Fashion Groups

[londoneffect]

Thanks for the link!!! I will definately take a look! I personally think that groups like that may limit the consumers' choice. Lets say, Gucci Group decides that its time to bring back the 90's and they lonch a 90's compaign with all their brands! So, if somebody does not know the background he/she might think its a trend and the rest of the brands simply.... suck , etc...

 

[Salvatore]

Well I don't think the group says what to make as much as they say how much money they want to make. It's more like the best way to make the most money while trying to keep the integrity of the brand is the way the groups work I guess. I believe the way Gucci Group and other groups work is basically they are huge investor and allots money to each company. I don't believe the groups to have an actual hand in the designs of the house and what not. They're just out to make money.

 

[londoneffect]

You know what...

I haven't done enough research here in thefashionspot before posting the thread. I mean the link you gave me, it was for a thread with an absolutely same purpose... so, maybe you know how to delete this thing?

 

[alix*]

Wow I never knew there were so many designers in one group.

 

[mediocrityrules]

Well I don't think the group says what to make as much as they say how much money they want to make. It's more like the best way to make the most money while trying to keep the integrity of the brand is the way the groups work I guess. I believe the way Gucci Group and other groups work is basically they are huge investor and allots money to each company. I don't believe the groups to have an actual hand in the designs of the house and what not. They're just out to make money.

Thanks Salvatore, I never thought of it that way. It is easy to fall into a conspiratorial? logic of sorts. It diminishes the "big brother" aspect of this fact for me in a way I wouldn`t have come up with on my own.

It is still kind of annoying though, these investors must be soooo rich! You are right though, why would these people have an agenda, they are money people with totally different interests.

 

[londoneffect]

BerlinRocks named even more groups in one other thread ("Fashion Groups"

"AEFFFE SPA : Alberta Ferreti, Philosophy di Alberta F., Moschino, Narcisso Rodriguez, Pollini, Velmar

CHANEL SA : Chanel, Eres, Holland&Holland

FRANCE LUXURY GROUP : Jacques Fath, J.L Scherrer

GUCCI GROUP : Gucci, YSL, Balenciaga, Sergio Rossi, Alex. McQueen, Stella McCartney, Bottega Veneta

HERMES GROUP : Hermes, John Lobb, JPG

LVMH : Dior, Vuitton, Givenchy, Céline, Pucci, Kenzo, Loewe, Donna Karran, Fendi, Marc Jacobs

MARZOTTO GROUP : Valentino, Hugo Boss

PRADA GROUP : Prada, MiuMiu, HelmutLang (RIP), JilSander, Church's (shoe), Car Shoe (??), Alaïa, Genny

RICHEMONT GROUP : Chloé, Cartier, Dunhill, Hackett

SALVATORE FERRAGAMO GROUP : Ferragamo, Ungaro

the book is from 2002.... so I guess some stuff have changed... they don't talk about P.Diddy group, Hilfiger etc."

To visit this thread, click here

 

[city girl]

actually that's what i'd love to do..work at a fashion corparation such as gucci group or lvmh

 

[londoneffect]

Thanks Salvatore, I never thought of it that way. It is easy to fall into a conspiratorial? logic of sorts. It diminishes the "big brother" aspect of this fact for me in a way I wouldn`t have come up with on my own.

It is still kind of annoying though, these investors must be soooo rich! You are right though, why would these people have an agenda, they are money people with totally different interests.

Well I think that every businessman looks how to get more money, that is why you invest rather than give money away to charity. And if you have a block of successful brands working for the same boss, why woouldn't you cooperate?

 

[saann]

this is a regular thing.. not only in fashion

I think these days it's kind of hard to create a big name and house without beloning to some kind of group for financial backup

most food labels belong to the same group, like a group called Unilever has Knorr, Heartbrand, Ben & jerry's, Blue Band, Becel etc they even have Dove

(unilever.com is their website)

 

[Whitelinen]

I don't think there's anything shocking in this. The "big brands" are mostly crap these days, and they all look the same. Everything in their marketing technique is awful, and the whole logo/branding thing disgusts me. All the big brands are forming to be empires of luxury products, which usually are tacky and useless stuff for the nouveau riche to buy. I don't know why most people buy into these huge brands anymore, when the actual talent and interesting design is mostly in independent brands. These big brands are all owned by the same fat businessmen, it has nothing to do with fashion design or the want to make clothes.

 

[Beautiful Stranger]

I dislike this, i really do, but then again.. I try to think of it only to be the "sponsor" of the brand. But it really ruins alot of the whole "loving-and-buying an item"-process for me. I'm just glad that Vivienne Westwood doesn't belong to any group, as far as i know. And i guess, i don't care that much. I still love alot of Stella's and Alexander's work, even though they're not 100% "free".

 

[londoneffect]

I don't think there's anything shocking in this. The "big brands" are mostly crap these days, and they all look the same. Everything in their marketing technique is awful, and the whole logo/branding thing disgusts me. All the big brands are forming to be empires of luxury products, which usually are tacky and useless stuff for the nouveau riche to buy. I don't know why most people buy into these huge brands anymore, when the actual talent and interesting design is mostly in independent brands. These big brands are all owned by the same fat businessmen, it has nothing to do with fashion design or the want to make clothes.

I know what you mean, but as you said its hard to become a hudge brand and not belong to the "fat business man". But can you say that you really are not influenced by those brands? Don't you really have any items branded with recognizable labels?

 

[Loud Love]

Fashion is a business.

I don't remember where I read or heard it, but someone once said that fashion is more of a business than art. Not everyone owns a piece of art, but everyone wakes up in the morning and has to pick something to wear.

 

[londoneffect]

^ what can I say... everything is business these days, but isn't that a shame? I mean don't you think that groups like that make it harder for new designers to reach the top? What if one day two or three of those groups unite? Then fashion industry would become a monopoly, wouldn't it?

 

[Loud Love]

I agree that it does make it harder for new designers to emerge, but I don't think that big brands would take that in consideration...

And I don't think it would necessarily become a monopoly, some people are always looking for new designers and don't like to wear what everyone is wearing so I don't think it would be that bad for newcomers.

 

[sanati]

Who didnt know that many fashion brands are part of conglomerates... like Gucci Group, PPR & LVMH.... its a business and these men know how to make money. They spend a lot of time chosing the correct designers for each house... and in my opinion the houses stay true to their values and history...
For an example, I dont find GUCCI, BALENCIAGA & YSL to be similiar, and their target group and market is different...
Being bought by a fashion group also provides the house with more money, which may bring new opportunities without boundaries.

 

[londoneffect]

We all know the positives, but don't you really see any negatives?

Are you so sure that some of those brands are not limited to make the others grow- therefore make a bigger profit in the long run?

Or do you think that a few houses in the same group actually compete? To what extent can they do that?

Would the owner of a group let one of the brands totally destroy another one?

Will some brands try to promote others in their group?

I mean, I see this whole thing as unnatural... doesn't anyone see the bad side?

 

[Scott]

i have news for you,conglomerates control the industry like it's a disgusting factory machine these days. mega brands and groups are making it increasingly hard to for the small designers to make much of an impression these days because they do have the money and they have advertising which is being paid to magazines to print...and also to showcase on a consistent basis. not only that,there is a deeper demand for these products by the people in the streets. why do you think there are so many independent's struggling? certainly didn't come about till we saw this rise in fashion conglomerates such as Prada Group and Gucci Group(now PPR)...and the king of them all LVMH.

and i disagree with the notion that it can bring possiblities. being bought by a fashion group can hold many regrets. if you don't increase profit or make it,you could find yourself out from behind the label that bears one's name. look at helmut lang...

honestly,if there was one thing that would and should have taught anybody,it would have been the whole debacle with Lang. i can't grasp why anybody would defend such a parade of profit mongering dictatorship especially towards somebody who went into such an agreement thinking he would have some kind of creative freedom?

 

[londoneffect]

I couldn't agree with you more Scott!!!

Thank you for providing some really good thoughts about this issue! Because I thought I am the only one disaprooing to this whole idea of groups.

It would also be great if you told more about the Lang story, whenever you have time. Thank you so much! Karma!

 

[Whitelinen]

I know what you mean, but as you said its hard to become a hudge brand and not belong to the "fat business man". But can you say that you really are not influenced by those brands? Don't you really have any items branded with recognizable labels?

I might be influenced, but in cases like Chanel, I am inspired by its past, not its present. I don't own any designer items, not even designer make-up.