Do You Fear for the Future of Chanel?

LoveFashion25

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 17, 2021
Messages
169
Reaction score
128
I really miss Karl and although in order to change one must move forward, but I have been disappointed with Virginie at Chanel. There's no sparkle, glamour or anything that makes it CHANEL!!!!

Why does it feel like we are back to how Chanel was before Karl joined and revived it?
 
Love this thread as Chanel was my entrance into couture. Maybe its nostalgia...Karl was the vision behind Chanel for almost 40 years and maybe it is all we are accustom to (that's an assumption, could be wrong if you are older). I felt the exact same way when Virginie took over, almost like there was a level of sell out to the work but I'm starting to question if it's just because I am so use to what is was. I am curious what you mean when you say how it was before Karl joined and am very much looking forward to that perspective! :smile:
 
Love this thread as Chanel was my entrance into couture. Maybe its nostalgia...Karl was the vision behind Chanel for almost 40 years and maybe it is all we are accustom to (that's an assumption, could be wrong if you are older). I felt the exact same way when Virginie took over, almost like there was a level of sell out to the work but I'm starting to question if it's just because I am so use to what is was. I am curious what you mean when you say how it was before Karl joined and am very much looking forward to that perspective! :smile:
Meaning once Coco died, Chanel went through a couple of designers but it had at that point become very matronly and as some would say an "old" fashion house. Karl's revived making it more chic and trendy but not overly changing the ethos of Chanel.
 
I used to think of Coco Chanel as an icon and Karl as a god lol they were soooooo soooo creative, good, revered and had so much.
Virginie on the other hand, no disrespect it's just how I feel, leaves me very cold: it's practical fashion but it's not Chanel. Her vision of Chanel feels empty and not exciting.
I used to wait with so much trepidation to watch every single Chanel show, now I just watch some pics online but it's not what I used to love.
 
Well, it certainly doesn't keep me up at night haha...so, I wouldn't say I fear LOL

But, I knew that Virginie was the wrong choice from the get go...the moment they announced, I knew it was a mistake.

Karl was too big - an icon who created iconic work. You can't really replicate or keep that machine going without the brain behind it. Virginie isn't half as imaginative or clever or curious as Karl. So, while on the surface, it seems like things are relatively unchanged - everything has, in fact, changed. It's now a very hollow, uninteresting and empty feeling house.

I had, at the time, thought that the only viable successors to Karl would have been Phoebe Philo or Hedi Slimane. Due to the scale that Karl grew Chanel to, you have to have someone who can come in with a vision strong enough to direct, inform and influence all aspects of the business. You have to be able to give the Couture, the RTW, the shows, the ad campaigns, the stores, the fragrances, the ambassadors a feeling and a cohesion. There aren't many designers working anymore who have a strong enough vision to make all those decisions. Philo's Celine was a total world. Every detail mattered. Same goes for Slimane.

Virginie does not have the capability or maybe even the desire?

If the suits think it's a practical solution to have an easy employee - it may work in the very short term, but we will very quickly hit a wall where Virginie will run out of steam or good will - or both, and we, the audience and consumer, will run out of patience and interest.
 
Well, it certainly doesn't keep me up at night haha...so, I wouldn't say I fear LOL. But, I knew that Virginie was the wrong choice from the get go...the moment they announced, I knew it was a mistake. Karl was too big - an icon who created iconic work. You can't really replicate or keep that machine going without the brain behind it. Virginie isn't half as imaginative or clever or curious as Karl. It's now a very hollow, uninteresting and empty feeling house. I had, at the time, thought that the only viable successors to Karl would have been Phoebe Philo or Hedi Slimane. Due to the scale that Karl grew Chanel to, you have to have someone who can come in with a vision strong enough to direct, inform and influence all aspects of the business. Virginie does not have the capability or maybe even the desire? If the suits think it's a practical solution to have an easy employee - it may work in the very short term, but we will very quickly hit a wall where Virginie will run out of steam or good will - or both, and we, the audience and consumer, will run out of patience and interest.

Absolutely agree 200000% on every single word.
 
Well, it certainly doesn't keep me up at night haha...so, I wouldn't say I fear LOL

But, I knew that Virginie was the wrong choice from the get go...the moment they announced, I knew it was a mistake.

Karl was too big - an icon who created iconic work. You can't really replicate or keep that machine going without the brain behind it. Virginie isn't half as imaginative or clever or curious as Karl. So, while on the surface, it seems like things are relatively unchanged - everything has, in fact, changed. It's now a very hollow, uninteresting and empty feeling house.

I had, at the time, thought that the only viable successors to Karl would have been Phoebe Philo or Hedi Slimane. Due to the scale that Karl grew Chanel to, you have to have someone who can come in with a vision strong enough to direct, inform and influence all aspects of the business. You have to be able to give the Couture, the RTW, the shows, the ad campaigns, the stores, the fragrances, the ambassadors a feeling and a cohesion. There aren't many designers working anymore who have a strong enough vision to make all those decisions. Philo's Celine was a total world. Every detail mattered. Same goes for Slimane.

Virginie does not have the capability or maybe even the desire?

If the suits think it's a practical solution to have an easy employee - it may work in the very short term, but we will very quickly hit a wall where Virginie will run out of steam or good will - or both, and we, the audience and consumer, will run out of patience and interest.

There are massive rumors the family is looking for a buyer but nobody can afford to pay the asking price - both of the two brothers are over 71 and 74 by now, no willing heirs, and their step-mother, who is a seasoned lawyer (still listed and has her office) and the mastermind of the company, is 97 years old.
 
Chanel Again Raises Prices of Classic Handbags
The French luxury brand said the increases in several countries were due to its price harmonization strategy.

MARCH 3, 2022, 12:20PM

PARIS — Bad news for Chanel customers: the French luxury house is raising prices again.

Bruno Pavlovsky, president of fashion and president of Chanel SAS, said the brand was hiking the cost of its four core handbag styles and spring ready-to-wear collection by 6 percent in the euro zone, 5 percent in the U.K., 8 percent in Japan, 5 percent in South Korea and 2 percent in Hong Kong, effective on Thursday.

Its classic 11.12 bag, for instance, now retails for 8,250 euros, compared with 7,800 euros previously. The costs of the Boy, 2.55 and Chanel 19 bags have also gone up.

Prices in the U.S. and China remain unchanged. This marks the sixth time that Chanel has increased its prices since the start of the coronavirus pandemic, and the second time in the space of six months, following an adjustment last November.

Pavlovsky also confirmed a PurseBlog report that it separately raised prices for the Coco Handle, Business Affinity and Boy Bag With Handle handbags on Jan. 15.

Conscious of the growingly vocal discontent among purse aficionados, Pavlovsky spoke to WWD to clarify the brand’s strategy. Chanel introduced a price harmonization policy in 2015 that is designed to guarantee that differences between the retail prices of its products do not vary by more than 10 percent from region to region.

“Our objective is to offer the same price everywhere to limit the parallel market. It’s an important signal to our customers, because it’s a way of engaging with them in an honest way. Nowadays, there is no reason to penalize a Chinese customer versus an American customer. It’s normal that they should pay the same price for the same product,” he said.

“That’s our choice as a brand. But what that means is that if we let prices slip between Europe, for example, and Asia, we know that we are directly or indirectly feeding a parallel market, which is not very satisfactory for our point of view with regard to our local customers,” he added.

While the brand initially lowered prices in China when the policy was introduced, in most cases, it has resulted in price increases, which have snowballed since COVID-19 hit. “We raise our prices more often because of this price harmonization policy. Having said that, it’s not the only reason,” Pavlovsky said.

Since the pandemic began, Chanel has accelerated the pace of increases due partly to rising production costs, and partly to positioning. However, he denied the widespread interpretation that the brand was driving the cost of its handbags upward in order to align itself with rival Hermès’ Birkin bag.

“Hermès bags are great, but I think our bags are very different. The construction of our bags is different, as are the materials. Even the way you wear them is different. So yes, we do compete with Hermès, but we are not in competition on a specific handbag,” he said.

“You can’t be the most luxurious, the most desirable brand and not have a price positioning that is high on the market today,” he argued.

Indeed, pricing power is a key attribute of luxury goods, and Europe’s biggest players have been reporting robust business.

Dior said it pushed through an average 8 percent increase worldwide on Jan. 18, while last month, Louis Vuitton was reported to have hiked the retail cost of its signature bags by 10 percent on average to reflect inflation, and rising production, raw material and transportation costs.

However, in what appeared to be a veiled dig at Chanel, LVMH Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton chairman and chief executive officer Bernard Arnault in January cautioned against excessive price rises.

“We don’t want to give the impression, like some brands do, of heading toward prices that no longer match the economic reality of the price of the products. You have to be reasonable. We try to be reasonable so that our customers feel that they’re dealing with brands that offer them something realistic, and not something that is artificially inflated, even if the products are very beautiful,” he said.

Pavlovsky said Chanel has invested heavily in improving the quality of its handbags and making sure they meet its environmental responsibility standards. Its seven tanneries, located in France, Spain and Italy, are increasingly using chromium-free and waterless methods.

“Today, we’re investing in our bags to make them even more beautiful, using the finest materials and the latest technologies with the aim of ensuring that these bags are aligned with the CSR transformation that we want them to reflect,” he said. “We’re noticeably increasing the perceived quality of these bags.”

He added that Chanel last year increased the warranty for its handbags to five years from two years and created the “Chanel et moi” program, which offers bag maintenance and repairs.

“It’s not just a price increase for the sake of a price increase, or because of a race against our competitors. It’s because we have a valuable product and this valuable product requires real commitments and real investments to guarantee its existence for the next 20 years,” he said.

WWD
 
There are massive rumors the family is looking for a buyer but nobody can afford to pay the asking price - both of the two brothers are over 71 and 74 by now, no willing heirs, and their step-mother, who is a seasoned lawyer (still listed and has her office) and the mastermind of the company, is 97 years old.
I would not be shocked if that is true but I hope they don't sell it. Imagine if lvmh bought it? That would be horrible for Chanel.
 
Well, it certainly doesn't keep me up at night haha...so, I wouldn't say I fear LOL

But, I knew that Virginie was the wrong choice from the get go...the moment they announced, I knew it was a mistake.

Karl was too big - an icon who created iconic work. You can't really replicate or keep that machine going without the brain behind it. Virginie isn't half as imaginative or clever or curious as Karl. So, while on the surface, it seems like things are relatively unchanged - everything has, in fact, changed. It's now a very hollow, uninteresting and empty feeling house.

I had, at the time, thought that the only viable successors to Karl would have been Phoebe Philo or Hedi Slimane. Due to the scale that Karl grew Chanel to, you have to have someone who can come in with a vision strong enough to direct, inform and influence all aspects of the business. You have to be able to give the Couture, the RTW, the shows, the ad campaigns, the stores, the fragrances, the ambassadors a feeling and a cohesion. There aren't many designers working anymore who have a strong enough vision to make all those decisions. Philo's Celine was a total world. Every detail mattered. Same goes for Slimane.

Virginie does not have the capability or maybe even the desire?

If the suits think it's a practical solution to have an easy employee - it may work in the very short term, but we will very quickly hit a wall where Virginie will run out of steam or good will - or both, and we, the audience and consumer, will run out of patience and interest.
Even the fashion shows are boring. It doesn't capture my imagination. Karl's Paris shows used to be an event!
 
Not 'going', already gone tbh. For all the criticism that Sarah Burton (another right hand woman who stepped in to head up a brand after the unexpected death of its head) gets at McQueen, I have to say she gets the brand DNA and isn't boring - yes, her shows and collections lack the extreme drama of Lee's, but she gets what kept things ticking. I'm not sure Virginie, based on what we've seen of her Chanel, does. Ok, I just don't think she has any of that 'spark' to keep it going - and Chanel without the spark is just another boring bougie brand.
 
But Virginie was always designing the bread and butter of Chanel ... Karl only did what was on the runway. So while that has changed and may no longer be exciting, literally it's the only thing that has. The experience of people buying Chanel is basically the same now as it was during Karl's tenure. I don't see why, with the usual infusion of ad $$$$, it won't keep ticking along ...
 
Not 'going', already gone tbh. For all the criticism that Sarah Burton (another right hand woman who stepped in to head up a brand after the unexpected death of its head) gets at McQueen, I have to say she gets the brand DNA and isn't boring - yes, her shows and collections lack the extreme drama of Lee's, but she gets what kept things ticking. I'm not sure Virginie, based on what we've seen of her Chanel, does. Ok, I just don't think she has any of that 'spark' to keep it going - and Chanel without the spark is just another boring bougie brand.
The spark is what separated them!
 
How are sales soaring when prices are soaring? That is so interesting. I wish I cud spend money like that. I'm dying here gas is $6/gallon. Anyways can you imagine now in social circles there's gonna be even more discrepancies with status :rofl: "she's not even allowed in the private store"
 
As the poor *** b*tch -that won’t be buying anything at Chanel- that I am, I find this so stupid yet so fascinating.
 
I personally believe this is a natural evolution of the boutique experience. Most Chanel boutiques in the major cities have "VIP rooms" anyway. This idea is just an extension of that. If your spending is at that level, and your loyalty to the brand is that strong, then you deserve to have some kind of privileges, no?

Besides the format of these boutiques, I suspect will be entirely different. They will most likely feature product lines that Chanel will want to grow and push, like Fine / High Jewellery, Watches, and Ready-to-Wear. I doubt they will feature the classic bags and all the logo costume jewellery and shoes.
 
I think we just need to accept that Chanel immediately post-Karl (and we are still in that moment) won't have the wicked wit and sparkle that lifted what could have been dull 'ladies who lunch'-wear into the thing that everyone from age 12 to 72 wanted. Their clothes still sell, otherwise Virginie would not still be holding the reins four years down the line.
 
Chanel's groundbreaking style has always been mature and the runway shows have looked awkward since forever, dressing young models in the pearls, camellias and tweeds. And the Chanel styles are not what young women wear even in dupes or affordable brands. I still remember the insanely ridiculous Scream Queens show and their stars dressed in their clothes, didn't work at all.

A cheesy tv show is not the measure of Karl's Chanel - which in the 00s actually did get worn irl (whether real or as dupes) by young women wearing Chanel jackets, bags and flats with jeans, and styled on the runway with a more youthful/contemporary approach. The novelty accessories were huge in those years and drew a lot of attention, and even the red carpet stuff had a lighter and fresher touch than it does now. The first ever Metiers d'Arts collection was walking proof of how well it worked.

Yes, Chanel has always been a mature label with silhouettes (the collarless jacket) that feel inherently stodgy. But fifteen years ago even Balenciaga was inspired by elements of Chanel. I can't imagine that being a thing now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
210,716
Messages
15,124,760
Members
84,416
Latest member
barakz12
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->