Do you think it is bad form for a tailoring house to publish details of its "celebrity" client list?

[David Reeves]

I think this is an interesting question. Starting at Gieves we were forbidden to disclose who our clients were. I remember one girl being berated by Mr Robert because she asked (within the workroom) out loud "are these trousers for Prince William?".

Even now in the U.S.A I am very much into client confidentiality its just how I was "brought up". So much so that I even ask my clients if I have their permission to take photographs of the clothes I make them and if it is ok to put them online.

I have noticed though when talking to people in the States people seem to find this attitude rather dated or just plain odd. I have also noticed that even a lot of tailoring houses in the Uk and even on the Row are now, not being shy about who they make for.

So what do you think? Is this what is done these days and is it a good strategy?

 

[othertravel]

Went to RL madison, and they happily discussed who buys what. e.g. - Anderson Cooper goes for purple label, as does Mr. Lauren himself.

And even the local Harry Rosen bespoke shop has pics of all the celebrities that use their services.

 

[gaseousclay]

I think this type of information should be used only at the discretion of the client and business. if a celebrity client is ok with a business that divulges such information, and if it further increases business, then I think it should be ok. we're not talking about attorney/client privelage here but a tailor. in some instances I think it's fair for a tailor to assume discretion, especially if it's someone of royalty or a mega celebrity who doesn't want un-needed attention.

 

[Claghorn]

The old way has a lot of appeal to me. Tailoring seems intrinsically attached to tradition (otherwise, why tolerate so many wonderful impracticalities?), so the old fashioned has intrinsic value. Not that this value should always trump practical considerations, but given that in this situation a tailor is essentially saying "buy from me because XXXX buys from me" and not "buy from me because you like the quality/design/etc," it seems like the old way is the way to go.

 

[bourbonbasted]

I'll note that many "celebrities" dress like complete garbage. Especially in the US. Perhaps the other side of the coin is that a tailor doesn't want to align themselves with someone who does not wear their creations well. Or who has gone against their advice. (aka "Make this for me, I'm a celebrity!" vs. "What is your professional opinion? I want to look my best.")

As an example: So many "celebrities" use Astor & Black and I've never seen one of their suits fit well. Accordingly, I think the abortion-like fits reflect poorly on the house and would never consider them...

 

[Holdfast]

If the client is happy for their name to be used in conjunction with your brand, all well & good. If they haven't given explicit permission, clearly a no-no in my worldview.

Assuming permission is given, on the wider question of whether it is good marketing, I think that depends on both the quality (read that any way you like) of the celebrity and whether the linking of the two brands makes sense in terms of the public image you want to create.

 

[David Reeves]

Actually looking at this local NYC tailor chipp pushes JFK.

 

[archibaldleach]



The old way has a lot of appeal to me. Tailoring seems intrinsically attached to tradition (otherwise, why tolerate so many wonderful impracticalities?), so the old fashioned has intrinsic value. Not that this value should always trump practical considerations, but given that in this situation a tailor is essentially saying "buy from me because XXXX buys from me" and not "buy from me because you like the quality/design/etc," it seems like the old way is the way to go.

This.

 

[Holdfast]

Actually looking at this local NYC tailor chipp pushes JFK.

I think it's even worse when someone can't tell them to shut up. At least if it's an alive figure, there can be an overt agreement between the two to use each other for marketing/branding reasons. Or even if the celeb just feels generous/grateful for the service and lets them do it anyway. Chipp is not alone though; many old tailoring firms seem to love talking about their long dead & buried past clients these days.

I also feel the same way about colleges/universities talking about famous - and frequently historical/dead - alumni in order to build up their rep and so get donations. I understand it on a marketing & financial level, and honestly, would do it too if I were in their shoes and doing their job. It probably works well. I just don't really think very much of it.

I suspect that part of the origin point of my feelings is that I work in a profession where you just don't do this - confidentiality is central to our work - so that influences my thinking when it comes to other jobs, even if the same needs/strictures don't officially apply.

 

[Bounder]



If the client is happy for their name to be used in conjunction with your brand, all well & good. If they haven't given explicit permission, clearly a no-no in my worldview.

Assuming permission is given, on the wider question of whether it is good marketing, I think that depends on both the quality (read that any way you like) of the celebrity and whether the linking of the two brands makes sense in terms of the public image you want to create.

This, exactly.

For RTW, I can see this. In fact, celebrities get paid to wear clothes from various brands. I'm sure there are people who want to look like Kobe Bryant so that's a plus for them. But for bespoke, it's probably very different. I can't imagine many potential bespoke customers would be really attracted to a particular house because they had produced this . . .

On the other hand, while I, personally, value discretion, I am forced to admit that there is a long tradition of celebrity name-dropping in bespoke that goes right back to the beginning. How many bespoke houses splash about a royal warrant? Which, BTW, they almost certainly paid for the privilege of receiving.

 

[David Reeves]



I'll note that many "celebrities" dress like complete garbage. Especially in the US. Perhaps the other side of the coin is that a tailor doesn't want to align themselves with someone who does not wear their creations well. Or who has gone against their advice. (aka "Make this for me, I'm a celebrity!" vs. "What is your professional opinion? I want to look my best.")

As an example: So many "celebrities" use Astor & Black and I've never seen one of their suits fit well. Accordingly, I think the abortion-like fits reflect poorly on the house and would never consider them...

Yeah but what if we said erm, say David Bowie or Bryan Ferry? Good dressers, not idiots.

 

[bourbonbasted]

TBH there are very few contemporary celebrities that I find consistently "stylish." And I don't know if there are any that I would think of as universally tasteful. I think older generations of celebrities lend more credibility and would be of more value in communicating an image of taste and elegance.

However, I will say that the two you've mentioned are established style icons in their own right. It's no doubt that their celebrity has made us aware of their styles, but I honestly think people that are cognizant of such details would think of someone like Bryan Ferry as a style icon in the same breath as mention his music. And Bowie has been a fashion icon for decades. So, if your questions revolves around leaking names of style icon clients, then yes I think it's of value (on multiple levels). However, I don't think Huntsman for Justin Beiber does much for anyone.

 

[Holdfast]

However, I don't think Huntsman for Justin Beiber does much for anyone.

Someone, make this happen. It would be glorious.

 

[David Reeves]



TBH there are very few contemporary celebrities that I find consistently "stylish." And I don't know if there are any that I would think of as universally tasteful. I think older generations of celebrities lend more credibility and would be of more value in communicating an image of taste and elegance.

However, I will say that the two you've mentioned are established style icons in their own right. It's no doubt that their celebrity has made us aware of their styles, but I honestly think people that are cognizant of such details would think of someone like Bryan Ferry as a style icon in the same breath as mention his music. And Bowie has been a fashion icon for decades. So, if your questions revolves around leaking names of style icon clients, then yes I think it's of value (on multiple levels). However, I don't think Huntsman for Justin Beiber does much for anyone.

Oh yes thats what Im talking about. I mean those are the only kinds of people worth mentioning in the context I am thinking really. However very few people if any are famous just for the way they dress (and rightly so). Bryan and Bowie are great dressers no doubt, but of course their music is the star, but then the look and the performance, are all intrinsically part of the "package"....or product if you will.

 

[MikeDT]

Some tailors make a big business of their celeb clients.

However they might not be the best tailors in the world...