In our mix + match fashion culture, what is the role of a fashion lifestyle brand?
Lifestyle brands envelop the consumer in a fantasy world, a world that reinforces the brand not only though the models’ wearing of that label head to toe, but also, as the name suggests, though the lifestyle the company espouses. Ralph Lauren is the epitome of the fashion lifestyle brand. He created the "World of Ralph Lauren," a fantastically fictional WASPy world of Hamptons mansions, yachts, and upper crust American leisure. And while Ralph Lauren was building his empire, this lifestyle branding made a lot of sense. It not only allowed him to diversify into a wide variety of product lines, but it also reinforced the "one outfit, one designer" aesthetic of the day.
It’s quite an understatement to say that the world has since changed. Dressing head to toe in one designer gave way to the pluralism seen in today’s outfit choices. Nowadays, mixing and matching garments between different designers is a given—and it is more stylish than personifying a single designer’s vision.
In this atmosphere of fashion pluralism, the role of a lifestyle brand has also shifted. As direct translations of a designer’s vision, these lifestyle brands are no longer to be taken literally—instead, they exist to inspire us, to give us something to aspire to, to give us a taste of another life. Here, one can draw a parallel, comparing meticulously fictionalized lifestyle brands to elaborately staged runway shows. Much is being said about how runway shows are growing more irrelevant over time. Some deride them as money losing propositions staged for ephemeral brand value. Others question the wearability of the outfits that are presented.
But while these factors do alter the role of the runway show, they do not necessarily make that role immaterial. We would argue against runway’s irrelevance–and that of lifestyle brands. For as long as they continue to inspire, to encourage innovation in design, to wake the creative spirits in the consumer public, they will hold value—measurable or not.
Posted by Trisha on February 3rd, 2006 in News, Off Topic |
We’re all over…
Stacked Heels
Sturdy enough to withstand walking.
Avoid the stripper look and wear with a demure skirt.
Black Gucci Platform Sandal | $695 at Neiman Marcus
We’re all over…
Geometric Black and White
Right on target with this season’s mod trend.
Diane von Furstenberg Elisabetta top | $198 at DVF
We’re all over…
Japanese-inspired dressing
Vivid colors and beautiful lines make this aesthetic so pleasing!
Diane von Furstenberg Fariba jersey wrap dress | $345 at Saks Fifth Avenue
We’re So over:
Crystal-encrusted denim
Swarovski phone + rhinestone clutch + encrusted denim =
Too many crystals. Plus, don’t they come off in the laundry?
(Photo Credit: Saks Fifth Avenue)
We’re So over:
Oversized specs
This season has taken our beloved Jackie O. look to such enormous proportions that we’re starting to get bug-eyed. Mary-Kate, Ashley, Lindsay, Nicole–are you listening?
(Photo Credit: Fred Flare)
Tell us: What’s In? What are you so over?
Posted by Susannah on February 3rd, 2006 in Trend, What's In and What's Out |
The centuries-old Japanese kimono has undergone a major transformation, courtesy of fashion houses worldwide. The very contemporary result: an airy, flowy top that reveals just enough (usually with a low V-cut) but not too much (the length is still tunic or longer). These tops–shown here at every price range–are perfect for dressing up a pair of jeans, or wearing alone as a dress to go out.
Missoni Kimono top| $960 at Neiman Marcus
Stella McCartney Kimono Top | $939 at Bergdorf Goodman
Diane von Furstenburg Kimono-Style Wrap Dress | $425 at Bloomingdale’s
Geren Ford Kimono Dress | $350 at Active Endeavors
T-Bags Kimono Dress | $145 at Blaec
China Doll top in white | $51.60 at Go Clothing
What do you think of this style? Classic, or on its way out? Let us know.
Posted by Susannah on February 2nd, 2006 in Trend, Trendscape, Trendscape, Women |
Can I express how gratifying it is to find a stylish dress with pockets? The search for a perfectly pocketed frock can be extensive. Luckily for you, look no further than below to score a stress-free and oh-so-original fashion find.
Calvin Klein Parachute Poplin Dress | $37.99 at Million Products
Loop Terry Tube Dress with Pockets | $44 at American Apparel Store
Marc Jacobs SF Denim Jacket (worn here as a dress)| $398 at eLuxury
Issac Mizrahi Trench Dress | $29.99 at Target
Black and White Pocket Dress | $48 at Hot Topic
Posted by Melody on February 2nd, 2006 in Trend, Trendscape, Trendscape, Women |
Julie of Almost Girl asks, "What will fashion advertising look like and where will it come from?" While the future is hazy (at best) to us as well, we’ll offer up our two cents.
Question 1: What will fashion advertising look like?
Fashion advertising, as discussed in Part One of this post, will likely be a combination of branding and direct response advertising—and more heavily weighted toward direct response than it is now. As for what it’s going to look like, we’ll throw our hat in the ring and offer up a few ideas:
Branding isn’t going to go away. The “slick expensive ad campaigns shot by expensive photographers with exotic models†described by Julie aren’t going to end. However, the measurability of direct response is likely going to affect the way branding campaigns are run.
We predict that these branding campaigns (the ones with the beautifully blasé looking models) will be held to a higher standard, one that involves metrics in some shape or form. The fashion industry is waking up to the potential of the Internet, and though the industry will inevitably face a rocky road on its quest to embrace these online opportunities, they’ll get there.
Direct response fashion advertisements aren’t going to look like your standard Google text ad. For one, they’ll have to include images—even a lengthy description of that perfect oversized teal sweater is far less compelling than a thumbnail image of the garment.
Question 2: Where will fashion advertising come from?
Right now, fashion advertising is dominated by Big Companies with Deep Pockets. Completely natural, given that they’re the ones that have the dollars to shell out on these expensive branding campaigns. Take a look at the latest Vogue (or other fashion magazine of your choice). Who do you see advertising? Luxury brands, big name designers—most, if not all, with financial backing. After all, that Versace ad with Halle Berry can’t have been cheap to produce.
Fashion, however, is becoming more democratic (in part, thanks to the scores of up and coming designers looking to make their mark, and as The Fashionable Kiffen notes, thanks to fashion bloggers). Advertising in the future, especially as the industry shifts towards the scalable, affordable direct response ads, will include more of these voices. While the majority of fashion ads might still be from the Louis Vuittons, the Versaces, and the Calvin Kleins of the world, smaller designers will be able to speak as well.
Posted by Trisha on February 1st, 2006 in News, Off Topic |
Whether you’re into not-so-mellow yellow, outrageous orange or eye-piercing purple, flats, pumps, or mules, there’s an easy way to determine which shoe will shine brighter on your fabulous feet.
If your pain threshold is below zero, your obvious choice is a flat shoe. If you can strut, groove, and kick butt all while in your 4-inch stilettos, choose one of the wedge styles. If you’d rather go for a walk than sit and read a book, let sneakers do the hiking for you.
Warning: If you tend to be shy and despise attention (even if it’s only to your feet), stay away from the following pairs.
Prada Leather and Patent Leather Butterfly Peep Toe Flats | $133 at Designer Exposure
Metallic Braided Wedge | $48 at Urban Outfitters
Gucci Orchid Suede Brown Logo Sneakers | $316 at Bluefly
Miss Sixty Harold Heel | $170 at Urban Outfitters
Jeffrey Campbell Metallic Yellow Leather Rounded Toe Flat | $49.99 at Bluefly
Posted by Melody on February 1st, 2006 in Trend, Trendscape, Trendscape, Women |
Danielle over at Final Fashion wrote an interesting post about how runway shows are a money-losing proposition and only really appropriate for Big Name designers. Fashion Merchandising 101 told me that runway shows, while Glamorous, are staged more for branding purposes than for actually directly generating sales. I’m generalizing here, but runway shows are staged for the press (so they’ll write about you and promote you to Jane Q. Public) and for your top clients (so they’ll feel special and buy more of your clothes!).
As Bob McCarthy pointed out in his blog, The Direct Response Coach, the advertising world is made up of two groups with very different philosophies: branding and direct response. The fashion world, for better or for worse, is heavily weighted towards the branding camp. Why? Well, fashion depends heavily on perception, and having a strong brand gives a product a leg up in the marketplace. And what makes branding so enticing to fashion companies is that building a strong brand allows them to elevate consumers’ perception of their entire product portfolio—all in one fell swoop. When you consider the number of products that are in a typical fashion line (from dozens to hundreds), branding as an advertising philosophy makes a whole lot of sense.
Direct response, however, is the reigning queen of the online advertising space. What’s so interesting about Internet advertising (as compared to offline advertising) is its inherent measurability. If you run an ad through Google AdWords or through Yahoo! Search Marketing, for example, it’s possible to see how many people saw that ad, how many people clicked on your ad, and how many people bought something/registered for something/etc on your site. You can calculate your return on investment (or ROI) for your advertising dollars. You can quantify how effective your advertisements are and make adjustments as needed.
Branding vs. Direct Response. In the fashion world, branding (at least offline) is the clear winner as I write this in January 2006. But what about the future? Will branding continue its reign? Or will direct response win out in the end?
I don’t pretend to know the answer to this question, but I’ll share with you my humble prediction. The forces that make branding so enticing today will continue to exert influence in the years to come. But the allure of direct response’s measurability will also have an impact on how fashion advertising budgets are spent. There’s something to be said for a quantifiable ROI. Already, some fashion companies are listing their products on direct response-type sites like Shopping.com and Shopzilla.com. A quick glance at women’s apparel on Shopping.com showed items from Bergdorf Goodman, Bloomingdales, J. Crew, and Kenneth Cole. I predict that we’ll see a significant increase in this direct response advertising, but we won’t see that jump until we see more specialized fashion shopping search sites. That is, it’s not going to be a Shopping.com or a Shopzilla.com that’s going to see this gain (unless they radically improve the way their sites work for the apparel category). Instead, I think it’s going to be a specialized fashion search vertical.
What do you think about the future of fashion advertising? Branding? Direct response? Or both?
Posted by Trisha on January 31st, 2006 in News, Off Topic |
You took your girlfriend’s “I’ll like anything you plan for Valentine’s Day, sweetie. The important thing is that we’re together…" too literally, and now the plans go something like: take a hike up San Bruno Mountain, have a picnic in an open field, hike a bit more, play soccer at the peak, hike back down, and rent and ride bicycles. It’s obvious you’ve turned a day of love into a day of your love of sports.
All we have to say is you had better look darn good that day… or you’ll be getting comfy with the living room couch come nightfall.
Getting some action = Corny Tee + Khaki Shorts + Sneakers + Bouquet of Red Roses.
Paul Frank Horns for You Tee | $28 at Urban Outfitters
Stock Flight Short | $49 at Urban Outfitters
Asics Canvas Mexico | $80 Urban Outfitters
Two Dozen Long Stemmed Red Roses | $79.99 at 1-800 Flowers
Posted by Melody on January 31st, 2006 in Men, Ready Made Outfits |
Your man is Really into nature, and he’s planned an outdoors adventure for Valentine’s Day this year. Problem is, hiking uphill and playing sports aren’t your idea of romance (Unless it’s a contact sport that doesn’t involve a ball!). Fret not. Just because you’re not excited about the plans doesn’t mean you can’t be excited about your ensemble.
After all, the more irresistible you look in your hiking gear, the less of a chance you’ll have to hike to the top of that hill.
"Au Natural" Gear = Printed Tee + Tank Top (layered underneath) + Jogging Pants + Sneakers.
All You Need is Love Tee | $25 at Shop Intuition
Balance by Marika Swirl Top | $26 at Nordstrom
Balance by Marika Knit Pants | $42 at Nordstrom
Puma “Bashy†Leather Athletic Shoe | $64.95 at Nordstrom
Posted by Melody on January 30th, 2006 in Features, Ready Made Outfits, Women, Working Out in Style |
This week, Omiru is proud to participate in "The State of the Fashion Union," a blogging carnival hosted by Julie of Almost Girl.
We’ll continue to post the product-focused fashion guides that you’ve
(hopefully) come to love, but we’ll intersperse them with posts about
more philosophical issues in the fashion world. We encourage you, as
always, to tell us what you think about these issues. Our opinions are
just that—our
opinions. If you have another way of looking at the issue, or anything
else to add, we wholeheartedly welcome your comments. And with
that…let’s begin!
Back in December, Cathy Horyn wrote an article in the New York Times about how fashion is Two Clicks Behind. That is, the processes of the fashion industry (and particularly the mainstream fashion media) hasn’t caught up to the speed of the Internet. Julie of Almost Girl, however, believes that, thanks to fashion bloggers, the fashion media isn’t all Two Clicks Behind anymore—in fact, some of us are Two Clicks Ahead.
My question is: What happens when the fashion media is Two Clicks Ahead? What does this mean for the fashion ecosystem?
As it stands, the fashion ecosystem, like those found in nature, is the result of a careful balance of forces. Designers staging runway shows wield great influence. These designers influence the buyers that stock store shelves, the designers at mass market fashion brands lower down the food chain, as well as the consumers who ultimately buy the clothes. Some consumers go straight to the source and buy clothes from the designer. But those of us who don’t have money to burn need not worry. The trends these designers espouse find themselves interpreted by mass market fashion brands, repackaged and resold at more affordable price points. But these designers don’t design in a vacuum. They, in turn, are influenced by anything and everything—street style, art, music, movies, and the work of other designers.
Back in fashion school, I was taught about the Fashion Trend Life Cycle. It was a very nice, simple diagram. You first have your fashion innovators creating the trends. Next up are the early adopters who popularize the trends. After the early adopters comes the mass market, after which are the late adopters…and then the trend is over. This is the way fashion has always been. Each trend starts somewhere, it gains popularity, it goes mass market, it starts to go Out of style, and then it’s gone.
But back to the question—what happens when the fashion media is Two Clicks Ahead? To answer this question, one first should look at the time it takes to go through one cycle. Back in the Olden Days, it used to take several years for a style to come in and go out of fashion. Then it took one or two years. Now, it can be a matter of months. As the fashion media moves towards being Two Clicks Ahead, the time it will take for a style to rise to prominence will become shorter and shorter.
I wonder, how far can we take this accelerated fashion trendmill? What happens when it’s a matter of weeks to popularize a style from obscurity? Or, even scarier, a matter of days? What will fashionistas do?
I don’t know the answer to these questions, but here are my predictions:
Fragmentation: As the fashion trendmill accelerates, I think the
fashion market will fragment more and more. It’s going to be harder
for big companies to sell tons of the same style. Companies that are
going to benefit from this sea change in the industry are going to be
those that produce clothes in small batches as close to market as
possible. Small batches because of this increased fragmentation, and
as close to market as possible to more accurately predict demand for
each trend.
Confusion: As fast as fashion moves now, it’s hard enough to choose what’s right for you. It’s going to become more and more important to choose your trends wisely, based on your personal style, body type, etc. My sad prediction is that we’re going to see a lot more fashion victims who choose their trends willy nilly.
Backlash: As trends come and go in what seems like the blink of an eye, smart fashionistas are going to rely more on their own concept of personal style in order to dress stylishly without having to run to the mall every couple of days. We’re going to see a lot of interesting fashion bubbling up from the streets, and it’s not going to be all about what you’re wearing. It’s also going to be about how you wear it. Well, that’s my pie-in-the-sky hope, at least.
But my predictions aside, tell me, what do You think will happen to fashion when it’s Two Clicks Ahead?
Posted by Trisha on January 29th, 2006 in News, Off Topic |
Next Posts
Previous Posts
