Chanel - The All-Things Chanel Thread

[chrisand489]

I have witness changes but I have simply stopped buying. No point in ranting about it.
I think consumers have to be informed but now there’s a lot of misinformation for example. I bought my bags when they stopped doing the gold plate. I have my first classic bags for 17 years now. But I can’t say that the quality is decreasing because of that for example.

The thing is that at some point the prices influenced our reactions. I have found some cute pieces from Virginie but I wouldn’t spend 7K for a tweed jacket today. And tbh, I’m not sure I would even if it’s Blazy.

I love Chanel but personally, I feel like Chanel has outpriced itself for the amount I’m willing to pay at full retail price for a single item.

But then again, I’m not spending 10K on a classic or 2:55 today and I’m not spending 9K on a jacket.

Honestly, I think you made a really good point. No matter how refined Blazy’s designs are, they just don’t hold the same long-term value as even a slightly awkward vintage piece from Karl’s era. Maybe I’m exaggerating a bit…but you know what I mean. There’s something about those older pieces that feels timeless, even if they weren’t conventionally beautiful. They carry legacy.

And speaking of value… I still can’t believe a Le Boy card holder costs around 700 euros in Japan. With that kind of money, I could easily get a compact Loewe wallet and might be more functional, and honestly, probably better made these days.

So maybe taste evolves, but legacy… that’s priceless.

 

[Caffeine]

Honestly, I think you made a really good point. No matter how refined Blazy’s designs are, they just don’t hold the same long-term value as even a slightly awkward vintage piece from Karl’s era. Maybe I’m exaggerating a bit…but you know what I mean. There’s something about those older pieces that feels timeless, even if they weren’t conventionally beautiful. They carry legacy.

And speaking of value… I still can’t believe a Le Boy card holder costs around 700 euros in Japan. With that kind of money, I could easily get a compact Loewe wallet and might be more functional, and honestly, probably better made these days.

So maybe taste evolves, but legacy… that’s priceless.

A lot of Karl's creations are very specific or awkward, but there are also plenty that are timeless as you said. I found an almost new 2018 Hamburg sailor jacket: the cut is perfect with today's casual pieces and it is just so darn well made. I put it on and my heart skipped a beat

 

[Creative]

Chic people going to Hermes? If Hermes is doing those numbers, it’s precisely because chic people are not to the sole consumers. People buys those brands because they can afford to buy it. People ranting about the quality of bag on the internet aren’t spending 3/4K on a cardigan or 7/9K on a jacket.

But it’s indeed time to put some class back into the house and maybe evoke youth without feeling juvenile.

I don’t know if they have to launch a proper menswear. Maybe they should start by few looks but more than that, expand the availability of the products. Producing bigger sizes on their shoes, doing either a real bag for men or at least a unisex bag.

Yes, they are going more and more to Hermès. Chic locals don’t want the Chanel flap but a Kelly. You don’t see very rich locals buying new Chanel at all.

Of course Hermes also has a wide variety of customers as we’ve talked about in different threads, having chic customers doesn’t mean you will have just that.

If I were a woman I’d find nothing interesting at Chanel tbh. Just the slingbacks… the rest is garbagish or tacky or matronly or super outdated.

 

[tourbillions]

i still cant compare hermes rtw to chanel. Id still see way more people in chanel tweed than hermes rtw. I don't think hermes would have much sales at all without their holy grail bags. Even then most of what they sell are bedsheets, throw pillows, plates, everything but rtw. Except for their sandals..

At chanel i know many people are still avid users of their facial care products and i dont mean make up. They have one of the healthiest haute couture division, tweed jackets still sell a lot and i think that the people complaining about quality are the vocal few. Maybe they should play "the game" at chanel to get offered the better quality bags idk.. or maybe they just come in and see whats on display and complain. I think even chanel high jewelry sell more than hermes. So i dont know which chic people are in hermes, all i see are people accumulating points for one of the bags.

chic people are obviously in jacquemus these days, preparing for their vacations in st tropez or bodrum

 

[Lola701]

Honestly, I think you made a really good point. No matter how refined Blazy’s designs are, they just don’t hold the same long-term value as even a slightly awkward vintage piece from Karl’s era. Maybe I’m exaggerating a bit…but you know what I mean. There’s something about those older pieces that feels timeless, even if they weren’t conventionally beautiful. They carry legacy.

And speaking of value… I still can’t believe a Le Boy card holder costs around 700 euros in Japan. With that kind of money, I could easily get a compact Loewe wallet and might be more functional, and honestly, probably better made these days.

So maybe taste evolves, but legacy… that’s priceless.

To me, it’s not even a question of value. I buy what I like. But even Karl at current prices would make me question it.
Karl’s Chanel was already very expensive towards the end. But there were pieces that were great and which for me weren’t outrageous. But I’m more a fan of Karl so I bought a lot of Fendi. I have actually more Fendi clothes and variety of clothes than Chanel. I would say that 80% of my Chanel clothes are tweed.

The moment I realized I was over it was with Virginie’s first collection. There was that long red cashmere cardigan. I really loved it. But if I remember, it was a little bit over 5K. And I kept remembering that I spend a little bit more than 3K for one of the chunky sweater dresses from the Hamburg collection. It simply wasn’t worth it.

Eventually, Virginie made it easier for me because the clothes weren’t good. Kim Jones also made it easy for me at Fendi. What was lacking was an intention really. It was just commercial clothes and when you are leading fashion house, it’s not enough. It can work at Hermes but not so much at Chanel for me.

But in reality, when it comes to luxury HF brands, I always choose the sales route. If I’m willing to pay full price, I would rather go to Vuitton (because of NG) or independent designers (Plan C, N21 or others). I can get strong pieces there.

But as I know women who still buys Chanel clothes and bags. They know what they are paying. And it’s not even a question of « can you afford it ». It’s just the willingness to buy.

There are a lot of women who don’t care about the designer behind, the season or others. They just love the brand and what it represents.

Chanel has relied too much maybe on that. The Chanel look, the codes, the color palette.

But the discussion we are having around Chanel can be applied to a lot of brands that are going to experience an overhaul in September/October.
I think that Chanel and Dior are going to be the big winners because they are « valeurs sûres ».

 

[jeanclaude]

A Chanel bag which looks already used:

TikTok - Make Your Day

And then this wallet:

 

[chrisand489]

 

[tourbillions]

I dont know why releasing a mens line is controversial in 2025.

If brands would do something as low as moving demna from balenciaga to gucci, then making a mens line in a supposedly "woman power" brand makes more sense.

Tweed jackets doesnt always need to be cut the same way.

 

[theshadedgaze]

Well there goes that fantasy c’est la vie. Just have to keep buying what’s on offer for women.

 

[yslforever]

Just a reminder that Chanel underperformance (let's say compared to Hermès or smaller brands like Prada or others) is 90% the consequences of the choices, decisions, and policies this lady decided and implemented, Virginie Viard was only responsible for poor fashion designs (ok, terrible designs actually), but fashion is only a fraction of Chanel.
Maybe Mathieu will help redeem the brand, and in the meanwhile this lady position, or she can go back to where she belongs: in a Carrefour aisle selling Axe stink-covering sprays, ultra-processed "food" and micro-plastic loaded detergents.

Excuse-me, or don't excuse me, for the classism, but I do believe elite people with creative or aesthetic interests (the Dumases, Miuccia for instances) understand better how the other elites live, what they aspire too, and what they want.
Chanel should be the most exclusive brand in the world, not because of the tag prices, but because they should offer the most extraordinary and beautiful experience, full stop.
They are able to it.
But I don't think this lady sees where the standards should be, or even cares, she does not strive for perfection.

 

[RosesAreRed]

Smart move. They don't need menswear.

 

[Norden]

Just a reminder that Chanel underperformance (let's say compared to Hermès or smaller brands like Prada or others) is 90% the consequences of the choices, decisions, and policies this lady decided and implemented, Virginie Viard was only responsible for poor fashion designs (ok, terrible designs actually), but fashion is only a fraction of Chanel.
Maybe Mathieu will help redeem the brand, and in the meanwhile this lady position, or she can go back to where she belongs: in a Carrefour aisle selling Axe stink-covering sprays, ultra-processed "food" and micro-plastic loaded detergents.

Excuse-me, or don't excuse me, for the classism, but I do believe elite people with creative or aesthetic interests (the Dumases, Miuccia for instances) understand better how the other elites live, what they aspire too, and what they want.
Chanel should be the most exclusive brand in the world, not because of the tag prices, but because they should offer the most extraordinary and beautiful experience, full stop.
They are able to it.
But I don't think this lady sees where the standards should be, or even cares, she does not strive for perfection.

Completely agree. Whenever I see leena talking, or Bruno for that matter it ruins the prestige of the brand further. Let’s hear what blazy has to say, if he has something to say beyond product. But this woman is not it, there’s something so dry about her, it’s very politician in Brussels.

 

[Creative]

Indeed. Lena seems clueless and not very smart fashion wise. You can tell she never had a Vogue magazine or a fashion book in her hands in her life.

 

[Lola701]

The thing is Leena Nair became the president of Chanel in 2022. Let’s say that their strategy started really to have shifted during the pandemic.
She was clearly hired for something, something the Weirthemers knows. I have never saw her as a permanent but rather transitional hire so it’s a bit difficult to envision what the guideline is.

Chanel has always stood out to me as a company that seems to make long term oriented decisions as opposed to it real competition (which is not Hermes). And lately, the price hikes, the communication or even release the numbers all seems really short term aimed.

Chanel is a privately owned company. They started to release their numbers for the first time in decades in 2019 a little bit before Karl died.

@yslforever pointed out perfectly that Chanel was always above the pack. The secrecy added to the aura.

I don’t understand suddenly why they feels the need to halfway explain all their decisions.

I think there’s a cultural problem maybe. Leena is maybe a great leader, someone who understand HR and maybe the challenges of a huge conglomerate today but the culture of fashion, of luxury is very different. Some may think it’s outdated but when you are Chanel, I don’t think you have to justify yourself or even explain yourself for creative or strategic decisions.

The fact that they are doing it is the proof that they aren’t confident. Some people mistakenly believed that the price thing was for competition against Hermes.

I actually believe now that the price hikes were like a patch to hide the lack of real strategy after Karl’s death. The hyper commercialism of Virginie’s clothes was also that. The aura of Karl’s work was strong enough that it impacted all the others areas of Chanel.

Creativity leads the vision and business is supporting that. Without it it’s just marketing at the service of business.

The brand will continue to do great regardless but they are lucky that it happens now at a time where the whole industry is a bit suffering. It would have happened regardless.

So yes, Blazy marks a new era at Chanel. But I don’t think that era will be Nair’s era.
Matter of fact, I don’t even think she was involved in the decision making.