Designers Switching Houses & Moving to New Brands

[Lola701]

Do we know for sure his contract expires next spring?

This. His first contract was probably the typical 3 years contract they all gets so he renewed it in 2018. If he got a 5 years renewal so yes he is living next year but if he got an extension of 3 years he already probably renewed it.

Considering that Michele was let go before the end of his contract I don’t see why they wouldn’t let Demna leave before the end of his… Giving the numbers at stakes, I’m sure it would be cheaper to let him go now unless Charbit has a plan for damage control. Designers’s contracts never ends in between season. The due date is generally after a major FW. Maybe they will announce something in March who knows…

 

[velvetandsilk]

IMO, the main problem with Givenchy stems from the lack of basic branding principles. RiccardoTisci had a strong voice in the fashion world and could create a fantastic house. The main design principle of Givenchy was practical, comfortable, gorgeous clothes. When you check the website, the fashion house appears to be a new house with no history. They should hire a good brand manager who will create the basic rules and when a new project comes up, they should refer to these values in their brand interpretation. They will not find a new Riccardo.

 

[LadyJunon]

IMO, the main problem with Givenchy stems from the lack of basic branding principles. RiccardoTisci had a strong voice in the fashion world and could create a fantastic house. The main design principle of Givenchy was practical, comfortable, gorgeous clothes. When you check the website, the fashion house appears to be a new house with no history. They should hire a good brand manager who will create the basic rules and when a new project comes up, they should refer to these values in their brand interpretation. They will not find a new Riccardo.

The thing about Givenchy is that, unlike Dior, Fendi and Kenzo, it has too abstract of an identity to have specific go-to elements to reference, but it has too strong of a background in clothing design to allow full creative freedom like a leather goods company like Celine, Loewe or Louis Vuitton would.

 

[Avonlea]

As ridiculous as it might sound I would love to see Yohji Yamamoto at the helm of Givenchy. It would be refreshing to see older designer with different sensibility. I am afraid most of young designers already have a skewed vision of high fashion.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

This. His first contract was probably the typical 3 years contract they all gets so he renewed it in 2018. If he got a 5 years renewal so yes he is living next year but if he got an extension of 3 years he already probably renewed it.

Considering that Michele was let go before the end of his contract I don’t see why they wouldn’t let Demna leave before the end of his… Giving the numbers at stakes, I’m sure it would be cheaper to let him go now unless Charbit has a plan for damage control. Designers’s contracts never ends in between season. The due date is generally after a major FW. Maybe they will announce something in March who knows…

Was Michele let go early?

 

[jeanclaude]

Givenchy has a background...although it seems no one remembers the relationship between Hubert and Balenciaga; and between Hubert and Audrey Hepburn.
That´s enough narrative to build an identity for this house.

 

[velvetandsilk]

^Yes, but now the beauty department only mentions it now. The fashion house does not refer to anything at all. Clare Waight Keller in her marketing and inspirations referred to what you mention. No one is interested in this company now. The only group of cosmunts for whom it is still cool are footballers, men influence and streetwear. If you want to have a brand that competes with other top fashion houses, there are certain things you don't allow to touch.

 

[jeanclaude]

^Yes, but now the beauty department only mentions it now. The fashion house does not refer to anything at all. Clare Waight Keller in her marketing and inspirations referred to what you mention. No one is interested in this company now. The only group of cosmunts for whom it is still cool are footballers, men influence and streetwear. If you want to have a brand that competes with other top fashion houses, there are certain things you don't allow to touch.

Yes, it is sad people are just interested in stupid logo t-shirts and hoodies...

 

[Avonlea]

^Yes, but now the beauty department only mentions it now. The fashion house does not refer to anything at all. Clare Waight Keller in her marketing and inspirations referred to what you mention. No one is interested in this company now. The only group of cosmunts for whom it is still cool are footballers, men influence and streetwear. If you want to have a brand that competes with other top fashion houses, there are certain things you don't allow to touch.

Interesting, I find Clare's tenure to be rather directionless. There was no clear vision and I can't remember her refering to things mentioned above besides Moon River song at HC show and Ariana dressed in Adudrey's black dress for the campaign.

 

[velvetandsilk]

^Her references to Hubert were very subtle, but they alluded to what he liked about design. She started doing it only on a larger scale from F/W 2019. First of all, gloves and a hat are in F/W 2020. It was one of the elements of women's wardrobe, which according to Hubert, adds charm to a woman. The ruffles. His most famous example is the Bettina blouse, but Givenchy will refer to it by designing e.g. dresses - CWK HC SS 2020, FW 2019. Her attempts to do Givenchy/Balenciaga were very clumsy. The problem with her designs was that they were too much in the spirit of the 80s and did not reflect the spirit of the modern era.
Givenchy/Balenciaga:
Fall HC 2018

vogue.com
SS HC 2020

wwd.com

 

[LadyJunon]

As ridiculous as it might sound I would love to see Yohji Yamamoto at the helm of Givenchy. It would be refreshing to see older designer with different sensibility. I am afraid most of young designers already have a skewed vision of high fashion.

My only issue (the issue that makes him downright incompatible with most couture houses' aesthetics) is that he probably considers (Hubert's) Givenchy to be a house that makes "b*tch clothing".

I like Yohji's work though.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

My only issue (the issue that makes him downright incompatible with most couture houses' aesthetics) is that he probably considers (Hubert's) Givenchy to be a house that makes "b*tch clothing".

I like Yohji's work though.

I don't think so. I think he has great respect for a lot of the old masters.

But it's moot because he's about to retire any day now.

 

[bc collector]

Yes, it is sad people are just interested in stupid logo t-shirts and hoodies...

The suits know the average luxury customer today is a dumb walking wallet, they spent years and millions in marketing budgets to court him/her and now here we are...

The arrival of Tisci at Givenchy has been a blessing and a curse at the same time: he made the house successful again, but at the price of completely obliterating the word of the founder. The designers who followed were faced with the conundrum: following Hubert's work (CWK did so at least for Couture; her RTW image was more confused) or Riccardo's (MW thought he could make a good pudding again, and he failed).

I think I said this a hundred times already, but maybe, despite Hubert's undeniable merits as a couturier, his work does not have enough style identifiers to build a competitive business upon; what's more, they don't even have other legs to stand on, like cosmetics or hit fragrances...


P.s: Merry Xmas to you all, guys

 

[LadyJunon]

The suits know the average luxury customer today is a dumb walking wallet, they spent years and millions in marketing budgets to court him/her and now here we are...

The arrival of Tisci at Givenchy has been a blessing and a curse at the same time: he made the house successful again, but at the price of completely obliterating the word of the founder. The designers who followed were faced with the conundrum: following Hubert's work (CWK did so at least for Couture; her RTW image was more confused) or Riccardo's (MW thought he could make a good pudding again, and he failed).

I think I said this a hundred times already, but maybe, despite Hubert's undeniable merits as a couturier, his work does not have enough style identifiers to build a competitive business upon; what's more, they don't even have other legs to stand on, like cosmetics or hit fragrances...


P.s: Merry Xmas to you all, guys

I think that they just need to pull a "JWA×Loewe", for any hope for a profitable Givenchy.

 

[Lola701]

Givenchy is a great name but it’s difficult after all to build an identity of a house around nothing really substantial.
Clare’s Couture was good because it felt modern and clean and somehow timeless. Sometimes it was clearly too over the top.

I really think that LVMH’s strategy of looking for a star designer was the demise of Givenchy. They have internal talents that deserves to have a voice too…I think about the gorgeous and strong precollections at Fendi. Those people needs voices!

Add to that the fact that executives are looking for a designer that can do womenswear and menswear. You have that added pressure…But a lot of designers in the forefront don’t have the talent, the vision or the expertise to handle such a situation. There’s too much emphasis on looking for somebody that has a following, a community…Between a socialite or a creative director.

Yes the financial strength of Riccardo’s Givenchy was on the print items, the sneakers, the bags, the accessories but there was good RTW.

But the fashion credibility of the house was there thanks to his skills. Yes he could do a Rottweiler t-shirt but once it was time to do a cocktail dress to appeal to a more formal crowd, it worked.

The clientele is diverse and you need to be skilled and versatile to appeal to those people. Even more when you are doing menswear and womenswear.

Was Michele let go early?

The impromptu nature of the announcement among other things indicate that they came to that decision right after negociations. I mean he was fired to be less gentle. For either a 3 years or a 5 years renewal after his first contract he should have never left the company this early.

But I think the departure of Michele is interesting compared to the one of Lee. Obviously, the tension was higher at BV so they were able to figure out a plan of replacement. Now they are still figuring things out at Gucci.

 

[Deleted member 7575]

Givenchy is a great name but it’s difficult after all to build an identity of a house around nothing really substantial.
Clare’s Couture was good because it felt modern and clean and somehow timeless. Sometimes it was clearly too over the top.

I really think that LVMH’s strategy of looking for a star designer was the demise of Givenchy. They have internal talents that deserves to have a voice too…I think about the gorgeous and strong precollections at Fendi. Those people needs voices!

Add to that the fact that executives are looking for a designer that can do womenswear and menswear. You have that added pressure…But a lot of designers in the forefront don’t have the talent, the vision or the expertise to handle such a situation. There’s too much emphasis on looking for somebody that has a following, a community…Between a socialite or a creative director.

Yes the financial strength of Riccardo’s Givenchy was on the print items, the sneakers, the bags, the accessories but there was good RTW.

But the fashion credibility of the house was there thanks to his skills. Yes he could do a Rottweiler t-shirt but once it was time to do a cocktail dress to appeal to a more formal crowd, it worked.

The clientele is diverse and you need to be skilled and versatile to appeal to those people. Even more when you are doing menswear and womenswear.


The impromptu nature of the announcement among other things indicate that they came to that decision right after negociations. I mean he was fired to be less gentle. For either a 3 years or a 5 years renewal after his first contract he should have never left the company this early.

But I think the departure of Michele is interesting compared to the one of Lee. Obviously, the tension was higher at BV so they were able to figure out a plan of replacement. Now they are still figuring things out at Gucci.

You see I don't actually think he was.

Michele hinted in a profile over the summer that he would be leaving soon. If I can find it I'll share but he was pretty open and frank that his time at Gucci was nearing an end.

At least that was the clear impression that I received and that I think the writer did as well.

The announcement of his departure was unexpected for the public but I think the decision was made a long time ago.

 

[Lola701]

You see I don't actually think he was.

Michele hinted in a profile over the summer that he would be leaving soon. If I can find it I'll share but he was pretty open and frank that his time at Gucci was nearing an end.

At least that was the clear impression that I received and that I think the writer did as well.

The announcement of his departure was unexpected for the public but I think the decision was made a long time ago.

Maybe…
I got the impression that the tension was build up. We had a news of the kind of separation between how the collections on the runway and what’s going on in the stores will be handled…A bit similar to the Lanvin situation (it will be interesting to follow that case too).
When those kinds of articles are released, it’s always to add pressure to the CD or at least to signal that « no one is bigger than the brand ». I think like you that the decision was made a long time ago by KERING or at least the possibility (I wouldn’t be surprised to know that Michele is not behind the Ryan Gosling campaign that somehow links up with the opening of a stores dedicated to luggages) but I’m not sure that Michele was aware of the effectiveness of his departure that early.

What i got from the various releases in the press was that they wanted a shift in terms of aesthetic and the last fashion show was the final exam. We know that the relationship between the CEO and Michele weren’t great so he might not have had a hint of the collection itself besides the theme and logistic.

But what motivates my idea of him being let go earlier is definitely the roll out after the announcement. The uncertainty of the next creative director. The fact that the next collection will be designed by the team in which they expect the leader to have his other Michele « breakthrough » moment. With BV, there were much more confident. The number 2 got the job.

I can only imagine the type of crisis meetings they have at KERING at the moment. They have to deal with 2 internal crisis in the moment…Even if Gucci is less problematic.

 

[perhydrol]

A bit similar to the Lanvin situation (it will be interesting to follow that case too).

Re: Lanvin, there's an interesting article covering the topic. It's a bit old now as it's from May, but still it gives an interesting insight.

Lanvin has lost dozens of key talent and staff in recent weeks. They are jumping ship from every department, from the couture workshop to finance, and joining rivals such as Hermès, Dior and Chanel, several informed sources told Miss Tweed. Many employees have lost faith in the ability of Lanvin’s Chinese owners to turn it round and make France’s oldest fashion brand profitable and relevant again. Even the head of its historic boutique in Paris resigned last month to run the flagship of another luxury brand in London.

misstweed.com

Apparently, the same thing is happening now at AZ Factory.

 

[donyan]

Apparently, the same thing is happening now at AZ Factory.

Is that also from Miss Tweed?

 

[LadyJunon]

Givenchy is a great name but it’s difficult after all to build an identity of a house around nothing really substantial.
Clare’s Couture was good because it felt modern and clean and somehow timeless. Sometimes it was clearly too over the top.

I really think that LVMH’s strategy of looking for a star designer was the demise of Givenchy. They have internal talents that deserves to have a voice too…I think about the gorgeous and strong precollections at Fendi. Those people needs voices!

Add to that the fact that executives are looking for a designer that can do womenswear and menswear. You have that added pressure…But a lot of designers in the forefront don’t have the talent, the vision or the expertise to handle such a situation. There’s too much emphasis on looking for somebody that has a following, a community…Between a socialite or a creative director.

Yes the financial strength of Riccardo’s Givenchy was on the print items, the sneakers, the bags, the accessories but there was good RTW.

But the fashion credibility of the house was there thanks to his skills. Yes he could do a Rottweiler t-shirt but once it was time to do a cocktail dress to appeal to a more formal crowd, it worked.

The clientele is diverse and you need to be skilled and versatile to appeal to those people. Even more when you are doing menswear and womenswear.

Maybe…
I got the impression that the tension was build up. We had a news of the kind of separation between how the collections on the runway and what’s going on in the stores will be handled…A bit similar to the Lanvin situation (it will be interesting to follow that case too).
When those kinds of articles are released, it’s always to add pressure to the CD or at least to signal that « no one is bigger than the brand ».

The advantage of heading a couture house over a leather goods house is that the idea of a more radically "high fashion" proposition makes more sense due to the norms set up by Gaultier, Galliano, McQueen and Mugler. The golden rule is just to offer a strong commercial offering for the customers that represents and supports the runway offering.

The thing with Lanvin is that, like Nina Ricci and Rochas, their couture history is too removed from the 21st century Zeitgeist. Revival Balenciaga avoided that trap because Bogart almost instantly gravitated towards an innovative avant-garde direction with the hirings of Thimister and Ghesquiére.

The impromptu nature of the announcement among other things indicate that they came to that decision right after negociations. I mean he was fired to be less gentle. For either a 3 years or a 5 years renewal after his first contract he should have never left the company this early.

But I think the departure of Michele is interesting compared to the one of Lee. Obviously, the tension was higher at BV so they were able to figure out a plan of replacement. Now they are still figuring things out at Gucci.

You see I don't actually think he was.

Michele hinted in a profile over the summer that he would be leaving soon. If I can find it I'll share but he was pretty open and frank that his time at Gucci was nearing an end.

At least that was the clear impression that I received and that I think the writer did as well.

The announcement of his departure was unexpected for the public but I think the decision was made a long time ago.

I think like you that the decision was made a long time ago by KERING or at least the possibility (I wouldn’t be surprised to know that Michele is not behind the Ryan Gosling campaign that somehow links up with the opening of a stores dedicated to luggages) but I’m not sure that Michele was aware of the effectiveness of his departure that early.

What i got from the various releases in the press was that they wanted a shift in terms of aesthetic and the last fashion show was the final exam. We know that the relationship between the CEO and Michele weren’t great so he might not have had a hint of the collection itself besides the theme and logistic.

I knew that Michele's tenure was possibly coming to an end from his Spring '20 show in 2019. In multiple interviews for that show, he said that he's been trying "a new creative direction".

Then we had the solo menswear show the following January, which was done to push the menswear, that has been suffering since the magic of Michele's gender-fluidity eventually repulsed male customers.

Then in the following years, we had "Aria×Balenciaga", "Love Parade" "Exquisite×Adidas", "Cosmogonie" and "Twinsburg" which were all engineered to put Michele's Gucci back in the limelight. Not to mention all of the increased product drops we got in-between like "Valigeria" and "Ha, ha, ha".

But what motivates my idea of him being let go earlier is definitely the roll out after the announcement. The uncertainty of the next creative director. The fact that the next collection will be designed by the team in which they expect the leader to have his other Michele « breakthrough » moment. With BV, there were much more confident. The number 2 got the job.

I can only imagine the type of crisis meetings they have at KERING at the moment. They have to deal with 2 internal crisis in the moment…Even if Gucci is less problematic.

I think that Blazy at Bottega Veneta is more similar to Vaccarello at YSL in the way that the current artistic director was hired to continue a popular, lucrative aesthetic in their own dialect. To add to that, they both have experience being an artist director of a house, with Blazy anonymously leading Margiela (to Demna's chagrin) in the gap between Martin and Galliano and Vaccarello designing under his own name for 8 years before taking up YSL. The candidates for Gucci don't have that history.