Burberry consolidates all its brands into one

[marcBarna]

By Vanessa Friedman

On Tuesday, in a briefing just before Burberry unveiled its latest holiday ad campaign, Christopher Bailey, chief executive and chief creative officer of the brand, also announced what he suggested was a gift to consumers: the news that the three Burberry women’s and men’s wear lines would begin a consolidation process, so that by the end of 2016, there will be a single brand on offer in stores.

No more Burberry London! Or Burberry Brit! Or Burberry Prorsum (the name of the runway line, which most consumers could neither pronounce nor spell)! No more separate design teams!

Soon it will all be Burberry, period.

(Of course, it’s very likely you never realized there was a difference, but that’s the point.)

Mr. Bailey also announced the construction of a factory in Leeds, England. Due for completion in 2019 and at a cost of 50 million pounds ($77 million), it is expected to employ more than 1,000 people, clearly a boon to the local economy and to Burberry’s identification as the dominant British luxury brand. But, it’s the one-line thing that I think has the most far-reaching implications.

Along with the decision by Marc Jacobs’s management in March to fold the Marc by Marc Jacobs line into the main brand, the announcement three months later that LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton would, after Ms. Karan’s departure, suspend the main Donna Karan collection, not to mention the 2011 decision by Dolce & Gabbana to end the D&G line, that makes four — count ’em — major labels that have abandoned the old model of separate high-end/accessible lines.

It’s kind of a big deal, not just because of the logistical transformation involved, but also because it is a repudiation of a strategy that has shaped fashion since the “bridge” line became a “second” line around the turn of the millennium.

“We will still have the wide range of products that we have today — they will all just be known as Burberry, as part of a unified, consistent luxury brand,” Mr. Bailey said in a speech. “We believe that this will make us simpler and more intuitive for our customers. And we are confident that this will make us both more productive and more efficient as a business.”

It is an eerily familiar rationale after the one offered by Sebastian Suhl, chief executive of Marc Jacobs, about the Marc by Marc Jacobs decision. To paraphrase: 1) People shop high/low, elitist/accessible, these days, especially online, so why should we create and organize our offerings differently? 2) They were confused by all the different names anyway.

Julian Payne, a spokesman for Burberry said that despite the consolidation of Brit, London and Prorsum, no layoffs are planned, and the overall size of the product offerings and the price mix would not change; just the names (and the names of stores — there are a few Burberry Brit-only stores, which will now become Burberry stores).

Unlike Marc Jacobs, however, who mixed his product lines in his runway extravaganza in September, the new, big tent Burberry will reserve its high-end “conceptual” pieces for the catwalk, and they will be distinguished by a special garment tags (the broader Burberry offering will display a trench-beige tag with black script; the runway collection will have a black tag with golden-beige script). However, the full range will appear as one in stores, which is how, Mr. Bailey said, his customers shop.

nytimes.com

 

[anlabe32]

That's a good thing. It was confusing anyway.

 

[Pricciao]

90s diffusion line thing finally can put to an end. I'll just wait to see these b*tches give up pre collections in ten years time.

 

[Marc10]

Burberry's weren't really "diffusion lines" like D&G and Marc by Marc, they were just the basic, shop floor pieces. Burberry London is the more traditional tailoring, blazers, suits and the trench coats; Burberry Brit is the more urban and younger pieces like duffle coats, parkas, knitwear and puffer jacket; and Black Label is sold exclusively in Asia. Never really understood why they had separate names.

 

[Pricciao]

Each brand sites diffusion lines to be more approachable to the majority, and then it developed from this concept. Some brands create alter egos while some remain the same. No difference is there on Burberry.

 

[fashionista-ta]

90s diffusion line thing finally can put to an end. I'll just wait to see these b*tches give up pre collections in ten years time.

I'm not expecting that to happen ... isn't that where all the money is? I have found some good pieces in Resort over the years ...


Also didn't realize that the Donna Karan main-line decision was LVMH's. It's really too bad, as that line was a fairly intuitive alternative to Lanvin ... also woman-friendly. What is happening ...

 

[Pricciao]

It coincides with the recent break down on designer changes, there are way too many options it becomes no option.
Eventually they'll have to back off from this system.

 

[fashionista-ta]

To me it would be preferable to scale down other collections and scale up Resort. I seem to recall it has a longer shelf-life than any other collection, it's under the radar, and profitable due to the long shelf-life and often more practical & unpublicized nature of the clothes.


I'm not sure what the answer is as far as making the process more sustainable. This would be an interesting question for fashion students to work on ...

 

[lucy92]

didn't they also have a licensed thomas burberry line only available in mainland europe at some point?

 

[Thefrenchy]

Good move I guess, can't say it will make me see the brand differently...

 

[Street_a_Licious]

I'm kinda sure Black and Blue Label will remain available.

And i kinda like my Prorsum stuff :/

I always understood Brit as the young, less structured line.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Doesn't really matter to me, but it seems like it could make it harder for the focused customer to shop.


I want them to bring back their dog line, that's what I think is important here

 

[Kaye Beeh]

I always thought it was all the same but at different price point and offerings but usually similar customer types went for london and brit. And prorsum was runway.

Not a bad way to clear up some confusion, lets hope things are done as they said they are to be and not deviate so much like price, store models, etc.

And for the person that mentioned Resort, +1.

 

[AD011620]

They should have kept Prorsum seperate... The rest of the brand simply doesn't interest me and I see no point going through the shop for hours to look at the stuff I like... But to be honest maybe I just whine for no reason... Most of the time I shop online:-)))

 

[VogueDisciple93]

I think this a great idea, Burberry had too many brands, and even though I understood the differences I doubt a regular customer would. I hope there are more ideas in the pipeline because this brand needs a turn around.

Resort/Pre-Fall will only grow, it is where most apparel sales are generated because of accessibility of the designs and it has a longer shelf life than Spring/Fall collections (it is in most stores over a month longer). Because the pieces are transitional customers buy into the fact that they can get more wear out of these pieces and in regions of the world that do not experience dramatic changes in seasonal climates these collections perform incredibly as not all countries need the heaviness of most fall collections.

 

[vetements]

Other than prorsum, which I feel Christopher Bailey has a hand in it, rest of the lines reminds me too much of customers who cannot wait to flaunt their signature checks, I don't see any design elements in those lines, but maybe it's just me, since I am already biased and I don't check them out.
Prorsum in recent years have also become less covetable, so I will say just as well.

Burberry also faces competition from Daks, Aquascutum I feel, and to a lesser extent, perhaps Mackintosh, clothing line of Church's or even Barbour and Belstaff...interesting to see how this consolidation will pan out.

 

[Phuel]

Burberry’s been headed downhill in terms of high fashion edge ever since the company’s been controlled by shareholders. It was inevitable this would happen because frankly, the general public couldn’t care or tell the difference between Burberry Prorsum and Burberry the brand that’s on golf polos sold at department stores. It’s all the same brand to them.

At this point, the Burberry label is at best synonymous with a classic, reliable, investment brand. I’m still interested, but not in the same way I was several years ago when Christopher did lead. I have to say, Burberry’s high fashion impact has been the shortest one of any high fashion label. But, I guess it matters not, since in the long run, it’s become a brand that will still be coveted by the general public. And that is all that matters to the shareholders.

 

[pen6693]

So they're still going to differentiate their runway products from their other lines... Why not just keep the different names, essentially it's the same thing.

 

[Phuel]

^^^ Maybe because having the same label design run through the entire line will pyschologically give consumer that even if they’re wearing the lower-end London, it’s still of the same “lineage” as the more prestigious Prorsum? It’s the same marketing mentally Marc went with displaying the diffusion Marc by Marc Jacobs alongside his mainline in his shops.

Apparently the hangtags will be the only distinction that separates Prorsum from the rest on the shops floors.

As a practical business move, both internally and externally, consolidating the label into a single brand makes perfect sense. I mean, it’s not like Prorsum’s pricepoint will drop to that of London’s and the company saves a bit of money on producing just one label design LOL

 

[kasper!]

In fact they have 4 brands...(image from Mr Porter)


How very stupid.