Marc Not Happy

Discussion in 'Designers and Collections' started by Lena, Feb 10, 2004.

View Users: View Users
  1. Lena

    Lena etre soi-meme

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2002
    Messages:
    23,866
    Likes Received:
    0
    :blink: thats news to me...
    could the ysl/jacobs rumours turn true?

    from fwd :flower:
     
  2. faust

    faust New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Messages:
    10,231
    Likes Received:
    0
    Interesting read, thanks! I think he should go on his own, and then we'll see if he sinks or swims. I understand him completely, but what did he think when he joined a conglomerate? It's all about business with LVMH.

    On the human level, he has my sympathy. No designer should lose creative control.

    P.S. I don't see him complaining about the mega name LVMH made him with all the advertising they threw at the general public! :innocent:
     
  3. PrinceOfCats

    PrinceOfCats Naturellement pulpeuse

    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2003
    Messages:
    10,125
    Likes Received:
    0
    I don't have too much sympathy for Marc - most of Vuitton's sales are made by the Vuitton name not Marc's design skills.
     
  4. Orochian

    Orochian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, and regarding his quote referencing Gucci's treatment towards Tom Ford, I wouldn't exactly consider his contribution to Vuitton to be remotely near what Ford has done for Gucci. When they can churn out something as revolting as the Murakami collection and still manage to get waiting lists for that stuff, you'd know it's more about the logo than the design.

    First it's Alexander Mcqueen, then Michael Kors, now Marc Jacobs. I really believe that LVMH has absolute no clue how to treat big-name designers, and is a poor manager of brands.
     
  5. faust

    faust New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Messages:
    10,231
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, and regarding his quote referencing Gucci's treatment towards Tom Ford, I wouldn't exactly consider his contribution to Vuitton to be remotely near what Ford has done for Gucci. When they can churn out something as revolting as the Murakami collection and still manage to get waiting lists for that stuff, you'd know it's more about the logo than the design.

    First it's Alexander Mcqueen, then Michael Kors, now Marc Jacobs. I really believe that LVMH has absolute no clue how to treat big-name designers, and is a poor manager of brands. [/b][/quote]
    I absolutely agree. Only, they have the most powerful tool of the trade and they use it well - advertising. And as long as the masses remain sheep LVMH will be a hit.
     
  6. Orochian

    Orochian New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2004
    Messages:
    428
    Likes Received:
    0
    For me personally, LVMH is the luxury goods equivalent of General Motors - a lumbering, inefficient giant that excels in nothing but mediocrity and bureaucracy. What makes GM sink and LVMH float, though, is that car buyers are generally savvy of their purchases, while there are more than enough fashion victims willing to part with their substantial amounts of cash for a logoed handbag of questionable taste, to keep Bernard Arnault and his shareholders happy.

    I wonder though, just how long can LVMH maintain their superiority in the business over their rivals, given the current state of their portfolio of brands. Besides Vuitton and Dior (who has a fair share of problems itself, such as a schizonphrenic brand image and clashing design mentalities within the house), most of their labels aren't making any money. There are a few names under their umbrella that have the potential of being much more than the staid, passe brands that they are now, if they were in more capable hands. I've always thought Celine was on the right track with Michael Kors at the helm. Now after his departure, when was the last time the brand was even mentioned in a glossy magazine as something remotely trendy or desirable?

    That's why I was so thoroughly puzzled when Hedi Slimane declined a generous offer from the Gucci group and instead chose to work for LVMH under Dior, a menswear label burdened with the tacky, poor quality licensing stuff favored by middle age Oriental businessmen - not at all the "blank slate" he claimed it to be. He complained about bureaucracy and creative restrictions with the Gucci group as if Tom Ford was the devil himself, while merrily signing his contracts with LVMH. Oh the irony. :innocent:
     
  7. faust

    faust New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 28, 2004
    Messages:
    10,231
    Likes Received:
    0
    I think you answered your own question. Fashion for the masses today is what the car market for the masses was in the 60's and 70's. Let's examine what happened then? Uneducated consumer masses with money to buy but uneducated about the car market went to GM in hords, because GM used heavy advertising. Seeing incredible sales GM stopped caring for the quality of their cars. Not before long, the Japanese enter the market. Soon, GM sales start slomping, regardless of their advertising budget. The consumer, like you said, has become savvy. The same will happen to the fashion market, because fashion for the masses is in the infant stage. When the AVERAGE consumer will become more discerning and start making decision for himself, instead of looking at glossy adverisements, the tide will turn.... or at least I hope so!

    I think everything is a learning curve.
     

Share This Page

monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"