• STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Discussions about the fashion industry thread

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
49,852
Reaction score
26,114
Last edited:

Parker

Distinguished Member
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jan 9, 2005
Messages
8,774
Reaction score
15,623
I think a lot of people aren't necessarily ready to buy stuff until they see it in magazines or on real people (celebs or other influencers). I'm not sure how many in the general public follow every show anyway. I'm just guessing though.
 
Last edited:

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
49,852
Reaction score
26,114

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
21,775
Reaction score
52,892
Ha, I was just going to post that in the RFT thread.

The whole "see now, buy now" thing seems to have died before it started. A few of the brands who jumped on have apparently already jumped off.

I like the skepticism in the article, but not sure it actually comports with my experience.

Certainly, repeated exposure is important. But how much repeated exposure happens between the show and start of the season? I'd argue almost none -- you see the show, then forget about it until the deluge of social media and/ or marketing happens six months later.

I guess the counter argument is that this is building interest among editors and social media influencers, who are really the ones following this stuff. That may be true. But the original argument was that this new schedule wouldn't affect editors' interaction with a designer or label anyway -- those views would just get pushed back (and they'd have to sign NDA contracts or whatever). By the time the public sees it, editors and bloggers have already known about it for six months.
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
49,852
Reaction score
26,114

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
21,775
Reaction score
52,892

This.  It feels like the argument was shoehorned in.  Sure, there might be a optimal period between initial exposure and products on the market, but the original reasons for the six month time gap has nothing to do with building enthusiasm, but with the buying period and production schedules.

Maybe this is unfair, but I think the author also makes the mistake of assuming t=0. In other words, she doesn't take into context that designers are working in response to a long history of trend buidling -- a lot of repeated exposure already happening.

Unless you're Hedi or Raf, you're probably not setting up these really disruptive collections. In order to sell things, you can only push the needle so far before you're out of the conversation/ risking zero sales.

So even if the repeated exposure argument is important in the way she presents, a "see now, buy now" collection will likely be building on a year or more of repeated exposure by other brands. It's not like t=0 here; t = some huge number. Designers are drawing on a long history of fashion trends that everyone's already thinking about, which is why they're designing the things they're designing. Presumably because that stuff is hot right now.
 
Last edited:

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
21,775
Reaction score
52,892
For those interested and not already following, LeanLuxe is a great read for fashion industry news.

http://leanluxe.com/

They have an email newsletter, which you can sign up on that home page. Worth the additional email.
 

LA Guy

Opposite Santa
Admin
Moderator
Joined
Mar 8, 2002
Messages
49,852
Reaction score
26,114
Last edited:

WSW

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2006
Messages
725
Reaction score
173

It seems to be a company in crisis, and huge stores with huge overheads are great vanity projects during times of prosperity, but is an unnecessary cost center in belt tightening times.  Apparently, the Paul Stuart store is nearly there completely for the prestige and the marketing appeal to the Japanese customer (it's owned by a Japanese conglomerate, afaik.)

I dropped by the store two Thanksgivings ago. It only sold up to the Blue Label / Polo Ralph Lauren Line, thus mid-priced items. I couldn't see how they could move enough product to justify the rent, the expensive decor and the number of staff present.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
21,775
Reaction score
52,892
Hard to separate these factors out, since they kind of go hand in hand, but I wonder how much of this is about

1) Heritage trend dying (see J Crew and Ralph Lauren above)

2) Size. Once you reach a certain size as a fashion brand, the biz dynamics change -- how many units you have to sell, how quickly you want to (or can) react to trends, etc. Maybe this is just a story about how retail at a certain level is shifting to both online shopping and smaller boutiques. Early- to late-20th century fashion shopping shifted away from big dept stores like Saks. Maybe this is like that.

Put it another way, is there a menswear brand that's both 1) not heritage-y and 2) growing?
 
Last edited:

cyc wid it

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Apr 2, 2011
Messages
12,419
Reaction score
20,356
Probably John Elliott? Geller seems to be coming along? They have no physical retail locations though.
 

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Featured Sponsor

Summer Loafers: With or Without Socks?

  • With socks

  • No socks


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
459,651
Messages
9,972,514
Members
207,686
Latest member
ny2918
Top