Alessandro Michele - Designer, Creative Director of Valentino

[tatouejeremie]

Will Gucci’s New Creative Configuration Work?
The Italian megabrand has partitioned its creative department and recruited Maria Cristina Lomanto to oversee merchandising. Is it enough to reignite consumer interest? Luca Solca does the analysis.

By
Luca Solca
28 June 2022
BoF PROFESSIONAL

On page 22 of Gucci’s presentation at parent company Kering’s recent capital markets day, there was an interesting announcement: the Italian megabrand has partitioned its creative department.
While Alessandro Michele remains Gucci’s sole creative director, a longtime deputy is now dedicated to the development of the brand’s commercial collections in the newly created role of design studio director, reporting to him. Meanwhile, Maria Cristina Lomanto has been recruited to oversee merchandising and brand elevation as executive vice president, brand general manager.
In the late 2010s, Gucci delivered one of the most successful turnarounds in the history of the modern luxury industry. The new baroque aesthetic invented by Michele, masterful merchandising brought by Jacopo Venturini, and impeccable execution orchestrated by Bizzarri powered Gucci’s rapid acceleration from 2016 to 2019.
The brand was key to defining “new luxury” and has brought new product categories to the sector with its original interpretation of streetwear. Rival Louis Vuitton followed in Gucci’s footsteps, with its Supreme collaboration (2017) and hiring of Virgil Abloh to lead its menswear (2018).

Historically, Gucci has found consumer relevance when it’s exuberant. Luxury brands, with their unique DNAs, are like different animal species in nature. Some of them are more demure and more stable. Gucci’s past suggests that the Florentine brand does best when it’s over the top.
Designer Tom Ford succeeded in putting Gucci centre stage by dialling up its sex factor, both on the catwalk and in daring advertising campaigns that were banned in some markets. Michele tapped a similar exuberance, albeit channelled into a very different look. By contrast, a craftsmanship- and heritage-driven play under Frida Giannini was less successful.
Now, Michele’s Gucci is showing signs of consumer fatigue. The label seems to have lost its spark, falling significantly behind top rivals on organic growth. When a brand slows, there are a thousand reasons, of course.
At the epicentre of Gucci’s woes are the Chinese. The repatriation of Chinese luxury spend since the pandemic has meant a significant price increase for Chinese consumers relative to what they could spend on the same goods on trips to Europe before Covid-19. This is particularly troublesome for Gucci, as the Chinese were the first to enthusiastically embrace the brands revamp under Bizzarri and Michele.
At this stage, as Gucci delivers more of the same aesthetic, it’s quite likely that some Chinese consumers have dropped the brand from their shopping lists: why buy more of the same (at a higher price) when one has a lot in one’s wardrobe already? Gucci’s senior management in China must take some of the blame for this, but is that really the underlying issue?
The reorganisation of Gucci’s creative department is a step forward. With more space to innovate, Michele must reinvent Gucci again, while the newly promoted design studio director oversees commercial collections and Maria Cristina Lomanto oversees merchandising and a brand elevation push. If they succeed, then wonderful.
But if Michele were to fail to reignite consumer interest for Gucci, then replacing him further down the road could be less of a shock with a new structure in place.
As much as Kering’s smaller brands, like Saint Laurent and Balenciaga, are doing extremely well, all eyes remain on Gucci, still the most important contributor to group profits. Senior management is aware that they need to shift gears at Gucci and they are doing that. That is, in itself, a good sign. But re-energising the brand without new creative inputs may be unlikely at this point.
If all goes to plan, Gucci is likely to improve gradually. Is that enough to deliver on the ambition to grow sales to €15 billion announced at Kering’s recent capital markets day? Perhaps a little patience is warranted at this stage. But for how long?

Editor’s Note: This article was amended on 28 June 2022. A previous version of this article misstated that Maria Cristina Lomanto oversees the development of Gucci’s commercial collections. She does not. Gucci’s commercial collections are overseen by the brand’s design studio director, a newly created role. Maria Cristina Lomanto oversees merchandising in another newly created role, executive vice president, brand general manager.

 

[Lola701]

Gucci has set-up a new postion named Design Studio Director which is responsible for main collection. Their organizational construction has spilt into 2 ways- fashion collection and main collection. Obviously François Pinault and other shareholders are unhappy currently....

Pretty much the same like LV. All the clothes on the runway must be ordered right after runway. You can not walk in and say I want to buy runway look 32.....Stores are full of monogram clothes. Always denim jackets and Tees...che pazzo!

It doesn’t smell too good for Alessandro. It’s weird because I think that if his collection were as focused as his first 2 ones, he can refresh Gucci again.

I hope if he is on the way out, that they(KERING) will be more gentle with him than they have been with all their designers who left

 

[Deleted member 7575]

Interesting. It’s perhaps time for Alessandro Michele to go as I don’t believe he has anything new to offer. Maybe instead of going to Versace, they should look into Tisci if they want someone with a name although I am sure there is an undiscovered talent waiting in the wings for their chance.

I think we can all agree that Tisci at Gucci would be a huge hit.



The brand fatigue was inevitable and I'm actually really suprised he was able to last this long.

I don't think it would be so bad if Michele made the effort to evolve but he didn't. It was just always more and more of same and the collection became increasingly derivative and predictable. What might have before looked lush and provocative before now just looks silly and affected (it always did to me). It's hard to tell of they declined in quality or if we're desensitized to it all.

I don't think Gucci needs a complete makeover, just a strong nudge forward. I believe Michele has it in him. But if he doesn't, I won't miss him either.

 

[jeanclaude]

I see this as the prelude of Michele end at Gucci. I don´t think he is able to revamp Gucci again...because he is unable to make one collection look different from the rest he has made so far.

 

[GoldenTribe]

I can't think of any other major label -- not Thom Browne, not Rick Owens, nobody -- in which every collection (maybe even every garment) is completely and utterly interchangeable, without a single exception, over a period of many years. I didn't even make it to the end of his very first Gucci runway show without "brand fatigue" setting in, so colour me surprised that it took this long for the market to begin to sour on his ultra-expensive vintage-logo-everything maximalist approach.

And this might be an arbitrary point of entry to respond to the question of quality, but today's new arrivals on SSense.com include a Gucci men's beige double-breasted blazer (with peak lapels broad enough to double as a paraglider) priced at $4300 and made of 100% polyester.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I can't think of any other major label -- not Thom Browne, not Rick Owens, nobody -- in which every collection (maybe even every garment) is completely and utterly interchangeable, without a single exception, over a period of many years. I didn't even make it to the end of his very first Gucci runway show without "brand fatigue" setting in, so colour me surprised that it took this long for the market to begin to sour on his ultra-expensive vintage-logo-everything maximalist approach.

And this might be an arbitrary point of entry to respond to the question of quality, but today's new arrivals on SSense.com include a Gucci men's beige double-breasted blazer (with peak lapels broad enough to double as a paraglider) priced at $4300 and made of 100% polyester.

 

[Fulton St Critique]

I understand yo

I can't think of any other major label -- not Thom Browne, not Rick Owens, nobody -- in which every collection (maybe even every garment) is completely and utterly interchangeable, without a single exception, over a period of many years. I didn't even make it to the end of his very first Gucci runway show without "brand fatigue" setting in, so colour me surprised that it took this long for the market to begin to sour on his ultra-expensive vintage-logo-everything maximalist approach.


And this might be an arbitrary point of entry to respond to the question of quality, but today's new arrivals on SSense.com include a Gucci men's beige double-breasted blazer (with peak lapels broad enough to double as a paraglider) priced at $4300 and made of 100% polyester.

I completely understand your point on “brand fatigue”, but I find your observation of the price of Gucci’s apparel a little misinformative. I too, find the price of that beige blazer excessive, to say the least, yet just because the piece is 100% polyester doesn’t necessarily mean the garment is a complete waste of money as I am sure you know.

I think outsiders to the industry view fashion as this terrible business model that seeks to rip off their consumers, even if some designers *cough*, Marc Jacobs at Bergdorf, are charging absurd prices for their clothes. This viewpoint that it costs, for example, 15 cents to create a t-shirt that sells for $900 is so out of touch with reality.

A yard of poly- American here, sorry - at this fabric shop near me can range from as little as $2.99 to $80.00. And I believe it takes somewhere between 1.5 to 2 yards for a blazer if I remember correctly. Factor in the price of trims, the labor, the shipping to Ssense’s warehouse (Italy to Montreal), the markup Gucci is charged from their suppliers, and the eventual markup they have to sell it for and you are looking at a very high cost for what appears as just another poly blazer. I am not sure how Ssense runs their accounts, but they might even mark up the piece AGAIN, but please do not quote me on that. I don’t work in merch at Gucci, but if I had to guess, I am sure with these rising costs they WISH that they could charge even more.

I am not saying that as a means to attempt to educate you, I am sure you considered these things and are aware of the business practices at large, however, the reality is that Gucci is a luxury house that expects to earn a certain rate per piece, and if there is a buyer who is willing to spend $4,300, why wouldn’t they charge that price?

 

[GoldenTribe]

I stated the exact price and the exact product composition of a garment. I am amused you took the time to call that "misinformative" (a hideous word).

Then you go on to call the price excessive anyway. And then you say it's Marc Jacobs who is in fact selling rip-off pieces (why no parallel argument in defense of his pricing?).

Whatever argument you are having, it is entirely inside your own head; feel free to leave me out of it!

 

[Fulton St Critique]

I stated the exact price and the exact product composition of a garment. I am amused you took the time to call that "misinformative" (a hideous word).

Then you go on to call the price excessive anyway. And then you say it's Marc Jacobs who is in fact selling rip-off pieces (why no parallel argument in defense of his pricing?).

Whatever argument you are having, it is entirely inside your own head; feel free to leave me out of it!

Ok

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I understand yo


I completely understand your point on “brand fatigue”, but I find your observation of the price of Gucci’s apparel a little misinformative. I too, find the price of that beige blazer excessive, to say the least, yet just because the piece is 100% polyester doesn’t necessarily mean the garment is a complete waste of money as I am sure you know.

I think outsiders to the industry view fashion as this terrible business model that seeks to rip off their consumers, even if some designers *cough*, Marc Jacobs at Bergdorf, are charging absurd prices for their clothes. This viewpoint that it costs, for example, 15 cents to create a t-shirt that sells for $900 is so out of touch with reality.

A yard of poly- American here, sorry - at this fabric shop near me can range from as little as $2.99 to $80.00. And I believe it takes somewhere between 1.5 to 2 yards for a blazer if I remember correctly. Factor in the price of trims, the labor, the shipping to Ssense’s warehouse (Italy to Montreal), the markup Gucci is charged from their suppliers, and the eventual markup they have to sell it for and you are looking at a very high cost for what appears as just another poly blazer. I am not sure how Ssense runs their accounts, but they might even mark up the piece AGAIN, but please do not quote me on that. I don’t work in merch at Gucci, but if I had to guess, I am sure with these rising costs they WISH that they could charge even more.

I am not saying that as a means to attempt to educate you, I am sure you considered these things and are aware of the business practices at large, however, the reality is that Gucci is a luxury house that expects to earn a certain rate per piece, and if there is a buyer who is willing to spend $4,300, why wouldn’t they charge that price?

That example may not have been perfect but I have seen many overpriced, poorly made garments in absolutely lousy polyester fabrics from Gucci. I could not believe the terrible, crunchy, cheap, CHEAP hand and drape of some of those garments and the ludicrous price tags attached. Complete garbage. Utter sh*t.

There may be some nice quality polyesters out there, like the kind that Alber Elbaz was fond of using for Lanvin, but they ain't at Gucci.

Frankly, none of the wares you get from any LVMH or Kering-owned brand are going to be such great value as their markup is way, WAY above the industry standard. All of these mass-oriented "luxury" brands that are trying to sell everything to every rich ***hole in the world are a f*cking racket.

 

[Vitamine W]

That example may not have been perfect but I have seen many overpriced, poorly made garments in absolutely lousy polyester fabrics from Gucci. I could not believe the terrible, crunchy, cheap, CHEAP hand and drape of some of those garments and the ludicrous price tags attached. Complete garbage. Utter sh*t.

There may be some nice quality polyesters out there, like the kind that Alber Elbaz was fond of using for Lanvin, but they ain't at Gucci.

Frankly, none of the wares you get from any LVMH or Kering-owned brand are going to be such great value as their markup is way, WAY above the industry standard. All of these mass-oriented "luxury" brands that are trying to sell everything to every rich ***hole in the world are a f*cking racket.

And that is the T. Preach mama!

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I understand yo


I completely understand your point on “brand fatigue”, but I find your observation of the price of Gucci’s apparel a little misinformative. I too, find the price of that beige blazer excessive, to say the least, yet just because the piece is 100% polyester doesn’t necessarily mean the garment is a complete waste of money as I am sure you know.

I think outsiders to the industry view fashion as this terrible business model that seeks to rip off their consumers, even if some designers *cough*, Marc Jacobs at Bergdorf, are charging absurd prices for their clothes. This viewpoint that it costs, for example, 15 cents to create a t-shirt that sells for $900 is so out of touch with reality.

A yard of poly- American here, sorry - at this fabric shop near me can range from as little as $2.99 to $80.00. And I believe it takes somewhere between 1.5 to 2 yards for a blazer if I remember correctly. Factor in the price of trims, the labor, the shipping to Ssense’s warehouse (Italy to Montreal), the markup Gucci is charged from their suppliers, and the eventual markup they have to sell it for and you are looking at a very high cost for what appears as just another poly blazer. I am not sure how Ssense runs their accounts, but they might even mark up the piece AGAIN, but please do not quote me on that. I don’t work in merch at Gucci, but if I had to guess, I am sure with these rising costs they WISH that they could charge even more.

I am not saying that as a means to attempt to educate you, I am sure you considered these things and are aware of the business practices at large, however, the reality is that Gucci is a luxury house that expects to earn a certain rate per piece, and if there is a buyer who is willing to spend $4,300, why wouldn’t they charge that price?

Also before you knock Marc Jacobs, his clothes at Bergdorf Goodman are almost entirely made in New York, his fabrics are incredible and his ready-to-wear is probably some of the best made on the market and is sometimes even better constructed and finished than Dior or Valentino. Say what you will about their design, but the quality and integrity of his main collection garments are very high---a fact that he has personally insisted upon and has protected.

 

[Fulton St Critique]

That example may not have been perfect but I have seen many overpriced, poorly made garments in absolutely lousy polyester fabrics from Gucci. I could not believe the terrible, crunchy, cheap, CHEAP hand and drape of some of those garments and the ludicrous price tags attached. Complete garbage. Utter sh*t.

There may be some nice quality polyesters out there, like the kind that Alber Elbaz was fond of using for Lanvin, but they ain't at Gucci.

Frankly, none of the wares you get from any LVMH or Kering-owned brand are going to be such great value as their markup is way, WAY above the industry standard. All of these mass-oriented "luxury" brands that are trying to sell everything to every rich ***hole in the world are a f*cking racket.

isn’t that a known fact though? Even with the example above with the blazer, I'm sure if the price was cut in half they would still turn a decent profit, but decent profits don't result in 62 and 17 billion euro top lines. We could discuss MU, GM %, or any other KPI all day, but that's not going to change anything, LVMH would do anything to retain their profitability, that is obvious.

I know I'm digging myself into a hole here, but is that really your view on fashion? That it is to serve rich a-holes? I get the argument today that fashion in 2022 is a mess, the quality of design goes down every season, the customer is getting scammed, etc., but that is really such a negative view of a great industry, even with it's many, many flaws.

I just find it funny that it's always fashion that gets pinned as the most unethical, terrible industry in the world, as if the auto, food, entertainment industries aren’t riddled with issues of there own. Have you seen the price of Broadway tickets recently?!? And while yes this is a fashion forum, I rarely hear on the news, amongst friends, and even on SM how quote “bad” these other industries are, it's always fashion’s fault. Maybe I just need to remove my rose colored glasses and retire lol, clearly I am oblivious to reality.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

I know I'm digging myself into a hole here, but is that really your view on fashion? That it is to serve rich a-holes?

Is that what I said?

It's not.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

Whatever argument you are having, it is entirely inside your own head; feel free to leave me out of it!

I will second that.

 

[Fulton St Critique]

I will second that.

Noted.

 

[vogue28]

A look at Alessandro Michele's Gucci on CBS News' 60 Minutes:

 

[Deleted member 7575]

Looks like Michele is out at Gucci according to WWD.

 

[susseinmcswanny]

Good luck girl

 

[Norden]

It’s time for him to leave. He’s had a great run but it’s obvious his world is too narrow to reinvent.