OP-ED: PUTTING FASHION BACK TOGETHER
by Eugene Rabkin
"These days the fashion press that still bothers writing about fashion is filled with two types of articles. It’s either opinion pieces decrying the broken fashion system, or news about individual designers taking change into their own hands.
Some of the woes befalling the fashion systems, according to the “broken fashion system” articles, is that the stores demand deliveries too soon and put them on sale too soon, and that the fast fashion system produces knockoffs at far cheaper prices and put them in stores before the real stuff hits the racks. Supposedly, the latter necessitates the former, but designers don’t like to be rushed, and the additional stress put on them is the other reason for the fashion system being broken. We have fall clothes filling the racks in the summer, and summer clothes in the winter. Everyone shops on sale.
Designers like Burberry, Tom Ford, and Vetements have now decided to shift calendar and deliver the goodies right after their “seasonless” shows. Supposedly, this will combat the fast fashion copy cats and satisfy those rabid fashion fanatics who want the stuff now and have an attention span of a snail because their lives revolve around their Instagram accounts.
To put this as diplomatically as I can, this is all a bunch of bullshit. The only real problem from the ones described above is that fashion is delivered too soon and gives people few reasons to buy the clothes they don’t need. But, the bigger problems are that there is too much bad fashion and that fashion is too expensive.
First, for anyone who survived the Antarctic weekend in New York during the fashion week (which only proves, again, that god hates fashion), the idea of seasonless fashion is largely nonsense. Most markets that are located in the Northern hemisphere will still demand heavier clothes in the winter and lighter clothes in the summer. I don’t see this changing and some designers who were showing summery frocks on the New York runway this week got more raised eyebrows than critical acclaim for their forward thinking.
Second, the threat of fast fashion copycats and knock-off artists to the designer fashion industry is mostly a myth that has already been debunked, but no one seems to listen. In the video linked in the previous sentence, none other than Tom Ford says that his consumer and the fast fashion consumer exist in different universes. In other words, the Park Avenue woman is not going to go to H&M to buy a Gucci knockoff, because she can afford the real thing and she wants the real thing for its tag and its quality alike.
Furthermore, according to China Daily, half of the luxury fashion today is bought by Chinese consumers. Most of these are still aspirational consumers, and I know how an aspirational consumer works, because I, being an immigrant, have experienced it firsthand. Believe me when I say this – they want the real thing as soon as they have the money for it. Yes, they may wait for sales, yes they may hunt on eBay and YOOX, but they want the real thing. Knockoffs are for those who cannot afford the real thing, plain and simple. I don’t know exactly why so blindingly obvious a thing is hard to comprehend for the luxury executives, though I have an idea.
The luxury conglomerates produce fashion but they operate by the same diktats as any other conglomerate – they are slaves to the logic of capitalism that dictates constant expansion and continuously growing profits. To them, everyone is a potential consumer, everyone is one market, and everyone is a competitor. No wonder they foam at the mouth when they see H&M opening 300 stores a year and Zara making more money than them. Obviously, there are some exceptions to the scenario outlined above, but by and large it is true.
The most obvious solution for driving more customers to high-end fashion is lowering its insane prices. This past weekend I was browsing the spring issue of T-magazine, where plenty of outerwear and some dresses hovered in the $10,000 mark. Need I say more?"
Full article on SZ-mag
by Eugene Rabkin
"These days the fashion press that still bothers writing about fashion is filled with two types of articles. It’s either opinion pieces decrying the broken fashion system, or news about individual designers taking change into their own hands.
Some of the woes befalling the fashion systems, according to the “broken fashion system” articles, is that the stores demand deliveries too soon and put them on sale too soon, and that the fast fashion system produces knockoffs at far cheaper prices and put them in stores before the real stuff hits the racks. Supposedly, the latter necessitates the former, but designers don’t like to be rushed, and the additional stress put on them is the other reason for the fashion system being broken. We have fall clothes filling the racks in the summer, and summer clothes in the winter. Everyone shops on sale.
Designers like Burberry, Tom Ford, and Vetements have now decided to shift calendar and deliver the goodies right after their “seasonless” shows. Supposedly, this will combat the fast fashion copy cats and satisfy those rabid fashion fanatics who want the stuff now and have an attention span of a snail because their lives revolve around their Instagram accounts.
To put this as diplomatically as I can, this is all a bunch of bullshit. The only real problem from the ones described above is that fashion is delivered too soon and gives people few reasons to buy the clothes they don’t need. But, the bigger problems are that there is too much bad fashion and that fashion is too expensive.
First, for anyone who survived the Antarctic weekend in New York during the fashion week (which only proves, again, that god hates fashion), the idea of seasonless fashion is largely nonsense. Most markets that are located in the Northern hemisphere will still demand heavier clothes in the winter and lighter clothes in the summer. I don’t see this changing and some designers who were showing summery frocks on the New York runway this week got more raised eyebrows than critical acclaim for their forward thinking.
Second, the threat of fast fashion copycats and knock-off artists to the designer fashion industry is mostly a myth that has already been debunked, but no one seems to listen. In the video linked in the previous sentence, none other than Tom Ford says that his consumer and the fast fashion consumer exist in different universes. In other words, the Park Avenue woman is not going to go to H&M to buy a Gucci knockoff, because she can afford the real thing and she wants the real thing for its tag and its quality alike.
Furthermore, according to China Daily, half of the luxury fashion today is bought by Chinese consumers. Most of these are still aspirational consumers, and I know how an aspirational consumer works, because I, being an immigrant, have experienced it firsthand. Believe me when I say this – they want the real thing as soon as they have the money for it. Yes, they may wait for sales, yes they may hunt on eBay and YOOX, but they want the real thing. Knockoffs are for those who cannot afford the real thing, plain and simple. I don’t know exactly why so blindingly obvious a thing is hard to comprehend for the luxury executives, though I have an idea.
The luxury conglomerates produce fashion but they operate by the same diktats as any other conglomerate – they are slaves to the logic of capitalism that dictates constant expansion and continuously growing profits. To them, everyone is a potential consumer, everyone is one market, and everyone is a competitor. No wonder they foam at the mouth when they see H&M opening 300 stores a year and Zara making more money than them. Obviously, there are some exceptions to the scenario outlined above, but by and large it is true.
The most obvious solution for driving more customers to high-end fashion is lowering its insane prices. This past weekend I was browsing the spring issue of T-magazine, where plenty of outerwear and some dresses hovered in the $10,000 mark. Need I say more?"
Full article on SZ-mag
Comment