Sabato De Sarno - Designer, Creative Director of Gucci

[LenaLena]

But why would Kering want to get the "core Gucci client" back if they tripled sales without them? From a business point of view that makes no sense. Gucci under Alessandro did $10 billion without that appealing to that supposed core clientele.

It's a matter of brand heritage identity, it's not about actual numbers. Once a luxury brand looses the lux heritage it's no way back to the market. Hence the change of strategy at Gucci and more brands.

 

[grimm]

It will take time to bring back the original Gucci client.
Hype is great for brand awarness, actual sales is something else.
Dropping hearts at IG accounts does not translate to actual sales and
this was the whole issue with Michelle, too much hype, not enough sales.

I don't say Di Sarno is great, he's not. He's just a guy doing what has been asked from him. Brands are not dependent on designers, this is not the '90s.

How can you say Michele's hype didn't translate to sales? The numbers speak for themselves. He grew the business from €3.9bn to €9.7bn. That is a phenomenal amount. And he was just a guy doing what he was asked to do. Difference was his worked.

 

[LenaLena]

That´s the big mistake here. No CEO nor marketing campaigns are going to revive a brand. The only way of reviving a brand is through a designer able to do it. If the final product (clothes and accessories) is not desirable, there is nothing it can be done.

Oh no, this is not the 90's don't be nostalgic of by gone eras.
No matter if you agree or not, this is 2024, the luxury fashion section is plain, raw unsuccesful marketing. Boring? Yes! But this is it.

If you do not agree with their strategy just send your own brilliant suggestions to Gucci.

 

[GivenchyHomme]

I must say, there’s a certain poetic justice unfolding here. For years, they’ve mistreated their designers, and now it seems they’re reaping the consequences. Their current roster of employees appear to lack the skill and vision to steer their brands effectively, including the designers themselves. Let’s not forget, Sabato wasn’t exactly Gucci’s first choice. It’s no wonder why designers are so reluctant to join a company that’s quick to abandon its creatives at the first sign of trouble. The transgressions against their former designers are unforgivable: from suing those who dare to speak out, as in the case of Nicolas Ghesquière, to attempting to withhold compensation, as they did with Hedi Slimane; from controlling the narrative, as Alessandro Michele experienced, to the unceremonious exits of Tom Ford and Frida Giannini. The company is in dire need of transformation, but how that will come about remains uncertain.

 

[nationalsalt]

I must say, there’s a certain poetic justice unfolding here. For years, they’ve mistreated their designers, and now it seems they’re reaping the consequences. Their current roster of employees appear to lack the skill and vision to steer their brands effectively, including the designers themselves. Let’s not forget, Sabato wasn’t exactly Gucci’s first choice. It’s no wonder why designers are so reluctant to join a company that’s quick to abandon its creatives at the first sign of trouble. The transgressions against their former designers are unforgivable: from suing those who dare to speak out, as in the case of Nicolas Ghesquière, to attempting to withhold compensation, as they did with Hedi Slimane; from controlling the narrative, as Alessandro Michele experienced, to the unceremonious exits of Tom Ford and Frida Giannini. The company is in dire need of transformation, but how that will come about remains uncertain.

Who was their first choice?

 

[jeanclaude]

Oh no, this is not the 90's don't be nostalgic of by gone eras.
No matter if you agree or not, this is 2024, the luxury fashion section is plain, raw unsuccesful marketing. Boring? Yes! But this is it.

If you do not agree with their strategy just send your own brilliant suggestions to Gucci.

Yes, I know we are not in the 90s anymore; but it is not a question of nostalgia, it is a question of common sense.
Marketing is not magic, you can´t transform a mediocre product into something desirable by just using it. A turd with glitter is still a turd, no matter what.

It is obvious their strategy is not working at all. But as long as I am concerned, Gucci and Kering could go to bankruptcy and disappear. The people who should care about this are the ones working there, which is not my case (and it will never be).

 

[Plax]

For sure, I don't think he is a good designer or has a single direction. But it's super scary to see that people are expecting continuous growth for this enourmous brand. They made more than three times growth in AM's tenure which is super crazy. I think it's natural to lose a bit.

For me, It's just so scary this industry gets super greedy in recent years. I don't say they weren't in the past. Now, it's too too too much, and it's only about money money money. It's just too sad to see it.

 

[justpassingthrough]

For me, It's just so scary this industry gets super greedy in recent years. I don't say they weren't in the past. Now, it's too too too much, and it's only about money money money. It's just too sad to see it.

I’ve worked in luxury retail for over a decade, within recent years whenever I interview for a CA position I’m very passionate about vocalizing how important it is for fashion houses to sell clients DREAMS & to have a strong creative team to do that. I also touch on the importance of creating relationships with new prospective clients for long term results & I’m realizing lately…most companies I interview for don’t want to hear about the emotional side of selling.

I’ve always been so proud of myself for never having a problem finding work in this industry until recently. Companies generally only want to hear names & numbers these days & I feel like there’s so much more that I have to offer than KPIs.

Not to mention seeing first hand HOW MUCH these companies mark up & profit knowing the quality doesn’t align with price hikes. Working in this industry lately has really made me think about these businesses a lot differently. It’s really sad to see how much has changed in such a short amount of time right before my eyes.

 

[yslforever]

For sure, I don't think he is a good designer or has a single direction. But it's super scary to see that people are expecting continuous growth for this enourmous brand. They made more than three times growth in AM's tenure which is super crazy. I think it's natural to lose a bit.

For me, It's just so scary this industry gets super greedy in recent years. I don't say they weren't in the past. Now, it's too too too much, and it's only about money money money. It's just too sad to see it.

I, personally, don't expect enormous continuous growth from fashion or more luxury brands, I am not publicly quoted nor publish quaterly reports. I expect them to respect their products and their clients, offering them a serious set of products or styles that are ethically clean, meticulously crafted, in a sustainable way, and that should be able to go through ups and downs of economic cycles.
A lot of the last price increases had nothing to do with the products, or their rising productions costs, but mainly MBAs or boards decisions, to set themselves in the benchmarks. But MBAs aren't stupid people, they know it's not sustainable at middle or long-term, they do what their greedy shareholders, thinking 3 months ahead, order them.

 

[AVC]

Yes, I know we are not in the 90s anymore; but it is not a question of nostalgia, it is a question of common sense.
Marketing is not magic, you can´t transform a mediocre product into something desirable by just using it. A turd with glitter is still a turd, no matter what.

It is obvious their strategy is not working at all. But as long as I am concerned, Gucci and Kering could go to bankruptcy and disappear. The people who should care about this are the ones working there, which is not my case (and it will never be).

Marketing can indeed be magic - there are so many case studies of marketing-led products that are purely successful because of the branding and marketing strategy. Liquid Death is the most obvious example in which selling water in a can ended up being a mega successful brand simply due to marketing and brand strategy.

Luxury is about selling the dream and the aspiration, it is most definitely marketing and branding led, not product driven. You can convince the masses that your turd of a bag is worth thousands, it’s been done time and time again.

 

[jeanclaude]

Marketing can indeed be magic - there are so many case studies of marketing-led products that are purely successful because of the branding and marketing strategy. Liquid Death is the most obvious example in which selling water in a can ended up being a mega successful brand simply due to marketing and brand strategy.

Luxury is about selling the dream and the aspiration, it is most definitely marketing and branding led, not product driven. You can convince the masses that your turd of a bag is worth thousands, it’s been done time and time again.

That´s the reason why the industry is in the disaster state is nowadays: they have forgotten the product; and they only care about the marketing.
If marketing were magical, all the brands which are in big trouble now (like Gucci) would be in perfect state. But they are not.
If marketing were magical, Sabato´s tenure would be like the second coming of Tom Ford (that´s how they are trying to sell it, without any success).

Fashion industry does not work like other industries, that´s another problem which has been created by hiring execs coming from other industries. You can´t treat a fashion brand like an ice-cream brand. But they do...and that creates the big problem the whole fashion industry is in.

 

[Frederic01]

It's a matter of brand heritage identity, it's not about actual numbers. Once a luxury brand looses the lux heritage it's no way back to the market. Hence the change of strategy at Gucci and more brands.

But how did Gucci "loose his luxe heritage" under Alessandro Michele? If anything they increased their luxury image due to the level of craftsmanship and couture level detail of Alessandro's collections and all those made-to-measure pieces they were making.

Besides, there are no truly luxury brands anymore in the year 2024. Maybe The Row or Schiaparelli, but anything owned by LVMH and Kering is just a revenue generating business operating with the strategies of luxury branding and that's it. Hermes is not as luxurious as people make it out to be. The pricing and the supposed "scarcity" of their bags gives an impression of luxury, but really, if a brand is selling branded t-shirts, dog accessories, knick-knacks, etc - it is not luxury. If you have boutiques at every single mall in the world and in every single major airport, you are not truly luxury in any sense of the world.

Luxury is scarcity, and extreme attention to product creation and curation, and to some degree a sense of it being worn by a very discerning and chic clientele that the masses want to get close to.

No one looks at Louis Vuitton or Gucci or Dior anymore and thinks, I want to be part of that world, when you see what they are pushing and what their clientele is wearing. If anything the people with taste run away from it. That's why houses like The Row, Khaite, etc are the future of the luxury world. Small businesses with a very curated image that focuses on luxurious products and craftsmanship without having to resort to selling branded t-shirts and keychains and dog collars.

 

[LadyJunon]

No one looks at Louis Vuitton or Gucci or Dior anymore and thinks, I want to be part of that world, when you see what they are pushing and what their clientele is wearing. If anything the people with taste run away from it. That's why houses like The Row, Khaite, etc are the future of the luxury world. Small businesses with a very curated image that focuses on luxurious products and craftsmanship without having to resort to selling branded t-shirts and keychains and dog collars.

I wouldn't really call these brands small. The Row makes $200-300m a year and Khaite makes $500m a year. That's around the size of a smaller corpo house. Size aside, this industry really needs a brand that delivers Khaite/The Row quality without that stench of Philophilia.

 

[Monsieur Cristobal]

So many sharp and accurate oppinions here, specially Fréderic01 and jeanclaude.
If there is a t-shirt with your brand stamped on it, you are not luxury anymore.

Now, Gucci is a house that always took risks and I have to admire them for that. I don't think a single designer who worked for Gucci was a star before being appointed. Gucci turned them into stars: Tom Ford, Alessandro Michele.
When you play so hard, the highs and lows are inevitable.


What we have right now at Gucci is a mediocre product (not catastrophical, not wow) with a lack of a clear vision (at all levels, management included).
That is not a good combination.

You might like it or not, but the last Cardin show (😅) has a much clearer point of view than all Gucci since Sabato started.

 

[LenaLena]

Marketing is not magic, you can´t transform a mediocre product into something desirable by just using it. A turd with glitter is still a turd, no matter what.

Of course marketing can not transform a mediocre product. "Clever" marketing can actually sell a very mediocre product as if it was gold. This is how it works today with most luxury brands. From Chloe hobo revival to Loewe.

 

[90sfan]

Oh gee, you hire a mediocre designer, with his crap product, so no desire created….Thats a short and long of it.
Why would anyone expect a miracle?!?

 

[NoInvite]

Go to gucci.com, not only the products are mediocre, the navigation is super complicated.
Clearly they need help in all directions.

 

[AVC]

That´s the reason why the industry is in the disaster state is nowadays: they have forgotten the product; and they only care about the marketing.
If marketing were magical, all the brands which are in big trouble now (like Gucci) would be in perfect state. But they are not.
If marketing were magical, Sabato´s tenure would be like the second coming of Tom Ford (that´s how they are trying to sell it, without any success).

Fashion industry does not work like other industries, that´s another problem which has been created by hiring execs coming from other industries. You can´t treat a fashion brand like an ice-cream brand. But they do...and that creates the big problem the whole fashion industry is in.

I highly disagree. The marketing from Gucci has been disastrous - from the bad bunny / kendall ad to the lack of focus on handbag campaigns, to the flip flop from Daria to the basic white Zara-ad backgrounds… are you saying the marketing was great and it’s solely a poor product that caused Ancora to crash?

 

[jeanclaude]

Of course marketing can not transform a mediocre product. "Clever" marketing can actually sell a very mediocre product as if it was gold. This is how it works today with most luxury brands. From Chloe hobo revival to Loewe.

But the problem is that they are not selling, no matter what kind of marketing they try to use (be it clever or not).

Marketing is a tool to sell a product. The huge problem comes when you are trying to sell the marketing as if it were the product (and forgetting about the real product in the process) .

 

[jeanclaude]

I highly disagree. The marketing from Gucci has been disastrous - from the bad bunny / kendall ad to the lack of focus on handbag campaigns, to the flip flop from Daria to the basic white Zara-ad backgrounds… are you saying the marketing was great and it’s solely a poor product that caused Ancora to crash?

No, I am just saying that marketing can´t save a mediocre product. I am not saying Gucci marketing is great, because it is more basic than a Zara t-shirt. They are a disaster both at product and marketing levels.

But even if Gucci´s marketing was amazing, there is nothing to do with such mediocre products.