Discussion: Should Making It in Fashion Be This Hard?

LadyJunon

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 11, 2021
Messages
3,072
Reaction score
5,555
I thought that this article could be interesting to discuss as it gives a look into the financial demands of creating and running a fashion label, while also showing a young designer's crippling lack of pragmatism.
Should Making It in Fashion Be This Hard?
The young designer Elena Velez may be headed for bankruptcy, cancellation or glory. This is her great experiment.

25ELENA-VELEZ-lkfg-articleLarge.jpg

Elena Velez, a talented designer whose inspiration lies somewhere between Midwestern grit and feminine aggression.Credit...Tamara Blake Chapman for The New York Times

author-jessica-testa-thumbLarge-v3.png

By Jessica Testa

May 25, 2023
Elena Velez held up her phone. A banking app showed the available funds in her business account.

It was Feb. 17. Earlier that week, she had held a runway show that earned her raves as an original voice in New York fashion; reviews from Vogue and others called her “urgent,” “provocative,” “delightfully deranged,” a “rare talent.” Three months before, she’d been named emerging designer of the year at the CFDA awards, the industry’s version of the Oscars. Her deconstructed corsets and asymmetric dresses had made the rounds on celebrities known for their propulsive sense of style: Rosalía, Solange Knowles, Julia Fox. What more could a 28-year-old fashion designer want?

Well, money. There was $370 in her account. “And I made a $400 sale two hours ago,” she said, meaning she had been in the red that morning.

That triumphant runway show, held in a Brooklyn warehouse and opened by a model-musician who lurch-walked as if she’d been summoned from hell, cost Ms. Velez’s company almost $40,000, she said, most of which came from her mother’s retirement fund.

Her cash runway was “days,” Ms. Velez said. “But it’s always been that way. The ramp has been days for years.”

“Even today, I was like, ‘Well, this is it. We’re pulling the plug,’” she said. Then her publicist told her someone claiming to represent Kanye West and his new wife were interested in buying some pieces. Ultimately they bought about $7,000 worth, Ms. Velez said.

She started her company in 2018, and lately these scattered windfalls have helped keep the business afloat. Orders placed on behalf of high-profile clients — like the stylist for Beyoncé’s world tour — mean that Ms. Velez’s outlook can shift from grim to manageably grim in the span of a day. Agree to host a branded party: small paycheck. Organize a sample sale: bigger paycheck.

Earlier this year, she was named a finalist for a prize worth up to $150,000 from Fashion Trust U.S., a new nonprofit. Ms. Velez was hopeful. Hours before the winner was announced, in March, she recited from a spreadsheet she’d made outlining how she might use the money: settle debts, cover new production costs, fund the next runway show, begin work on opening a factory in Milwaukee, her hometown.

25ELENA-VELEZ-02-vjcz-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg
25ELENA-VELEZ-05-vjcz-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg
25ELENA-VELEZ-04-vjcz-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg
25ELENA-VELEZ-03-vjcz-mobileMasterAt3x.jpg

Looks from Ms. Velez's breakout runway show in February. Credit...Photographs by Albert Urso/Getty Images

But she didn’t win. Ms. Velez smiled gamely at the awards ceremony but clapped her hands a little too tightly together, looked down a little too long at her untouched plate of roast chicken. Later that night, she won a different award of $25,000. Even then, she felt as if she’d lost.

“I’m in trouble,” she said.

To sustain her business, to stay living and producing her designs in New York City, to convince herself that it was possible to succeed in fashion without money or connections — to just “be OK,” as Ms. Velez put it — she needed more.

‘A heavy, heavy, heavy burden.’
Fashion is not an especially easy industry to penetrate. And making a living from it is even harder for young designers of color who don’t come from privilege. Ms. Velez, whose father is Puerto Rican and who was raised by a single working mother, is certainly not the first to struggle.

But she is bringing new candor to the struggle. There is a game of humble gratitude and head-down perseverance that Ms. Velez declines to play, even as her star rises. After receiving her breakout award from the Council of Fashion Designers of America, she wrote on Instagram, “could y’all just stock me tho?” over a zoomed-in photo of her young son’s face.

For those potential retailers, Ms. Velez does not make easily marketable hoodies or leather bags; H. Lorenzo and Ssense — the highest profile places that stock her clothes — are known for selling more avant-garde designers. Her garments are unapologetically gnarly and technically chaotic: a skirt shaped like an “obeliskoid pillow” ($735), a cutout dress with “collapsing styling possibilities” ($1,475).

They are also produced in the United States, which is costly but core to her values. She dreams of building infrastructure for fashion manufacturing in Wisconsin, providing an alternative to New York and Los Angeles for herself and her local collaborators. The Midwest is her muse, but not for its farmland and lakes. She likes its sharper, rustier edges, the industrial yards and seedy truck stops.

Ms. Velez’s mother, Holly Church, is a ship captain in Milwaukee, and Ms. Velez spent parts of her childhood accompanying her on construction tugboats and dinner cruises. That proximity to manual labor helped shaped the Elena Velez aesthetic, which she has described as “anti-beautiful” and “unrefined.” A 2021 collection titled “Vessel” used repurposed materials like boat sails and rigging line in slinky silhouettes.

“I have never been the female form of beauty that she wanted when she was younger,” Ms. Church, 59, said by phone in April. “But then she began to understand that strength and beauty come in different forms.”

Ms. Velez first started filling up notebooks with fashion drawings around age 5, according to Ms. Church, and received her first sewing machine as a gift from a family friend at age 10. She took sewing classes at 12 (the instructor accepted only adults, initially, but Ms. Velez looked mature for her age, Ms. Church said). At 15 a local TV reporter described the teenager as having “the talent and drive to be a world-class designer someday.”

But for as long as she has wanted a career in fashion, Ms. Velez and her mother have been reckoning with its costs.

25ELENA-VELEZ-01-vjcz-articleLarge.jpg

Ms. Velez, with Keke Palmer, left, at the CFDA ceremony in November, when she was named emerging designer of the year.Credit...Nina Westervelt for The New York Times

Ms. Church sold their family home to pay for Ms. Velez’s tuition and fees at Parsons School of Design. To start her business, Ms. Velez said she raised about $450,000 from a handful of investors, “which came and went in two years,” she said. (Those investors have not given any additional money since.) There was a $50,000 award for being a CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund finalist, a $25,000 grant for small brands at New York Fashion Week and a $20,000 donation from a family friend.

Lately, Ms. Velez has begun taking predatory loans she finds online. Ms. Church has opened multiple credit cards and waits tables in the winter to help with bills. She said she has given Ms. Velez about $25,000 from her savings and, more recently, another $25,000 from her I.R.A. account. That last sum went toward financing the February runway show, covering expenses like catering and fake nails and “all of these dumb things that you have to have to get written about on Vogue Runway,” Ms. Velez said.

“My mom doesn’t have a retirement fund anymore, and that’s an awareness I have to confront and suppress every time somebody doesn’t want to come to the show because ‘It’s too late at night,’ or ‘It’s in Brooklyn,’” Ms. Velez said.

Yet there is no sense of regret from either woman. “I know that if she can find the financial footing, the rest is history,” Ms. Church said. “She’s worth every single ounce of energy to push her where she needs to go, so that other people can recognize what she has to offer.”

The problem, Ms. Velez has learned, is that recognition — the buzz around awards, reviews and celebrity endorsements — doesn’t always yield tangible returns. If anything, she said, it contributes to the idea that things are going well when they are not. And these metrics have not been easy for her to explain to venture capitalists.

“How many accomplishments do I have to collect, and how many co-signs and check marks does it take before people invest in helping me keep myself afloat?” Ms. Velez said, with an expletive or two. “Nobody’s malicious. Everyone is just busy doing their own thing and assuming that you can take care of your own business, which theoretically, you should be able to do. But we can’t deny that there’s a lot of money in this space, and a lot of people who are playing are playing with their own.”

While home in Wisconsin a few months ago, she said, she drove past an Arby’s with a sign advertising a manager position for something like $20 an hour. It occurred to her that there was more stability in that job, even if her job’s perks included an invitation to sit at the Balenciaga table at the Met Gala in May. Then she realized she was unqualified for anything but fashion.

“It’s a heavy, heavy, heavy burden for me, and a lot of the people that I love,” she said. “And I think that I could live a healthier, more sustainably paced life doing another thing.”

‘Crashing and burning’
It’s from this mentality that Ms. Velez sometimes jokes about going to work at Pumps, a strip club in Brooklyn. It’s a raunchy flavor of humor from a woman who often makes references to her own inevitable cancellation — an edgy, uncompromising attitude that’s either savvily authentic or a form of self-sabotage.

On Instagram, she has fought back against questions around size inclusivity, arguing it’s not financially feasible for small brands, and posted about being “removed from the line” of a Met Gala after-party for causing a scene when her guest wasn’t allowed inside.

Ms. Velez does not always engage in fashion’s mutual back-scratching. Elle magazine recently named her one of its “women of impact,” celebrating her at a Washington event with members of the Biden family. But when Elle asked to borrow an Elena Velez dress for a cover shoot with Karol G, the designer declined, in part because she didn’t think the pop star aligned with the brand. (She prefers more “feral” girls, like Ethel Cain and Caroline Polachek.)

25ELENA-VELEZ-06-vjcz-articleLarge.jpg

Ms. Velez, Anna Wintour and Lindsay Peoples, then the editor of Teen Vogue, at Teen Vogue Celebrates Generation Next in New York in 2019.Credit...Ilya S. Savenok/Getty Images for Teen Vogue

She has pointed views on “toxic femininity,” a theme she plans to explore in her next collection, and was recently a guest on the “Red Scare” podcast, whose controversial hosts she has dressed. On the episode she answered questions like: “Who hates women more, women or gays?” and “Who’s the bigger problem in fashion, women or gays?”

She has been critical of certain aspects of modern feminism, like the de-emphasis on motherhood — “it doesn’t rub me the right way,” she told Vogue — and once shared a clip on her Instagram of Jordan Peterson on “The Joe Rogan Experience” discussing women “turning university students into the infants they never had.”

These views come in part from the clarity that being a mother has brought to her own life. She became pregnant with her son, Atlas, at 25. Her second child, Freja, is almost 1. She has their names tattooed in tiny print on her cheek and neck. Earlier this month, she married their father, Andreas Emenius, a 50-year-old Swedish painter with whom she shares studio space in the Brooklyn neighborhood of Greenpoint.

“All my friends back home have kids, they own real estate, and I come here and I’m like a teen mom,” Ms. Velez said. “I feel very much like I have to keep the struggle of motherhood back-of-house. Nobody really wants to see it.”

Still, she’s often seen with at least one of her children nearby: napping on a couch at an industry cocktail party, sitting on her lap at a friend’s downtown fashion show, being rocked in a stroller by her side while she speaks on a Parsons alumni panel. She’s been told, she said, that it’s “such a cute P.R. stunt.”

But Ms. Velez is also aware that her inability to pay people could be a much bigger problem than some of her more outspoken views. She has joked about someday getting hit with the “inevitable toxic workplace allegations.”

In April, after the Fashion Trust U.S. awards, she estimated her debt to be about $90,000. Her creditors include factories that are starting to get mad, she said, but also people central to her team, like the designer Andrew Curwen, who is owed a few months’ worth of invoices.He helped create some of her February show’s most memorable pieces, like a bomber hoodie with bulbous, fungal-like quilted sleeves. (Most models in that show agreed to trade their services for exposure and clothing rather than be paid a fee.)

“I know that when money comes through, I will get paid,” Mr. Curwen said, comparing working for Ms. Velez to working for Alexander McQueen in the early days (a company that was later sued for unpaid intern wages).

“She’s not riding around in some Maserati,” said Gregory Werbowsky, her publicist and a fellow Midwesterner who also hasn’t been paid regularly — except in stained glass pieces made by Ms. Church.

Mr. Curwen pointed to Ms. Velez’s transparency around the struggles of being a young designer as part of the value in being in her world. “I don’t see what Elena is doing right now as just the beginning of her thing but as a movement in fashion in general,” he said.

She is sharing resources, including more recently with paid subscribers on her Instagram. She is sharing her blunt anger, too, and sometimes it seems as if she wants to burn the whole system down, though she is quick to clarify she doesn’t.

She is more interested in making an example out of her own “crashing and burning,” she said, for the greater benefit of the system.

“There’s never going to be a democratic American fashion narrative if the only people who can do it are, like, the coastal elites,” Ms. Velez said. “I’m transparent because I don’t expect it to be here that long. I want people to know this was an experiment to see whether or not it was possible to create a thriving fashion brand with these assets. So far, the answer is no.”

“I’m going to sink with the ship one way or another," she said, “and just hope that kind of energy is attractive to people.”
Source: NYTimes
 
Personally, while I understand her frustrations with how difficult and taxing running one's own label can be, I feel like Velez made so many bad decisions. One of the worst is her holding a runway show that neither she or her brand could afford and paying for it with her mother's retirement fund.

That and her using her son's face to publicly beg for stockists on Instagram, while exclusively making clothes that have little appeal beyond the conceptual high fashion niche.
 
Personally, while I understand her frustrations with how difficult and taxing running one's own label can be, I feel like Velez made so many bad decisions. One of the worst is her holding a runway show that neither she or her brand could afford and paying for it with her mother's retirement fund.

That and her using her son's face to publicly beg for stockists on Instagram, while exclusively making clothes that have little appeal beyond the conceptual high fashion niche.

Agreed with what you are saying. She seems to lack a strong business acumen. She should be developing products that can help her recoup costs and keep the business afloat that can help support her more artsy pieces. I think her marketing is bad, too.
 
While it's easy to empathize (in theory) with a young and not super well funded young designer, she's not doing herself any favors with the obnoxious tone she puts across in the article. You are not a case study for *all* young designers. Your brand crashing and burning is not an inevitability because of your background, if/when it happens, it's a result of every choice you've made and just... luck. Yes, there are people with advantages that allowed them to rise above their peers and find success that perhaps isn't warranted. But there have been plenty of designers from relatively humble background who rose to prominence as well. It's an exclusive field, not everyone can be a winner unfortunately. I think too many people now are so focused on building a brand they lose sight of... building quality, desirable products. The fact she's being written about in the Times and has meetings with Anna and other editors is a sign she had plenty of valuable opportunities and advantages already, it seems.
 
Her work looks like any other young designer you'd currently find on Instagram/TikTok who's into edgy, sort of raw approach to high fashion and probably has vintage snaps from Margiela or Helmut Lang on their moodboad and, of course, corsetry. From what I've just seen of her work, there is nothing that sets her apart from her peers and the fact that she's so publicly whining about her business 'crashing and burning' makes me feel even less sympathy for her. Hard truth is that some people simply aren't extraordinary (or connected) enough to make it in high fashion and if you want a career in fashion design despite that, lower your standards. Don't shoot for the stars, start smaller and focus on developing your craft. There is nothing attractive about this unprofessional energy she's claiming, it's very weird honestly. Designers are arrogant by nature so it's not surprising that she feels entitled to success, but just because you're doing it doesn't mean you're good at it.
 
Such an interesting topic and read..,
LaQuan Smith made it in the US and he didn’t come from privilege…
Zac Posen, incredibly talented but no viable business ever…Even if he is personally safe from a financial POV.

It’s so interesting to see the American way a little bit.
In France, young designers aren’t supported like that. I kept being shocked by the amount of money she has received in support. It’s almost like philanthropy at some point.

Because in France there’s no support really, usually designers’s brands are their side projects up until they have a breakthrough.
Some starts late after saving money for years.
The girl raised 450000$! Insane…
It’s almost as because there’s so much money around or so much opportunity to have big money that she is chasing a check instead of structuring her business.

All I kept thinking about her while reading was how she doesn’t realize her privilege. She says it’s difficult to succeed in fashion without connections and when you don’t come from a privileged background and it’s true but so far, she has had access to spaces unavailable to a lot of people without taking advantage of that.

‘Maybe she needs a mentor.
Because she can’t possibly have won so many prizes, been on those spaces without asking for guidance in structuring her business.

‘I went to her website and there were some cool pieces but indeed, nothing to sustain a business and more than that to take her brand to the level she seems to want.

‘Maybe some pragmatism would be needed. How can a young professional who loves her brand can get a piece of that brand for her everyday life? Those are the questions some external pov would ask.

That was a good article to read.
 
Whether the piece is aware or not— or she’s aware or not, there’s an absolute air of entitlement. It’s very American, sadly. You know, I thought perhaps she was being tongue-in-cheek with the “Could y’all just stock me tho?” that’s the equivalent of “Help a brotha out!”… But the inclusion of her child is just so exploitively inappropriate. That, and the whole I’m-a-POC-from-an-immigrant-working-class-background manipulation is such a turn-off: Welcome to the club lady; you’re not special. While the rest of the world with aspirations of becoming a productive designer will humbly hold down a full-time job, while designing on the side; investing their savings to produce a mall collection, a website (and even just using Insta) to sell their wears, and maybe a small showing if they’re lucky. And they keep at it until they’re able to sustain a humble business that affords them the privilege of designing full-time— or until their investment in time and money are spent, and know when to leave the industry: Many talents fall by the wayside. And they don’t/won’t have the privilege of dressing Beyonce, nor meeting with high profile powerhouses of the industry. I wouldn’t stock her even if her offerings were more substantial than the typical deconstructed/lingerie/vegan-leather bell-bottom aesthetic with her “Could y’all just stock me tho?(…cuz I need to feed by baby-- by dressing Beyonce and being carried at Saks)". Sheesh.
 
It's nice to know that I'm not alone in my thoughts. I've managed to put together a analysis of Elena Velez's label and what she could be doing better:

The Clothes
Her offering is very much the typical gritty Margiela-derivate deconstructionism that we often see with emerging designers (Marine Serre is the most recent successful example of that), but she does differentiate herself with very feminine overtones (the consistent reference to corsetry, petticoats and other pre-20th century underpinnings).

Her main issue is the collection that survives the runway-to-production selection is too small. If she's going to create these dramatic runway pieces, she'll need to support them with less prohibitive items. Creating a star item or accessory could help a lot as the finances as well. Look at the young Paris and Milan-based houses: Ludovic's eyelet briefs, Jacquemus' Chiquito and Bambino bags, Y/Project surrealist denim, etc.

The Distribution
Having H.Lorenzo and Ssene as stockists is quite good for a designer in her 4th season, but both of them are oriented to the type of customer doesn't really have the means (or desire) to regularly shell out four digits for 47% of an evening dress.

Again, those more commercial items will allow her access to stockists that have a more diverse, well-rounded customer base, including customers that might eventually be willing to buy the €2'100 half-dress, if they like the simpler items.

The Marketing
Having biannual runway shows that one cannot afford is incredibly irresponsible, especially if it's not their own money. One thing that I'll never understand about NYC and London's designers is how they always manage to consistently start with full-scale runway shows that are on the official schedule (Velez included). When I look at Paris and Milan's designers, it's always a completely different story. Lots of their designers are usually in business for 2 - 5 years before holding their first runway shows, opting for cheaper alternatives instead. The runway budget needs to come from the business and exclusively from the business.

Another issue is how she presents herself and her business. Buyers are going to be repulsed by designers using their children to beg for stockists and the industry (which is desperately trying to give itself a progressive makeover) is not going to agree with her association with the "Red Scare" podcast and their (perceived) right-wing feminist views and ideologies.

She needs to reduce her public image until she's certain that she create a steady business that can survive such controversies and that is more dependent on consistent sales than industry approval.
 
what I don't understand is the necessity to have shows when the brand clearly can't afford them? Especially in this day and age when a direct-to-consumer business can be built through websites and social media channels - I would have understood this ten years ago, not now.

And it's not just normie bland brands that build a business that way, Dilara did her first ever show this past London Fashion Week - that was after the label had existed for six years already and she's no Frankie Shop BUT had the sense to offer accessories/jewellery which had her aesthetic at a relatively afforable price point. Starting off with shows now just seems like an albatross around young designers' necks, and it's poor business strategy if your business relies entirely on the endorsement of "cool people" and niche musicians and not people who actually pay for the clothes/pieces and wear them.

I doubt this podcast thing is any real scandal either, just smoke and mirrors - the real issue seems to be poor business choices because 450k, even over five years, certainly seems like enough money to get a fashion business off the ground.
 
what I don't understand is the necessity to have shows when the brand clearly can't afford them? Especially in this day and age when a direct-to-consumer business can be built through websites and social media channels - I would have understood this ten years ago, not now.

And it's not just normie bland brands that build a business that way, Dilara did her first ever show this past London Fashion Week - that was after the label had existed for six years already and she's no Frankie Shop BUT had the sense to offer accessories/jewellery which had her aesthetic at a relatively afforable price point. Starting off with shows now just seems like an albatross around young designers' necks, and it's poor business strategy if your business relies entirely on the endorsement of "cool people" and niche musicians and not people who actually pay for the clothes/pieces and wear them.

I doubt this podcast thing is any real scandal either, just smoke and mirrors - the real issue seems to be poor business choices because 450k, even over five years, certainly seems like enough money to get a fashion business off the ground.
To be honest, this idea of doing shows straight away seems to be such an Anglo-Saxon (London and New York) approach to fashion.

As I said before, an overwhelming majority of the newcomers on the Paris and Milan schedules have been in business, making and selling clothes, marketing on social media for 2 to 5+ years prior to going physical. Even then, their first set of shows are small-scale shows held in function rooms with no set and models having 2 to 3 passages in a show.

If she's so insistent on the runway format, then she could do it "pandemic style", which reduces the numbers of everything needed because of the magic of video editing and completely eliminates the costs needed to accommodate a physical audience. This video below is a really good example:
Soundtrack aside, the production team behind this is little more than what's usually needed for a standard lookbook.
 
^^^ Apparently, “there is a game of humble gratitude and head-down perseverance that she declines to play" (…but will gladly play and exploit her child/working-class family/color to amass financial sympathy support from buyers) is all one needs to know about her attitude. I do get why she’s convinced such indulgent trappings of the industry are necessary for her brand: there is this mentality for many new, young creatives-- not just fashion designers. to build and develop an aura, an illusion of grandeur around their brand, and having a show, an extravagant party, an event et etc for every new collection, provides the delusion of grandeur that they’re a part of the established glamour, alongside other multi-million dollar brands. If she’s not receiving any grants for the shows, she really should invest that show budget into securing her business— not her brand. Perhaps it’s very much an American tradition to “need” a big production/runway show that's rooted in self-importance and inflated ego: My show, my vision, my world…

Putting aside her arrogance and cringe attitude, she does seem to have technical as well as creative talent. She is still a new, young designer and her sensibility is typical of someone of her age (but she's likely convinced she is so much better). And it is admittedly refreshing to not see a single trace of any resemblance of logo/monogram/hoodie in her offering. The best direction for her is to grow, evolve and expend her offering that’s reflective of her creative growth rather than following marketing trends. She seems a competent, technically proficient dressmaker/seamstress, and do not resemble anything first-draft, held together with pins and fabric glue. And that’s refreshing in this age of drag costumes made on the fly. I’m trying not to be too hard on her, and hopefully she will naturally come into a more pragmatic offering with a much much much more responsible budget-management structure in time— along with a tad of humility.
 
Putting aside her arrogance and cringe attitude, she does seem to have technical as well as creative talent. She is still a new, young designer and her sensibility is typical of someone of her age (but she's likely convinced she is so much better). And it is admittedly refreshing to not see a single trace of any resemblance of logo/monogram/hoodie in her offering. The best direction for her is to grow, evolve and expend her offering that’s reflective of her creative growth rather than following marketing trends. She seems a competent, technically proficient dressmaker/seamstress, and do not resemble anything first-draft, held together with pins and fabric glue. And that’s refreshing in this age of drag costumes made on the fly. I’m trying not to be too hard on her, and hopefully she will naturally come into a more pragmatic offering with a much much much more responsible budget-management structure in time— along with a tad of humility.

yeah I don't have an issue with her design sensibility (which at least doesn't seem lazy), just the business strategy. And I respect that she does actually know how to sew and physically make clothes given she was on tv at age 15 showing clothes she'd personally made, which puts her lightyears above a lot of current emerging designers in terms of technical knowhow, in a world where fashion education seems to be deprioritising it.This is not a Pyer Moss situation where the designs were clearly of the 'don't know their *ss from their elbow' ilk with visibly shoddy product that everyone just kept shut about until the mess piled up too high, like the man had KERING on his side and still pissed it all away on parties and 'brand building' instead of paying vendors and employees - she has the ego but also some level of skills, that said she does need to change something.

Like @LadyJunon said, it does seem to be a bit of an Anglosphere thing to be having shows right out the gate but apparently she blew up on Tiktok from some newgen-sponsorship-scheme type show (which is another issue with these things, they take new designers on for a fixed time and then drop them off cold without any further support - another issue other designers have cited in the past, it's insane that so many of the newer designers seem to be basically reliant on prize money to keep going). but even Dilara, who I mentioned, is London-based and did all the publicity stuff online for years until her LFW debut, I assume with a decent enough customer base already in place.

And frankly, shows shouldn't be such an expected requirement of young designers, it eats all their money and for what? A fashion media that's being devalued by socials? Luxury retail buyers who won't pay these designers up front for orders placed/won't pay them at all until end of season? (which means that if they get the orders, the designers have to fork up for production costs on top of a show and then cross their fingers that there's enough sell-through, that's nearly a year between show and payment!). The pandemic exposed that as a practice at multiple luxury e-commerce places, I heard MatchesFashion was one that had to be chased for payments to their vendors a.k.a. designers, Batsheva - another newish NY brand that got started around the same era (2016 to EV's 2018) - also mentioned that some European stockists weren't paying her and it's known that some buyers at luxury multibrand stores used to use the prestige of 'being stocked at Barney's' etc to squeeze smaller designers/brands into less favourable terms for being stocked (no pre-payment for any of the cost of the order - insane). So yeah, bad strategy is one thing, but the industry operating like this can easily sink a smaller brand and it's not even her fault. I'd say sit out a season or two, do a lookbook/video, make some slightly more affordable products that still bear your sensibility (with her focus on metalsmithing, I think jewellery would be an interesting fit), just broaden your appeal so money isn't getting pissed away.
 
Idk if it's really on topic or off but I respect that she sticks to what she does. And even that video right there shows she's actually had the interest in the craft since she was younger and built her brand on that (regardless of what it looked like) instead of the regular jacquemus or ludovic type person we get shoved in our faces every season or more who wanted to build a brand solely on the foundation of the desire to be a *famous* "designer".
 
Idk if it's really on topic or off but I respect that she sticks to what she does. And even that video right there shows she's actually had the interest in the craft since she was younger and built her brand on that (regardless of what it looked like) instead of the regular jacquemus or ludovic type person we get shoved in our faces every season or more who wanted to build a brand solely on the foundation of the desire to be a *famous* "designer".
Also, her clothes also seem to be extremely well made for indie NYFW standards. Her problem is that she just needs a drop of pragmatism really. Especially with a total of 450k in funding.
 
Also, her clothes also seem to be extremely well made for indie NYFW standards. Her problem is that she just needs a drop of pragmatism really. Especially with a total of 450k in funding.

yeah financial mismanagement has sunk quite a few promising indie designers with interesting and innovative designs and aesthetics (that the likes of Gucci then went on to copy), even ones who'd been in business a lot longer than her. But given what I've pieced together about the payment terms even for ones who seem to have 'made it' (stocked in high-end shops, endorsed by celebs, but not given the money to pay their factories for production runs - there are exceptions though, like DSM funds production for younger designers whose collections it gets exclusives on), it makes it even harder on small brands/people just starting out.

Expecting a show on the NY schedule every season (expensive) combined with buyers who order on terms that mean that they won't be paying these designers for almost a year after the show (at the end of the season/after sales), would make it a struggle for anyone who doesn't have serious money - family or otherwise - backing them up. I don't know if there's some version of a down payment required when these things are ordered for retail, but there really should be. That's just a broader point about conditions in general, I don't know if it's the case for her.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
210,732
Messages
15,125,821
Members
84,451
Latest member
nicos18
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->