I think it helps that Puig seems to have a realistic approach to fashion business (unlike Kering), knowing that the speciality is beauty and perfumes. Outside of the mess that is Nina Ricci, all of the fashion companies seem to be doing consistently well and there hasn't been a major change of creative directors in five years.
Do they have a realistic approach to fashion or an expertise in beauty that allows them to not be too involved on fashion?
Because there’s a real lack of strategy for the fashion side. The good thing is that it allows more imput from the designers. Gaultier was able to find a model that was working for the relevance and the survival of his brand. The success of Dossena has put Paco Rabanne in the club of brands that matters. Carolina Herrera is Carolina Herrera I guess.
What is healthy is that it’s a fairly small group of many decent sized maisons and interesting beauty licences like Louboutin.
I don’t know if there’s an ideal group because some things are collateral damages at the end of the day.
Richemont is a bit like Puig. Their business is mainly watches and jewellery. Fashion is not a strong focus so in a way, the prestige of their fashion brands has been preserved. Sometimes, preserved may looks like abandoned. I think Dunhill should be more important as an brand in menswear. Delvaux should be bigger. Az Factory is a mystery in terms of strategy…
They have a lot of interesting brands that are a bit under exploited. Moynat for example is more desirable than Delvaux
If you look at Renzo Rosso’s OTB, yes we can applaud the rather success and creative integrity of Margiela, Jil Sander and Marni…Even if it did came with a bit of controversy. Viktor and Rolf remains a mystery supported by a very successful fragrances empire.
LVMH and Kering have their pros and cons and some houses are better managed than others. Their niches brands are particularly well preserved and some brands are a total mess.
