Lena,
Thanks for the article. It is really interesting for me to see the business side of a fashion house and the way in which a businessman thinks about fashion... even though a part of me hates to see it broken down so much to numbers, dollars, and cents.
I guess that most of the time all that I think of is the finished product from a given house, the interesting clothes, unique ideas, etc... but it interesting to know that perhaps BECAUSE of other considerations, some with which I wouldn't agree... those clothes can come about as they do and be as interesting as they are. What I mean is that, as Bertelli said, it is because of a large conglomerate that some smaller businesses were able to stay afloat. And, those large conglomerates become and stay large by making tough decisions based on the bottom line and what is going to make them larger... as opposed to a singular artistic vision come-what-may.
Or, in the case of Prada itself, it is because of the nylon bags and the sneakers (which many of us descry) that we can have some of the really interesting clothes that she sometimes produces from the main line or from Miu Miu. Without the financial freedom afforded from a successful accessories line, she probably couldn't take so many chances with the clothes line. For, like her or not, she doesn't just "play it safe" all the time. Just look at some of the collections from a few years ago... sleeveless, nylon halter vests for men, wool "double trousers" (I'm sure you saw them... they looked like one pair of pants worn on top of the other). I'm guessing that they probably sold 3 pair of those.
Of course, there is the converse argument, that because of their current financial constraints they are having to cut corners... But I still think that she has more of an ability to "play around" with ideas that she might have than some other large houses.
Look at Armani, for example. His business is almost entirely based on clothes, right? For this reason, he really can't take huge chances on a collection that may fail. Hence year after year of the same thing without much risk (all of which sell, predictably, like crazy).
Thanks again,
John