When Net-a-Porter announced it was reducing its brand offer by an estimated
\n30 percent next season, it was a sign of the times. How much fashion is too
\nmuch? How much room in the market is there for fashion, for new brands and
\nfor clothes we don’t particularly need?<\/p>\n
\nTake the closure of the Marc by Marc Jacobs label. Just a few seasons ago
\nthe LVMH-owned company drafted in British designers Katie Hillier and
\nLuella Bartley to head up its ailing label. Now the duo designers have been
\nousted as Marc Jacobs is consolidating his business and reducing its
\nproduct categories, showing everything under one umbrella. When you dilute
\na brand too much it becomes the same as watering down a drink; the flavour
\nis no longer there.<\/p>\n
\nDid the duo do the Marc Jacobs brand image any favours? Perhaps yes, if you
\nmeasure it by press coverage. But the clothes themselves? They felt
\ngimmicky and unreal. Superfluous is no longer a desirable option for
\nsuccessful fashion businesses. Even if the brand is targeted at a younger
\nmarket.<\/p>\n
\nIn the early noughties the high street was bustling. New brands were
\nspouting up every day, the consumer couldn’t get enough of cross-brand
\ncollaborations and fast fashion was coming at us faster than the speed of
\nlight. But the competition has come to breaking point. Global fashion weeks
\ncannot accommodate the many designers hoping to show their collections on
\nthe catwalk. Once reserved for serious ready-to-wear companies and haute
\ncouture, the catwalk is now a platform for every Tom, Dick and Harry who
\nwants to make it into the fashion world. Earlier this year New York Fashion
\nWeek announced it would reduce its catwalk designers, and brands would have
\nto go through a more discerning process to secure an official slot. What is
\nit that we need to see on the catwalk? The industry should ask itself, does
\ncasualwear, denim, high street and lingerie all need to be shown on a
\nrunway?<\/p>\n
\nSo it appears the fashion world has reached a saturation point. There is
\ntoo much style over substance, too many brands shouting for rail space and
\nsimply too many clothes. By dropping a third of its designers, Net-a-Porter
\nis leading the pack and returning to its luxury roots. Luxury in the sense
\nthat its fashion offer is a careful curation of considered brands and
\ncompanies, not an encyclopedia of collections that smack of excess but in
\nthe end don’t have meaning and are again superfluous.<\/p>\n
\nAnd that is what consumers are looking for: For real clothes, for a meaning When Net-a-Porter announced it was reducing its brand offer by an estimated 30 percent next season, it was a sign of the times. How much fashion is too much? How much room in the market is there for fashion, for new brands and for clothes we don’t particularly need? Take the closure of the Marc … <\/p>\n
\nbehind brands, for relevance and a reason to buy. With so much competition
\nfor brands and designers to be bought by stores, it seems those that speak
\nthe loudest have been the most successful. Thankfully we are now entering a
\ntime when the clothes need to speak for themselves.
\nImages: Marc by Marc Jacobs
\nClick Here: IQOS White<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"