Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by HRHAndrew, Oct 22, 2003.
I thought some of you would enjoy the following article.
call me a dreamer, but i think it should be law that a business which carries someone's name should have to rename itself in the event the business is sold. it is one thing to license out manufacturing contracts (no one expects calvin klein to be an expert in sunglass manufacturing), but having something sold with your name on the label, when you've had no input whatsoever into the creation of it, is fraud. even if all you do is approve of the final design before it goes into production, that's still something.
i don't believe a designer would willingly give up all creative control over his own label if he is still in some way associated with the company. btw, i have never seen a joseph abboud garment that struck me as having been "designed." it's all very standard stuff to me.
You're not exactly dreaming, but really, if Abboud signed a contract that didn't give him veto power or some sort of ability to work with the designers to come up with suitable designs befitting his brand, then that's bad foresight and bad lawyering on his part. It's actually something that people, especially designers and artists, need to be very careful about. When your brand is your name, you can't be so quick to grab the money. Sounds like they originally threw a bunch of money at Abboud and he took it and ran. Then, when the designs starting slipping, he had regrets.
But I agree with you about Abboud clothing. Very VERY average looking at best.
Why's he complaining, again? He received sixty-five million dollars to not do anything. He should call it a 65 mil retirement fund, and shut the hell up. If any fashion designers are reading, I'll happily not design anything for you for half that figure. A quarter even.
Separate names with a comma.