Ann Demeulemeester to Exit House

[cats]

[kunk75]

^doing great so far

[Shucks]

But CCP is still OK right?!

5char

[amen]

I havent read all the articles but apparently her husband has had some healthy issues lately - a sudden departure could easily be related especially for ann. Its sad but i felt the lines been pretty uninspired the last handful of seasons seemed like she was running out of steam tbh.

[david s]

While I say it is sad to see her go, she comes across as a level-headed and someone who definitely follows her own path. I saw a long form interview of her in French and I thought she came across as quirky, genuine and joyful.

I can say one of the few designers I've ever actually wanted to meet in person.

Does make me curious to see what she will be doing next.

[snafu]

Mr B great post, im happy for her.

Everyone else get a chance to retire so why shouldn't designers.
She built a legacy that will remain, no one can take that for her.

but its probably time to start buying up a good few years worth of suede sneakers.

[k3mist]

great article faust.

dont know how to feel right now.
one hand saddened but as all of u have said, she deserves this.
had a brief talk with her 3 years ago, won't forget it now.

so is anyone, cant think of anyone, going to be creative director now
or will it run like margiela...really hope it doesnt be the next margiela with colabs everywhere.

[kunk75]

i just don't see ann d. ever being acquiesced by the cheeseball market

[Fuuma]

great article faust.

dont know how to feel right now.
one hand saddened but as all of u have said, she deserves this.
had a brief talk with her 3 years ago, won't forget it now.

so is anyone, cant think of anyone, going to be creative director now
or will it run like margiela...really hope it doesnt be the next margiela with colabs everywhere.

The guy that was designing men's for Margiela has been designing men's for Ann for a couple seasons now....

[Geoffrey B. Small]

.

His name is Sebastien Meunier and he is a very competent designer for the job. He used to have his own collection many years ago, and we showed collections together in Paris on several occasions at the Espace Cardin in the late 90's (we had the same press agent at the time and shared the runway space on the calendar) and later at Area in 2004 when he tried to relaunch his own collection while working for MMM. He is an Hyeres Festival and Andam (I believe) prize winner, and while eventually unable to sustain his own collection as an independent, he spent many years as the designer of Margiela 6 (for both men's and women's) for Staff and Renzo Rosso, so he is very well versed in the Italian industrial side of things. It should be noted that the design role at 6 was a critical one, as the 6 line was the major commercial component and driver for the entire brand.

In regards to Ann, all I can say is that the job is not an easy one, and to be able to let go and move on with other things in life is totally understandable. If it is for health related reasons in her family, as some have alluded here, even more so.

It is also noted by many here that she does not own her company, and with the rash of acquisitions being seen today in the luxury market industry and the astronomical valuations of designer and luxury collection brands and companies currently being flouted in the financial community, I would not ignore the possibility that the firm's current ownership may have a very strong interest in the possibility of selling the company while the iron is so very, very hot...

Current valuations on recent deals are running at five times annual sales turnovers (in more sane times, one would always value against earnings, what a company makes after all of its expenses, not just the top sales figures), so if anyone out there knows the A.D. annual sales figures, they can multiply it by 5, and that number is what a reasonable offer would start at today for the purchase of the company. So for example, if the firm did 40 million euros last year in sales, the current owner could currently ask for a cool 200 million euros in her pocket to sell the company to either an LVMH, Kering, or yes, a Renzo Rosso. That's a lot of money, folks. Or it could try for even more and run an IPO like Brunello Cucinelli just did becoming a billionaire on paper... I for one, can only guess who the actual purchaser(s) or deals might be. But if there is anything going down, the parties involved probably feel the need to act now, and Ann may have decided to separate herself and her personal reputation, from that entire scenario as well... while she still can. Which to me would also be quite understandable.

What can I say, people. It's a hard, hard game. And you need a lot of passion and and a life's commitment to really do it well. But there is more to life than that alone. And sometimes, you gotta make choices on what you are going to do with your life, whatever is left of it. So, I say, best wishes to you Ann, enjoy your time and freedom and life, whatever you do with it.


.

[boomslang20117@]

Taken from Sade Samthen on Facebook

[Shucks]

[COLOR="Silver"]Current valuations on recent deals are running at five times annual sales turnovers (in more sane times, one would always value against earnings, what a company makes after all of its expenses, not just the top sales figures), so if anyone out there knows the A.D. annual sales figures, they can multiply it by 5, and that number is what a reasonable offer would start at today for the purchase of the company. So for example, if the firm did 40 million euros last year in sales, the current owner could currently ask for a cool 200 million euros in her pocket to sell the company to either an LVMH, Kering, or yes, a Renzo Rosso. That's a lot of money, folks. .

sorry, but which recent deals are you referring to here which were based on a "five times revenue" rule of thumb? i have never heard of ANY business analyst basing a valuation on a multiple on turnover - it makes no sense. also, any rule of thumb by definition fails to consider business specificity - i have trouble seeing how even in a shallow business such as fashion that deals would be made based on such crude tools. but please share if you have insights and examples.

[Johnny]

sorry, but which recent deals are you referring to here which were based on a "five times revenue" rule of thumb? i have never heard of ANY business analyst basing a valuation on a multiple on turnover - it makes no sense. also, any rule of thumb by definition fails to consider business specificity - i have trouble seeing how even in a shallow business such as fashion that deals would be made based on such crude tools. but please share if you have insights and examples.

i was thinking the same thing. sale of any trading business will usually be based on earnings multiples.

[Pumpfish]

i was thinking the same thing. sale of any trading business will usually be based on earnings multiples.

Perhaps in a sane market, but as Geoffrey clearly argues, in a bubble, or irrational market, ratios go out the window. Google, Twitter or LinkedIn don't trade on earnings multiples.

Fashion appeals to Private Equity firms, because the smart people in PE think that fashion is a mugs game. It is relatively easy to ramp up profits in a year or two and then pass the parcel to the next schmucks.

Nice to see the fuckers get burned once in a while.

[Faust]

I would imagine Geoffrey is referring to the recent acquisitions of unproven brands like Nicholas Kirkwood and J.W. Anderson, but I might be wrong.