1.) Is It Time for Karl Lagerfeld to Retire?
“As a lover of brands and someone who has worked for a decade for some of the biggest luxury houses as a consultant, I always gain inspiration from a local Church of Chanel. But in recent months, I must confess a growing sense of disappointment at the state of the brand. Its shop windows lack inspiration, the new collections are a little too derivative and the clientele looks older to me on each visit. Whisper very softly, but I think Chanel is getting dusty.”
The author notes that he’s likely to be in the minority with this opinion, but he does bring up some interesting points: A.) the two recent movie biographies of Coco Chanel have focused on her own personal history more than the development of the house of Chanel, and that personal history comes across onscreen as, well, very historical rather than very contemporary and of the now — yet a fashion house has to be “now” if it’s to compete globally; B.) there have been recurring rumors over the past year that Lagerfeld is retiring soon, and that he’ll be replaced by Alber Elbaz, currently head designer at Lanvin. Elbaz has done a bang-up job introducing Lanvin into the 21st century, and his collections are generally met with excitement from the gaggle of fashion critics, while Lagerfeld has to literally drag in gigantic chunks of iceberg from the North Pole to get anyone to talk about Chanel.
Video examples below — first, Elbaz’s Fall 2010 collection for Lanvin:
Sleek and taut
Now, Lagerfeld’s Fall 2010 collection for Chanel:
Moose and squirrel
Lanvin now looks more Chanel than Chanel, whereas Chanel now looks . . . like a circus act, and how long has it been since the circus has been popular? Right, exactly.
This seeming lack of contemporary relevance has hit Chanel where it hurts. According to the latest Millward Brown Brandz valuation, Chanel has lost 11% of its brand value over the past year, while competitors like Gucci, Hermes and Louis Vuitton have seen their brand values increase as the recession lingers and the market consolidates.
Speaking of luxury brands and global markets, in the wake of numerous articles announcing the end of bling and the rise of the new discreet luxury — Gucci even announced that cutting back on the logo-ification of their accessories has increased sales — Forbes has published a piece that wonders whether China’s newly rich luxury consumers are interested in expensive designer merchandise that doesn’t flash a lot of logos: “When Chinese consumers purchase a luxury item, they’re not just buying the product but are paying for all of the added value denoted by this object — identification of status, display of economic power and so forth . . . If a luxury buyer’s coworkers and friends can’t tell the price of the brand, even if this person spent a lot of money on a given item, their satisfaction level will still be low.”
In an interview with Jing Daily, Linda Pilkington, founder of luxury perfume brand Ormonde Jayne, talks about the unique challenge of introducing an “invisible” luxury product like perfume to the wealthy Chinese tourists who visits her boutique: “Pilkington said that introducing her products to Chinese tourists, who rarely speak English, is a far ‘purer experience,’ as they’re less swayed by marketing-speak and are simply choosing products based on personal, sensual preferences. This, Ms. Pilkington observed, is a very important development, since Chinese luxury shoppers typically seek out the items that are most ostentatious and heavily branded — Louis Vuitton bags, Chanel sunglasses, etc. — and luxury fragrances, as an ‘invisible status symbol,’ are a comparatively new concept for them.”
Pilkington also noted that there’s been a distinct shift in tourist demographics on London’s high street — where it used to be Middle Eastern and Russian shoppers, it’s now mostly Asian, with the majority of them Chinese, and that while they’re still in thrall to the logo, they’re also becoming curious about luxury brands and goods on a personal level.
This difference in cultural attitudes and consumer needs is driving speculation that a one size fits all global branding approach cannot continue if global brands are to survive in the Asian markets, as it might be too soon for Western luxury brands to ditch the logos in favor of less flashy designs.
With the above in mind, the decision of Hermes to develop its own “made for China” brand, Shang Xia — with its first boutique scheduled to open in Shanghai this September — is looking downright brilliant (I’ve questioned this decision for months, but am now just realizing how savvy it might be) . Instead of requiring Chinese consumers to change their tastes to the style of Hermes, Hermes has taken the step to develop another brand entirely to cater to the tastes of the Chinese consumer. This keeps Hermes from diluting its heritage while also giving them a foothold in the Chinese market.
But hey, as long as we’re talking about China: Why luxury brands are forced to engage on Chinese social media (even when they don’t make money) — “Lifestyle and fashion trends are driven by social media in China; people are influenced by what other netizens think, the peer is the true trend setter. For example, whenever a product is featured on (Chinese shopping and social media site) Taobao, or most voted by other users, it would become the new trend in fashion. Singers/ celebrities actually dress themselves based on what people like, or what’s hot on social networks like Kaixin, not the other way around like most other countries.”
Which helps to explain the continued power of the logo in China. Buying a logo clad designer brand is often not about expressing individual style, but about publicly flashing the approved insignia. In the U.S., designer brands have hit the over-exposure wall as their goods are featured in magazine spreads and on celebrity gossip sites, entertainment news shows, reality tv shows and movies, so while the Western consumer is moving to rid her/himself of branded status symbols (which have come, in some quarters, to symbolize the financial excesses that crashed our economy), the Chinese consumer has only just begun his/her arc of awareness.
More on social media in Asia: “One of Asia’s great rapid growth stories in Social Media over recent months has been the Twitter’s ascension in Japan . . . One reason for the possible appeal of Twitter in Japan and Sina Weibo in China is how much can be expressed in 140 characters. Each character in Chinese and Japanese is equivalent to a word, making microblogs more like blogs.”
2.) Givaudan Reports that the Fragrance Market is Improving:
“Fragrance and flavour maker Givaudan struck an upbeat note for 2010 as retailers restocked perfumes and strong demand in emerging markets helped its first-half sales and net profit beat expectations . . . The company coped well with the economic downturn as demand for its flavours and commercial scents, especially in emerging markets, offset a decline in more cyclical fine perfumes.”
Ah, but there’s the rub. The fine fragrance market is still hurting, though there’s always a silver lining: LVMH reported that its fragrance and cosmetics division saw a 12% increase in sales for the first half of the year in comparison to 2009, while Hermes reported a 17% increase in perfume sales for the 2nd quarter of 2010.
Flavor & Fragrance giant IFF is also reporting a sunny 17% increase in sales for the 2nd quarter of 2010, with a 23% growth in the fragrance unit alone. But (and there’s always a “but” lately) CEO Doug Tough cautioned that the second half of 2010 will be challenging as the benefits of restocking (companies purchasing goods/materials to replace reduced inventory levels) subside.
In other fragrance news, pop-soul singer Mary J. Blige launched her celebrity fragrance, My Life, on the Home Shopping Network (HSN), selling 60,000 bottles in 6 hours, “shattering fragrance records at HSN for units sold and placing the launch amongst the most successful in the prestige fragrance market.”
Analysts are crowing as to how this changes the future of fragrance launches: “‘Long gone are the days of traditional marketing that rely only on sampling and advertising. Consumers want to connect, believe and immerse themselves in the experience. They want to see themselves fit into the story,’ said Steve Stoute (investor).”
Though before anyone dumps the department store model and moves to HSN, it should be noted that pop-soul singer Beyonce’s Heat fragrance sold 70,000 bottles in its first hour of sales (fans snagged 500 gift sets — priced at $122.00 — of the fragrance at Macy’s on its first day), while raking in over $3 million in one month on the market. HSN may have been a good launchpad for Blige, but that’s because Blige’s popularity is several levels lesser than someone like Beyonce. Expect to see the entire Hollywood D-List rush to HSN soon.
3.) Women Try On 21,000 Items of Clothing in a Lifetime:
“On average, women hit the shops four times a month and disappear into the changing rooms with ten tops, pairs of jeans, dresses or shoes on each trip.
That’s a total of 40 different items of clothing tried on each month – or a staggering 480 a year . . . it also emerged that one in two women regularly try clothes on at stores – with absolutely no intention of buying them. Sue Beck of Lambrini, which carried out the research, said: ‘For many women, trying on different clothes is often the best part of a shopping trip. Hours are spent in changing rooms with friends trying on weird and wonderful outfits you wouldn’t ever dare wear out in public.’”
For some reason, I didn’t consider trying on 480 items of clothing a year to be particularly “staggering” . . . dear god, I have to try on ten pairs of jeans to find just one that fits my legs properly without falling off my waist. I mean, what? Do that many people really purchase clothing items without trying them on first? It must be nice, ‘cuz I am so not an Off The Rack size.
I think what was even more amusing about the article is that the author drops the castigating “staggering” amount of clothes tone to chastise women shoppers for only buying “half” of what they try on! But here are the other statistics: 84% intend only to window shop, but buy something anyway; if five items are purchased on a shopping trip, on average one will never be worn and one will be returned; 40% of women decide they don’t like an item as soon as they get home; and 85% of women regret buying something they thought they wanted, while 85% of women regret *not* buying something they thought they wanted.
It’s a mystery wrapped in a riddle inside an enigma!
More Women Shopping news: 84% of women plan to increase spending as the economy improves — “The survey found that 41% of consumers say they plan to purchase clothing and accessories and 34% plan to buy electronics. However, there were clear gender differences. For instance, 52% of women say they plan to spend on apparel, compared to 30% of men.”
Well, I hate to break it to ya, but that aint gonna be anytime soon: “Broad declines in other retail sales have economists concerned that spending will slow further in the second half of this year. Households are saving more and spending less as they struggle with high unemployment and lackluster job growth.”
Not to mention foreclosures: “Declines in new default notices, which were down on a year-over-year basis for the sixth straight month in July, have been offset by near-record levels of bank repossessions, which increased on a year-over-year basis for the eighth straight month.”
So when, exactly, is all that spending supposed to start happening again?
4.) So Now He Tells Us:
“When we ran into Calvin Klein this weekend … we complimented him on the sultry Zoe Saldana Calvin Klein ads, but he quickly informed us, ‘I have nothing to do with any of it. I sold the company. I have nothing to do with it.’ Oh, okay, then. Since he is surely still at least an observer in the fashion world, we asked what trends he’s sick of. But, no, he’s pretty much over those, too: ‘You know, since I’m no longer involved in the fashion business, I’m so happy to not pay attention to trends because they are meaningless anyway. They are over fast. As soon as you see them, as soon as you see people wearing them, they are over. That’s it. As soon as you see it on someone, forget it.’”
It’s kind of like the old saying that a new car starts depreciating in value the second you drive it off the lot. Yet one more reason to not follow trends and wear what you like, when you like.
I was recently contacted by a writer for a quote about perfume that was to be published on an Indian Internet Portal for women. She didn’t tell me exactly what the article would be about, but asked me two questions: 1.) Are there any guidelines to choosing perfumes?; and 2.) How should one use/wear perfumes?
Simple enough. I answered with gusto, talking about issues of perfume in the workplace, wearing a perfume head to toe instead of just on the neck and wrists so that the scent isn’t in everyone’s face all day, choosing a gourmand fragrance when dining out so you don’t disturb other dinner guests, etc. But my main point was that there is no guideline to choosing a perfume — a woman should simply choose and wear what she likes, trends be damned.
So guess what gets published anyway? Uh-huh, I’m cringing, too: “Since fragrances are part of a woman’s personality, one should select a perfume keeping in mind one’s age, identity and character. ‘For instance, edible or gourmand fragrances and strong, sporty perfumes suit trendy teenage girls, while women in their forties’ might prefer a fragrance that is classy and chic,’ explains (IFF perfumer) Vilobha Joshi.”
*sigh*
Just let people buy what they like, right? For a commercial perfumer to tell older women they can’t wear the happy gourmands they might enjoy, or teenagers that they can’t wear the Shalimar they love, seems wrong on so many levels.
5.) INDUSTRY QUICK HITS:
A.) The Wealthy Make the Retail World Go ‘Round: “What is surprising is just how much or our consumer economy is now dependent on the rich, and how that share has increased as the U.S. emerges from recession. In the third quarter of 1990, the top 5% accounted for 25% of consumer outlays. That held relatively steady until the mid-1990s, when it started inching up past 30%. It dipped in 2003 and again in 2008, but started surging in 2009 amid the greatest bull market rally in history, with the Dow Jones Industry Average rising nearly 50% in the last nine months of the year.”
That was one of those trick questions, right? Because I’m trying to figure out how anyone could have considered the above news “surprising”.
B.) A Movement Towards Zero Waste Design — and no, it’s not about skinny models: “Zero-waste design strives to create clothing patterns that leave not so much as a scrap of fabric on the cutting room floor. This is not some wacky avant-garde exercise; it’s a way to eliminate millions of tons of garbage a year. Apparel industry professionals say that about 15 to 20 percent of the fabric used to produce clothing winds up in the nation’s landfills because it’s cheaper to dump the scraps than to recycle them.”
The fashion industry was making public noises back in 2007 about “going green”, yet it’s 2010 and they’re only *just* experimenting with non-wasteful design processes? My head, it shakes.
C.) The Department Stores Are All Right: 1.) Nordstrom 2nd Quarter sales are up 13%; 2.) Neiman Marcus’ sales increase 12% for the month of July; 3.) Kohl’s 2nd Quarter sales are up over 7%; 4.) Saks Fifth Avenue reports a nice July, with sales increasing over 4%;5.) Macy’s posts a surge in profit; and 6.) JC Penney reports a slight increase in profit for the 2nd Quarter.
But the retail numbers are down for apparel overall. Hmmmm. I do notice that the department stores reporting the best numbers are the ones that sell the highest end merchandise. Or perhaps their numbers seem so high because they’re being compared to last year, when they were so bad.
{ 1 trackback }