Phoebe Philo - Designer

Not so long ago, we had a fashion industry with a lively independent designer scene that actually spawned promising talent of which unfortunately a lot of businesses did not survive the Covid years and financial crisis that has dominated the past 10 years.

So from that perspective I can only find it saddening when people consider Phoebe Philo’s decision to launch her own brand daring when in fact she has an established name already and a minority investment from LVMH as well as production through the facilities she worked with at Celine sorted out.

All these factors put her in a much more favorable position than other emerging designers and it’s safe to say she could have been where the J.W. Anderson brand is at right now, had she gone for a different distribution strategy with her brand and put the gambles that high.

So yeah, not much pity for Phoebe from my side if she has to learn it the hard way now that being this super secretive and highly pretentious insider brand that she wants to be is perhaps not the right way to success.
Im sorry but your comment doesn’t make sense from a business standpoint.
Brands have strategies and positioning. You can’t expect one brand to follow a supposed strategy just because of the status and the glorious past of a designer.

Clearly she doesn’t want to be a contemporary designer. There are compromises that she probably don’t want to have at this stage of her career.

And again, we are talking about a brand that has been operating for a year. We can give someone grace over 1 year of operation…

Yes, she has the unfair advantage to have access to the facilities she had at Celine. But, as an independent brand, she won’t be able to afford the same number of orders they did at Celine.
Celine was already a fully operating brand when she took over.

There’s a reality of the industry, the reality of the current climate in terms of economy, the aspiration of a designer.

Choices have to be made and we cannot expect anyone to come with the fully « set up 1 decade looking brand » just because they are established.

We can say, ok Tom Ford did it but Tom Ford had a different plan and choose a different path. And even with that path and immediate success he had to compromise at the end.

And of course that launching your own brand as an established designer who had the opportunity to express yourself for years in other brands and with a lot of success is daring.

That’s why there are so few examples of designers who did it. Except for YSL, Karl, Lacroix, Tom and Phoebe, I can’t name others. I could almost add Herve Léger to the list…
And those brands have had different trajectories, different milestones, some different outcomes and example of success.
 
After the death of McQueen, which for me marks the end of an era, the obvious names who have all that you need to create your own brand (Nicolas, Hedi, Alessandro...) have always preferred to work for heritage houses.
Even Demna, who had a big momentum with Vetements, moved to Balenciaga asap.

It's easier to work for an stablished structure than having to create it yourself from scratch. And it pays better, most probably.

But you know what?
I think this will change, more soon than late.
There will be fashion students that will discover the runways of Margiela in the outskirts of Paris, with the children running across and playing with the models.
And the idea of becoming a new Maria Grazia Chiuri at Dior or a new Kim Jones at Fendi will appear too bland and depressing to them.
 
After the death of McQueen, which for me marks the end of an era, the obvious names who have all that you need to create your own brand (Nicolas, Hedi, Alessandro...) have always preferred to work for heritage houses.
Even Demna, who had a big momentum with Vetements, moved to Balenciaga asap.

It's easier to work for an stablished structure than having to create it yourself from scratch. And it pays better, most probably.

But you know what?
I think this will change, more soon than late.
There will be fashion students that will discover the runways of Margiela in the outskirts of Paris, with the children running across and playing with the models.
And the idea of becoming a new Maria Grazia Chiuri at Dior or a new Kim Jones at Fendi will appear too bland and depressing to them.
I think there’s something simple: when someone wants to become a designer, he/she wants to design. The person is excited about the creative side. And sometimes, they are as excited about the business side.

The reality of a designer being at the helm of his own house means responsibility, meetings outside of the creative side and maybe some unwanted compromises.

The stories of a Lee McQueen, of a Margiela or stories that are difficult to replicate and out of all the brands we have had, there are so few survivals.

Margiela had a good business partner. But despite all his influence, he hasn’t experienced a quarter of the commercial success his brand has today. Thankfully, the barometer of success wasn’t solely about sales. He had a following of clients and retailers and critical acclaim. He did Hermes and even if we can blame him for a lot of things, Renzo Rosso saved the brand.

When you look at the story of Karl Lagerfeld, it’s a story of creative freedom above all. He had a good business sense but didn’t want to deal with business. He launched his own brand through a licensing deal. When the business side didn’t worked, he got his name back, had Lagerfeld Gallery (which was really the only time he operated the brand himself) which was a very small operation and as soon as it experienced a bit of success, he sold the brand.

The reality is that today’s environment is very difficult. Fashion is a very expensive business and there’s a business side to handle and on that, it’s really a gamble.

There are designers like Alexandre Mattuissi who are fantastic in their pragmatism but it’s something else.

We talk about Hedi Slimane often. He has a great business sense but the man was in his studio at Saint Tropez. He wasn’t dealing with the challenges of the company on the day to day basis.

We will continue to have design assistant who wants to be on their own, to be Margiela and others. But much like the idea of being a MGC would seem bland to someone, the idea of being a Nicolas Ghesquiere can also be exciting. The man is putting whatever he wants on the runway, he express his creativity, he doesn’t even have to sell one dress, as long as his bags works.

I think in High Fashion, you are either a Karl or an Azzedine. If you can’t be either, do contemporary.
You can’t have it both way because the level of compromises are insane and the creativity is always loosing.
 
It
Im sorry but your comment doesn’t make sense from a business standpoint.
Brands have strategies and positioning. You can’t expect one brand to follow a supposed strategy just because of the status and the glorious past of a designer.

Clearly she doesn’t want to be a contemporary designer. There are compromises that she probably don’t want to have at this stage of her career.

And again, we are talking about a brand that has been operating for a year. We can give someone grace over 1 year of operation…

Yes, she has the unfair advantage to have access to the facilities she had at Celine. But, as an independent brand, she won’t be able to afford the same number of orders they did at Celine.
Celine was already a fully operating brand when she took over.

There’s a reality of the industry, the reality of the current climate in terms of economy, the aspiration of a designer.

Choices have to be made and we cannot expect anyone to come with the fully « set up 1 decade looking brand » just because they are established.

We can say, ok Tom Ford did it but Tom Ford had a different plan and choose a different path. And even with that path and immediate success he had to compromise at the end.

And of course that launching your own brand as an established designer who had the opportunity to express yourself for years in other brands and with a lot of success is daring.

That’s why there are so few examples of designers who did it. Except for YSL, Karl, Lacroix, Tom and Phoebe, I can’t name others. I could almost add Herve Léger to the list…
And those brands have had different trajectories, different milestones, some different outcomes and example of success.

Back in those years when I worked as a buyer for a multibrand boutique, the common strategy was for brands to start off with maybe 10 assorted top wholesale clients worldwide - The names showing up on that list would often be similar ones, such as Joyce, Dover Street Market, Ikram, Maria Luisa, Via Bus Stop etc. - Obviously as of the last 10 years, the market has changed and brand-run e-commerce has become a more common practice but I don’t think wholesale has completely vanished since.

Phoebe Philo has the authority to make strong demands (such as asking for her collection not to be put on sale or for the entirety of the order to be paid upon confirmation) and cherry pick the clients she would like to work with. Working with wholesale partners on different markets is not a question of market position, that’s largely what The Row is generating it’s revenues from even today…
 

A First Look at Phoebe Philo’s New Collection​

Styles for next year raise the question: How dressed up do you need to be to look and feel dressed?​

By Cathy Horyn

So far, Phoebe Philo has put out one collection in her name, which she offered during the past year in a series of “edits” and deliveries on her brand’s website. The former Celine designer has not held a runway show nor opened a store. However, she recently began selling clothes and accessories to a small number of stores, including Bergdorf Goodman and Corso Como in Milan. Philo did that in response to customers who wanted to be able to see and try things on — not unreasonably, given the cost and newness of her venture. She expects to add more retailers next year.

And today, without fanfare, Phoebe Philo Ltd. She will release images of her second collection, with the first styles available for sale in early 2025 and more to follow through May. Today’s images are only a preview, then. You will not be able to place orders.

For any entrepreneur, a start-up is a lesson in humility, perhaps especially when you once worked for LVMH, which has the means and know-how to open stores. Philo owns her business, with a minority investment from LVMH. In a time when journalists are speculating about who will be the next artistic director at Chanel or which designers are on the move (last Friday, Kim jones said he was leaving Fendi), Philo is actually sailing into the wind. She is one of the rare big names in recent memory to take the risk of having her own label. And she clearly doesn’t feel obliged to show multiple collections a year, as virtually all major brands do, or market herself. She’s given only one interview, to the New York Times, and that was months ago.

Philo is contrary in another way: Not only did she propose a seasonless wardrobe for women — instead of changing styles and concepts every six months, willy-nilly — but she also has a vision of a woman. Again, that practice is not as common among designers as you might think. For Philo, she is someone who has to navigate modern spaces like offices and subways, who has to consider transitions from a work meeting to a restaurant dinner, and who wants to look cool and smart but also comfortable. If a style is glamorous, according to Philo’s thinking, it has to be effortless glamour — like the ivory satin tunic top with an asymmetric hem and a built-in bodysuit that she introduced last fall. You can wear it alone, as a minidress, or with trousers. When I first saw the top, I thought, Why don’t we get more dress-up looks like this — practical yet stylish — from high-fashion designers? The simple answer is they’re not interested in sportswear. Or they’ve forgotten it. But not Philo. So much of what is compelling about her vision comes from the sportswear tradition.

Her intuitions have paid off in influence. She has sparked the trend for popped collars, utility jackets converted into slouchy pantsuits, square-toed loafers with high tongues, black satin turtlenecks with extra-long sleeves, and big, fluffy coats. I can’t look at the styling of H&M’s images, not to mention its products, without seeing her influence.

Philo and her London-based team brought much of the new collection to Paris in late September to show to fashion writers, and it was interesting to see how she had evolved certain styles, while others were departures.

The most striking additions were tops in sturdy cotton jerseys with a wide train that swept to the floor. In either black or white, they have an easy and versatile glamour; plus, you can throw them in the washing machine. One sleeveless “train” top has a padded back, for a slight couture effect. The material is cotton, though it almost looks like duchess satin. There’s also a one-shoulder tunic dress in dark wool — the shoulder made sharp with padding — with an asymmetric hem that was a nice extension of her earlier tunic look. Another long-sleeved wool dress, called the Slice for its deep vents, can be drawn in the front with a belt to show more skin.

But all these styles raise the same question: How dressed up do you need to be to look and feel, well, dressed? For some time, a lot of runway fashion has looked overtly feminine and bizarrely dressy, no doubt because of the influence of the red carpet and social media. At the other extreme are luxury brands like The Row that offer earnest simplicity. Yet, in some cases, there can be a dearth of real design.

With Philo, though, you get the same ease and functionality but you also get a distinctive fashion look and high-quality materials. I’d argue that’s the power of sportswear.

I think that’s the difference that Philo has made with her brand and its considered details and fabrics: You get both a distinctive fashion look and a high degree of functionality.

Her popular BMX trousers, formerly in wool, will now come out in a sturdy cotton. She’s reworked her pin-striped shirts and added a new style in crisp white cotton with a squared-off collar that extends partially down the front, evocative of a man’s undone white tie. Tailoring has a bit more drape in it. Bomber jackets, in leather or silk-viscose, get a sharp shoulder. Having made the texture of her shaggy, embroidered coats a defining part of her image, Philo is not yet ready to move away from the style. Indeed, she’s come up with an extraordinary version in black fluff with a built-in denim jacket.

For sure, though, the collection makes a subtle shift toward glamour, in design as well as styling. There’s a shaved shearling jacket in a vanilla hue that has a whiff of the 1940s, and will likely be copied, and a marvelous long, crinkly skirt with a deep, knitted waistband, so you can pull it up and wear it as a summer dress. Philo has included one or two glam necklaces, one made of long streamers of sterling silver and another with a hunk of mother-of-pearl dangling from a plain collar.

If Philo’s nervy start-up is a lesson in humility, it’s also an excellent example of why patience matters in design, maybe more than ever. If you’re an intuitive kind of designer, and you also care about making clothes that are realistic, those ideas don’t come along every day. The new collection will be sold from early 2025 to May. And her company recently announced that, beginning next month, it will ship to Australia, Hong Kong, Japan, Singapore, and South Korea.

Thecut
 
looks like damage control after a personal vendetta. who will ever know?
for sure it all seems very immature, but also quite entertaining....

glassdoor.com
They should seriously expose the person who's been writing negative reviews on a perfectly timed monthly basis, for months now (like a psycho!), so that future employers know who they're truly bringing in. If anything, I now question their HR because you should see these gigantic red flags during the hiring process...

Imagine breaking up with her/him if that's how he takes employment separation and most pathetic of all, making glassdoor your one tool of vengeance lol, where is this again? London? just get a lawyer (assuming the oh so extraordinary abuse and Sri Lankan sweatshop level of exploitation you went through is true).
 
I generally find negative Glassdoor reviews to be true — if sometimes exaggerated 🤷‍♂️

I have some industry friends that have interviewed or consulted in the last year and it generally seems unorganized and the launch (especially digital) was poorly thought through. It would not surprise me if the ex-McKinsey CEO contributed to a poor working culture, especially coupled with a lot of press/attention and numerous problems at launch.
 
^ it’s not whether it’s true or not, I certainly don’t hold any fashion company in high steem. It’s the credibility of a person with obsessive behavior and multiple email addresses and accounts to manipulate public opinion after being ‘wronged’. Besides demonstrating a high level of entitlement (as if he was owed a job) and emotional immaturity (because, seriously, you settle abuse through evidence and by litigation), it says all you need to know about his/her capacity to handle a high-pressure position.. this person sounds deranged and good that the company flushed him/her but gotta wonder how they got hired in the first place..
 
^ it’s not whether it’s true or not, I certainly don’t hold any fashion company in high steem. It’s the credibility of a person with obsessive behavior and multiple email addresses and accounts to manipulate public opinion after being ‘wronged’. Besides demonstrating a high level of entitlement (as if he was owed a job) and emotional immaturity (because, seriously, you settle abuse through evidence and by litigation), it says all you need to know about his/her capacity to handle a high-pressure position.. this person sounds deranged and good that the company flushed him/her but gotta wonder how they got hired in the first place..
out of curiosity why are you so convinced its one person?
 
^ years of stalking, been on boards longer than most people who only made their debut on their internet via facebook and who truly believe they can sign up under a new name anywhere and no one will be able to tell who they were before. They always, without failure, give themselves away because there’s one thing you can’t fake and that’s the translation of your real life personality to your internet personality (which comprehends what motivates you and even what makes you switch from cellphone to laptop lol).
 
^ years of stalking, been on boards longer than most people who only made their debut on their internet via facebook and who truly believe they can sign up under a new name anywhere and no one will be able to tell who they were before. They always, without failure, give themselves away because there’s one thing you can’t fake and that’s the translation of your real life personality to your internet personality (which comprehends what motivates you and even what makes you switch from cellphone to laptop lol).
So it is an assumption right? im sorry to tell you the glassdoor reviews are very likely genuine from current or ex colleagues. Glassdoor is not the only indicator of the chaos internally. this has been covered by reputable journalists and a simple check on linkedin will show u a much higher turnover than what u may expect in a fashion business. and its not just high turnover in areas where u may assume design / atelier or low level juniors. its senior leaders in both corporate and design roles where u see a revolving door. so its very likely the glassdoor revirews are real. The business is also no longer has a ceo after the last left the business
 
^ Very likely real and very likely genuine. That would be an assumption too, right?

Basic use of a vpn will allow you to drop as many reviews as you can. Try it, pick any business and go to town with the negative or positive reviews, see if you’re stopped. It is not media, they rely on an equally basic IP detector and given the traffic, they will not research individually because there’s rarely a human on the other side.

Please cite the sources of the very reputable journalists that have covered the internal chaos and the outlets that have published them. Can you provide any links between departures (shown, as you claim, as openings on Linkedin) and the negative reviews?

I am genuinely interested in some empirical evidence past the little game we have with anonymity on the internet. I know this is one person the way I know today is Monday, but hey.. open to be proved wrong…
 
When I browse through these pages and the way her enterprise is being talked about, it sounds horribly corporate and institutional - Is that really how customers like to be addressed with? Does that align with the supposed 'clothes made for women by women' trajectory of what made her build up trust and lasting relations with a very particular female audience?

To me it sounds as awkward as Hedi's infamous struggle with the press that seems to have only worsened as he went on with his career post Saint Laurent. The fact that Phoebe gave but one interview and the very scarce communication of this brand does not feel right to me, it doesn’t feel inclusive or turning it to an advantage that she‘s running an independent venture. She is her strongest asset to sell her brand and the fact that she doesn‘t leverage that feels like a missed opportunity.

Perhaps this is the perspective you‘re getting when you worked all your professional life at brands owned by luxury conglomerates…
 
^ it's a one-man conversation in these pages for all we know....

Don't get me wrong, this company, given its field (fashion), is probably more of a s*ithole than not, but basing an opinion on Glassdoor, of all places, is like basing an opinion on internal dynamics based on tfs. Or better yet, on say, Mutterlein's 'heard from a friend who works there' posts aka. 'insider info'. What are we, 12?. Let's scrutinise content a little harder and keep critical thinking in shape.

And levels of awkwardness: Hedi had a very public manic episode on the internet. He decimated the aura of mystery and superiority in the 2 hours that he was glued to his keyboard TYPING!!LIKE!!!THIS/!!!@#$!!. His meltdown was no better than Kanye's and just like Kanye, and considering his state and no higher up intervention (which I'm sure the company lived to regret it), he proceeded to take action (ban journalists) that required crisis management for a long time but there was no recovery after that. It's why some of us look at him now and feel an automatic, little smirk and maybe or maybe not, that sadist thirst to see him lose his s*it in public again. I hope he's in treatment, but it's just hard to take him seriously.

That and poor, nearly silent communication do not equal the same.
 
^ it's a one-man conversation in these pages for all we know....

Don't get me wrong, this company, given its field (fashion), is probably more of a s*ithole than not, but basing an opinion on Glassdoor, of all places, is like basing an opinion on internal dynamics based on tfs. Or better yet, on say, Mutterlein's 'heard from a friend who works there' posts aka. 'insider info'. What are we, 12?. Let's scrutinise content a little harder and keep critical thinking in shape.

And levels of awkwardness: Hedi had a very public manic episode on the internet. He decimated the aura of mystery and superiority in the 2 hours that he was glued to his keyboard TYPING!!LIKE!!!THIS/!!!@#$!!. His meltdown was no better than Kanye's and just like Kanye, and considering his state and no higher up intervention (which I'm sure the company lived to regret it), he proceeded to take action (ban journalists) that required crisis management for a long time but there was no recovery after that. It's why some of us look at him now and feel an automatic, little smirk and maybe or maybe not, that sadist thirst to see him lose his s*it in public again. I hope he's in treatment, but it's just hard to take him seriously.

That and poor, nearly silent communication do not equal the same.

I meant that less in regard to what supposed employees had to say and more on the fact that the brand itself does nothing to get in dialogue with it‘s target customer - She could have done something like temporary sales during strategic coinciding events such as Art Basel, Fashion Week, put Phoebe more out there as a spokesperson of her brand, instead of putting these anemic photo shoots out. I could tell you stories how it was a common sight for people like Pieter Mulier to double as showroom vendors back in the early 2000s when Raf Simons was still an emerging designer or the regular sight of some independent designers in their showrooms working with buyers instead of being these unapproachable, far-removed creatives - I wonder, if we talk of 'senior design staff' today, how dirty do they get to make their hands on the more profane ends of working in an independent fashion brand? I feel like the Phoebe Philo brand does too little to put the charm of supposedly being a small house to the forefront of it’s selling assets. Where is the inviting feel to be a part of her world?

An independent designer who I think does well at that is Lemaire - It goes down from the way they use ‚friends of the house‘ to bring the clothes alive, to constantly put them in an everyday setting. Even their communication on the website and social media gives importance to the idea that what happens there is considered, nuanced and man-made.

People on TFS are stressing the importance of storytelling and narrative around a brand to such importance that it feels a bit ironic when a well-established designer who supposedly spent several attempts to launch this brand can be so easily forgiven for putting something half-***ed out there with much delay.

If we are to continue putting very high standards on designers in this industry, we should address that to people like Phoebe, Nicolas or Hedi the most, instead of advancing them with good will when it‘s not always justified - Especially when they gamble at such high stakes (very high price/difficult timing/etc.)
 
Last edited:
^ it's a one-man conversation in these pages for all we know....

Don't get me wrong, this company, given its field (fashion), is probably more of a s*ithole than not, but basing an opinion on Glassdoor, of all places, is like basing an opinion on internal dynamics based on tfs. Or better yet, on say, Mutterlein's 'heard from a friend who works there' posts aka. 'insider info'. What are we, 12?. Let's scrutinise content a little harder and keep critical thinking in shape.

And levels of awkwardness: Hedi had a very public manic episode on the internet. He decimated the aura of mystery and superiority in the 2 hours that he was glued to his keyboard TYPING!!LIKE!!!THIS/!!!@#$!!. His meltdown was no better than Kanye's and just like Kanye, and considering his state and no higher up intervention (which I'm sure the company lived to regret it), he proceeded to take action (ban journalists) that required crisis management for a long time but there was no recovery after that. It's why some of us look at him now and feel an automatic, little smirk and maybe or maybe not, that sadist thirst to see him lose his s*it in public again. I hope he's in treatment, but it's just hard to take him seriously.

That and poor, nearly silent communication do not equal the same.

I mean, what can I say - I work for a boss right now who retaliated continuous harsh critique from a magazine editor by smearing his dog‘s poo in her face. He‘s largely forgiven for it and didn‘t take any damage to his career after a 1,5 year sabbatical and undergoing a court case. He‘s a generous supporter and a nice person, despite his personal insecurities.

What I‘m trying to say is that in the end of the day, I think creatives should be judged for the most part by their body-of-work - That‘s why I graciously overlook Morrissey‘s horrendous political opinions as well as Galliano and Lars von Trier‘s recorded verbal outbreaks.
 
^ wait I want to reply to the other post but speaking of psychotic bosses, I have mine on my back today lmao. Will get back to the post later cause I’m not just letting the Lemaire mention slide haha!

FYI I still work with someone who did #2 on the middle of the floor of the VIP restroom (yes there’s such a thing lmao) and he still has a job. Who am I to judge… just don’t sell me one petty employee behind a computer like multiple employees with reasonable concerns, I don’t even care about Phoebe Philo and at this point I can say I wouldn’t really spend or even wear for free any of the pieces released so far, and do I believe there are multiple unhappy employees and former employees? yeah! just don’t tell me a throwaway account is not a throwaway account.
 
^ Very likely real and very likely genuine. That would be an assumption too, right?

Basic use of a vpn will allow you to drop as many reviews as you can. Try it, pick any business and go to town with the negative or positive reviews, see if you’re stopped. It is not media, they rely on an equally basic IP detector and given the traffic, they will not research individually because there’s rarely a human on the other side.

Please cite the sources of the very reputable journalists that have covered the internal chaos and the outlets that have published them. Can you provide any links between departures (shown, as you claim, as openings on Linkedin) and the negative reviews?

I am genuinely interested in some empirical evidence past the little game we have with anonymity on the internet. I know this is one person the way I know today is Monday, but hey.. open to be proved wrong…

Mullet, trust me, PP's company's environment is NOT the hill you want to die on :lol:

Indeed, "anyone can say anything hiding behind their computer" -- but if anyone working in this industry were to have their personal info on display, no one would be sharing any insider info ever because people would simply lose their job. And god forbid there's a hell lot to say that people don't know about :lol:

Many working in the industry know about, erm, certain... challenges... when it comes to working with her. Just like the same goes for a few others (a couple coming to mind are a British designer, a certain Italian one...). What's more surprising to me is: since it's pretty widely known, why sign in the first place? Just do not go... Having it on your CV for 3 months isn't going to be groundbreaking anyway :innocent:

What's wilder to me is those who are absolute a******es behind closed doors but have a great public image. Even within the industry... If only some knew :mellow:
 
Mullet, trust me, PP's company's environment is NOT the hill you want to die on :lol:
You overestimate my maturity.. I don’t care about the environment, or PP! It’s the ‘you have 10 different accounts on Glassdoor’ hill what I will go to war and sacrifice all that’s precious to me for. 🤣
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
212,461
Messages
15,185,444
Members
86,314
Latest member
BeneathTHEsurFACE
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"
<-- Admiral -->