Sabato De Sarno - Designer, Creative Director of Gucci

[jeanclaude]

I'm not saying anything and I have no "opinion" on this. It's just a marketing plan that may or might not work.
Gucci needs their core client back and they will get him back sooner or later, with or without Di Sarno.
Fashion is all about clever or not so clever marketing moves & communication strategies. It's not about clothes or designers.

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.

Kering do not want to see that the big problem is Sabato. They insist on keeping him, while changing everyone around him...but the problem is Ancora guy, as he is unfit to revive Gucci.

Remember that Gucci was revamped from the ashes by a designer called Tom Ford, not by a new CEO nor a miraculous marketing campaign. How Tom managed to do it?? By creating desirable products (and for that you need talent, not marketing strategies) .

 

[nationalsalt]

Assuming Pinault and Co. had a good idea of Sabato De Sarno's design style before they hired him, do you think they were actively seeking a designer who would make clothes with higher profit margins than Michele's?

Totally spitballing here, but I can only imagine that his vastly simpler garments would be somewhat easier and cheaper to produce than Michele's, therefore - assuming they still retail at similar price points - giving the execs a higher ROI per piece.

Obviously, this strategy hasn't quite panned out...but I'm wondering if the blame lies solely with De Sarno.

Thoughts?

 

[jeanclaude]

Obviously, this strategy hasn't quite panned out...but I'm wondering if the blame lies solely with De Sarno.

The blame lies in the execs, who chose to hire Sabato as CD, when it is obvious he is not fit for the job.

 

[sunnysideup]

Assuming Pinault and Co. had a good idea of Sabato De Sarno's design style before they hired him, do you think they were actively seeking a designer who would make clothes with higher profit margins than Michele's?

Totally spitballing here, but I can only imagine that his vastly simpler garments would be somewhat easier and cheaper to produce than Michele's, therefore - assuming they still retail at similar price points - giving the execs a higher ROI per piece.

Obviously, this strategy hasn't quite panned out...but I'm wondering if the blame lies solely with De Sarno.

Thoughts?

That was probably an added benefit in consideration as minimalism and a race to pared down basics is much cheaper to produce than embellished, decadence-dripped excess maximalism.

We’ve seen this in their bags already: the lower (low?) quality Blondie replaced the much more sumptuous Disco bag. Blondie costs more but is a definite downgrade in quality.

These luxury brands should have quality at the forefront—they must be obsessed with it to justify their offer and price point. You will only get away with quality and rarefied material deterioration for so long.

For example, many of these brands no longer produce fur and exotics NOT because of their supposed sustainability but because those materials are more expensive and difficult to source and produce. Those raw materials are more volatile and expensive to scale. So now we get polyester faux fur that will be in landfills for thousands of years at real fur prices.