Fashion House Musical Chairs: Designers Going From House to House

KhaoticKharma

Amour Comme Hiver
Joined
Jul 13, 2005
Messages
4,554
Reaction score
2
Alessandra Facchinetti- Gucci, Valentino
Lars Nilsson- Bill Blass, Nina Ricci, Gianfranco Ferrer
Olivier Theyskens- Rochas, Nina Ricci

These are just a few that I can name off the top of my head. What do they have in common? They've all been appointed to multiple fashion houses, but they haven't seemed to be able to stick around for very long. Is there a common denominator, or multiple factors? Due to their artistic talent (maybe even lack there of), or some commercial aspect? Obviously there will be different reasoning for each designer, but I am still curious for responses to this question.
 
Karl Lagerfeld himself has jumped ship quite a bit over the years, he used to be at chloe and has designed for other houses as well. Now obviously he's fixed at Chanel and Fendi, I think his own line used to be Lagerfelg Gallery and now it's simply 'karl lagerfeld'.
 
Those designers were all fired because they weren't selling clothes. Poor Alessandra :(
 
For me it's funny why valentino fired Alessandra, maybe she played too save in Gucci...Honstly, Frida done a better job, although I didn't really enjoy gucci clothes.
But she have done something amazing for valentino. I mean her collections and couture is much better than right now, I really hope that she can finanlly land a good position or start her own brand
 
Honstly, Frida done a better job

Don't even bother showing your face here again :lol: kidding. Frida is a good businesswoman Ill give her that, but not on the same creative level as Alessandra.
What is Alessandra doing at the moment anyway?
 
I suppose what I find puzzling is that many designers that bounce from house to house, Olivier in particular, is that they are regarded by the vast majority of fashion elite as being grand artists, the finest of their generation. The only Vogue I regularly read (in print) is US, and both Rochas and Nina Ricci were featured heavily in editorials and even articles. If industry insiders laud these designers left and right, why doesn't anyone buy their clothing? Or if a designer like Lars has designed for multiple houses to no avail, but still keeps getting work- why is he still frequently hired?
 
To be honest to the new Valentino designers, their SS10 collection and the Spring 10 HC collection were both really wonderful. Everything else, however, has been just dreadful.

I don't really understand what the new designer is doing at Nina Ricci. I don't really know the history of the brand, but it's a 180 change from what was happening there before. Not in a good way either.

Similarly with Salvatore Ferragamo. It seems like it's a conscious decision by the management to go into a different direction, but alas it's the wrong direction to go to, after that sleek and chic clothes the seasons before.
 
Don't even bother showing your face here again :lol: kidding. Frida is a good businesswoman Ill give her that, but not on the same creative level as Alessandra.
What is Alessandra doing at the moment anyway?

Probably working out a deal to work with Tom Ford on his women's line.
 
Paulo Melim Andersson went from I forget which house to Marni to Chloe to ???
 
I actually believe that these designers, alessandra especially, play a certain role in fashion.

Once a name sake designer leaves a house one of these designers comes in and designs while the fashion world takes time to mourn the house and reminisce. Then once the media is ready to truly pay attention to the house again, the transition designer is kicked to the curb, and the "real' replacements come in.

It could also be a matter of whether or not a designer really gels with a house and it's employees. And of course there is the issue of money.
 
To be honest to the new Valentino designers, their SS10 collection and the Spring 10 HC collection were both really wonderful. Everything else, however, has been just dreadful.

I don't really understand what the new designer is doing at Nina Ricci. I don't really know the history of the brand, but it's a 180 change from what was happening there before. Not in a good way either.

Similarly with Salvatore Ferragamo. It seems like it's a conscious decision by the management to go into a different direction, but alas it's the wrong direction to go to, after that sleek and chic clothes the seasons before.

Couldn't agree more:heart:.
As for Paulo Melin Andersson (who was at Marni & then went to Chloe), I really wish he would've stayed at Chloe. I love Hannah McGibbon at Chloe, but Paolo's vision of the quintessential Chloe gurl was so fresh & modern that made me so intrigued in his collections season after season.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I suppose what I find puzzling is that many designers that bounce from house to house, Olivier in particular, is that they are regarded by the vast majority of fashion elite as being grand artists, the finest of their generation. The only Vogue I regularly read (in print) is US, and both Rochas and Nina Ricci were featured heavily in editorials and even articles. If industry insiders laud these designers left and right, why doesn't anyone buy their clothing? Or if a designer like Lars has designed for multiple houses to no avail, but still keeps getting work- why is he still frequently hired?

Rocha's was closed for financial reasons wasn't it? (Even though it's since re-opened and is designing clothes with more wearability) So Oliver didn't really have a choice but to leave Rocha's, and then almost the same thing happened with Ricci didn't it? He came to the end of his contract, which was then not renewed. So it's not really something he had much of a choice in I imagine.

They did both do well editorially, but I doubt their sales were all that impressive. He was a big gown man, which while being beautiful and perfect for editorial and red carpet appearances, don't really make for amazing sales figures.
 
whether it's in fashion or not, change creates excitement. it's why cereal companies change their packaging, it's why companies spend millions on re-branding campaigns, it's why politicians craft speeches contradicting their old positions. within the world of fashion, this remains true. you'll notice that at the houses where the designers have stayed the same, the amount of change at those houses remains monumental. karl lagerfeld is such a genius that he can oscilate between a surfer girl one season and present a beautiful paris-monaco season the next. many houses would have to change designers to get that radical of a change.

also, let's not forget the economics of this beast. young, fresh talent remains the cheapest on the marketplace. once they've established themselves as good, they don't have to work for pennies on the dollars of the more established designers. unless these houses are willing to pony up more money, many of these designers willingly leave because they know they're worth more.
 
What's happening with Olivier theyskens (I know I spelt that wrong LOL)?
 
What's happening with Olivier theyskens (I know I spelt that wrong LOL)?

You spelled it correct :lol:

I think that with Alessandra's case is that she followed behind two great (subjective of course) designers both during times of changes at the top so these types of transitions are always messy . She gets used kind of as a trial designer which I don't think is fair since she is extremely talented .

I think at the end of the day, however, it all comes down to personality clashes and money .
 
Don't forget Alexander McQueen, John Galliano and Julien Mcdonald at Givenchy
and Stella McCartney, Phoebe Philio and Paulo Melim Andersson at Chloé
 
In Olivier's case, I think it couldn't be helped that he would be fired. P&G didn't have any experience in the fashion industry, and I imagine it would be rather intimidating to try to keep that up when I can't see Rochas succeeding without the kind of accessory business that Rochas didn't have.
 
Don't forget Alexander McQueen, John Galliano and Julien Mcdonald at Givenchy
and Stella McCartney, Phoebe Philio and Paulo Melim Andersson at Chloé
I don't think Phoebe and Stella should be mention here as they both chose to go from Chloé. Stella was offered to open her own label and Phoebe chose to step back from fashion to focus on other priorities.

Paulo is another story though... :innocent:
 
Out of all the names presented so far, the one that truly sticks out as a sore thumb is Alessandra Faccinetti, for no other reason than the fact that at both houses she inherited she was given anything but a fair shot at success. Both of her stints lasted only one fashion year (a s/s and a f/w season). Talent certainly isn't an issue, and even though there are mixed feelings about her work at Valentino the truth is that she had a firm grasp on both of the legacies she had to work with.

With her I think it was a matter of not getting what both Gucci Group and Marzotto/Permira bargained for. Obviously it's just speculation on my part, but given both the circumstances under which Tom Ford left Gucci and Frida Giannini filling the role of creative director after her two co-directors left after brief stints at the helm, it seems like Gucci Group wanted much more control over the Gucci label, everything from the products (all of those pre-season logo bag editions, the general mainstreaming and pairing down of the clothes that end up in stores) to the image of the house (the constant pushing of Gucci's heritage, the sterilization of it's hedonistic former image). I'm guessing there was some internal conflict over creative control that was never disclosed, because two full seasons worth of clothing sales doesn't seem like enough time to judge whether or not a designer's product sells well. I can't believe that sales were what got her fired, especially when RTW isn't the big money maker to begin with. I'm guessing it would have been easier for Gucci to exert control over someone who is out of their element, such as an accessory designer working as a creative director of a fashion house.

As for her stint at Valentino, I just think she upset people by having her own point of view and not sticking with the exact same course that the house had been on. Clearly that was what upset the founder himself, and all of a sudden when the news broke that she was being let go the company was agreeing with him.

Obviously this is just something I concocted, and isn't actually based on anything. :innocent:

Don't forget Alexander McQueen, John Galliano and Julien Mcdonald at Givenchy
Those were very different situations in that none of those designers were unceremoniously ousted from the house. Galliano left after two seasons because he was offered Dior and made the choice to leave. McQueen's contract wasn't renewed after three and a half years due to uneven reviews and sales, the bitter working relationship between him and LVMH, and his choice to sell a stake in his label to Gucci Group while he was still under contract at Givenchy (I'm guessing that last one was the straw that broke the camel's back). Even still, they just let his contract run out, he wasn't actually fired. Macdonald as well remained for the duration of his contract (3 years, I think), even though his time at the house was hardly a success.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
210,705
Messages
15,124,448
Members
84,410
Latest member
peytontung
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->