Luxury and Economic Recession

I recently finished writing my senior thesis for the Global Studies department at UCLA. The thirty-five page paper is entitled, Luxury and Recession: How the Fashion Industry Defies Global Economic Downturns. Because I have been working on this paper for the past 6 months, this blog has not been updated until very recently. Now, I have lots of new material to share, and I hope to make many posts throughout the summer months. Since I have spent so long thinking about how economic recession (something we seem to be hearing way too much about these days) and luxury are inexorably intertwined, I thought I would write about it here as well.
Despite the fact that high fashion has always been directed towards the world’s wealthiest customers, many luxury companies have direct historical ties with recession. Some fashion houses have even rose to fame specifically for how they handled their affairs during hard economic times. Right before World War One, a man by the name of Paul Poiret dominated the fashion scene in Paris, creating dresses for women that used large amounts of colorful, expensive fabrics which blurred the lines between art and clothing. When war broke out, these fabrics became scarce and his outfits became impractical for the generation of women who now needed to go to work in factories and in the fields in order to support their family while their husbands were at war. Gabrielle ‘Coco’ Chanel perceived the need for a more simple and refined style, and she presented the world with the little black dress, which was easy to move about in and used far less material than Poiret’s ornate gowns. By adapting to difficult times, Chanel gave women their first “staple” item of clothing, and created an outfit and a fashion brand that has not gone out of style for nearly a century.
Twenty years later, during the 1930’s German Occupation in France, paper, cardboard, and other sorts of packaging became scarce and many materials became rationed for use in the war. Hermès, one of the few fashion houses that did not close shop during World War II, used the only color of packaging material that they had available: vibrant orange. Hermès used it for boxes and bags and almost overnight it became the house’s signature color, and it is still used to this day.
Again, almost fifty years later in 1978, Miuccia Prada took over her grandfather’s Italian luggage company and showed the world how design could defy economic downturn. Prada wanted everything that came out of her shop to be new: new in design and new in concept. In the early 80’s, the world was still recovering from the economic damage brought on by the OPEC Oil Crisis, and Prada perceived the need for a high fashion bag that met the needs of women of the times. She began looking at other materials besides the traditional leathers, which had been stigmatized as excessive and lavish by previous fashion houses like Chanel and Hermès, whose opulence did not seem to have a place during the economic downturn. She instead turned to a nylon parachute fabric, which was light and durable (and far less expensive than leather, crocodile, or silk) and she created the first high fashion backpack. At first, critics were skeptical at the deviation from the usual notions of luxury, but the nylon backpack ended up being a huge success and turned Prada into a household name. Since then, she has used the nylon fabric to create purses, messenger bags, wallets, and luggage, all the while keeping the fashion house as reputable and prestigious as her competitors.
It is always difficult to do business in a troubled economy, but for the fashion houses mentioned above, innovation during a time of crisis proved to pay off. This should be a lesson for designers and fashion houses today - remembering that creativity and originality will be handsomely rewarded, even during a recession.

Quality Control (or lack thereof): The Prada Case Study

This post is inspired by a recent purchase – my very own Prada messenger bag. Like many young adults with an affinity for fashion, but not the bank account to back it up, I decided that while I can’t deck myself out in a Prada suit everyday for work, I could save my money and buy a little piece of the dream in the form of a black, nylon bag that I can carry almost every day. With the price tag at $750 dollars, it certainly wasn’t an inexpensive purchase, but I hoped that the bag would last a decade. A few days later, I was trying to explain my splurge to a friend who was criticizing me for buying a bag that “wasn’t even leather and wasn’t worth the money.” I was literally in the middle of countering her attack by saying, “Yeah, but look at the craftsmanship. Everything is perfect, the lining is immaculate, and the stitching is even…” when my friend noticed that the seam holding the strap to my bag was coming undone. It was only 5 stitches that were pulled out slightly, but having only carried the bag for a week and having spent almost 2 paychecks to get it, I was pretty horrified. I went to the internet to find out if there was anything I could do to have Prada either refund or fix my bag for me when I discovered they were dealing with other bag problems as well.
At Milan’s 2008 fashion week in January, there was much hype swirling about Miuccia Prada’s new design concept – colorful fairy prints. The clothes were colorful, avant-garde pieces said to be inspired by the daydreams of a young girl but they weren’t something everyone would want to wear. The purses, on the other hand, were quickly becoming the “It” bag of the season and were retailing for over $2200 dollar with a three month waiting list. But Prada's success was suddenly overshadowed by a devastating realization – the beautiful colored ink used to dye the bags was running the instant water touched the purse. Purseblog.com noted that, “Prada is well aware of [the bleeding] problem. Some SA’s warned their customers due to the nature of the delicacy of the bag the ink could bleed. There have also been conflicting stories [about] how Prada is handling it. Some say Prada will not refund you after buying the bag, some say they will. What I do know is that when paying upwards of $2500 for a bag, you want it to stay in tact and the ink to stay in place. For those of you that already own the bag, be cautious with it in the rain and make sure to read up on the issues.” One blog poster wrote, “My fairy bled and so did my heart.” A bit dramatic perhaps, but try and imagine watching the ink from 2,500 dollars worth of paper bills blotch before your eyes and you will see what this person was feeling.
The last Prada nightmare story I have encountered was in the pages of Dana Thomas’s book, Deluxe: How Luxury Lost its Luster (which I mentioned in the last post). Here is an excerpt from her book:

“In 1992, I bought a pink sleeveless Prada cocktail dress that was made of thick iridescent cotton and silk faille, fully lined, and finished beautifully. It cost 2,000 dollars, but it is couture quality and will last forever. Ten years later, I bought a pair of thin cotton-poplin cropped trousers at Prada for $500. I put them on, and the gentle passing of my foot ripped the hem out. I put my hand in the pocket, and it tore away from the seam. I squatted down to pick up my two year old, and the derriere split open. I hadn’t had the pants ten minutes and they were literally falling apart at the seams. I mentioned this to a former Prada design assistant. ‘It’s the thread,’ he told me. ‘It’s cheaper and breaks easily.’ When I told him about my gorgeous dress from 1992 that was as solid as a Rolls, he nodded. ‘That was then,’ he said with a sigh.”

How can companies like Prada call themselves luxury goods companies when the luxury only lasts ten minutes? It is true that people buy luxury goods for many reasons, status being the primary one (in my opinion). However, many people justify their purchases with the rationale that the price-per-wear or the price-per-use is similar to cheaper alternatives. So what IS the motivation to continue “buying labels” when they are guaranteed to fall off in a matter of days? I was fortunate in that my Prada bag was replaced within the week, but many others were not so lucky. I think it is time that Prada, as well as many other high-fashion companies, scale back on the plans for global domination and mass production (see the cover of Deluxe for the visual image of this idea) and take the time to reconsider what they are selling to the customer. Luxury may not last forever, but it certainly is supposed to make it out of the store!

How the Fashion Industry Sold Out: The Emergence of the Designer Cell Phone

I recently started reading a book by Dana Thomas called Deluxe, How Luxury Lost Its Luster, which was recommended to me by a professor at the UCLA Law Department two weeks ago. The book is all about how fashion is now solely focused on commodification and increasing profits as opposed to creativity, design and style. It is a very critical look at an already controversial industry, but because it is so well-researched and well-written, I am trying to keep an open mind despite the fact that it is destroying a lot of my preconceived notions about the fashion industry. One thing that the book has not yet mentioned (but would fit in perfectly with the idea that designers are selling themselves out to big business) is the prospect of the designer cell phone. Even I can see that the phones are a blatant attempt to reign in more customers, enter new markets, and brand something that you had no part in creating.
The first designer cell phone I ever remember seeing was Motorola’s Razr “designed” (and I use this term loosely) by Dolce and Gabbana in 2005. The phone was gold and had D&G emblazoned on the back of the phone and on the screen's wallpaper background. No extraordinary features were included on the phone with the exception of the color and a special ringtone, yet the phone sold at prices that were sometimes triple the cost of a regular Razr in silver or black. Since then, the hype in cell phone technology has only increased by including better cameras, touch screens, bluetooth, GPS, etc. and fashion designers have not ceased attempts to snag a part of the enormous profits.
Since the D&G phone, we have seen the emergence of the Giorgio Armani cell phone for Samsung, the Prada phone for LG, a Diane von Furstenberg Sidekick, a Dior cell by ModeLabs... I simply don’t have the time to list how much the unbranded phones cost versus their logoed counterparts, but let it suffice to say that they are all overpriced. With an iPhone now priced around $300 dollars, it seems ridiculous to pay $800 for a Prada phone or $5,000 (no that’s not a typo, there are three zeros on the end of that 5) for the Dior phone. One blogger writes, “When is a cell phone worth 5,000 dollars? Hint: never.” And I completely agree. I found one cell phone designed by the famous French jeweler Boucheron for Vertu that is selling for $310,000. Yes, the phone is decked out in diamonds and rubies, but PLEASE! Whose ego needs stroking so badly that their phone has to cost as much as a down-payment on a house? Here is an idea - buy a ruby bracelet, a diamond ring, AND a cell phone, keeping each entity separate from one another.
In my opinion, the materialization of designer cell phones is the most transparent attempt by fashion houses to expand their customer base and drive up sales without contributing anything besides their name. It is true that some customers might be unwilling to spend 900 dollars on a purse but would spend that much on a cell phone. It is also true that we have entered modern times, and adaptation is crucial in order to remain relevant. That is why I am not ranting about the creation of cell phone holders and iPod cases – I can imagine Miuccia Prada’s expertise in leather and craftsmanship could result in a very elegant cell phone case, but until the media leaks that she got her degree in computer science and has become a cell phone programmer as well as a fashionista, I will maintain that the two creations should remain separate. Sure, if you have a lot of money, go ahead and buy a nice phone, but if the name brand is the only thing distinguishing it from a phone that is hundreds of dollars cheaper, then you have undoubtedly entered “fashion victim” territory. I know I said that this blog wouldn’t be a style guide, but in this case I can’t help but cry out, “Stay away from designer phones!" They simply aren’t worth the money and you look like you are trying way too hard.

Want knock-offs from Prada, Gucci, and Diesel? Just GUESS which store you should shop.

Before I started this blog, I created a list of topics that I wanted to discuss- you know, to make sure I had enough ideas to make this blog worth while. Well, I thought I had a great little piece worked out for today dealing with the popularity of designer logos, but my shopping trip to Macy’s tonight made me change my mind. The “logos” debate can wait; tonight I want to talk about Guess, while my thoughts are still fresh. Here is how the whole thing got started…

Strolling through the Men’s Shoe Department, I was keeping my eye out for a decent pair of loafers. It has become a tiny obsession for me recently and until I can bring myself to buy the pair from Prada that I truly want, or find a cheaper alternative that I like just as much, I will continue to pay attention to them in every department store I enter. But what I saw tonight did not bring an end to my mania, it heightened it. At first glance, I could have sworn the loafers sitting right in front of me were none other than the famous Gucci loafers, complete with tan “guccisima” print, which now adorns almost every piece of merchandise the Gucci brand has to offer.
The thought evaporated in my mind almost as quickly as it had formed and was replaced by questions instead. “Since when does Macy’s (especially the store in my suburban town mall) carry anything but Gucci sunglasses?” I asked myself. Then I noticed the red sticker placed on the stand holding the shoes… “AND SINCE WHEN DOES IT GO ON SALE!?” I stared at the distorted print a second longer and realized that this was no Gucci loafer, it was Guess! I had been momentarily fooled… now they had really gone too far.
I have always thought Guess was a little too obvious in their mimicking of high fashion. I realize that “high-street” stores like Zara and Gap are meant to offer designer trends to a market that cares about fashion but can’t afford the high-end merchandise of French and Italian luxury brands, but Guess always seemed to go further than that. Let’s say Versace creates a line of purple and black dresses and then one month later, purple dresses and black leggings are displayed on mannequins in the front of an H&M. This happens all the time and it is fine with me. If a cotton purple dress is what you want, and you are not trying to pass it off for something it isn’t, then great. Many times, a $50 dollar dress can look as good as a $500 one. But taking the famous Gucci “G’s”, Prada’s iconic triangular metal logo, and the embroidery on the back pocket of Diesel jeans and calling them your own? It seems as though the company isn’t just taking trends, it is taking trademarks from famous fashion retailers! I mean, maybe I am looking into this too much, so have a look at the pictures and decide for yourself. I believe that even people that don’t care about labels will notice the blaring similarities.

While I think this practice of ripping off other companies is terribly tacky of Guess, it is not to say I dislike the brand entirely or think people should stop shopping there. I just think that one should be careful when making purchases from the store – are you getting something original for a better price than you would at Neiman’s or are you buying what might as well be called a knock-off?

To highlight my point one final time, I thought I would share a story about a shopping trip I took with my sister and her friend recently to Union Square after I came home from a five week trip to Shanghai. We were in Gucci looking at women’s shoes when I went over and picked up a pair of heels covered in the Gucci “G’s” and showed them to my sister. “Look at these,” I said. “I would never buy these. These are $400 dollar shoes, but when I was in China there were people trying to sell us the fake ones for like $20! They were everywhere! I just could not bring myself to buy shoes that cost this much if I thought people would just assume they were knock-offs.” To my horror, I realized a sales representative was standing not more than ten feet away from me, and by the grin on his face I could tell he heard me. He started to walk over, and just as I thought I was going to get some kind of light reprimand for calling his merchandise tacky, he smiled and said, “You don’t have to go all the way to China. A lower quality version of that shoe is in the display window at Guess right down the street.”
I Guess? I am not the only one who sees a similarity.