Maximilian Davis - Designer, Creative Director of Ferragamo

[yslforever]

^ memory comes from an interest. But thanks.


You need skinny toes for that type of sandal so it doesn't feel on the verge of breaking. It's a strap, not a roller chain.

Its a mens sandal model but the straps were actually a bit loose on my toes, so the feet kept slipping forward or side ways. You can slightly tie them tighter on the toes if you loose them a bit around the ankles, but then you don't have enough ankle support.

It's not to diss Ferragamo, I bought also some YSL Cassandre sandals and they're also terrible, the metal parts keep rubbing the skin and you end up with scratched skin and bleeding feet.

 

[Nimsay]

Ok the Ferragamos bought Ungaro business in 1996 for 250 millions of then French francs, there was only a limited business couture, 3 shops belonging to the Ungaro company and 13 through franchises. Then there was a huge fight between the numerous F cousins about what to do with Ungaro, but they kept pumping cash into it, especially to buy back licences and perfume ads.
They finally sold Ungaro for 1 € in 2004, after nearly half a billion of total loss. Some F cousins, the smaller shareholders, were furious because they had to mortgage their F shares to keep pumping cash into the F and Ungaro businesses, and their richer cousins had to bail them out.
It was maybe one the biggest failure of that period.

A huge failure. They should be hedging ungaro as rhe fashion forward brand not the OG Ferragamo brand. It is gonna take a lot to shake off the Clearance Section energy Ferragamo has.

 

[LadyJunon]

A huge failure. They should be hedging ungaro as rhe fashion forward brand not the OG Ferragamo brand. It is gonna take a lot to shake off the Clearance Section energy Ferragamo has.

They sold Ungaro ages ago, like just after the Giambattista Valli era.

 

[MulletProof]

I bought also some YSL Cassandre sandals and they're also terrible

We’re looking at a pattern then. I’d drop the idea. Men of virtue never reveal their feet in public anyway.

 

[yslforever]

Men of virtue never reveal their feet in public anyway.

Who said I wear sandals in public ? Anyway, that may be one the dumbest take on fashion I ever heard.

 

[Nimsay]

Not men of virtue.

 

[MulletProof]

Why was my post removed? so the moderation team beats around the bush every time this guy is wildly sexist but the moment I match the energy, I get ‘moderated’?

I asked a genuine question since he did say he doesn’t wear sandals in public, what’s the offense, ‘big toes in little sandals’? god forbid I trigger a mental breakdown, and how is it less problematic than him calling another poster ‘dumb’ or, as he did and you had to really scratch your head for half a day and wonder if it was an offense at all: an ovary.. dispenser?

 

[Nimsay]

Why was my post removed? so the moderation team beats around the bush every time this guy is wildly sexist but the moment I match the energy, I get ‘moderated’?

I asked a genuine question since he did say he doesn’t wear sandals in public, what’s the offense, ‘big toes in little sandals’? god forbid I trigger a mental breakdown, and how is it less problematic than him calling another poster ‘dumb’ or, as he did and you had to really scratch your head for half a day and wonder if it was an offense at all: an ovary.. dispenser?

The death of fashion was this whole censorship nonsense. Say whatever you like IMO. If people get offended then that should create a DIALOGUE...

Fashion is too judgmental for all that.

 

[LadyJunon]

Why was my post removed? so the moderation team beats around the bush every time this guy is wildly sexist but the moment I match the energy, I get ‘moderated’?

I asked a genuine question since he did say he doesn’t wear sandals in public, what’s the offense, ‘big toes in little sandals’? god forbid I trigger a mental breakdown, and how is it less problematic than him calling another poster ‘dumb’ or, as he did and you had to really scratch your head for half a day and wonder if it was an offense at all: an ovary.. dispenser?

The death of fashion was this whole censorship nonsense. Say whatever you like IMO. If people get offended then that should create a DIALOGUE...

Fashion is too judgmental for all that.

In honestly, this site is a mess when it comes to creating a "welcoming space".

I remember back when they were doing "diversity reports" and for two consecutive seasons a large chunk of brands found themselves with either 0% or 100% in model diversity.

The context?

Those were reports for the Spring'21 and Fall'21 seasons, AKA, the seasons when most of the industry went digital. While the larger houses did empty-house shows, lots smaller designers opted for lookbooks with one model. Also Burberry, Celine, Margiela and the entirety of Kering were absent for those seasons. Kering even made this whole announcement about emancipating themselves from the traditional February-September schedule (two out of their main five came back after two seasons and another two came back after three, McQueen lasted five).

The most ironic thing is that the writer hehind them is a self-proclaimed feminist, but has an article about celebrity wardrobe malfunctions (it's the most popular article on here).

 

[Mutterlein]

I wear flip flops in public. Take that!

 

[MulletProof]

The death of fashion was this whole censorship nonsense. Say whatever you like IMO. If people get offended then that should create a DIALOGUE...

Fashion is too judgmental for all that.

I don't know if you've been here before under a different account but no 'you can say whatever you like'. If you violate the rules, it does affect your account and soon enough, you're out. The problem is not the rules, nor enforcing them, tfs has always had strict censorship, the problem is how you decide to manipulate or misinterpret these policies and the bias in determining what constitutes a violation, and which rules apply for some mildly provocative content you personally don't like, while relaxing on highly disruptive and offensive content. In this case, I would agree the way of moderating is VERY representative of current fashion, very bro: it's 'debatable' whether some misogynist, incel junk straight out of 4-chan content should face removal or not, the ultimate offense, worse than misogyny, is making men who are all over womenswear like a rash feel like bats*it beauty standards apply to them too, or worse, invalidate their admittedly not-so valid, bogus 'insider' input sourced from pedestrian observation ('I walked into a store..' 'I looked from a window'). It's quite bizarre if you think about it: let's talk on and on about women's clothes, gate-keep it from certain women at all times, and sometimes even insult them just for being women (because ew), but also, do not dare to ever ridicule or shame me for any of this because how offensive and dumb.

I may have asked what's the best non-public place to wear sandals as a man with chunky toes, not exactly Maximilian-related but it is technically about his product, way more on topic than some nerd a*s story on how Ferragamo bought Ungaro in 1996. So the question remains, what's the violation? trolling? disruption? sexism? off-topic talk? some transparency should be brought back, moderators used to not be allowed to ever disable removal notifications so members could always see and learn from the reason chosen for deletion. Unless you can't justify the reason and just found it out-of-line as a man and wanted to do it (and did it) quietly. In that case, don't ask why I'm here and not in the Member Support & Feedback area, transparency goes both ways.

 

[Nimsay]

I don't know if you've been here before under a different account but no 'you can say whatever you like'. If you violate the rules, it does affect your account and soon enough, you're out. The problem is not the rules, nor enforcing them, tfs has always had strict censorship, the problem is how you decide to manipulate or misinterpret these policies and the bias in determining what constitutes a violation, and which rules apply for some mildly provocative content you personally don't like, while relaxing on highly disruptive and offensive content. In this case, I would agree the way of moderating is VERY representative of current fashion, very bro: it's 'debatable' whether some misogynist, incel junk straight out of 4-chan content should face removal or not, the ultimate offense, worse than misogyny, is making men who are all over womenswear like a rash feel like bats*it beauty standards apply to them too, or worse, invalidate their admittedly not-so valid, bogus 'insider' input sourced from pedestrian observation ('I walked into a store..' 'I looked from a window'). It's quite bizarre if you think about it: let's talk on and on about women's clothes, gate-keep it from certain women at all times, and sometimes even insult them just for being women (because ew), but also, do not dare to ever ridicule or shame me for any of this because how offensive and dumb.

I may have asked what's the best non-public place to wear sandals as a man with chunky toes, not exactly Maximilian-related but it is technically about his product, way more on topic than some nerd a*s story on how Ferragamo bought Ungaro in 1996. So the question remains, what's the violation? trolling? disruption? sexism? off-topic talk? some transparency should be brought back, moderators used to not be allowed to ever disable removal notifications so members could always see and learn from the reason chosen for deletion. Unless you can't justify the reason and just found it out-of-line as a man and wanted to do it (and did it) quietly. In that case, don't ask why I'm here and not in the Member Support & Feedback area, transparency goes both ways.

Not you making me go to my desktop to read this and respond...

This seems to be long running with many individuated interactions that I am not really privy to since I did just get here. This seems to have almost nothing to do with me.

Of course if people are saying what you are alluding to then that is beyond the pale of acceptable fashion discourse.

 

[yslforever]

I don't know if you've been here before under a different account but no 'you can say whatever you like'. If you violate the rules, it does affect your account and soon enough, you're out. The problem is not the rules, nor enforcing them, tfs has always had strict censorship, the problem is how you decide to manipulate or misinterpret these policies and the bias in determining what constitutes a violation, and which rules apply for some mildly provocative content you personally don't like, while relaxing on highly disruptive and offensive content. In this case, I would agree the way of moderating is VERY representative of current fashion, very bro: it's 'debatable' whether some misogynist, incel junk straight out of 4-chan content should face removal or not, the ultimate offense, worse than misogyny, is making men who are all over womenswear like a rash feel like bats*it beauty standards apply to them too, or worse, invalidate their admittedly not-so valid, bogus 'insider' input sourced from pedestrian observation ('I walked into a store..' 'I looked from a window'). It's quite bizarre if you think about it: let's talk on and on about women's clothes, gate-keep it from certain women at all times, and sometimes even insult them just for being women (because ew), but also, do not dare to ever ridicule or shame me for any of this because how offensive and dumb.

I may have asked what's the best non-public place to wear sandals as a man with chunky toes, not exactly Maximilian-related but it is technically about his product, way more on topic than some nerd a*s story on how Ferragamo bought Ungaro in 1996. So the question remains, what's the violation? trolling? disruption? sexism? off-topic talk? some transparency should be brought back, moderators used to not be allowed to ever disable removal notifications so members could always see and learn from the reason chosen for deletion. Unless you can't justify the reason and just found it out-of-line as a man and wanted to do it (and did it) quietly. In that case, don't ask why I'm here and not in the Member Support & Feedback area, transparency goes both ways.

You're having a complete public meltdown, out-of-topic issue with me when I disagreed and said Ferragamo has an history of ruining brands and not-knowing how to do business ; I gave the examples of their Ungaro adventures, the clashing factions of the Ferragamo cousins, and in-topic how they don't know how to market and distribute or make desirable Davis' designs, including those sandals, which are very good on touched photos and really not so good irl shops imho, because I happen to have tried them.

Then you started to rant about how men shouldn't wear sandals in public anyway, a statement I do find extremely regressive.

Now it's some kind of "incel, 4chan bro", as if men weren't allowed opinions on womens fashion, and btw all the Maximilian Davis shows have been womens AND menswear together.

 

[MulletProof]

^ why is it regressive? care to elaborate? care to draw a comparison with your own take on how women 'get jobs just because they're women and ovary dispensers'? is that not regressive?. I came up with my sandals 'rule' especially for you and your radicalized, misogynist mindset. You should like it.

And call it a meltdown, just like the ones you have every time you pee mark Dior threads. I'm just questioning you, and the biased moderation that quietly serve fetishistic men that come here now that membership is open but are far more shy when it comes to moderating actual offenses.

 

[yslforever]

^women 'get jobs just because they're women and ovary dispensers'?

I have never ever said that. You must be confusing with someone else.

 

[blueorchid]

I have never ever said that. You must be confusing with someone else.

Prett sure you said that was the only reason Maria Grazia has her job at Dior, but okay…

 

[MulletProof]

I have never ever said that. You must be confusing with someone else.

Just checked my screenshot, MY BAD: you said ‘ovary producer’, not dispenser. I am so sorry.

 

[Nimsay]

Not screenshots.

 

[LadyJunon]

I have never ever said that. You must be confusing with someone else.

 

[Mutterlein]

ANYWAYS

The new product only became available in February. I look forward to seeing how things move through the summer.