Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

BoF: Burberry Aligns Runway and Retail Calendar in Game-Changing Shift

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • lowrey
    ventiundici
    • Dec 2006
    • 8383

    BoF: Burberry Aligns Runway and Retail Calendar in Game-Changing Shift

    In a radical rethink of the fashion calendar, Burberry will combine its men’s and women’s shows together in two annual runway events, with ‘seasonless’ collections available to buy immediately after the shows. In an exclusive, in-depth conversation, Christopher Bailey explains the logic behind this game-changing move.


    In a radical rethink of the fashion calendar, Burberry will combine its men’s and women’s shows together in two annual runway events, with ‘seasonless’ collections available to buy immediately after the shows. In an exclusive, in-depth conversation, Christopher Bailey explains the logic behind this game-changing move.

    LONDON, United Kingdom — As discussions heat up around the ‘broken’ fashion system and brands seek new ways of presenting their collections to better align their runway shows — a powerful driver of consumer demand — with retail drops, BoF can reveal that British megabrand Burberry is completely shifting the way it produces, presents and sells its collections.

    Starting this September, Burberry will combine the presentation of its men’s and women’s offerings, packaging them together as one unified collection to be shown twice a year at major runway events during London Fashion Week. (The brand will no longer stage two annual menswear shows at London Collections: Men, but will retain a presence at the event.)

    While Burberry’s men’s and women’s collections have long followed the same creative theme — and recent seasons have seen female models appearing in the brand’s menswear shows and vice versa — the brand will, for the first time, be presenting its offering as one, holistic collection. Immediately after the shows, the full collection of men's and women’s looks will be available to buy both online and in-store, supported by digital and print advertising campaigns, which will launch as soon as the show ends.

    The new collections will be “seasonless” and branded “February” and “September” rather than Spring/Summer and Autumn/Winter, nomenclature conceived with an eye towards global consumers who live in non-Western markets with different climatic patterns.

    The decision follows the company’s move to unify its Prorsum, London and Brit lines under a single brand umbrella, known simply as ‘Burberry.’ In October, hurt by weak sales in Asia, Burberry forecast declining profit for the second year in a row and announced plans to trim discretionary costs, like travel, by £20 million this financial year.

    But most importantly, Burberry’s new strategy addresses a long-standing problem with the traditional fashion calendar, a legacy of a pre-Internet era in which fashion shows were conceived as closed industry events for press and wholesale buyers to preview collections months before clothing was available for purchase in stores. In recent years, the rise of digital media has put tremendous pressure on this model, as runway shows — now instantly shareable on the internet — have morphed into powerful consumer marketing events, leaving brands ill-equipped to convert buzz into sales for collections that have yet to be produced.

    Burberry has been taking steps to close the gap between runway and retail for some time, sharing its shows online and allowing shoppers to buy select items straight from the runway. But fully aligning the brand’s runway and retail cycles is a major step forward — with significant implications for the company's production and supply chain, as well as its communications strategy — and marks what may be the beginning of a sea change in the fashion industry.

    “The BFC executive board has been talking for some time about fashion shows better connecting to consumers and being a direct driver for retail sales," said Caroline Rush, chief executive of the British Fashion Council. "Burberry is a truly innovative brand and this strategic move shows brilliant leadership from Christopher Bailey and his team in driving this agenda forward. A number of British brands will move to a similar model over the next few seasons.”

    In an exclusive, in-depth conversation, Burberry's chief executive and chief creative officer Christopher Bailey talks to BoF’s Imran Amed about the logic behind the brand’s new model.

    Continue
    "AVANT GUARDE HIGHEST FASHION. NOW NOW this is it people, these are the brands no one fucking knows and people are like WTF. they do everything by hand in their freaking secret basement and shit."

    STYLEZEITGEIST MAGAZINE | BLOG
  • Faust
    kitsch killer
    • Sep 2006
    • 37852

    #2
    Shit i s fucked up and bullshit.
    Fashion is a form of ugliness so intolerable that we have to alter it every six months - Oscar Wilde

    StyleZeitgeist Magazine

    Comment

    • ProfMonnitoff
      Senior Member
      • Jan 2007
      • 556

      #3
      They've announced some version of their totally revolutionary "buy right off the catwalk" thing every year or two for as long back as I can remember, and it has never turned into anything. But hey, short attention spans...
      Originally posted by jogu
      i went out to take garbage out and froze my tits runnin down stairs , think im gonna chill at home tonite . hungry tho anyone have cool ideas on what to order for supper , not pizza tho sick of pizza

      Comment

      • d'avant-garde
        Member
        • Sep 2013
        • 51

        #4
        Tom Ford making changes as well

        "Fashion shows and the traditional fashion calendar, as we know them, no longer work in the way that they once did."

        Comment

        • snafu
          Senior Member
          • Apr 2008
          • 2135

          #5
          A clever move i think.
          .

          Comment

          • Law
            Senior Member
            • Dec 2013
            • 513

            #6
            Posted in the other thread, curious to know what this would mean for the smaller brands.

            Comment

            • Shifts
              Senior Member
              • Jul 2013
              • 325

              #7
              Sounds like it goes hand in hand with this article published by The Guardian a few days ago, clearly targeting a huge crowd of young Instagrammers: http://www.theguardian.com/lifeandst...-photographers

              Letting the 16 year old Brooklyn Beckham shoot an upcoming fragrance campaign, instead of relying on a professional photographer., is only about reaching this crowd faster. Cheap (my guess) and fast marketing. Fragrances being the easiest way for young with a low disposable income to get into a brand...

              Not that the Instagram crowd following Brooklyn Beckham is the target audience for the runway show, but still connected in trying to push it out hard and fast.

              Comment

              • ronin
                Banned
                • Dec 2009
                • 200

                #8
                It's funny how, these past few years, some high-street brands have moved heaven and earth to justify mock-up fashion shows and tease "collections" in advance in an effort to look more upscale, and now some luxury brands are aligning with their mass-market counterparts to suit the goldfish-level attention span of their customer base.

                I don't know how influent the CFDA is in America, but it seems it was their answer proposal to the whole "system is broken!" issue. (Personally I'm flummoxed by the many gaps this solution fails to fill, but, well, any effort is appreciated I guess?). Surprisingly, London seems to agree with them on a view that neither the Fédération nor its Milan-based peer share. More on it on FashionMag (US version of an original French article issued a few weeks ago) :Fashion titans clash over shake up of catwalk calendar

                Comment

                • Law
                  Senior Member
                  • Dec 2013
                  • 513

                  #9
                  Informative interview with Vetements. They talk about their showing/selling cycles: http://www.businessoffashion.com/art...fashion-system

                  Comment

                  • zamb
                    Senior Member
                    • Nov 2006
                    • 5834

                    #10
                    in some ways its a very good move but in others it will be a disaster for many designers.

                    One of the ways that it is good is that both designers and stores will shorten significantly the time it takes to make a return on ones investment. Sometimes from
                    designing a collection // to buying fabric // producing samples //having a show// taking orders // manufacturing the garment// then delivering to the stores//
                    It can be up to a year before one sees a return on investment. this is a very long time for smaller brands with not a lot of money. Shortening the cycle will allow for quicker turnaround and less overlap in the seasons because many times when a designer is planning a show and going to market they are in the middle of dealing with production for an upcoming season. that will be eliminated.


                    Here is where the problem lies now. Designers that do not control their production and do not have their own stores will have a challenge. To show a Spring collection in January with the intent to deliver the items in march only gives one about 8 weeks at best to manufacture. This is going to be HARD for smaller brands to do,
                    Most of them do not have access to their own production facilities and it is already hard sometimes to produce the collection within the Six month Window that is now the Model under which we operate

                    so think in the immediate short term we will see a two tier system where some people take the newer route while others have no choice but to stick to the older model. It will be huge production delays for some people and to an extent a headache for some buyers because you go to market as a buyer and one set of designer is showing you fall while another is showing you Spring.
                    “You know,” he says, with a resilient smile, “it is a hard world for poets.”
                    .................................................. .......................


                    Zam Barrett Spring 2017 Now in stock

                    Comment

                    • Law
                      Senior Member
                      • Dec 2013
                      • 513

                      #11
                      Originally posted by zamb View Post
                      in some ways its a very good move but in others it will be a disaster for many designers.

                      One of the ways that it is good is that both designers and stores will shorten significantly the time it takes to make a return on ones investment. Sometimes from
                      designing a collection // to buying fabric // producing samples //having a show// taking orders // manufacturing the garment// then delivering to the stores//
                      It can be up to a year before one sees a return on investment. this is a very long time for smaller brands with not a lot of money. Shortening the cycle will allow for quicker turnaround and less overlap in the seasons because many times when a designer is planning a show and going to market they are in the middle of dealing with production for an upcoming season. that will be eliminated.


                      Here is where the problem lies now. Designers that do not control their production and do not have their own stores will have a challenge. To show a Spring collection in January with the intent to deliver the items in march only gives one about 8 weeks at best to manufacture. This is going to be HARD for smaller brands to do,
                      Most of them do not have access to their own production facilities and it is already hard sometimes to produce the collection within the Six month Window that is now the Model under which we operate

                      so think in the immediate short term we will see a two tier system where some people take the newer route while others have no choice but to stick to the older model. It will be huge production delays for some people and to an extent a headache for some buyers because you go to market as a buyer and one set of designer is showing you fall while another is showing you Spring.
                      I concur.

                      Theoretically the logic behind it is sound and could well indeed work, with the traditional buying system in essence needing to be reversed. Unfortunately the concept is not pragmatic, as the article in Ronin's post above points out, the buying process would need to be shrouded in absolutely secrecy when dealing with wholesalers, as to not detract from the shows exclusivity.

                      What are the odds of brands being able to achieve that? It would have to involve no look books, showroom appointments only, no cameras etc etc.

                      Comment

                      • ProfMonnitoff
                        Senior Member
                        • Jan 2007
                        • 556

                        #12
                        It sounds like Vetements' plan is to pre-produce the collection, and then cut off orders when all the stock is accounted for. That's a very smart move and certainly works for a brand like theirs just as it would work for Gosha for example. Limited supply actually works in their favour instead of just being lost sales. So for them I think it can be very beneficial, and as an added bonus they get to use their factories in what is probably a less busy time, so possibly they can strike good production deals. And on top of that they get the PR of being ~FASHION INNOVATORS~

                        But I don't think that this is a model that most companies should be looking to implement. It's very specific to Vetements' position. It's very challenging in terms of cash flow, it places a lot of risk on the brand in terms of possibly not selling everything that was produced, and without a big enough buzz it will be difficult to get press and buyers to adapt.

                        But yeah, smart move from Demna and his brother.
                        Originally posted by jogu
                        i went out to take garbage out and froze my tits runnin down stairs , think im gonna chill at home tonite . hungry tho anyone have cool ideas on what to order for supper , not pizza tho sick of pizza

                        Comment

                        • Law
                          Senior Member
                          • Dec 2013
                          • 513

                          #13
                          Fixing the fashion system:

                          With designers departing historic houses and the rise of digital creating a culture of more, more, more, BoF editor at large Tim Blanks joins designer Erdem Moralioglu, blogger Susanna Lau, publicist Daniel Marks and editor JJ Martin to discuss the problems facing the industry and how to fix them.

                          "We are doing all our promotion of products which won't be available for four to six months. It's absurd"
                          TB: There’s still the old system of showing, producing, delivery. But then there’s this digital age where everything is instant.

                          JJM: We are doing all the promotion for products that won’t be available for four to six months. It’s absurd.

                          DM: To Susie’s point, we’re talking about simultaneous consumers here: the mass and the luxury consumers. Fashion shows are a trade event — that still exists and hasn’t gone away. But now the fashion show platform is going out to millions of people who are saying, “I want that bag!” And you have brands like Versus Versace doing ‘buy now, see now’ from a catwalk show, but that collection is not being seen or traded in the same cycle.

                          TB: Is that dangerous?

                          JJM: I think it’s very dangerous. Because it’s feeding all of these fast fashion companies that are just copying all of these designers’ hard work.

                          SL: Would we suggest that the schedule be moved so that all ready-to-wear shows be ready at the same time as haute couture, and go to market right away?

                          JJM: But Susie, it’s not a point of when the collections are shown, but when they are bought. If the collections get bought three to six months earlier than any show schedule, and what shows is what is in the store now, then we have a new schedule. It becomes for the consumers and for the press — which is going to be 100 percent digital anyway. So there should be two moments: private moments for buyers and later, the show for the public and the press.

                          DM: But that’s exactly how fashion started. The private moment was the show and the public moment was when the clothes hit the floor. What would be required is a six month break to stop, regroup, and allow the system to catch up with itself.

                          JJM: Or the designers can be clever about it, and already produce what they are showing on their runway and be ready for it.

                          SL: I think it’s a good idea to push seasons closer together.

                          EM: I think within the couture model, where you’re making a one-off for a very specific client, that works. In ready-to-wear that would be impossible unless you’re pre-making all your collection.

                          JJM: What if you were showing your collection to buyers early and saving the show for press and consumers? Would it be possible to sell your collection in advance and produce it before your show?

                          EM: No, it would be impossible, because you would have buyers coming into your showroom, taking pictures of models. I think the moment you create a collection and show it to buyers, it’s out there. Having a fashion show is the act of showing something you’ve been working on privately to the world.

                          SL: So you think the current season format still works for you?

                          EM: There are things that create a lot of pressure and relentlessness, but ultimately the way the system works is based on this idea of anticipation and excitement.

                          TB: But when you’re showing your new collection before the last collection is in the store and the customer says, “I want that, what I just saw,” is that an issue for you?

                          EM: For a woman to have chosen her wardrobe six months ago, and suddenly have it delivered, is a bit archaic. But, I just can’t imagine creating a collection and then having to produce it without understanding who’s buying it post the presentation and the show.

                          JJM: So you’re saying that the press’ interest and guidance helps in terms of the sales process?

                          EM: How we’re functioning at the moment — journalists and shops are acting like magazines and creating buyable editorial. It’s becoming increasingly blurred.

                          JJM: I feel the system is out of date. But I do find fashion week relevant. There is a cultural thing happening for us as an industry. It’s nice for everyone to get together and socialise with other journalists, exchange ideas with retailers — for all the designers to come together. I don’t think fashion week should go away.

                          DM: You get a cultural barometer of what fashion needs to say to the consumer; like being in Milan when Alessandro Michele transformed the brand and all of the sudden we’re buzzing about Gucci.

                          SL: Isn’t it a bit worrying that we need to have these changes with every single brand? Which is this thing that’s happening, that people are suggesting houses create these moments of excitement every three years?

                          DM: I think the worrying part is designing product because of a need to fill shelves, as opposed to a need to entertain and conjure and fulfill dreams. We have thousands of images changing every minute, but we forget there’s that magical moment where a consumer hands over a credit card to buy something they don’t need, just to feel beautiful or better or rewarded. That’s the magic we miss in this noisy digital arena of shouting at the consumer.

                          SL: I think there’s diminished quality across the board in the industry so it makes those moments harder to come by — so when they do come it feels more pronounced.

                          TB: Yet there’s a curious thing that a lot of those moments are emotional moments — especially when you are in a show and it’s created by multiple factors. It’s that very old school sense of drama and theatre that all coalesces into this thing we’re impressed by. The digital experience flattens that.

                          JJM: Completely. The digital flattens it for the viewer, and then our digital reality is flattening it for the designers. They can’t make magic 10 times a year, they can make magic twice a year — if that.

                          Comment

                          Working...
                          X
                          😀
                          🥰
                          🤢
                          😎
                          😡
                          👍
                          👎