Prada indicates selling off JIL SANDER AG

[Lena]

truth is that Sander was regarded as "german armani" or the "suit-lady" until maybe 95 or so, but she aways had the most immaculate finishes, her top sellers were suits..
i partly support ilove's point on Jil & Helmut selling out, but i also believe they never understood what was behind PB's machevelian move.
i dont believe mucia has anything to do with this.. and sorry i dont admire her for her professional relationship with PB.. he's a bit of a brute (excuse my language) and she's a dreamer.. of course it works, but she gets all the bruises

 

[iLove]

Andro,
Your facts sound more like opinions to me, you cannot state for a fact what Jil knew or did not know about Pradas plans to open new stores.
I also find it hard to agree that moving Jil's production from Germany to Italy would be considered a step down. Jil was watching out for her own factory people so she made a big deal. If she had such a successful profitable company she would not have to sell and hence been able to protect her people. Jil was out for Jil.

Fact Armani opened in '74 and was in on the cover of Time magazine by '82, his impact was much much larger than Jil's, plus she has never had any real impact on menswear.

What does that whole guys with deep pockets urinating on handbag things all about. Miucca was the one with the money not patrizio.

Is Patrizio any worse than Tom Ford?
Tom brought McQueen and Stella on board and then cut out. Tom was out for Tom. I'm starting to see a trend here, maybe the designers are just as ego and money driven as everyone else.

ps I worked wholesale at kashiyama when Helmut was there. He barely updated his collection from season to season. that is what killed him, he didn't give customers enough reasons to buy alot every season. He got stuck in his look and never moved. Marc jacobs is a genius at giving you a reason to over do your wardrobe every six months, that is why he is making so much money.

 

[Andro]

Jil being one of my favorite designers (I am male by the way) and the creater of this thread, I'm here to defend her part. And yes, it is true, Armani is the most successful fashion designer of all time. (Although I don't really admire anything he does). I give him credit for creating the idea of a woman's power suit and mixing uncommon materials with contemporary sportswear. The man is a multi billionaire and respectfully earned his title of the king of fashion, right next to her majesty, Ms. Quirky herself, Miuccia Prada.

As for the comment on Mr. Bertelli urinating on Prada's handbags, I was refering to the New York Times article by Cathy Horyn on Raf Simons, who mentioned this during a group meeting with the couple. Raf Simons was describing the love/hate relationship between Miuccia and Patrizio he witnessed at the holding's strategic board meeting. You can read the full article on Raf Simons which was posted in another thread.

The main point I want everyone to acknowledge about Jil Sander, is that of her creditibility as a influential designer. And also to realize how she managed to build her successful career, without a family inheritance or compromising her identity by starting a lower budget bridge line under her name. I'm sure she knows her company could have made it bigger if a less expensive line was started in the beginning. Sander did not over commercialize her brand, and by doing so respected her customers individuality by not going mainstream... (aplaud) AND No!!!., she's not a Coco Chanel or Madame Gres. But her simple appeal and pure elegance in design has a subtle influence in the contribution to fashion. She has a supporting role and spot among the many great fashion designers of the past and present. If there was an official top 10 list of the greatest fashion designers ever, I couldn't imagine the list complete without her name some where in the mix.

Basically, I just want to say that I don't have any hard feelings for anyone here and would lilke to give thanks to everyone who has posted on thefashionspot.com discussion forums. I can be grateful that there is a place to discuss all these interesting topics with people who don't think I'm crazy. Thanks you guys, for helping me keep my sanity!

 

[Lena]

thanks for being around and sharing your thoughts with us Andro..
here at tFS, we agree to disagree, this is what makes these discussions interesting.

ilove, your experience at Kashiyama, must have given you a very good knowledge on the fashion business, i dont see TF better than PB, just less 'dangerous' on the industry field ( mainly due to his -soft- ego center-ism.. PB seems to me much more cold blooded than TF)

 

[brian]

JIL SANDER cosmetics needs to make a comeback.

 

[tricotineacetat]

Andro,
Your facts sound more like opinions to me, you cannot state for a fact what Jil knew or did not know about Pradas plans to open new stores.
I also find it hard to agree that moving Jil's production from Germany to Italy would be considered a step down. Jil was watching out for her own factory people so she made a big deal. If she had such a successful profitable company she would not have to sell and hence been able to protect her people. Jil was out for Jil.

Fact Armani opened in '74 and was in on the cover of Time magazine by '82, his impact was much much larger than Jil's, plus she has never had any real impact on menswear.

What does that whole guys with deep pockets urinating on handbag things all about. Miucca was the one with the money not patrizio.

Is Patrizio any worse than Tom Ford?
Tom brought McQueen and Stella on board and then cut out. Tom was out for Tom. I'm starting to see a trend here, maybe the designers are just as ego and money driven as everyone else.

ps I worked wholesale at kashiyama when Helmut was there. He barely updated his collection from season to season. that is what killed him, he didn't give customers enough reasons to buy alot every season. He got stuck in his look and never moved. Marc jacobs is a genius at giving you a reason to over do your wardrobe every six months, that is why he is making so much money.

I don´t know which seasons you are refering to, but even though Helmut had always been known as a very consistant designer (as was Jil Sander), the collections he produced between 2000-2005 have all had their own identity and unique attitude about them. It´s true that the look he established built up heavily on classics that he always had in the collection, such as a men´s tuxedo jacket, crisp menswear shirting and straight-cut jeans, but I don´t see anything wrong with it, the thing I always saw as a problem was that Helmut´s approach had always been a very elite one, especially with his very deconstructed late collections, I never expected the clothes shown on the runway as commercially relevant. If you buy into an aesthetic like Jil´s or Helmut´s (or even someone like Yohji Yamamoto), you are investing in a longevity of design, I doubt that´s what a Marc Jacobs customer is doing, nor do they even share the same customer base.

 

[nqth]

I think i-D listed Jil Sander, among Raf Simons, Helmut Lang and Hedi Slimane the most influental men designers (in their article). It is for her clean, young and "modern" boys in her shows. I don't know if this counts:-) but I do think she has had a great influence in menswear, "keeping the teenage attitude (and shape:-P) in men's life".

I think Sander could probably want to built a Hermes-esque empire. She never made a second line. It was always about luxury, not just "fashion":-) But I think she chose just a wrong partner. The time was good for her (big money was the take), bad for Prada, tho.

But I think Prada was planning BIG, going public into the stock market. So buying the similar brands was a good tactic. There could be a huge corp. with all the most cult-status names. But the time was just bad, wasn't it.

 

[Lena]

Prada is not directly participating at the stockmarket

 

[Arturo21]

truth is that Sander was regarded as "german armani" or the "suit-lady" until maybe 95 or so, but she aways had the most immaculate finishes, her top sellers were suits..
i partly support ilove's point on Jil & Helmut selling out, but i also believe they never understood what was behind PB's machevelian move.
i dont believe mucia has anything to do with this.. and sorry i dont admire her for her professional relationship with PB.. he's a bit of a brute (excuse my language) and she's a dreamer.. of course it works, but she gets all the bruises

Yes, I've heard they don't get along too well at board meetings...I think I read this in the NY times profile on Raf article, if i'm not mistaken...

 

[nqth]

Prada is not directly participating at the stockmarket

Yes, they have postpone several times the emision and they have still not gone public.

 

[iLove]

All this talk about the downfall of Helmut and Jil just makes me appreciate everything Dries has and continues to do.

Dries realizes that their is a small crowd for his look and has grown his company and ego accordingly. Of all the designers I know he is consistently mentioned as the one they most respect.

If you want to discuss the biggest sham and conspiracy ever lets talk about Romeo Gigli and the Sozanni sisters collusion to bury him.
Maybe that is for another thread and for an older crowd that remembers him and what he meant. Jil, Helmut and especially Dries owe him alot.

 

[rach2jlc]

iLove,

I definitely see what you mean. But, to be honest, I can't say that Jil and Helmut's decisions are any different from what most any of us would have done. I believe that it would be the goal of most any artist/craftsperson/designer to allow both their business to grow and their ideas to be disseminated to a wider audience. Prada came along and offered them just that (in addition to a large amount of money). They probably had every reason to believe that Prada would have invested in their respective companies enough such that the entire group could have grown. Obviously, for whatever reason (whether it be because of 9/11 and economic downturns or simply because of a lack of interest on Prada's part) that investment just didn't happen.

So, Jil and Helmut did put themselves in this position, but I don't think it is necessary for many of us to take them to task for trying to grow their businesses in the best way that they saw fit. Nor should we call them "sell-outs" for being a little ambitious and accepting money. If they HADN'T taken Prada's offer, and if Prada had then continued to be a huge conglomerate at the level it was in the late 1990's, then we would probably be taking Jil and Helmut to task in the OPPOSITE way... for NOT taking up Prada's offer and for not taking advantage of a good opportunity.

Prada, at the time, was probably the fastest growing house on the planet and had more money than they knew what to do with (as evident with all the stuff they bought then). So, it was really probably a good idea to sign up with them at the time. Hind-sight being 20/20 and all, we realize that wasn't the case.

As for Dries, I also respect him a lot. In addition to all that you mentioned, he also has never priced himself outrageously either. I've always felt that he was more fair in his pricing than most companies (like the aforementioned Prada, which charges $400 for a made in China unlined nylon windbreaker that cost about $1.25 to make).

John

 

[faust]

This is FUN! Good opinions on both sides, and covering a lot of ground. Let me throw another one in. As far as I know, another GOLDEN promise that someone makes to a designer is, "I will take care of the business side while you retain complete CREATIVE CONTROL." Isn't that every designer's dream?!
But when such things don't happen, relationships turn sour. Helmut's quality, for example, went down significantly in the last years, while his collections were ones of the best in his career. What gives? Quality is one thing, in my opinion.

Also, Prada was too aggressive in growing the business maybe? It is a very commonplace error in business. Helmut's and Jil's aesthetic has never been mainstream, except for a few years in the 90's, but has always had a loyal niche following.

I wonder how long before Margiela follows Jil's and Helmut's steps? There seem to be too many parallels - he is owned by a big (bad?) company, his heyday is over, his designs are becoming increasingly generic and commonplace in quality, his following is still loyal but it's a niche following....

 

[iLove]

The "golden promise" can work in reverse also. Adversity drives alot of creative people, look at how often the best work is done before a singer has signed that big contract or a baseball player has signed on with the Yankess.

Before we bury Patrizio Bertelli we should consider that he might have extended the career of Helmut, Azzedine, and Jil had he not financed their companies.

i have worked with alot of designers and I just don't see them as these innocent dreamers. They say they want to be directional and small but they dream of the big payday like everyone else.

For that I have to give huge respect to Comme and Dries and even Yohji.


ooops i meant to spell Sozzani earlier

 

[Lena]

true iLove, what Prada Group did for Alaia, is really remarkable and also very true on the Gigli/Sozzani 'plot'

 

[tott]

If you want to discuss the biggest sham and conspiracy ever lets talk about Romeo Gigli and the Sozanni sisters collusion to bury him.
Maybe that is for another thread and for an older crowd that remembers him and what he meant. Jil, Helmut and especially Dries owe him alot.

Gigli was huge when I was a teen, but then he sort of fell off the radar... I'd be curious to know what happened...

 

[iLove]

Gigli was a partner with Carla Sozzani during his best years.

They had a messy breakup.

Carla briefly designed a collection called NoName.

Carla stopped NoName and turned the store into 10 Corso Como.

At about the time Franca , Carla's twinish sister, was gaining more power and editing first Elle Italia and then Vogue Italia.

Needless to say the Sozzani sisters are now the most powerful family in fashion. No store is more directional than 10 Corso Como, no magazine better than Vogue Italia.

I don't think it is hard to imagine that they pulled alot of strings to freeze out Gigli from the fashion elite.

It wasn't because Gigli suddenly lost his touch. Dries Van Noten is living off the void left by Romeo.

Of all the former design greats i miss Romeo Gigli most.

http://thesartorialist.blogspot.com/

 

[tott]

^ Thanks for the explanation! I vaguely remember this, I think; it sounds familiar.

I loved his stuff, the sumptuous colours and materials, and the quirky, romantic, sort of darkly byzantine and eastern influences... That's how I remember it anyway!

 

[Andro]

Sander interview by Giampierto Baudo

Giampierto Baudo: Ms. Sander, how's the man of today as he is?

Jil Sander: What is sure is that they are a changing... Today a designer must watch and deal with a man in the same way in which a woman thinks next to one... The boys today are much more versatile from those of my generation. They do not have anymore fear to exhibit or to show than their more delicate part. They are interested in more than just their body. They lend more attention to fragrances and cosmetics, and this not because they're all gay. Simply it is a different aesthetic. One that's more easy to face, even if same.

GB: And how does one imagines those tomorrow?

JS: Today the boys want to only be cool... And will continue to demand this.

GB: It defines its man.

JS: I love men who have a strong personality and they respect it. I love a man that's self condifent, one who's able to decide alone. I don't admire those that are only the marionettes in the hands of the designer.

GB: How does it work when one creates a collection?

JS: Job on the evolution... Delivery is always from the previous collection in order to understand what has just been and those things that did not go well. And then, to develop those ideas which arrive that entices me the most... The input always derives from something that one does not expect from me.

GB: But at which point is it's departure of... The woven idea, or shape?

JS: Absolutely the woven, is the more important thing to me. Also the choice of silhouette in season is fundamental but I do not succeed to think that without it , having in hand a piece of stoffa. I imagine as it is molded onto the body. I try to imagine it could change function of the color and shading can be modified to second the matter. And then to me it's always piaciuto to work with woven animation in three dimensions. Fot it to be able to carve itself, I not only lean to the figure and off of the falling body, but to the fascination and the beauty of the male. All of this derives just from the strong woven energy of the one which guides you .

GB: How does it workout in order to prepare for the runway show?

JS: It's always difficult when it must make editing of the collection one to carry in a footbridge... I always try to choose based on a personal feeling of mine and to the message that I want to communicate in that season. For next summer I wanted all of that guardaroba to be semplicità nearly as exasperated as one had to be, in the proportions, the colors and the materials... Consequently, all of this hard work that's been made, is always derived into other collections unfortunately.

GB: And what has been your message of season?

JS: Lightness and understatement... I had intentions for this collection to be modern and fresh. In one word, cool but not too fitted... Not even too rich. The message was a single one: Young & fresh with quality.

GB: What has translated in which silhouette?

JS: Also in a cinquetasche, I only used different parts for the denim. Like a shape near the posterior pockets forming a pant with bubbles decorated to add a touch of fun. I have tried to always insert a touch funky, an element of fantasy that could give a flash of joy to everyone's silhouette... Because the shirts here are painted by hand, it gives reasons inspiring one to the arts... I did not want the entirety of it to appear too old or conservative.

GB: There is a head feticcio of this sartorial-delicate new vague?

JS: I realized for the more fragile jackets, of the small architecture, an image woven from inside of the actual shirt. With capacities of a shirt cut like one jacket... exactly in the same proportion. I wanted to reduce the proportions of the male body, rendering them more small. And also stating an assignment that was very complex in order to create a new sartorial-code from the imprinting of the youth. In some cases we rendered into account that we created a silhouette that was too sporty but continued the search until we found more than one series of elegant textures.

GB: There is some designer of the past that its master considers?

JS: No... But I have a great respect for the culture of the male sartoria of the past, for all the tradition of men's fashion, in particular, the British. For the reason that it has been constructed in the balance between rigor and eccentricity. However, in the men's fashion the codes are always much more defined. And in a similar style, men dress themself in order to conque. Even in the end, if they did not clearly state it, before.

GB: What do you think it is about Jil Sander menswear that makes it modern?

JS: It never has to mention that it's always the same... I don't think it's right to create a collection with a style that is so eccentric and exaggerated. I have always tried to think of 'men that are men', who would wear these things in the daily paper... It is a very difficult job, to balance what is wanting to be said, and what is actually being molded into. Above all, something must be created that is new. But, it cannot always satisfy everyone... Because fashion is something for your own realm, not just for the outside world to see.

interview by Giampietro Baudo
courtesy of www.mffashion.it

 

[Andro]

With anyone as intuitive with their own work as herself, her shoes will be tough to fill . When Jil left Prada, the intelligence behind the money making label was gone too... ' J I L S A N D E R ' then became nothing more than a name. And nowhere was it more evident with Mukmirovic as creative director, a mere buyer for a merchandising retailer, for the company to find an identity that was similar to the timeless alluring luxury of the brand. When Jil left Prada, the substance that made it so successfull, left too... JIL NEVER LEFT SANDER! The brand will ALWAYS be synomonous with JIL SANDER... It's not like anyone can just make up some random name and start running a successfull company, just because 'PRADA' owns it.

This is just an idea, but what do you think would have happend to... let's say, CHANEL, if in 1999 Karl Lagerfeld left the company after it was bought by PRADA and assigned Milan Mukvirovic as creative director?

Scary thought, huh!!