Vetements - 2 Years After They Broke the Internet, It Looks Like Nobody is Buying Vet

[ThatDudeOverTher]

Well yeah, this type of product is short-lived.. that's the whole point of buying it like a vulture and parading it like a peacock, you only have like 5 weeks before it burns.

Demna is a charlatan and the consumers of his products are not any more respectable than those eating Tide Pods. Past and present consumers.

That said, this type of journalism IS bad (did Alec Leach actually study journalism? anybody knows?), and it's far more damaging than a fashion label, you can simply opt out not to consume or pay any attention to certain products (and there are a lot of s*it products in this world), anything visual smacks you in the face so with minimal questioning, you can accept or reject, but when you read words presented and published as truth and do standard assimilation of the material read, it's harder to detect and it contributes to have societies that later go and read about migration, war, new policies with the same dubious elements (said one buyer, said another, said a third one, the sources, a former manager at a luxury retailer, an anonymous buyer- care to explain what the sources are, why is anonymity granted so easily in fashion...) and absorb it like dumb lazy robots, nodding and being so pleased about this new piece of information they just learned. Question sources, why the sources are sources, what the motives are, how do we know they're legit and not just Alec's buddies, and what's with the nobody.. sounds like fashion gossip among two employees ("heard EVERYONE has left at Valentino" when they actually mean 2) and not something you would expect from a publication, even an informal one like hypebeast. People need to be more alert in a time of high media manipulation...

I heart you!

Vetements is a brand I couldn't get behind, try as I might. Demna and co presented the brand as anti-fashion and it was hyped so much that it became fashion. I'm not surprised that the people who supported this "anti" sentiment decided to move on. I also expected people who bought into the brand in it's early days to eventually come to their senses. It also seemed like Demna and co mocked the very same people they expected to pay money for the clothes. It was all one confusing mess to me and I wasn't for it.

That said, I 100% agree that that Hypebeast article was reckless. You simply can't (shouldn't) present speculations made by a few anonymous sources as fact. That can be damaging to a brand, especially one as young as Vetements and who's revenue largely depends on how it and the people who wear the clothes, are perceived. I can say that the few people I know who purchase Vetements, continue to support the brand, in spite of me making fun of them over the last two years (lol). I doubt this piece will turn them away from the brand.

This actually reminds me of the whole Parkland shooting vs the NRA situation. All the anti-gun protests, media lashings, and advertisers running has actually led to an increase in donations to the NRA. Perhaps the same thing will happen here, where the more the fashion press lash out at Vetements, the more their supporters will buy their clothes.

 

[Melancholybaby]

^The article is from Highsnobiety, not Hypebeast (lol). Just to be clear.

 

[ThatDudeOverTher]

^The article is from Highsnobiety, not Hypebeast (lol). Just to be clear.

Hahaha oops! Missed the editing window. Thank you though!

 

[MulletProof]

^^ something like that..

ThatDudeOverTher, that's a vulnerable group.. the early starved ones. Mostly the enthusiasm is already on decline and at least one person (whatever his motive) declaring it dead will only accelerate it. It's a bunch of "statement" pieces, not the kind of loyalty you would expect towards high quality, long-lasting garments.

 

[StoneSkipper]

Well yeah, this type of product is short-lived.. that's the whole point of buying it like a vulture and parading it like a peacock, you only have like 5 weeks before it burns.

Demna is a charlatan and the consumers of his products are not any more respectable than those eating Tide Pods. Past and present consumers.

That said, this type of journalism IS bad (did Alec Leach actually study journalism? anybody knows?), and it's far more damaging than a fashion label, you can simply opt out not to consume or pay any attention to certain products (and there are a lot of s*it products in this world), anything visual smacks you in the face so with minimal questioning, you can accept or reject, but when you read words presented and published as truth and do standard assimilation of the material read, it's harder to detect and it contributes to have societies that later go and read about migration, war, new policies with the same dubious elements (said one buyer, said another, said a third one, the sources, a former manager at a luxury retailer, an anonymous buyer- care to explain what the sources are, why is anonymity granted so easily in fashion...) and absorb it like dumb lazy robots, nodding and being so pleased about this new piece of information they just learned. Question sources, why the sources are sources, what the motives are, how do we know they're legit and not just Alec's buddies, and what's with the nobody.. sounds like fashion gossip among two employees ("heard EVERYONE has left at Valentino" when they actually mean 2) and not something you would expect from a publication, even an informal one like hypebeast. People need to be more alert in a time of high media manipulation...

Because fashion is made up entirely of f*cking children who've built an industry around inconsequentiality, that's why. This whole situation is a perfect example of that. (I also heavily agree with you on this matter.)

 

[Benn98]

^The article is from Highsnobiety, not Hypebeast (lol). Just to be clear.

What's the difference?

I just find it somewhat ironic that the outlet which build them up more than fashion magazines turned on them like this. I imagine he's shocked, hence the dramatic clap back. No sympathy for either parties from me.

As for the actual subject at hand, Vetements is somewhat integrated with Balenciaga. Has been ever since he took over. And if the tide will turn against the former, so will it for Balenciaga, which means he's jeopardising an entire brand. God help him if (or when, at this stage) that happens because they'll drop him like a hot potato.

 

[Melancholybaby]

What's the difference?

No difference whatsoever, but if we're going to make a point of investigating/questioning the sources, the least we can do is not miscredit them.

 

[Phuel]

The hyenas are finally turning on each other LOL

Now let’s see if these “wannabes" have the balls to turn on equally-hyped charlatans Shayne Oliver and Virgil Abloh...

 

[Deleted member 141523]

love the title of this thread!

 

[Lola701]

This type of short-lived success story is nothing new in the industry. Balmain could have end-up like that if Decarnin didn’t had to deal with what he had to deal because his last 2 collections showed signs of slowing down.

The problem with Vetements is that they wanted to make more money and started to collaborate and produce more. The success of a strategy like that is exclusivity. When you don’t have strong designs to backup that strategy, it’s hard to keep up.

Vêtements’s Hype was totally build by the industry and magazines like hypebeast and highsnobety were eating and feeding that hype. So, it’s kinda normal that they are the ones who talk about that.

Of course sources wants to stay anonymous because even if Vetements is not performing well, Demna is a powerful designer. It turns out that the Vetements’s stockists are also selling Balenciaga and nobody wants to have a Colette/Saint Laurent type of affair....Because Balenciaga is one of the hottest brand right now.

Demna is coming hard because it’s all about perception. Who wants to buy a brand that is not hot or not selling well?
Look at Prada. It may be a big brand, ever since that people have realized that the brand is not selling like it used to, every reports has shown a decline on sales. Yes, they are still selling and have their loyal clientele but those kind of reports also hurt sales.

It’s easier to be a hot brand that doesn’t sell a lot (Balenciaga by NG at the beginning or even McQueen back in the day) than being a brand that used to sell well.

And for a brand like Vetements that is relying a lot on collabs, this kind of bad publicity is not needed.

It will be interesting to see their next move from that point. Moving to Switzerland, showing during Couture and all were strategies motivated by the business and now that they have people attention again, they can (with a good collection) reinvent themselves or make their 15 minutes of fame last a little bit longer.

 

[Fernini]

It's just that fashion is so irrelevant nowadays, truth be told.

 

[Benn98]

Demna is coming hard because it’s all about perception. Who wants to buy a brand that is not hot or not selling well?
Look at Prada. It may be a big brand, ever since that people have realized that the brand is not selling like it used to, every reports has shown a decline on sales. Yes, they are still selling and have their loyal clientele but those kind of reports also hurt sales.

It’s easier to be a hot brand that doesn’t sell a lot (Balenciaga by NG at the beginning or even McQueen back in the day) than being a brand that used to sell well.

This is so true!! Prada's problem imo is perception. And Willy Vanderperre, of course. But it's mostly perception. She hasn't changed her business model nor creative direction at all. And it always used to work in her favour. Why not now? They've oulived hyped brands before. So it must be public perception. And maybe the same applies to Marc Jacobs as well.....

Demna better look at Balenciaga's menswear and step it up in the luxury department. The line is really his trump card and the one area where NG never impressed me. Demna made it nearly as profitable as the women's line. So please, no more cheap-looking 80's garbage which looks like it was fished from some Salvation Army bin. Ask your mate Michele on how to do vintage with a luxury feel.

 

[Lola701]

This is so true!! Prada's problem imo is perception. And Willy Vanderperre, of course. But it's mostly perception. She hasn't changed her business model nor creative direction at all. And it always used to work in her favour. Why not now? They've oulived hyped brands before. So it must be public perception. And maybe the same applies to Marc Jacobs as well.....

Ahahah Willy!
From a personal and client perspective, her business model was kinda outdated. Having those amazing shows that were directional and having 90% of the shops filled with black nylon and basic pieces was just weird. Ok, as clients, we were able to order pieces we liked from the show but in a era where shopping is the new religion, it was weird. It's interesting that all her problems came forward when Gucci had the rebirth because the Gucci business model was the opposite of that.

The real pity about Prada is that, ok she had the problem but because of the perception, she felt the need to change the business strategy (Prada is available on every e-commerce) and the creative direction (from the styling of Rizzo, the changes at MiuMiu to the debacle of Willy). Result, it only makes it worse because now, it is really visible that Prada is struggling. I went to the store in Paris one week after the menswear show and i can't say that the sales assistants were that excited about having to sell those endless black nylon pieces.

Yes, Marc Jacobs is the same. I must say that i was quite surprised actually because the Marc Jacobs situation was similar to the Dolce & Gabbana one. Dolce & Gabbana was selling well to an older and more fashion forward clientele and D&G which was making more money was aimed to the younger one. But they were so confident about the merge of the two lines that nobody could ever tell if they experienced a slowdown in sales.

MJ was confused. The brand wasn't hot but it was still the most important show of NYC. The stores were empty but what killed them was actually when Bernard Arnault said during the annual report that the brand was in the red. From that, it became totally out of control: the stores started to close one after the other, they discontinued the menswear, he had the cultural appropriation controversy and despite the good reviews, it will be very hard to change people's perception.

Versace managed to do it because the name itself is so evocative and celebrities have always loved being associated with that name. When Versace was in a very bad shape, perception played a huge part but the collections were bad. Even when Donatella got her groove back, people were still afraid of Versace even if her collection from 2007 to 2009 were totally classy. For people, Versace was vulgar and Nouveau Riche which was weird because at the same time, Cavalli was selling really well!
The irony is that the H&M thing changed people's perception of Versace and it became cool again. Today Versace is making a huge amount of money out of clothes that 10 years ago, could have damaged the brand.

Here we have a thing for Marc Jacobs to change people's perception of his brand: an H&M collection.
As for Demna...

 

[WilliamsLe010919]

i laughed out loud when I read ther "fashion is not about hype" statement your brand lives on hype for god sake

 

[Nomar]

An intersting article but I also noticed that the hype had died down with Vetements quite a while ago. I think a big factor is the inaccessible price point that has increased over time. It is really quite ridiculous for the quality that they offer and it's is not like they're a heritage house with amazing craftsmen or artisans working behind the scenes. If they want to limit their stock volumes then they should at least make it a reasonable price. For a brand like them, there is no point creating hype and exclusivity around your products if only a few people can actually purchase them.

People will eventually just find others brands and it's no surprise that everyone just went to Demna's improved version of Vetements i.e. Balenciaga. If you compare some of the recent collections between both brands, it really looks like he's been putting all the effort into Balenciaga. To top it off, it's even more appealing because it has a rich heritage and more affordable prices.

I mean at this point we can only speculate but the fact that they got a reaction out of him speaks volumes already.

 

[vetements]

Like Benn, both parties get no sympathy from me.

They both benefited quick bucks from it and that’s already kind enough IMO.

Even with Balenciaga, I find there’s a lot of hype than depth, and it comes up with hit items every now and then, like the logo caps but who’s wearing them these days?
Or the triple s sneakers, soon it’s hype will be over if it not already has.

One other brand I am noticing a slow down in growth is Gucci, it doesn’t seem to be selling as well as say, 2 Seasons ago...let’s see.

I just see this as a sign of times.

And me too love the comeback of high fashion perhaps, vs the streetwear hope these days...but did Virgil Abloh just got appointed? Lol

 

[Benn98]

The Gucci bubble is bound to burst. That it's lasting as long as it does is interesting. In theory the brand is the only one following that aesthetic. Eventually Michele will have to come up with a new direction just to prove to critics that there's more to him than kitschy vintage luxe. Gucci in many ways reminds me of Coach, who oddly enough get less hate. Vevers too has been doing collections with a very defined aesthetic. I predict at some stage the audience will grow weary of it.

My personal dislike for Demna and Virgil is because they came and jumped onto an existing bandwagon, tweaked it a bit, and all of a sudden got heralded as heroes. The streetwear hype has been going for years now. And maybe that's why their collections won't have longevity. I like Balenciaga Men's logoless pieces, their silhouette for the jackets. But despite that I still find it very 'trendy.'

 

[Deleted member 130879]

The Gucci bubble is bound to burst. That it's lasting as long as it does is interesting. In theory the brand is the only one following that aesthetic. Eventually Michele will have to come up with a new direction just to prove to critics that there's more to him than kitschy vintage luxe. Gucci in many ways reminds me of Coach, who oddly enough get less hate. Vevers too has been doing collections with a very defined aesthetic. I predict at some stage the audience will grow weary of it.

My personal dislike for Demna and Virgil is because they came and jumped onto an existing bandwagon, tweaked it a bit, and all of a sudden got heralded as heroes. The streetwear hype has been going for years now. And maybe that's why their collections won't have longevity. I like Balenciaga Men's logoless pieces, their silhouette for the jackets. But despite that I still find it very 'trendy.'

Gucci won't burst anytime soon. Even though I hate them equally, Gucci still gives a sense of luxury at a "normal" price. It's not a printed cotton hoodie selling for thousands. Also, the individual pieces can go behind many looks while streetwear is... streetwear. You can try and fancy it up a bit but a hoodie will always be a hoodie. Gucci also has a few statement pieces. Derivative, trashy and all, but still more approachable to a greater number of fashion addicts.

And he can say whatever he wants... it's not selling. I've seen plenty of Vetements going for 80% off (I think I even saw a 90% off piece). Every brand has huge sales, sure, but for a brand that produces way less than brands like Michael Kors or even Balmain and that claims to be the ultimate hype, that eeeeeeeeevvvvvvvvveeerryone wants... it's just horses****. I've seen more Vetements than Chanel or Dior on sale on plenty of websites. Kids don't care. Older women won't buy some up and coming brand that won't maintain value in 10 or 20 years. Vintage Chanel goes for thousands still. A worn up cotton hoodie won't sell for thousands in 10 years.

 

[fashionista-ta]

Yeah no one is surprised. That's what happens when you build a brand solely on hype and face value. I also think Balenciaga played a major part, it's basically a more realized version of Vetements so it doesn't make sense buying both.

And LOL at Demna breaking from his ~mysterious artist~ character to go on a full on Trump-ish "FAKE NEWS!!!" rant. What an idiot.

"You're having a laugh" ... that sums up perfectly what I've always thought about the brand. He gives irony a bad name.

 

[donyan]

And LOL at Demna breaking from his ~mysterious artist~ character to go on a full on Trump-ish "FAKE NEWS!!!" rant. What an idiot.

this! up until now I still kinda liked Vetements and I still think Demna is a good designer, but his response to the whole thing is embarassing, and doesnt paint him in a very sympathetic light. I also think it's proof that what Highsnobiety says in the article is very close to the truth.