Chanel - The All-Things Chanel Thread

[Lola701]

Raising eyebrows on this article because I heard about it too many times when Maureen Chiquet was the CEO.
While Bruno joined Chanel in 1990, he only became the president of fashion around 2002. So this is someone who knows the maison, who knows the Weirthemers and who survived already 2 previous CEOs.

On top of that, he is also the president of all the metiers d’arts and all.

And in a way, I wonder how his activities as the president of fashion relates to the decision to fire people in the US by Nair.

I’m maybe naive, I’m maybe wrong but I think we give her more importance that she may have at Chanel. Because the Weirthemers are still keeping an eye on the business, I think a twist can happen.

As I mentioned months ago that Chanel won’t hire a non-French speaking designer at the helm of the house, I don’t think they will replace Pavlovsky with someone who doesn’t know the house from within. He succeeded Françoise Montenay.

I don’t think Pavlovky/Nair is the story. The Weirthemers are in their 70’s so their succession is the main subject. CEOs generally stays a little bit more than a decade at Chanel. Their position is the most volatile there.

 

[PDFSD]

This is a BIG problem and a BIG mistake. What is she doing at Chanel and how he landed there is beyond my comprehension...!

She is there for the restructuring the company to have different power balance to be fair she don't need to be a fashion or luxury queen :-)
Many Ceo´s in tech and other big companies are from indian decent as well, there is a culture that has produced savvy leaders for these giant brands/corporations, even when like in her case she does not seem to know how to speak on behalf of Chanel at times but so does Elon or even Sam Altman are odd when being interviewed.
Her CV is impressive you can't take that away no matter how bad she looks or sound in Chanel.

The global economy regards Indian CEOs as visionary leaders who bring a unique combination of technical prowess, strategic acumen, and cultural intelligence to the corporate world. Their ability to drive innovation while navigating complex international markets has made them highly sought after in various industries.
Indian CEOs are often seen as bridge-builders who can seamlessly integrate Eastern and Western business practices, fostering growth in both emerging and developed economies. Their emphasis on inclusive leadership and adaptability resonates with global organizations aiming to thrive in an interconnected world.
www.vciinstitute.com

Chanel issues have been there before she started so i don't see it as a her problem.

If VV did shows like she did its on VV just like if Blazy will do well creatively or flop its on Blazy, cutting corner on quality or other issues where there with Karl final years as well.

I think we are reading to much into it in regards of her being there and any thing we might dislike about Chanel.
I don't see her have much influence in directing the fashion /creative marketing other than making sure the teams are build for the company goals set up with the owners hence her being hired to implement these changes

 

[LadyJunon]

^^That article screams disaster on so many fronts. And may be why fashion as a whole seems stuck. When middle class executives are too worried about the bottom line instead of supporting the designer fully in creating a magical world that is beautiful and endearing because it is temporary. We don’t want every season to see the same beige coat or white dress or at least I don’t. I want to see themes and creative experiences. One season take us on a Chanel safari, the next a Chanel mystery movie set, the next a disco urbane Chanel, the next a more historically accurate interpretation of the house codes, the next Chanel on planet Jupiter. Make us dream and fantasize because at the end of the day we can go buy a good or even great beige coat or white dress for a fraction of the cost at Bloomingdale’s or Liberty. We buy designer for the fantasy and the magic.
The reason vintage is so big right now beyond environmental and financial issues is because people are going why would I spend $9,000 on this basic coat when I can go get a similar and a lot of times better quality coat from 1995 for $3,000.

Another reason why is also because designers from the 90s/00s are (rightfully) perceived as being better. When the Dior Saddle was rereleased in 2018-ish, it took advantage of the rise of vintage purchases, while adding the allure of Galliano to Chiuri's collections.

I associate Chanel with a sense of utility when it comes to certain styles and wardrobe staples, but its strong ties to couture eliminate the idea of efficiency. Really any high fashion and couture oriented brand shouldn’t be using such a word to associate the management. It ruins the essence of what it is about. Talk about bleak.

There's a good reason why the Lagerfeld Era introduced the current brand image of the permanently young, free-spirited post-mod woman. While utility and efficiency is a part of Chanel's design identity (trousers, rectangular shapes, dropped waists, 2.5" to 3.5" heels), it comes at odds with the ideology of Haute Couture. The idea is spending a five-figure sum for a dress or suit that demands three fittings and dozens of hours to be put together in the era of ready-to-wear is considered to be very frivolous. Had Chanel been founded in the post-war era, it would've been a exclusively ready-to-wear house like Chloe or Rykiel.

 

[Caffeine]

does Elon or even Sam Altman are odd when being interviewed

It's very different. These two men are brilliant founders and builders (with Asperger's). Nair is a professional manager without any skin in the game. Her job is to improve the net profit margin, not to give people fantasies.
I think that the debate is: should Chanel be a bottom line driven company or a company that sells fashion fantasies.
It's difficult to be both.

 

[PDFSD]

It's very different. These two men are brilliant founders and builders (with Asperger's). Nair is a professional manager without any skin in the game. Her job is to improve the net profit margin, not to give people fantasies.
I think that the debate is: should Chanel be a bottom line driven company or a company that sells fashion fantasies.
It's difficult to be both.

Agree on all but Elon being brilliant lol.... sneaky yes cunning yes opportunist yes.......... altman there is a book on him just came out last month i think these people are not the as brilliant as the next wolf in sheeps clothes it's far more layered

but let not get into this i agree on your main points:-)

 

[Caffeine]

Agree on all but Elon being brilliant lol.... sneaky yes cunning yes opportunist yes.......... altman there is a book on him just came out last month i think these people are not the as brilliant as the next wolf in sheeps clothes it's far more layered

but let not get into this i agree on your main points:-)

Objectively, he is. 92% of the rockets launched in the world is through spaceX and I can continue with 50 other bullet points. You can hate his politics or personal life, but he is objectively brilliant.

To compare Nair to either of these two is an insult. Again, the key is skin in the game. Karl had skin in the game because Karl was Chanel. He was building a legacy. What is Nair building aside from her personal net worth? Instead, she has destroyed the Chanel aura.

 

[HigthaVandah]

he is objectively brilliant.

At what field of engineering is he objectively brilliant, to be given credit for space technology? I don't consider being a venture capitalist to be engineering.

 

[PDFSD]

Objectively, he is. 92% of the rockets launched in the world is through spaceX and I can continue with 50 other bullet points. You can hate his politics or personal life, but he is objectively brilliant.

To compare Nair to either of these two is an insult. Again, the key is skin in the game. Karl had skin in the game because Karl was Chanel. He was building a legacy. What is Nair building aside from her personal net worth? Instead, she has destroyed the Chanel aura.

LOL

 

[99 Percent Polyester]

LOL

this is sending me into the orbit; i’m legit cackling 😭

 

[theshadedgaze]

So execs should get paid more so they can relate to the wealthiest clients?

Not in terms of money but middle class thinking. All about the dollar/bottom line, no room for dreaming. I often find in all the years of working with so many people in different fields and financial status that poor and rich people are often more dreamier or fanciful in their thinking where as the middle class are always so mediocre. Very bland and so focus on business success, not creating something that will inspire or provide magic in people’s lives. Now of course there will be exceptions that many can think of but that is all through my own personal experiences.
Now I would hope an executive at Chanel would be paid well enough to afford couture or high jewelry.

 

[theshadedgaze]

It's very different. These two men are brilliant founders and builders (with Asperger's). Nair is a professional manager without any skin in the game. Her job is to improve the net profit margin, not to give people fantasies.
I think that the debate is: should Chanel be a bottom line driven company or a company that sells fashion fantasies.
It's difficult to be both.

I think Chanel has become about selling fashion fantasies. When the house first started it was definitely perceived as clothes for an egalitarian and even working woman type person but with luxury senses. The tweed suit became the ultimate symbol for a working rich woman who was on a mission and strongly independent maybe she had a man but she didn’t need a man where as Dior (and most of the other couture houses) became a symbol for a woman who didn’t work she came from money or had a rich husband and spent her days planning garden parties and charity balls. And Yves Saint Laurent was for the bohemian rich woman who experimented in all aspects of culture, sex, drugs and rock and roll while also being a more modern version of the independence highlighted by Chanel. All of us know this.
Now today no matter the codes of the house and what they mean to the history of women and fashion, they are all seen as highly impractical and very fanciful (if only because of money). Go to any department store or office building today and you see the associates who once wore a Chanel like suit everyday with all the trappings and trimmings and today they wear “fashionable” denim and what they think is a fancy blouse. So yes to save the typing all of the high fashion houses are in the business of selling fantasy due to the depths to which fashion has sunk to for the masses.

 

[theshadedgaze]

Let’s please not discuss that so called genius who needs to be crate shipped back to South Africa. Like a Kardashian, a disease and plight on humanity.

 

[jeanclaude]

She is there for the restructuring the company to have different power balance to be fair she don't need to be a fashion or luxury queen :-)
Many Ceo´s in tech and other big companies are from indian decent as well, there is a culture that has produced savvy leaders for these giant brands/corporations, even when like in her case she does not seem to know how to speak on behalf of Chanel at times but so does Elon or even Sam Altman are odd when being interviewed.
Her CV is impressive you can't take that away no matter how bad she looks or sound in Chanel.

The global economy regards Indian CEOs as visionary leaders who bring a unique combination of technical prowess, strategic acumen, and cultural intelligence to the corporate world. Their ability to drive innovation while navigating complex international markets has made them highly sought after in various industries.
Indian CEOs are often seen as bridge-builders who can seamlessly integrate Eastern and Western business practices, fostering growth in both emerging and developed economies. Their emphasis on inclusive leadership and adaptability resonates with global organizations aiming to thrive in an interconnected world.
www.vciinstitute.com

Chanel issues have been there before she started so i don't see it as a her problem.

If VV did shows like she did its on VV just like if Blazy will do well creatively or flop its on Blazy, cutting corner on quality or other issues where there with Karl final years as well.

I think we are reading to much into it in regards of her being there and any thing we might dislike about Chanel.
I don't see her have much influence in directing the fashion /creative marketing other than making sure the teams are build for the company goals set up with the owners hence her being hired to implement these changes

For me, the problem is she is now at Chanel...but her mind and behaviour shows she is still at Unilever.

Even if she has a great CV and is a very competent worker, she doesn´t seem to understand she is now at a luxury high fashion brand. As long as she doesn´t change her frame of mind, this is going to keep creating problems for the brand.

 

[jeanclaude]

Objectively, he is. 92% of the rockets launched in the world is through spaceX and I can continue with 50 other bullet points. You can hate his politics or personal life, but he is objectively brilliant.

To compare Nair to either of these two is an insult. Again, the key is skin in the game. Karl had skin in the game because Karl was Chanel. He was building a legacy. What is Nair building aside from her personal net worth? Instead, she has destroyed the Chanel aura.

Although this is totally off-topic, I must say is not brilliant having a car brand focused towards progressive minded consumers; just to destroy all your customer base when publicly supporting far-right minded politicians.

He just shot his own feet.

 

[LadyJunon]

Although this is totally off-topic, I must say is not brilliant having a car brand focused towards progressive minded consumers; just to destroy all your customer base when publicly supporting far-right minded politicians.

He just shot his own feet.

A few years ago (2019, I think), there was this indie digitally-native designer who went on a whole "eat the rich" tangent, while selling dresses for €400 to €600. Sales were slashed in half, rendering the company unprofitable and the pandemic the following killed them off for good.

 

[Nimsay]

I mean i thought I commented that Leena doesn’t need to be here post Pavlosvky. She is here to restructure Chanel to be like Unilever - a bunch of brands working independently. That is a good thing and means that each department has basically become a branded mini company within Chanel. Very smart to break it down like this because w don’t have Karl sending lighting bolts down. As far as who is in charge obviously the Ws got in her in here to do just that. Thats why im thinking she won’t be here once she’s done.

Part of me expects a lot of creativity and disjointed collections. The handbags shoes jewelry and clothing will all be only lightly associated Im thinking. No centralizing Karl to bake in the motif from top-to-bottom. Maybe they’ll have weekly zoom calls to make sure they have similar vibes.

As far as a men’s line goes - without Hedi Slimane - im expecting something like the original LV Homme in like 1998. Officewear - 1/4 zips, full zips, chinos. It’s gonna have to be something the Chanel Femmes husband can wear to work to.

Also who isnt going to buy that robot? Like as soon as I can order it.

 

[jeanclaude]

Also who isnt going to buy that robot? Like as soon as I can order it.

Think twice about it:

 

[LadyJunon]

As far as a men’s line goes - without Hedi Slimane - im expecting something like the original LV Homme in like 1998. Officewear - 1/4 zips, full zips, chinos. It’s gonna have to be something the Chanel Femmes husband can wear to work to.

Maybe it's for the best that they're not doing menswear then...

 

[PDFSD]

For me, the problem is she is now at Chanel...but her mind and behaviour shows she is still at Unilever.

Even if she has a great CV and is a very competent worker, she doesn´t seem to understand she is now at a luxury high fashion brand. As long as she doesn´t change her frame of mind, this is going to keep creating problems for the brand.

I can see this in the tone and message, but to be frank she is not involved in the fashion or marketing side as far as i know and understood ....she is there to do the boring restructuring job she just happens to wear a pink chanel suit.

i find Belletini more troublesome or a Marco Bizzarri (recently stated that Ceo need to have more guts with creativity lol this from the guy that chose ancora boy and same Marco that found his star CD to flamboyant at end of his 2 years at gucci hence star CD left Gucci to only appear at Valentino doing same thing ) both that supposed to have a longer and more in depth of fashion and luxury but the outcome is far from it with her recent appointments and messaging in press statements.

At least at Chanel we have bruno even if sometimes he does say bs he knows how to sell the dream.

I find Burberry current Ceo more damaging to the industry where you see that the CD is held hostage and not respected but just used because there is no Plan A

it would be fair to have same energy for these men & woman Ceo as well as well that are not from Unilever but could just as well be.

 

[PDFSD]

I mean i thought I commented that Leena doesn’t need to be here post Pavlosvky. She is here to restructure Chanel to be like Unilever - a bunch of brands working independently. That is a good thing and means that each department has basically become a branded mini company within Chanel. Very smart to break it down like this because w don’t have Karl sending lighting bolts down. As far as who is in charge obviously the Ws got in her in here to do just that. Thats why im thinking she won’t be here once she’s done.

Part of me expects a lot of creativity and disjointed collections. The handbags shoes jewelry and clothing will all be only lightly associated Im thinking. No centralizing Karl to bake in the motif from top-to-bottom. Maybe they’ll have weekly zoom calls to make sure they have similar vibes.

As far as a men’s line goes - without Hedi Slimane - im expecting something like the original LV Homme in like 1998. Officewear - 1/4 zips, full zips, chinos. It’s gonna have to be something the Chanel Femmes husband can wear to work to.

Also who isnt going to buy that robot? Like as soon as I can order it.

i should role my eyes now

you did read why she was hired as ceo of Chanel in 2021? i think many didnt get it why she is there.

Chanel hired Leena Nair as Global CEO, Her appointment was driven by a combination of factors, including her extensive experience in human resources, her expertise in leading global organizations, and her focus on diversity and inclusion. Additionally, Nair's background at Unilever, a company known for its sustainability initiatives, aligns with Chanel's growing focus on environmental and social responsibility
Chanel is already a bunch of satellite brands each working independently and under & for Chanel (i worked with two in the past they are very free once things get approved by the board and when it comes to Chanel its top priority in person meetings not Zoom calls.

Leena is not there to make this happen it's already like this its opposite she is streamlining the operations between those brands as chanel itself with the objectives set by the owners if we have issue with the direction talk to the owners of Chanel.


(WSJ) Aug. 27, 2023
Historically, Chanel has structured its internal divisions along product lines (fashion; watches and fine jewelry; fragrance and beauty), each operating under individual leadership. And until recently, it has not publicized its sustainability or philanthropic efforts (the Fondation Chanel was created in 2011 to further women’s causes around the world, and a Culture Fund was founded in 2021). Though the company has invested heavily in its historic ateliers, Nair has suggested that it needs to emphasize technological innovation, a key piece of any large-scale fashion operation.
“She understands how to change the system,” says Unilever’s recently retired CEO, Alan Jope, who notes that during Nair’s tenure female managers at the company increased from 38 to 50 percent.
Early in her tenure, Nair decided to champion the Fondation Chanel by increasing its funding to $100 million annually to aid its mission of helping women and girls worldwide. “I want us to do ambition with integrity,” she says. “I want us to be exemplary in the luxury sector, [to show] what excellence looks like in commitments in the environment and social sectors.” The company aims to shift operations entirely to renewable energy by 2025 and to reduce its carbon footprint 50 percent by 2030.
Building on one of her internal initiatives, Nair has injected a business-school ethos at Chanel by taking a leadership committee of her 17 direct reports on inspirational trips—to Silicon Valley to meet with Microsoft and Google executives, for example, and to Los Angeles to meet with artists, gaming companies and Disney.
“I want to build curiosity,” says Nair, who says she is looking decades out for Chanel, “building a shared understanding of what’s going on in the world.”

Still, boosting e-commerce is not part of the plan. “I don’t want you to just go and buy a shoe because you like it off the internet. I want you to know the story of the shoe—the look, the collection,” she says.
“We never rush; we take our time and do it in a Chanel way.”