1.) It's the End of New York Fashion Week, and I Feel Fine:
"I lost count of the number of times I heard the words 'uncertainty' or 'caution' from a fashion designer this week and what this really meant was, 'I have no idea if anyone will be buying clothes next season, or if I'll be around to sell them' . . . Anyway, what is the point of all of these journalists and retailers slogging around the world, seeing the same shows, in often the same order, every year, like some ridiculous Groundhog Day, sponsored by Gucci. Yes, we know the arguments about needing to see the clothes in person, but the depleted audience suggested that this is just no longer economically viable for many straitened publications, to say nothing of the designers who can spend $100,000 on a show, only to see all their designs ripped off by copyists before they even get theirs in stores."
The article goes on to mention that the best show of the week was a show that wasn't a runway show, but instead, a static presentation (a gaggle of models standing on a low platform while assorted buyers and fashion writers examined the outfits from all angles) that shed some light on how irrelevant the runway show is in the Internet age -- and it was Tory Burch: "Burch ... is building a mini empire selling simple, beautiful clothes (70s Gucci by way of Hamptons WASP) that rarely go for more than $400 . . . If I could have, I'd have pumped some money into the American economy and bought the whole collection."
The L.A. Times questions the relevance of the traditional runway show, as well: "Runway looks, traditionally shown to buyers and the media six to eight months before they land in stores, can be seen online minutes after a designer shows them, worn by celebrities days later, and knocked off soon after that. Which means that sharp-shoulder silhouette that came down the Balmain runway in Paris in March was available at the mall long before the designer original arrived, and at a fraction of the price."
Has the internet made the runway show irrelevant? And now that the print magazines have lost clout, will we start to see designers presenting fall and spring collections in, like, you know, the fall and spring, when people might actually want to wear them?
Crazy, I know.
A video clip of Tory Burch's sensible Spring/Summer 2010 static presentation below:
A new direction
Laird Borrelli-Persson wrote high praise for the Burch collection at Style.com: "Might Tory Burch be capable of saving the economy single-handedly? Editors were acting like kids in a candy store at her Spring presentation: They didn't just like what they saw, they wanted to buy it . . . Burch's designs are always familiar; her DNA, after all, is the American staple. What she does is reimagine it, sprinkle it with some fashion dust and a pinch of fun."
But speaking of design dinosaurs that still party like it's 1999, the opposite of Tory Burch's simple, wearable and absolutely accessible sportwear is the excessive and often overly fussy approach of Marc Jacobs. His Spring show was widely praised, but in an auto-pilot kind of way that revealed hairline cracks in the fashion press' infatuation with all things Marc: "The scary part was that it seemed to actually take on a strange beauty as the show went on and the ruffles migrated to shrunken Hong Kong businessmen's suits and the Harlequin patterns and pearls became breezy summer dresses. Still, it was pretty out there -- and we're a little bit afraid to follow."
And this from USA Today: "Marc Jacobs is known for his thrilling masterpieces not only in his eponymous line, but also for Marc by Marc Jacobs ... and for major fashion house Louis Vuitton. Nonetheless, we found his Marc Jacobs line fantastical, but a little bit tedious inside a sweltering New York Armory Monday night."
Video clip below:
"Exhilarating pell-mell madness" -- or maybe just a lot of Lady GaGa?
Quite a bit of about-town chatter, however, focused on a group of new designers becoming more influential with each season, with the most prominent of them being part of what's called the Asian New Wave: "At New York Fashion Week, which begins today, 25 Asian-American fashion designers plan to hold shows or presentations, nearly double the number five years ago, according to the Fashion Calendar, an industry newsletter that lists fashion shows and events."
The new Asian designers include the likes of Thakoon Panichgul, Alexander Wang, Jason Wu, Doo.Ri and Phillip Lim. Lim's collection was also praised at Style.com as "a collection to sell, sell, sell, no matter what the prevailing wisdom," while the L.A. Times stated: "You could almost hear the cash register going ka-ching as Phillip Lim's models walked down the runway." That beats "exhilarating pell-mell madness" any day.
Video clip of Lim's American sportswear meets European chic Spring/Summer 2010 collection below:
Shake that moneymaker, Mr. Lim!
Now that New York's fashion week is officially over, London's Fashion Week is just beginning, and it's their 25th anniversary Fashion Week, which means . . . oh, nothing really, except maybe an excuse for a headline or two in the fashion press: London Fashion Week turns 25! -- "London Fashion Week started out as a small gathering of dedicated fashion designers and trend makers in a car park in west London. Now, the event has grown into an extravaganza that channels 28-million US Dollars bi-annually into the British capital's economy. In terms of direct spending, it generates orders in the region of over 140-million US Dollars."
But with all this talk of fashion and hype and luxury, how do market analysts view the luxury industry at this point? -- "As analysts scan the landscape they see a virtual Who's Who of battered luxury chains. 'Saks and Neiman's sales are horrendous. Tiffany was down 27% in U.S. same-store sales last quarter, Bulgari was down 21%, Harry Winston sales were down 49%, and [LVMH Moet Hennessy] Louis Vuitton down 23%," says Howard Davidowitz, chairman of Davidowitz & Associates, a retail consulting and investment banking services firm. "If you look at Madison Avenue, it's a ghost town in terms of store closings. It's an absolute disaster.'"
I think I like the phrase "Now, the event has grown into an extravaganza" much better than the phrase "It's an absolute disaster" . . .
2.) How the Fragrance Industry Can Adapt to the Economic Climate:
"The ever-growing pace of launches simply cannot continue. 'Certainly, we and others are going to continue to launch smart line extensions of our brands and fill consumer segments,' says Steve Hicks, P&G's director of flavor and fragrance development. 'But we're going to put more and more emphasis on big blockbuster fragrances that have real staying power and things that we can view as classics in time, as opposed to fragrances that just come and go. I think the consumers are going to want that in a world where they're looking for more simplicity. We've all built businesses giving them more and more, and now I think they want better and better.'"
Excuse me while I pick myself up from off the floor. I must have fainted when I read that the fragrance industry is possibly thinking the consumer might be interested in quality over quantity. No -- it can't be! How avant-garde!
*rolls eyes*
But isn't that kind of like bolting the barn door shut after all the animals have fled? A faster and faster pace of releases that were increasingly lower and lower in quality managed to ruin the reputations of once respected perfume house, and turned a big chunk of consumers off to fragrances entirely. I mean, why would anyone bother to spend their money on a bottle of perfume that doesn't smell much better than the hand soap at a rest stop or a jug of concentrated laundry detergent?
Along the same train of thought, Italian perfumer AbdesSalaam Attar posted in a recent blog entry that he talked to scientist and perfume critic Luca Turin as to why he and partner Tania Sanchez ceased publishing their quarterly updates to Perfumes: The Guide: "He told me that I could not imagine how boring and deluding it was to smell 2000 perfumes a year, 1500 of which were totally inept . . . he became tired of always having to find new "vacheries" (nastinesses) for products of fine perfumery barely worthy of being shampoo fragrances. 'At least shampoo producers do not pretend to make fine perfumery, this is making a joke of the customers' he said . . . 'The industry cannot go ahead like this, something will happen.'"
Hmmm, maybe that "something" he's referring to is unprofitable brands/labels getting the axe: Estée Lauder Cos. to Shutter Prescriptives Brand -- "Estée Lauder ... said Thursday it will shut down wholesale distribution of its 30-year-old Prescriptives brand by Jan. 31 (2010). Products will continue to be available through the brand's Web site for consumers needing replenishment, until supplies run out . . . Wall Street analysts have speculated for some time that Prescriptives' anemic profitability has made it a candidate for divestiture."
If you're a Calyx prefume fan, then I would say that now is the time to stock up.
In other perfume news, the Marc Jacobs people demonstrated a canny awareness of the importance of fragrance sales to the bottom line by leaving a bottle of Jacob's latest fragrance release, 'Lola', on every chair in the venue where they were holding their Spring runway show (a pusher always gives you the first hit for free, you see). The L.A. Times mused aloud, while reviewing the Rodarte show, about whether a brand can survive without accessories to offer, such as fragrance: "Though there is certainly a place in fashion for collections that are about fantasy and hype, the question is: How long can (Rodarte) last -- especially in this climate -- if there are no fragrance or accessories sales to support them?"
Clip of Rodarte's fantasy&hype-heavy S/S 2010 collection below:
"From Star Wars Sci-Fi to Snuffaluffagus and the Cookie Monster -- it's all there."
3.) DSquared2 embraces the Internet -- they've got an online shop, y'all! Of course, they also have a near embarrassingly bad video clip to promote it, too. Here I thought they were a proudly boutique designer brand with a focus on high style, superior materials and quality craftsmanship, but it turns out they're just into strippers. Ah well, they're gay Canadian designer twins -- that has to count for something, right?
Velveeta-flavored marketing aside, the online shop is a smart move, and just in time, too. DSquared2 needed to make their small line more widely available if they were going to stay in business. While they presently sell some of their merchandise in upscale department stores, not everyone who shops at Saks or Neiman Marcus is interested in spending $695.00 on a pair of their jeans, which means the brand's reach needed to get a whole lot more . . . uhm . . . well, just a whole lot more!
While behemoth brands like Louis Vuitton and Chanel are still arguing that the luxury shopping experience needs to be more restrictive in order to keep it desirable, it's good to see younger labels get on board with taking their merchandise to wherever the consumer might be . . . credit card transactions are just as easily processed in an online shop as they are in a brick and mortar store, you know. Hello, are you listening, Uncle Lagerfeld?
Meanwhile, Saks Fifth Avenue is taking matters into its own hands and figuring out new ways to cope with plunging sales -- Saks Has New Approach To Cope With Recession, Retain Cache: "The luxury retailer is doing more with private-label brands, signing exclusive deals with suppliers and having 'more unique product made for us,' said Chief Executive Stephen Sadove. 'That, I think, is changing the nature of what we're selling' . . . . Saks, which has long lead times for making purchases, making it harder to order against anticipated demand, is taking as few chances as it can and buying about 20% less inventory than it did a year ago. The retailer is also offering lower-cost items among the brands it carries."
I like the private-labeling and exclusive deals approach. By offering merchandise or products that a consumer simply can't surf on over to Neiman Marcus or Nordstrom to find, they're positioning themselves as a destination. Smaller shops and boutiques that are feeling the pinch of competition from the large chains regularly slashing prices to bring in consumers can also benefit from the "We have what no one else has!" approach.
Just for use as an example: there's a shop in Bellevue, Washington called Posh on Main. For years, they offered high-end designer bags and shoes that Bellevue area women couldn't find anywhere else in Seattle -- but now that Neiman Marcus has moved in just down the street, a little boutique like Posh is going to have a really hard time keeping afloat, especially as Neiman Marcus carries all the brands that Posh carries, plus more.
A way in which the owner of Posh could fight back would be to take a page from the Saks Fifth Avenue playbook and start offering products and brands that Neiman Marcus doesn't -- handmade jewelry from local designers; a perfume created just for Posh by either a local perfumer, or a perfumer working in the United States; an exotic handbag line, such as Czechoslavakia's Bambas (#1 gorgeous, #2 hand painted, #3 next to impossible to find anywhere else, and #4 priced well below the likes of the more common Valentinos, Jimmy Choos and Chloes), etc.
If a retail shop or chain can't adapt, or won't make the effort to scout out specialized items for its clients and/or offer specialized services, it runs the risk of becoming obsolete in the eyes of a much more selective consumer.
Now, about those luxury behemoths arguing to keep their brands exclusive:
4.) eBay Calls on the EU to Break the Brand Monopoly on Luxury Distribution:
"The law allows luxury goods manufacturers to choose who (they'll allow to) sell their products on the web, but eBay says these distribution deals 'unjustly block the online sale of legitimate products across Europe'. It says consumers are being forced to pay higher prices and they want the law changed . . . EBay has handed a petition to the European Parliament signed by 750,000 people urging reform. The petition says manufacturers should not be able to 'insist that Internet retailers must have an offline retail store before they can sell online'."
Okay, let's be frank -- while I do agree that luxury brands could benefit from opening up their attitudes regarding Internet distribution, I don't agree that they should be forced to do so by the big stick of the law. Does it really hurt consumers that Chanel or Louis Vuitton strictly control their distribution channels and won't allow retailers to offer certain products on the net, or just won't allow certain retailers to offer their products at all?
Consumers have other fashion options, and designer handbags, shoes and jewelry are not even close to being necessities like food or medication (where the consumer is genuinely harmed by a lack of distribution options). I'm thrilled that DSquared2 has seen the light and now has its own online shop, but this is a decision a brand needs to make on its own, and I certainly don't see a problem with a luxury brand controlling who can sell their products and where.
Contemporary "luxury" is pretty much all about the exclusivity, and in an age of globalization, exclusivity can only be maintained through strict standards and controls, otherwise the merchandise is everywhere, offered at whatever price the merchant sees fit and then the brand's image is quickly in tatters. Brands have enough problems maintaining a positive image as it is (Hennessey and Kanye West, anyone?) without having to deal with Internet pop-up shops shoveling out the season's latest "IT" bag at cost plus 10%.
I don't have eBay's back on this one.
5.) State of the Industry:
A.) Singapore retail sales drop 10 percent in July: "Singaporeans are shying away from purchasing big-ticket items, instead pouring money into stock markets . . . 'Real buying of things like Chanel bags and watches hasn't improved much and is lagging speculative sentiment,' said Adrian Foster, head of financial markets research Asia for Rabobank."
B.) IFF (International Flavors and Fragrances) CEO Resigns as Other IFF Plants Likely to Close: "IFF is continuing to balance capacity and demand. Other Flavor & Fragrance companies such as Givaudan and Symrise are using similar strategies to identify and reduce redundancy . . . Additionally, Flavor and Fragrance demand is growing slower in Europe and North America than in the emerging markets ... F&F's will continue to expand capacity in Asia and South America to the detriment of Europe and North America."
C.) LVMH-Richemont Merger Would Be 'Master Stroke,' Bernstein Says: "A merger between LVMH Moet Hennessy Louis Vuitton SA and Cie. Financiere Richemont SA, the two biggest luxury-goods makers, would be a "strategic master stroke," according to Sanford C. Bernstein analyst Luca Solca . . . LVMH and Richemont could save about 500 million euros ($714 million) by merging, mostly through combining their distribution and gaining clout in negotiations to buy advertising and rent store space . . . LVMH's watch brands would benefit from Richemont's research and manufacturing capabilities, while Richemont's leather brands, such as Dunhill and Lancel, would benefit from LVMH's expertise, the analyst added."
As if LVMH isn't big enough as it is, but I can't say I'd be surprised by such a move. In a time of crumbling fortunes (even for the big guys), teaming up with the former competition might be the smartest (the only?) way to survive. And maybe the above article was initiated by this:
D.) Richemont Cautious On Outlook As Sales Drop: "Swiss Jeweler and watchmaker Compagnie Financiere Richemont SA Wednesday said it was too early to say whether the worst was over for its markets after sales in the five months to end-August fell 16%."
E.) Barney's Exploits the Obamas in Desperate Ploy to Drive Sales:
F.) Talbots Q2 Loss Narrows: "Talbots, Inc. said its second-quarter net loss narrowed slightly from a year ago, as costs decreased from the previous year (but) Both net sales and comparable store sales for the second quarter declined from the previous year, as the uncertain economy continues to discourage non-discretionary spending."
G.) Ad Shift Throws Blogs a Business Lifeline: "Though they do not command nearly the same ad rates that glossy magazines do, (blogs) are attracting ad dollars while magazines are losing them . . . advertising revenue for magazines dropped 21 percent in the first half, and the number of ad pages sold dropped 28 percent, according to the Publishers Information Bureau."
The article goes on to note how difficult it is to create blogs that generate ad traffic and ad revenue, as the focus has to be narrow, on point, breezy and pretty much sarcasm free. Advertisers are looking for new avenues, but blogs can often be too personal and opinionated for the comfort of large scale advertisers.
As a result, blog networks are more comfortable targets for ad revenue than single blogs: "Blogs, with their unpredictable and sometimes edgy content, can be frightening to advertisers, but blog networks are less risky, said Shenan Reed, a founder of Morpheus Media, a digital marketing agency that represents brands like Louis Vuitton and L'Oréal . . . 'When you're dealing with a company where the editorial control is living under one roof, you feel like there's a consistency in the message, which is what makes Sugar, Gawker and Curbed fantastically interesting to us,' Ms. Reed said."
H.) Bravo to announce 'Real Housewives' apparel line: "Bravo Media ... is set to announce its latest apparel adventure later today: a line of clothing and accessories inspired by the fashion and style of 'The Real Housewives' reality franchise. Bravo has struck a licensing deal with a company called Royal Plush to develop a co-branded the Real Housewives-Royal Plush line, which will consist of premium denim, loungewear, activewear, handbags and accessories."
Because reality show branding is just what we've all been panting for, apparently.
"Laaah la la laaaaaah . . . that's just a sample to whet your appetite."
6.) Tom Ford Makes the Leap from Fashion Designer to Film Director:
"Even before the formal reviews, the impromptu audience reaction proved impressive. 'I was incredibly nervous, and, well, I could feel the room,' Ford said. 'I could feel that people were breathing and living and laughing and crying at the right moments, so that was a great feeling. But the reaction at the end [a lengthy standing ovation] was something I hadn't anticipated, although we had had a precursor of it.'"
'A Single Man', Ford's directorial debut, has been drawing a number of high-profile rave reviews, surprising a lot of film and fashion industry people who thought he was likely biting off way more than he could chew. And it's not even a raunch-fest (unlike his ad campaigns for the Gucci and Tom Ford brands).
Below is the trailer for the film:
And below is a Q&A with Mr. Ford at the Toronto Film Festival:
I have to admit that I do find it a bit jarring when he goes on about how awful it is that we've become such a materialistic society and have lost sight of what life is really about. Sure, okay Tom -- whatever.
Search
Comments