Maria Grazia Chiuri - Designer, Creative Director of Christian Dior

[yslforever]

MGC is not a great designer, nor a great business woman, her strength is to offer very thematic collections 4/6 times a years, simple collections to be very accessible, aesthetically, so the army of Dior merchandisers can release Tote Bags and Birkenstocks with the latest MGC theme in 6 weeks... That doesn't make her a business genius.

 

[gallianostan]

Dear, I’ve been working for these kind of companies for the last 10 years, if there’s something I know it’s how it works and what’s considered big and small in the fashion business.

Dior before MGC was small. Now it’s big, and it was just thanks to Pietro and thanks to MGC (mainly MGC).

It doesn’t matter how much you like Galliano, business wise it was tiny when he was there. Now Chanel competes with Dior business wise, which was never the case before.

I will never get this kind of designers fans. I love(d) Nicolas as much as the next person but his Balenciaga was small. Now it’s “big” (+1B). Being big doesn’t mean it’s good fashion wise, it just means it’s big. Lol. We are not 6, things are objective.

a company with an annual revenue in the billions is not, under any measure, a "small business". that is fact and not up for argument.

 

[Creative]

You literally have no clue, tbh. Denying MGC business vision is just absurd. She was the first one to launch the kitten heel at that moment and it was a huuuuuuuuge success. She was the first one to lunch a Tote Book and now everybody is doing it (it was not a merchandiser thing, it was her own idea). She was one of the very first ones at a very luxurious house to give denim a huge relevance in the rtw category mix. She created a carry over line for rtw (her idea). She created a very easy and recognizable rtw look for the stores. She brought back the oblique (which wasn’t used for ages at Dior). The most important: she made the Lady Dior a huge success sales wise, which never was. She made it attractive for the young generation. Before 2017 no one under 45 wanted to carry it. The toile de Jouy was launched by her as well, and it has been huge. The T-shirts, the bras (that Hedi copied for Céline). She did it from the very first collection…

Stop the nonesense please.

 

[gallianostan]

You literally have no clue, tbh. Denying MGC business vision is just absurd. She was the first one to launch the kitten heel at that moment and it was a huuuuuuuuge success. She was the first one to lunch a Tote Book and now everybody is doing it (it was not a merchandiser thing, it was her own idea). She was one of the very first ones at a very luxurious house to give denim a huge relevance in the rtw category mix. She created a carry over line for rtw (her idea). She created a very easy and recognizable rtw look for the stores. She brought back the oblique (which wasn’t used for ages at Dior). The most important: she made the Lady Dior a huge success sales wise, which never was. She made it attractive for the young generation. Before 2017 no one under 45 wanted to carry it. The toile de Jouy was launched by her as well, and it has been huge. The T-shirts, the bras (that Hedi copied for Céline). She did it from the very first collection…

Stop the nonesense please.

what tf has any of this got to do with what i said? the nonsense here is you claiming that a billion-dollar company is a "small business". i've never heard such bs in all my life. a company with over a billion euros in annual revenue is NOTTTTTTTTTTT a "small business". especially DIOR. please.

 

[Creative]

^Lol, okay 🤣

 

[Lola701]

But @Creative i think MGC is more a pragmatic designer. However, the success of her Dior, particularly, IMO, is really the result of a more global strategy of Pietro Beccari.

She is what she is as a designer but we can’t say that her work is really the catalysis for Dior’s growth.

I don’t think that on her own, at another brand, she would generate the same kind of results. I think that PPP has more of that energy for example.

 

[Creative]

Yeah, she is very pragmatic, but you also have to have the vision to do Zara at Dior. You have to be "brave" (or uninspired) enough. If I was a designer I would've never done that at Dior. I would've never imagined Dior to look like that: straight jeans, a white T-shirt, sneakers... That was the core of her RTW in boutiques, and it was orchestrated by her.

Raf wanted to be commercial as well, but his Dior was not successful. It was "merchandised" enough for the time (the fusion sneakers, the Diorama...), but it didn't work. It didn't click with the clients.

And of course Dior is a great platform, but MGC gave women what they wanted during her tenure. And her personality and her input were very important: she had lot of character and a lot of saying (she changed everything, the packaging, the logo, the mannequins, the VM, the materials used at the stores, the looks of the stores...). And they are actually her ideas. Even the way to display the 300€ rings in a wood hand. The design team was also very small if you compare it to Raf's, it was just very few people working directly under her.

And, for instance, Ghesquière at Vuitton has the platform but it's not really as "successful" (yeah, it's another kind of business, but you get what I mean). And Nicolas has his own vision, but IMO he is not a business man. MGC has business very much in mind while working and we have to give that to her. She did what rich and aspiring-to-be-rich women around the world wanted.

The return of the saddle bag was probably one of the best marketing strategies (if not the best) I've seen in my career and it was actually her who decided to bring it back. The monogram as well.

I do think she is a huge part of Dior's success. And, as I said, I believe she's a terrible designer, but it is unfair to say she's not talented as a business woman or, at least, guessing what rich women want. Right now Dior is passé and burnt, and they are having a hard time. I am sure her replacement will be a matter of time, but she's done wonders for the brand business wise.

 

[Creative]

In big fashion brands it's all about the Creative Director... The CEO makes the strategy, decides where to go or who to cater through different strategies... But the soul of the company is the CD and the key to success is the designer. I know terrible CEOs, that even the big boss of the conglomerate considers them "s¡lly", leading big brands that have been pretty successful... If the business gear is OK, then you can survive or have a pretty decent success with a mediocre or untalented CEO. But you can't have success without a strong vision (strong vision doesn't mean fashion talent to create interesting shows).

At the moment, though, things are changing. And I think the most evident example is Chanel, where it's all about merchandising. The codes are so well-established that it is all about creating products to sell. And it sells better now than when the biggest fashion legend was there. Same as Hermès. But I feel it's still hard to reach that level.

I thought Chanel was going to drop a little bit, maybe not the first year, but in like 3 or 4 after KL's death. And it's been the opposite. It looks like Chanel doesn't need the fashion aura to keep selling. I don't know how much that can last, but I feel it reached Hermès status where it's out of trends. Dior is not there and it's hard for me to see it there in less than 10 years or even 20), but who knows.

 

[Scotty]

Chiuri gentrified the brand. She made the saddle bag more practical by adding in the strap (instead of separately having to buy), changed the entire brand aesthetics, the logo, the stores, and debuted brand new merchandise that appeals to the Dubai girlies, which is all that fashion has to offer nowadays. Now it’s just TikTok old money/new money/Dubai/Hermès victims or just hype-beasts.

Chanel, Dior, Hermès and Balenciaga (not on their level but still) are not going anywhere.

 

[PierreGotha]

MGC made Dior a lifestyle brand and made the house more notable. Her vision is holistic, yet incredibly mundane.
With that, Dior appealed to a much broader audience, especially after Raf's tenure. Not only the older clients can relate to and attain her offerings, but she has also ensnared the attention of the aspiring New Money of the 2010s. All because of her banal approach.

I'm quite sure that the current clients of Dior are getting fatigued by what she has been doing, I guess this is when Victoire comes in and gives them a better and finer reason to spend towards the brand.

She needs to spice it up quickly just like what Hedi did to his FW 24 collection at CELINE. Because Dior won't sustain itself by selling mostly embroidered Book totes and Lady Diors.

 

[plentyofhorns]

i doubt you have much credibility if you think dior before maria grazia chiuri was anything close to a "small business"

Aren’t you only 22? lol. You talk on here like you know everything but I’m doubtful you’re that connected….. just a self described “galliano Stan”

 

[plentyofhorns]

what tf has any of this got to do with what i said? the nonsense here is you claiming that a billion-dollar company is a "small business". i've never heard such bs in all my life. a company with over a billion euros in annual revenue is NOTTTTTTTTTTT a "small business". especially DIOR. please.

Okay you are definitely a 22 year old

 

[tourbillions]

mgc definitely drove the brand to 1 billions. Its most likely cause she had a clear vision of her Dior woman. She's selling a full fantasy even if its a boring one. Most of it was probably luck, she was at the right place at the right time. All other designers are just making different reiterations of balenciaga or loewe and testing which one would stick.

 

[gallianostan]

Aren’t you only 22? lol. You talk on here like you know everything but I’m doubtful you’re that connected….. just a self described “galliano Stan”

if you believe a global billion-dollar company is a small business you're beyond help; i'm putting you on mute to save myself from anymore of your brainless replies

 

[Nimsay]

Ok it is bernard arnault running the show. He did this with Celine and Dior. Get a hot shot designer to make the brand credible then follow up with a lifestyle designer to capitalize on the credibility built by John or Phoebe.

This dior only works because John made it that everyone wanted a piece of dior. Finally with MGC the clothes were accessible to the people who always wanted Dior. Same w Chanel. Chanel is cruising on Karl. Virginie is just filler.

Eventually Dior will need another visionary designer to keep the brand elevated.

 

[Kennnnn]

Ok it is bernard arnault running the show. He did this with Celine and Dior. Get a hot shot designer to make the brand credible then follow up with a lifestyle designer to capitalize on the credibility built by John or Phoebe.

This dior only works because John made it that everyone wanted a piece of dior. Finally with MGC the clothes were accessible to the people who always wanted Dior. Same w Chanel. Chanel is cruising on Karl. Virginie is just filler.

Eventually Dior will need another visionary designer to keep the brand elevated.

He really failed with post-Tisci Matthew Williams!

 

[tourbillions]

they're so lucky givenchy was way bigger than lanvin otherwise they would have had the same faith. seems lanvin now is becoming a department store brand, bordering on becoming christian lacroix.

 

[fenty]

Dear, I’ve been working for these kind of companies for the last 10 years, if there’s something I know it’s how it works and what’s considered big and small in the fashion business.

Dior before MGC was small. Now it’s big, and it was just thanks to Pietro and thanks to MGC (mainly MGC).

It doesn’t matter how much you like Galliano, business wise it was tiny when he was there. Now Chanel competes with Dior business wise, which was never the case before.

I will never get this kind of designers fans. I love(d) Nicolas as much as the next person but his Balenciaga was small. Now it’s “big” (+1B). Being big doesn’t mean it’s good fashion wise, it just means it’s big. Lol. We are not 6, things are objective.

I'm sorry but I can't with this reply... Just because MGC is making a good buck doesn't mean she's doing anything interesting. nonetheless, like you said the brand being big =/= good fashions.

I feel like the bigger the brand the sh*ttier the brand direction/vision gets, but hey what do I know?

 

[Nimsay]

He really failed with post-Tisci Matthew Williams!

You guys are gonna get mad…

Rics Giv didnt give the brand enough credibility to keep going without him. I dont think Arnault intended for Ric to do anything but keep the stores filled with merch. Him being successful was just silver lining. Givenchy has always been Arnaults testing ground label. No matter how big Giv was - Givenchy is a tiny brand. When Ric came on board, Givenchys manhattan store was on the second floor. I remember not even knowing where the store was. Unheard of - Givenchy wasnt even worth spending on a street level store. At this time Dior already long had their huge boutique.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Tbh, this is not true. I hate MGC as a designer but she is a great business woman. I know her story at Dior very well and she’s been amazing business wise. Dior before her was a small business, now it’s huge.

Also, at the beginning she did have a lot of saying in the stores and in the VM. Huge influence actually. All the wood was used because of her. She chose the mannequins as well. Even the props. The store design before her was COMPLETELY different.

She’s been one of the very huge business successes of the last 10 years with Alessandro Michele for Gucci and Hedi for YSL and Céline.

It's a bit pointless to compare where Christian Dior stands today with where it had been a good 10 years before, keeping in mind that Bernard Arnaud would have never let his most prestigious brand besides Vuitton underperform. So an expansion strategy was well in place that had nothing to do with how the fashion itself looked. We're talking about the expansion into different markets, opening flagships, corners as well all the other aforementioned lines that are not overseen by the creative directors of men's and womenswear. Money was never an issue when it came to invest in what was widely considerd LVMH's crown jewel, but even then, I would assume most of the brands owned by Kering and LVMH are performing better today than they did 10 years ago.

The store designs under Galliano and Raf Simons were still conceived by Peter Marino if I remember correctly. What happened after that I don't know but it was clear to me that the whole Dior Homme operation under Hedi was under a much tighter control by him. It was a small niche label that far exceeded LVMH's expectations and put Hedi Slimane on the map in the same way as Nicolas Ghesquière. The fact that this division was operated very much in autonomy from all the other divisions of the Dior fashion house created a funny schizophrenia when you walked into the Avenue Montaigne store, as these two worlds had nothing to do with each other. Arnaud was certainly pleased with the success of Dior Homme (a 'small' operation maybe in the same regard as Balenciaga under Nicolas) but when Hedi was considered a candidate to take over the entirety of the house, Arnaud refused as he was unwilling to hand him as much control over the entirety of the brand. Considering that these old and fairly conservative womenswear retail concepts existed for so long, it's no surprise they were eventually changed to better suit MGC's vision for the brand, but it shows us the creative director position for womenswear had less competences than Hedi's contract for Dior Homme.

That being said, let's not forget we are now at a time when 360* visual overhauls are much more common than they were back in the days.