seemingly parched for wearable fashion and flush with expendable income. If it's all about the pursuit of "creative vision" then they may as well have stacked a pile of cash in a public square and lit it on fire -- at least that would have been a bold statement worth looking at.
4:12 p.m.
Comme des Garcons has been around as a Japanese company since 1973, with their men's line added in 1978. They made their international debut in 1981. According to Wikipedia, the company has a dozen boutiques around the world with over 200 other vendors, and pulls in around $150 million annually, including revenue from a men's line, women's line, two sub-lines, a perfume business and more.
Dsquared2 debuted their first men's collection in 1995, with a women's collection following later in 2003. As of this writing, they have no flagship store or dedicated boutiques, no design lines subbed out to other designers, nor do they have a perfume line, but somehow the new kid on the block is pulling in an estimated $100 million or more as of last year.
It's not a mystery that people want attractive and wearable designs, and are more than willing to pay for them. This is how the likes of Chanel and Gucci built their empires, yet too many design houses treat wearable fashion like Hollywood treats family movies -- sure, people want 'em and they make lots of money, but it's more artistically gratifying to focus on tragedy while blaming the consumer for not recognizing real genius.
6:32 p.m.
Just received Chadha & Husband's "The Cult of the Luxury Brand: Inside Asia's Love Affair with Luxury" in the mail today. I'm only past the first few pages and it's already fascinating -- or horrifying, depending upon your point of view:
"In today's Asia, you are what you wear . . . The face you show to the world counts more than how you live. The phenomenon that is sweeping Asia isn't one of luxurious living -- although that too will come in time -- it is one of wearing luxury brands on your person."
When Brian and I visited Tokyo last year, I was astonished at how nicely everyone was dressed, the name brand bags slung over all the women's shoulders, the designer shoes on all the women's feet, the sleek business suits and designer trenchcoats for the men. I remember remarking to Brian that Japan must be over its recession because the shopping areas were thronged with people carrying bags stuffed with fresh purchases.
Little did I know . . .
Search
Comments