Fashion Cycles

Fashion cycles can be long (for classics) or quite short (for fads). Most items that are introduced into the fashion world barely register as a blip. If an “opinion leader” picks up the look and it gains a steady following, a trend is born. It becomes a classic if it sticks around for a while without losing followers. If it never gains substantial momentum, we see a fad. (Yes, that is my Anna Wintour stick figure for the Opinion Leader.)

Fashion Diffusion

Throughout the history of fashion, different Opinion Leaders have prevailed and the means of transmitting popular trends throughout culture have shifted accordingly.

Those trends that do register now have more followers worldwide than ever before, and that is due to the system of fashion diffusion. This mass following makes it difficult for the fashion system to keep up, when it has to both churn out new looks every 4-6 months and produce enough items to supply a global market.

The every-increasing speed of fashion diffusion has led some to question the future of the industry, and to question whether or not high-end fashion can be considered a part of the luxury industry today (as luxury is typically defined as something unique).

It has reached a period where fashion moves so fast that it is detrimental to the fashion business – people not buying because they know in five minutes they’re not going to like it any more, because it won’t be new… It’s too fast. Either it’ll keep on getting faster, or we’ll get fed up and stop buying. ~ Tom Ford in Pop Magazine, SS 2002

What Now?

We have to up our game and evolve the fashion business model again. New systems of diffusion have been transforming the fashion industry since its birth, and the digital revolution is no different.

I think this is actually a great opportunity to bring fashion back into an art form by using digital communications to bridge the gap that now exists between the designer and the consumer and by using the medium to demonstrate the more creative processes of the design houses, which are limited on the sales floor by mass market constraints. We’ve got a long way to go…

The Social Effects of WW1 on the Fashion Industry

As far as fashion in concerned, WW1 produced a strong discontinuity in the way women dressed (of course, the men were wearing uniforms). The increasing employment of women in industrial activities had relaxed strict dress codes, and allowed women to wear cotton trousers for the first time. As women’s roles in Western society changed, modern fashion changed along with it.

Easy-to-wear clothing had diffused into mainstream society, and the use of “poor” materials proliferated. (Wool was necessary for uniforms and interwar unemployment created a further need for substitution and recycled materials.)

Paul Poiret’s extravagantly-modeled business failed after WW1 erupted, as a result of his failure to understand the evolutionary landmark of the War and its impact on society and fashion. He failed to adapt to meet the modern needs of his clients, thus opening up a market for Coco Chanel.

The Revolutionary Chanel

Gabrielle Chanel best exemplified the discontinuities in fashion, brought on by WW1. Chanel began work in the major garrison town of Deauville, where she met an officer who provided the capital for her to start her own millinery.

Chanel believed that a woman could be active and still remain elegant. She put this philosophy into her designs, shortening skirts and using jersey in womenswear. Of course, jersey had previously only been used for men’s underwear and sportswear, so this was considered revolutionary at the time. Her dresses stressed the new social role played by women, incorporating simplicity and masculinity.

Chanel was among the first to validate the fashionable qualities of black, exemplified in her little black dress (beginning in the late 1930s). She felt that for daywear and eveningwear alike, that is was unnecessary to dress in a very opulent way.

In terms of a business model, Chanel ran the house and created the designs, but had her vendeuse in the shops for customer assistance. Assemblers were separated into workrooms by the piece of apparel or accessories being constructed, and further by function (weaving, embroidering, etc.). The work was seasonal and the company was completely hierarchical.

Chanel & Product Extension

Chanel began diversification of her brand through the production of perfumes and jewels. In the 1930s, the constructed pins made from stained glass. Chanel was the first designer to place great importance on bijoux. She maintained one symbol from her past among “doubtful” women- the camellia, trademark flower of high class prostitutes. She turned this symbol into a luxury accessory. Jewelry was an important decorative element upon the simple, clean Chanel dress.

She launched Chanel No. 5 for her 40th birthday in 1921, named so because it was the fifth perfume trial. However, this was developed in the days before licensing. Chanel accepted only 10% of the Parfum Chanel stock without royalty, and was only granted 2% sales royalty in 1947 by Pierre Wertheimer, owner of the manufacturing company. The unique bottle design of Chanel No. 5 was very simple, geometrical and linear, demonstrating the “essential” nature of the fragrance. Furthermore, it carried a simple, easy-to-remember name. Its scent was the first not to use a natural fragrance, but to incorporate an artificial one derived in a chemist’s laboratory.

Chanel’s Brand Power

Chanel used her own name in all matters, on all products and campaigns. With No. 5, she was selling her look and lifestyle, and therefore her branded self. This branded marketing was so effective that Chanel No. 5 remains one of the top-selling perfumes today. (The company estimates that one bottle is sold every 55 seconds.) However, the next time you are at the perfume counter with a friend, try a blind sniff test putting No. 5 up against a more modern fragrance, like Chanel’s Mademoiselle. These days, 99% of the time, No. 5 will not be appreciated unless the person smelling it knows that it is Chanel’s classic fragrance. It’s nothing against the fragrance- it’s just a bit outdated for our modern noses, and a little heavier than what most consumers today are after. Yet it flies off the shelves. That is some serious brand power!

By the second half of the century, Chanel was making more money in accessories and perfume than in apparel itself. Chanel stopped her business during WW2 and immediately after, due to market shortage, supply shortage and her public affair with a Nazi officer. She finally came back in the 1960s with her infamous suit, which was confident and comfortable, and represented a counterplay to the New Look by Christian Dior.

An intense fascination for the Orient was the largest influence on stylistic change at the turn of the century. The Ballets Russes was first performed in Paris in 1909, and quickly became a blockbuster sensation across Europe. Dancers performed oriental tales, dressed in brightly colored costumes of unprecedented combination. The designs, like that to the left, were originally created by Leon Bakst. It was the first time that a theater event had any major impact on the way we dress.

Consider how great the impact of celebrities -actors, sports stars, musicians, etc.- is on fashion now!

Before the Ballets Russes: The 19th Century Closes on Worth & Doucet

While Charles Worth was catering to upper-class women, Jacques Doucet (1853-1929) was designing stage sets and dressing actresses. Young designer Paul Poiret (1879-1944) worked for Doucet in this regard, until he gave a design to a particular actress, who had the pattern assembled by another designer. (This is one of the first in MANY cases questioning the copyright of a fashion design.) Poiret was dismissed, and then went on to work at the House of Worth.

Worth’s legacy had been 19th century dress. After his death in 1895, his two sons were unsure of how to move his style forward (this is the first case of a fashion house having to carry on without their namesake). Poiret presented them with a new style, which was rejected as low-class by Worth’s heirs (if you think this sounds like Marc Jacobs’ 1992 grunge collection for Perry Ellis, which got him fired while simultaneously rocketing him to superstar status, you are catching on… history does repeat itself).

After being dismissed by the two most important fashion designers of the day, Poiret went out on his own. He was a marketing genius and focused on window displays, adding shock value by giving them a theatrical stage quality to get attention.

After the Ballets Russes: Poiret Opens the 20th Century in Fashion

The Poiret dress had no crinoline, no corset and was more tubular than S-shaped, with a higher waistline. However, the corset did not completely disappear; Poiret’s dresses still needed undergarment support, though not as tight. The fabrics were also in brighter, happier colors than Worth’s sober patterns.

Aside from helping to free women from the corset and crinoline, Poiret’s greatest contribution to the fashion world was his attention to the means of communication and diffusion for his creations. As fashion magazines were often too sober for his colors, Poiret started a cooperation with young artists, Paul Iribe (right) and Geirges Lepape, to draw his dresses. Again, we are seeing here another first example: this time of an in-house marketing team.

The Making of the Poiret Brand

Poiret went further to create a symbol (trademark) of his maison: the rose. This would not only serve as his logo, but the pattern would be incorporated into many of his designs, such as the famous Joséphine dress (1907), named for the Empress Joséphine.

He generally paid more attention to the overall effect than to the fine details of dress construction, and threw a huge party to sell something more than a dress, but rather, a dream. The Féte de la Mille et Deuxiéme Nuit was the name of Poiret’s 1910 traveling party, in which he toured his models throughout Europe. The traveling party was Persian-themed with authentic props, decoration, musicians and so on. Guests came in Persian costume, creating a buzz and word of mouth marketing for the house, which led to mass attention from the press and the world. This was followed by a US tour in 1913.

Poiret was also the first to extend his brand beyond fashion, into perfumes, cosmetics and furnishings (brand extension). As many ground-breaking brand strategies as Poiret introduced into the fashion industry, he could very well be considered the godfather of modern fashion branding.

For a great article on Poiret, check out this article at style.com: Fashioning the Century.

UPDATE: I found another great blog post about Poiret on Nothing Elegant.

While Charles Worth and his ilk had monopolized the heavily adorned and radically contorted body cuts, a backlash was brewing. Industrial elite members of the “Grand Denial” sought a more discrete luxury and sober distinction in their fashions. Moralists felt that the modern fashions were shameful and ostentatious, and they sought a return to “worker-friendly” produced clothing that was natural and free from dyes. This was perhaps the first known market demand for ethical fashion! Ironically, these market trends are repeated today.

The Dress Reform Movement was mass-publicized by Amelia Bloomer in the US around the 1840s and -50s, and was closely related to the first feminist movements (and now *sort of* I know why my Grandma used to call “undies” bloomers). In response to the immobility that 18th Century fashion imposed on women, Ms. Bloomer created a costume that included the upper layers of a traditional dress, shortened to form a below-the-knee skirt over Turkish-style pants, tied at the ankle cuffs. This costume did not show more of the body than traditional dresses of the period, but it was still found unacceptable because the trouser shape (in any form) was only for men.

While other notable feminists including Susan B. Anthony wore the Bloomer costume, although the look was heavily ridiculed. It would not take long for Ms. Bloomer herself to abandon the look. Forms of the Bloomer costume were occasionally retained for athletic activities, as witnessed at Vassar College where physical education was added to the curriculum in 1865.

it is specially desired that the dress of students shall not be expensive . . . but rather such clothing as will not be injured by active sports and vigorous exertion.” ~ 1865 Vassar College Handbook excerpt

Ironically, it would not be until after her death in 1895 when Ms. Bloomer’s design would become socially acceptable among the majority of active women.

In addition to radicals, social reformers and feminists, doctors and hygienists also supported the Dress Reform Movement. They stressed the medical dangers of corsets, and claimed that women should wear no more than 6.5 lbs (3 kilos) of undergarments as opposed to the more standard 13 lbs (7 kilos) containing the crinoline, corset and other accouterments.

Perhaps the most notable member of the hygienic/rational dress movement was a designer/producer named Dr. Gustave Jaeger. Based on his studies in zoology and anthropology, Jaeger was convinced that one would automatically appear more aesthetically-pleasing in clothing that drew toxins from the body and allowed the skin to breathe. He theorized that only un-dyed animal fibers could achieve this affect, and in turn began to produce the Jaeger system of undergarments and suiting.

He began to reach commercial success in the 1880s, although his style of liberating woolen suit forms in autumn colors continued to resonate with the British until the mid-20th Century. Among his peers were other outspoken reformers, eccentrics and artists, including Oscar Wilde and George Bernard Shaw, who was seldom seen in his youth without his rust-colored Jaeger suit. They pushed the concept that fashion could be used to represent an ideological point of view, and that personal comfort should reign supreme. Within 20 years, this concept would become a given to fashion consumers.

(Shaw’s suit) had become a part of his personality; one can come to think of the reddish-brown Jaeger suit as if it were a sort of reddish-brown fur, and was, like the hair and eyebrows, part of the animal… In any case his brown woolen clothes, at once artistic and hygienic, completed the appeal for which he stood; which might be defined as an eccentric healthy-mindedness.”  ~G.K Chesterton about George Bernard Shaw

Sportswear

The expansion of industry and the improvement of living conditions saw the advancement of leisure activities. Sports became increasingly fashionable among upper-class women, who in turn needed specific kinds of clothing for these activities.

From the last years of the 19th Century through the first decades of the 20th Century, cycling, swimming, golf and riding were especially popular.

Industrial advances had made it possible to begin some form of standardized production which had proven quite challenging to the customized intricacies of more formal women’s attire, yet which proved accommodating to active wear.

The combination of industrial advances, wealth accumulation and social change had led to the fastest diffusion of fashion styles the world had yet seen. The idea that, from this point forward, fashions would continue to emerge and be diffused at an ever-increasing rate has led to our understanding today of marketing dynamics and brand identity. But more on that later…

Sources: personal lecture notes & Fashion by Christopher Breward

The First Industrial Revolution (1760s-1830s) radically transformed production and consumption patterns. Transportation improvements allowed vast distances to be traveled, and new goods such as cotton could be traded with highly frequency and efficiency. Mechanized processed using coal allowed mass factory production. Previously, in-home production by the family unit was the norm. The textile industry was at the heart of this rapid development in raw materials (cotton), technology and factory proliferation.

Cotton grew in prominence so greatly in this time for a number of reasons. It is much more resilient than silk, linen and wool, so it was easier to work with on primitive manufacturing machines that would destroy other fibers. John Key’s flying shuttle loom, invented in 1733, was instrumental to this end. In addition, the slave labor available in cotton-producing regions made the labor-intensive business of harvesting cotton more practical.

The Industrial Revolution produced a great many advances in society, but it also created new socio-economic groups ranging from the profoundly poor to the Industrial Aristocracy. The fashion of the Industrial Aristocracy was drastically different from previous fashions of the traditional nobility. Nobility dressed in tightly fitted garments of bright colors. Precious fabrics, together with precious stones and braids, showed that the person who wore it belonged to the highest social class. Industrialists expressed their “Grand Denial” by wearing full trousers instead of knee-highs, black coats and hats, which were to emphasize their thrift and intelligence. Great importance was placed on the details (hat, shirt, shoes). The modern men’s suit is adapted from this.

Since men had become the modest symbol of the “Grand Denial”, women became the means through which their husbands or fathers could demonstrate their wealth and social status. Upper-class women adapted to the S-shaped silhouette with the help of the corset and the crinoline. The corset was used from childhood so that the bones of the ribcage could adapt as the child grew into adulthood. Corsets were also known to induce miscarriages. One fun fact in this not-so-fun topic: the term “straight-laced” comes from corset-slang, if you will. A respectable and virtuous Victorian woman always wore here corset tight. Ladies of ill-repute were “unlaced”.

The crinoline was composed of layers of caging, which attached to the corset to create an S-shape. Women in this costume needed a maid to assist in using the restroom. Movement was very limited, and therefore the only women who could afford to dress in this manner were women of great financial means. Further, the half-crinoline was made from 30m of fabric. It was extremely expensive and VERY HEAVY… for the least active of women.  Full underwirings were required for all activities except fencing and swimming. FYI, it was absolutely disgraceful for a woman to be seen in her nightgown, even by her husband.

Female fashion was strictly regulated by etiquette codes that required specific dresses for different daily activities. These codes served as a method to prevent the trickle-down effect in fashion. Only the very wealthy could perfectly live the coded life with up to six ensemble changes per day. Furthermore, women could not walk, but had to ride in a carriage due to the impediments caused by their dresses. Some examples of coded dressing include: dresses in the “tapestry style” for indoor visits during the day and outrageously low necklines in dresses for the evening (forbidden in the day), where shoes and ankles were never to be seen.

The Industrial Revolution fulfilled the two prerequisites necessary for the emergence of department stores: high supply through mass production, and high demand. Department stores, with their large displays, labeled prices and marketing techniques were one of the first steps in the ideal of the “democratization of fashion”. Their catalogs were mailed for free, and showed people how to measure themselves for sizing.

In the meanwhile, as mass production was gearing up in the States and England’s textile factories, a man named Charles Worth (also from England) was busy developing a new model for deployment in Europe. The democratization of fashion had given many the opportunity to partake in the fashion system they were once excluded from, but it also gave rise to a call for differentiation on the demand side. The demand of high fashion came as a reaction to the clothes being worn by the lower social classes.

Worth started making dresses that showed off the high quality of the fabrics he had learned about from working as a draper. However, people had become interested in the fashion of the dress instead of just the fabric. They wanted something exciting and exotic. Worth founded his own couture house with much fanfare in Paris in 1858 and was the first designer to gain star status simply by signing each of his creations as if they were works of art. Targeting the European aristocracy and the American market (the world’s richest markets, at that time), Worth personally determined what he would make for each client (as opposed to being ordered to make something), and labeled his creations with his own name instead of his clients’. He did not create a new style, but rather elaborated the existing style (reducing the crinoline and introducing trains as luxurious accouterments, and developed interchangeable patters with the use of a sewing machine. He flamboyantly presented a new collection each year using the first live models (his wife and friends), and this introduced the constant factor of change within the fashion industry. Worth lived a very public life as an acting artist, creating a sense of notoriety and developing himself as a brand. Haute couture was thus born.

However, aside from revolutionizing fashion marketing, Worth did little to revolutionize the heavily girdled, contoured and covered “ladylike” look of the femme omee of the Belle Epoch. The French system of haute couture made its debut in Paris with the Pavillon de l”Elegance at the World Fair of 1900. Here, a few select fashion houses including Worth and Doucet showed their spectacular creations to an amazed international audience.

According to Worth: “We live by and for luxury, therefore all the questions we ask ourselves are superfluous; we must assume our roles, and that is all.”

The birth of fashion occurred somewhere around the end of the 1300s. We can trace the history of fashion through several key sources:

• Dresses & Garments: these artifacts become more rare before the 17th century, and the artifacts we have were typically of the most expensive nature, as cheaper garments were worn more frequently and were more likely to be ruined.
• Fabrics: these give us an idea of the technology and distribution systems the existed in different periods and regions, providing insight into markets and distribution chains
• Figurative arts: these are of course subjective, depending on what the artist (or the artist’s patron) wanted you to see, based on their own values, symbols and priorities (for example, a Renaissance master might use more expensive colors to demonstrate wealth in his patron’s clothing, and we have no way of knowing what is factual and what is not)
• Archives: accounting records and postmortem inventories often documented dresses, as these were among the most valuable items transmitted to heirs
• Literary texts
• Oral history

Okay, so we’ve got our sources down. Back to the history!

Prior to the mid-14th century, in Classical Periods, colors were dull and derived from a limited palette (typically white, yellow, red and some blues… all were dull). Clothing was neither cut nor sewn, but was draped indifferent to the body shape. Think: toga. Mid-14th century Europe brought about the appearance of a new type of clothing, with strong differentiation among men (short and tight, with silk tights) and women (long and close-fitting). Ah, how the times have changed!

Clothes began to show the body, and were cut to form. Men wore bright, contrasting colors, short blouses and tight silk or wool stockings, with an emphasis on the groin region (although this was shunned by the Church). Note the image to the left of The Martydom of Saint Sebastian, by Vincenzo Foppa 1489. Women’s fashion was equally tight around the bust, with a low neckline, and typically hung quite low (the longer the dress, the richer the woman).

We call this era the birth of fashion because there were changes in style taking place, there was an increase in options, and there was an increase in the speed of change of style (in contrast with previous uniformity in appearance). Furthermore, in previous times, unnecessary items were publicly burned by the devout. This was the first time in several hundred years where accessories could be displayed. There were also more available colors and construction techniques to provide increased options.

The birth of fashion was not merely about changes in style. It is also connected with the commercial revolution in Europe. People still typically wore rags in this period, and masses would wait outside of hospitals to beg for or steal the clothing of the recently deceased. However, new technologies invented in the 14th-15th centuries enabled great economic expansion. Eye glasses were invented, enhancing science and optics industries, and enriching the economy by allowing those with poor vision to work better and longer, and to see smaller objects in the manufacturing process. (Glasses at this time were basically magnifying glasses.)

People left serf conditions on farmland to move into cities for freedom and the ability to buy and sell. Innovation, itself, was centered in the urban communes. This was a new world, open to talent and ambition, based on different values from those in the countryside. Within the walled cities, people were getting rich. Here, fashion was born.

Clothing became the means through which the new business community (merchants and craftsmen) could affirm its social, political and economic status over traditional dominating classes. The use of clothing as a means of attesting one’s social status is confirmed in the sumptuary laws, whereby appearance was a public decision, not a personal choice. More specifically, these laws dictated what could be worn, and by whom. Sumptuary laws were most common in England.

Regarding new technologies, draped clothes were eclipsed by sewn garments thanks to buttons. Buttons allowed men’s tights to fasten and women’s form-fitting dresses to be worn. Sleeves became important as detachable elements because they gave the appearance of a whole new dress, and could be easily removed for more frequent laundering.

Colorful clothes were made possible due to improvements in dying. People in the Middle Ages placed great importance on color. The contrast in light versus dark, the social value of colors in the church or politics, and combinations of patterns or stripes prevailed. Take, for example, the famous Van Eyck painting, The Arnolfini Marriage, 1434. The husband is darkly dressed, demonstrating his seriousness, and that he is thrifty and committed. His wife wears green, demonstrating loyalty to her husband and wealth, while the white accents symbolize her purity. It was extremely difficult to find black or green clothing in this era, so this family is shown to be extremely wealthy.

Modern age trend setters were focused solely in the royal courts of Europe. The Spanish Court was known as the Black Triumphant. The Papal court also demonstrated magnificent elegance. Yet most important was the French court under Louis XIV. Versailles became the center os creation and diffusion of fashion, and Lyons became the center of silk production. The daily-changing spectacle that ended in revolution continues to influence fashion and culture through the tales of Marie Antoinette to this day. At the time, fashion ideas were transmitted through portraits, individuals (ambassadors or princes), gifts, and second-hand-clothes (the first example of ready-to-wear). We can see in this portrait of Louis XIV, he was quite a fashionable guy, with his wig, fur mantle, draped garment, silk stockings, and red heels!

What is Fashion?

Fashion is the culmination of a cultural system and a business system.

Cultural Definition

Fashion is a form of speech. It not only embraces clothing, but also accessories, jewelry, hairstyles, beauty and body art. What we wear and how and when we wear it, provides others with a shorthand to subtly read the surface of a social situation. For example, their are several different stereotypes of fashion expression. Among them:

• Fashion victim: buys on trend, not brand loyal
• Conservative: does not buy the look of the season, but of seasons past
• Customizers: buy variations within a strict uniform (Muslim headscarves, black suits with new cuts)
• Accessorizers: buy smaller items as accents of expression or aspirational belonging

Fashion is associated with social change and it is itself a tool for change. The history of creative/design aspects of the fashion business are made up of people and personalities. In learning about their lives and accomplishments, the development of the industry automatically unfolds. In order to understand the dynamics of the industry in each country, it’s always important to bear in mind the following:

• Social & economical changes taking place within a period

• Their impact on consumer demand

• The reaction of the industrial system

Within a designer’s creativity and research, there is an underlying reinterpretation of the past. For example, for his 1998 collection, John Galliano for Dior reinterpreted Paul Poiret’s 1910 collection. In the same year, he reinterpreted Jeanne Lanvin 1926.  There have been many variations on the reinterpretation of the royal gowns, as well as the reinterpretation of how the female form is represented in the silhouette.

→

National Cultures & Industry Influence

The French Way:

The French model offers no second or young lines. These brands grow through accessories, cosmetics, fragrances and eyewear. There is a strong focus on specific product categories. Couture holds prominence. (An example is Dior.)

The Italian Way:

The Italian model grows through extension in the core business of apparel. Brand extension comes later. The designer delivers a lifestyle model from which all brand and line extension emerges. Ready-to-wear holds prominence. (An example is Armani.)

The American Way:

The US model is characterized by strategic alliance with department stores. Glorification of basic products is demonstrated in brand extension in everything from couture to house paint, paving the way for the brand-inspired lifestyle.

Industrial Definition

Fashion is a business! The fashion pipeline of fashion is a system of materials, production facilities and mechanisms, technicians and artisans, and supporting streams including communications, logistics, retail, and so on. The pipeline is a key concept for defining fashion cycles, market dimensions and supply segmentation and role innovation. For example, the Spring/Summer 2009 collections are a culmination of the following activities (in broad terms):

The June 2007 yarns suggestions are taken into account, based on current trends and availability → Selected yarns are displayed by manufacturers in the September 2007 Yarn Fairs for producers to source → Having selected their yarns from the yarn fairs, textile producers show their available textiles in the March 2008 Textile Fairs → The textiles are selected by fashion and apparel houses, who use these to create their collections, shown in the September 2008 Fashion Shows → In February 2009, finalized collections become available in retail outlets worldwide → → →

To give you an idea of what goes on at a textile fair, check out the clip below from the Paris Premiére show:

The trends examined in the development of each of these steps within the pipeline refer to trends identified in the external cultural setting. Trends are influenced by media and arts, technological innovations, socio-cultural trends, designer creativity and research, and the availability or certain materials within the pipeline.

Industry Sectors

Beyond apparel, the fashion and luxury industries embrace different sectors (clothing and accessories, fragrances and cosmetics, watches and jewelry, automotive, tourism and hospitality, household goods and decor…) that compete on the symbolic meaning of their products rather than on the price or on product usefulness. This is why consumers may pay 5 times the price of a bag displaying the Louis Vuitton logo as they would for a bag produced using the same techniques, without the logo. The symbolic meaning  of status, group belonging, wealth, sophistication, recognition, etc. are the key factors that drive consumers to  Louis Vuitton, beyond product quality or usefulness. Examples of sectors include:

• Couture
• Ready-to-Wear
• Designer
• Diffusion
• Bridge
• Mass

Industry Sub-Segments

Each sector or industry is divided into its sub-segments which include the primary category’s key technology, product areas, group of clients, and end uses. Sub-segments are developed based on the following considerations:

• Supply Structure (what do we have to work with form the beginning? raw materials? set up costs? logistics?)
• Growth Outlook (how many people might want to buy this?)
• Mega Trends (what else are people doing with their time and money?)
• Attractiveness (is the product easily copied? can I protect my brand/market/dominance?)

By understanding how a brand fits within the above considerations relative to other brands, you can begin to understand their potential for success.

Competitive Strategy in Fashion & Luxury

Different business models within the fashion industry compete using various ranges of business logic. While I refer here to fashion, this principle is equally applicable in other symbolic industries.

• Luxury conglomerates often compete and protect their dominance based on the strength of their branding. (LVMH, Richemont, Gucci Group, Polo Ralph Lauren)
• Designer brands rely on creativity and the power of their communications campaigns to protect their brands. (Dolce & Gabbana, Prada, Chanel, Valentino)
• Industrial brands retain their brand strength by focusing their business models on trade services. (Diesel, Coach, Zegna)
• Retailers base their business models around the strength of their stores. (Zara, H&M, GAP)

More soon…