Just a feeling this show gave me. The atmosphere kind of just like at the funeral. And ultimately she has designed so much of the same. I do not believe there is endless market for these same clothes over and over again. After watching for like two minutes I do not understand why she is there. To make Dior brand weaker compared to the rest LVMH brand portfolio? To push forward some political agenda? Why stronger designer has not been picked up for Dior? Excuse me if I get something wrong, her collections seemed interesting for a second because there was something new moving on but after that second they personally do not feel relevant. Her design is a like a short-lived trend, like demonstration that after it is over the crowd starts to disperse and no one cares anymore.Why?
Just a feeling this show gave me. The atmosphere kind of just like at the funeral. And ultimately she has designed so much of the same. I do not believe there is endless market for these same clothes over and over again. After watching for like two minutes I do not understand why she is there. To make Dior brand weaker compared to the rest LVMH brand portfolio? To push forward some political agenda? Why stronger designer has not been picked up for Dior? Excuse me if I get something wrong, her collections seemed interesting for a second because there was something new moving on but after that second they personally do not feel relevant. Her design is a like a short-lived trend, like demonstration that after it is over the crowd starts to disperse and no one cares anymore.
So it is reduced just to calculated strategy and there is no passion and believe in heart. And once the critical mass of people will see that, these businesses will be in serious trouble because when confidence in those brands is completely eroded I will be very hard to restore that confidence back. Actually quite a lot of people are already dissatisfied, at least from what I read.
I love this! I'm a marketing engineer and fashion marketing has always fascinated me.^ To add to what Lola said, there is an endless market for uninspired clothes because the Dior customer isn't really looking for fashion but rather buying these clothes to buy into a supposed "world". I'd like to offer a illustration of sorts - my overly simplified take of how this brand functions in the luxury industry.
Imagine a typical woman buying into luxury accessories (not fashion). For a lot of key markets, this means French because of the country's haute couture heritage. The typical beginner would buy into Louis Vuitton first. When said woman gets bored with Louis Vuitton, she then is faced with two choices: Chanel or Dior. Hermès would typically present itself after these two options.
This woman would definitely be attracted to Chanel because of the cachet of the 2.55 bag and the "legendary" house codes. Chanel hallmarks are definitely more recognizable to the mass market, since Mlle. Chanel had years to establish said codes, not to mention bang-up job the brand's marketing department does. However, as she soon finds out, quality, customer service and after sales isn't all that great, and at such elevated price points, finds it unacceptable. And with Karl's passing, some customers feel that the brand is going stale.
Then said woman goes to Dior. What she finds is a friendlier luxury shopping environment (mandated by global brand strategy), and discovers a selection of bags that she'd soon realize that has the same (or almost the same) level of cachet as the ones from Chanel at half the price (again, global brand strategy to create value proposition and competitive advantage). But eventually said customer will buy enough bags - it is imperative as a customer retention strategy, to cross-sell the clothing.
Monsieur Christian Dior only had about ten years of output and his most recognizable legacy is the Veste Bar, and, to a lesser degree, the Robe Junon. There really isn't that much to play with in terms of house codes recognizable enough by the mass market to rely on. What Dior needs to execute the aforementioned retention strategy is unremarkable clothes because these need to be (1) not intimidating and (2) appealing to the mass market in order for cross-selling to be an easier proposition. Make these Bar pieces at half the price of the iconic Chanel Tweed Jacket, diversify offerings with t-shirts and entry-level products with some "woke" slogan to appear current and relevant, propose straight-forward, uncomplicated, relatively easier to manufacture dresses (and again, at half the price to those of Chanel) to sell the haute couture dream, and you got winning commercial strategy to increase both sales and market share.
Mary Grace is untalented, but Dior doesn't really need talent to sell "luxury". The brand is powered and finely tuned by MBAs, financial forecasters and big data managers from the likes of HEC or INSEAD. These people have been able to determine a key segment of the luxury market, and was able to finely tune it's pricing strategy and the key product categories that are needed to attract and retain this key segment and actually increase it's market share.
And yes, once the numbers reveal that sales are slowing down for key products and market share is going down, M. Arnault will seek another person to assume the role of creative director. It's a process that's proven effective for LVMH and Kering. Once Mary Grace is gone, I'm afraid, things would not be that much different.
I’m not sure if there still is a critical mass, and if so , if these are the people who buy into this cynical , marketing driven version of luxury.And once the critical mass of people will see that, these businesses will be in serious trouble
Well, if this is a consumer driven industry, this kind of fashion is set by those who have the money today. And once most of the money is spent, there will be a transfer of power to those who got that money, and there should be a change in fashion too.I’m not sure if there still is a critical mass, and if so , if these are the people who buy into this cynical , marketing driven version of luxury.
I would say that the Dior client today is the wealthy version of those who buy Zara.
^ To add to what Lola said, there is an endless market for uninspired clothes because the Dior customer isn't really looking for fashion but rather buying these clothes to buy into a supposed "world". I'd like to offer a illustration of sorts - my overly simplified take of how this brand functions in the luxury industry.
Imagine a typical woman buying into luxury accessories (not fashion). For a lot of key markets, this means French because of the country's haute couture heritage. The typical beginner would buy into Louis Vuitton first. When said woman gets bored with Louis Vuitton, she then is faced with two choices: Chanel or Dior. Hermès would typically present itself after these two options.
This woman would definitely be attracted to Chanel because of the cachet of the 2.55 bag and the "legendary" house codes. Chanel hallmarks are definitely more recognizable to the mass market, since Mlle. Chanel had years to establish said codes, not to mention bang-up job the brand's marketing department does. However, as she soon finds out, quality, customer service and after sales isn't all that great, and at such elevated price points, finds it unacceptable. And with Karl's passing, some customers feel that the brand is going stale.
Then said woman goes to Dior. What she finds is a friendlier luxury shopping environment (mandated by global brand strategy), and discovers a selection of bags that she'd soon realize that has the same (or almost the same) level of cachet as the ones from Chanel at half the price (again, global brand strategy to create value proposition and competitive advantage). But eventually said customer will buy enough bags - it is imperative as a customer retention strategy, to cross-sell the clothing.
Monsieur Christian Dior only had about ten years of output and his most recognizable legacy is the Veste Bar, and, to a lesser degree, the Robe Junon. There really isn't that much to play with in terms of house codes recognizable enough by the mass market to rely on. What Dior needs to execute the aforementioned retention strategy is unremarkable clothes because these need to be (1) not intimidating and (2) appealing to the mass market in order for cross-selling to be an easier proposition. Make these Bar pieces at half the price of the iconic Chanel Tweed Jacket, diversify offerings with t-shirts and entry-level products with some "woke" slogan to appear current and relevant, propose straight-forward, uncomplicated, relatively easier to manufacture dresses (and again, at half the price to those of Chanel) to sell the haute couture dream, and you got winning commercial strategy to increase both sales and market share.
Mary Grace is untalented, but Dior doesn't really need talent to sell "luxury". The brand is powered and finely tuned by MBAs, financial forecasters and big data managers from the likes of HEC or INSEAD. These people have been able to determine a key segment of the luxury market, and was able to finely tune it's pricing strategy and the key product categories that are needed to attract and retain this key segment and actually increase it's market share.
And yes, once the numbers reveal that sales are slowing down for key products and market share is going down, M. Arnault will seek another person to assume the role of creative director. It's a process that's proven effective for LVMH and Kering. Once Mary Grace is gone, I'm afraid, things would not be that much different.
You guys don't support other women! We should all be feminists and support this collection.