Discussions about the fashion industry thread

[Fuuma]

Google study telling you young people think google is really cool:
https://storage.googleapis.com/think/docs/its-lit.pdf

Lots of mentions of cosmetics, trainer brands, Supreme, Uniqlo, etc.

 

[dieworkwear]

Yea, JE and RG aren't on the kind of level I'm talking about. It's easier to double your profits when you're making $1 million in sales a year. Harder when you're making $100 million. Growth numbers in those cases just mean different things.

The only brands I can think of that are dong well are H&M and Zara, but that's tied less to design and more price points (fast fashion, etc).

Everyone else -- J. Crew, Banana Republic, RL, etc -- have reported struggling sales for years.

So much has been written about Lyons' exit from J. Crew. Robin Givhan at WSJ tied it to the death of that classic preppy look for women, which doesn't sound all too unfamiliar for menswear.

But I think this is less about a shift in stylistic trends and more about shopping habits. People are shifting away from mid-scale stores and towards higher end boutiques and cheap fast fashion. You can sell that preppy Americana look at Sid Mashburn, and whatever is the season's hot trend at Zara, but the middle is having a tough time.

I also think J. Crew has had an especially hard time because they introduced many of their core customers to higher end brands, so you get the Diderot Effect. People get something nice and then suddenly realize their other stuff isn't so nice, so they start replacing those other things. Hard to buy J. Crew outerwear after you've bought a Barbour (which J Crew sold)

 

[LA Guy]

Yea, JE and RG aren't on the kind of level I'm talking about. It's easier to double your profits when you're making $1 million in sales a year. Harder when you're making $100 million. Growth numbers in those cases just mean different things.

The only brands I can think of that are dong well are H&M and Zara, but that's tied less to design and more price points (fast fashion, etc).

Everyone else -- J. Crew, Banana Republic, RL, etc -- have reported struggling sales for years.

So much has been written about Lyons' exit from J. Crew. Robin Givhan at WSJ tied it to the death of that classic preppy look for women, which doesn't sound all too unfamiliar for menswear.

But I think this is less about a shift in stylistic trends and more about shopping habits. People are shifting away from mid-scale stores and towards higher end boutiques and cheap fast fashion. You can sell that preppy Americana look at Sid Mashburn, and whatever is the season's hot trend at Zara, but the middle is having a tough time.

I also think J. Crew has had an especially hard time because they introduced many of their core customers to higher end brands, so you get the Diderot Effect. People get something nice and then suddenly realize their other stuff isn't so nice, so they start replacing those other things. Hard to buy J. Crew outerwear after you've bought a Barbour (which J Crew sold)

I wonder where most of the bleed is to, though. I don't have any numbers, but my feeling is that it's in large part due to a large influx of consumer migration to small MTM brands, as well as to the Uniqlos and Hermes of the world.

When this forum first started, a small Hong Kong based outfit called Jantzen as the bees knees. The purchasing system was labyrinth, and you were going to mess up a few shirts, and the delivery time was indeterminate, but the Proper Cloths and Spier&MacKays of the world simply didn't exist yet, nor did Kickstarter or Indiegogo. Yes, all of these outfits are very small in comparison to a Ralph Lauren, but retail has always been a low margins business, so an influx of these would certainly perturb the ecosystem. And just anecdotally, this type of outfit and kickstarter model outfits are the top two types of business who inquire about advertising on Styleforum.

 

[dieworkwear]

I think we're saying the same thing. My comment above was about how I think the middle is breaking -- consumers are moving towards expensive upscale stores and inexpensive fast fashion brands. I'd categorize Jantzen and its ilk to more expensive brands, at least if you compare them to the ~$50/ shirt you find at J. Crew, etc.

It worries me if we start seeing firm sizes bifurcate into two forms though. Big companies are just cheap, fast fashion brands. Small companies are all high-end labels. Being small can come with lots of disadvantages (inherent price inflation given its small run, lower ability to whether bad financial stores, etc). Seems like that could squeeze wages and make employment more volatile, which has to have an eventual effect on talent pools.

 

[Epaulet]

At our level, we've seen the brick & mortar boutique business dwindle to unbelievably low levels. It's clear that for most of the United States, the days of the independent menswear boutique are numbered. You can sense this clearly at all of the trade shows.

You're also seeing a lot of the gimmicky e-commerce outlets (Trunk Club, Jack Threads) folding as well. Menswear was and always will be a small corner of the industry compared to womenswear. It could never support the amount of new firms and brands that launched in the past few years.

In terms of larger retailers, I'd agree with the other posts here: the "middle" is being hollowed out across the board. Fast fashion is still performing and certain luxury is doing well. Online only sellers can be profitable through their control of overhead and expenses. But I can tell you this: my friends at places like J.Crew and Bloomingdales are all searching for new jobs. Many of them have left to work for cosmetic companies.

It's interesting to examine the reasons. I'd say that you've a few big factors at play:

1) Online Sales are ubiquitous. You can get anything that you want and often delivered very quickly. This makes people impatient and uninterested in B&M. I feel the same way. For the longest time, it was such a treat to go to a cool sneaker store and find a new pair. Now I'm just frustrated if they have a style that I like but not my size.

2) Young people just ain't what they used to be. You need young customers to support a large scale business, and anyone who is 24yo now was in their teens when the recession hit. They saw their parents panic. Their earning potential is less and their debts are higher than previous generations. They're just not as inclined to shop like people my age (40) did back in the days.

3) Media is so decentralized and social-focused now. It's harder for big brands and larger retailers to break through the static of Facebook and Instagram. The new hyper-fast way of digesting media favors simple one-shot messages. Something idiotic like "Untuckit" could never have existed 10 years ago. But it works (maybe) now, because the message is simple. Shirts that are shorter so you don't have to tuck them in. You can see that in a quick facebook ad. You can only see so much J.Crew stuff in that same space.

 

[dieworkwear]

Regarding point one, I think online shopping has also made people less interested in personal interaction with SAs. Nobody likes a pushy SA, but if you're used to ten years of private online shopping, where you just pick out stuff on your own, it can be even more off putting when an SA approaches you. Aside from all the other stuff people talk about -- the convenience of online stores, the wider selection, the ease of finding sales -- I think it's changed how private people feel about the activity.

A couple of generations ago, the whole idea of an SA giving you personal style advice, knowing your name, etc at a place like Saks was considered a luxury. Now, I think few people want that kind of relationship with a store. More and more people want to be left alone when they shop, and I think that has to do with the rise of online commerce.

One of the things I've thought about for a while is how online shopping will change fashion design. It's harder, I think, to sell really subtle detail -- the texture in a fabric, the sheen, the finishing, maybe small things you may not notice in photos. Online shopping favors bolder things that will catch your eye as you scroll. Over a long period of time, I imagine that affects how a store plans their seasonal purchases, and thus what designers design. (I could be wrong here; @Epaulet would know better).

Really a shame cause I think B&Ms add a lot. Not just to the experience of getting something, which I think is important, but also what you're able to find. There's a ton of stuff I never would have considered, but picked up because I was able to see it in person (and try it on).

 

[Epaulet]

^ yup agreed. I have no patience for lousy SA's or long lines. I used to just grin & bear it, but now I feel like I don't have to. I think that many customers think this way.

I think that there's still a place for personal interaction, but people want it on their terms. A lot of online sites like Proper Cloth use the concept of personalized selling to give the customer a better experience virtually. Trunk shows and events give both that interaction and a fun social setting that's richer than just visiting a store.

And yeah, I'd agree that online largely favors (1) simplicity of approach and (2) easily understood details. I'd say that's accurate for larger ventures. It also allows really niche and specialized items to sell because you can reach a huge audience and use tools like video to communicate better than an image or a catalog ever could. Videos have become incredibly important, and we'll look to have a video presentation for every single new product that we launch. If you can get a customer in the door, there's so many new tools for selling online.

The loss of B&M shops is especially depressing for its effects on downtowns and streets. It's depressing to stroll a block where everything is coffee, nail salons, and Soul Cycle. Our former street in Brooklyn is headed that way, and it used to be a really vibrant block for independent stores of all stripes. But them's the breaks.. it's impossible to maintain a shop if customers just aren't interested in patronizing it.

 

[bry2000]

Can anyone cite a specific example of a retailer which shut its retail stores to sell exclusively on-line and has done so successfully (that is, the business thrived on whatever relevant metric like sales)?

 

[LA Guy]

Can anyone cite a specific example of a retailer which shut its retail stores to sell exclusively on-line and has done so successfully (that is, the business thrived on whatever relevant metric like sales)?

The Hollywood Trading Company (HTC) is possibly the best example of this. Started as an LA boutique, is now a leather brand, selling mostly in Japan and Europe. (Note, I only know this story second hand, so it may be inaccurate.)

 

[ClambakeSkate]

I may sound like an old fart by saying it, but I think a big over-reaching problem with B&M shops is that most people who are becoming old enough to shop for their own clothes are used to having most of their interaction with people online; facebook, insta, tinder, styleforum, etc. So most of the population of that generation is completely inept at looking someone in the face and having any sort of human contact.

 

[Landau]

There is also something to be said about the fall of the division between strictly 'formal' business attire and regular /lounge wear. Whereas one had to effectively keep two wardrobes, most people nowadays can get away with one. In a culture where a hoodie, t-shirt and jeans become the de facto uniform, there is arguably less value in 'investing' in 'quality' pieces and, in fact, often gets looked down upon (see sticker shock for a Merz B. Schwanen Henley or Truman boots or a reigning champ hoodie or your favorite denim). All of which leads to a culture where it's more than alright to dress yourself completely from Uniqlo.

I agree with the rest of the points you guys made above, but I'd also add that the hollowing out of the middle traditional retailers like J. Crew gives rise to a new hype driven market ecosystem. For some, this is unbearable (and I understand and sympathise with the sentiment), but it is giving rise to a series of independent designers with a hyper tailored niche like never before. Sure, yeezy/supreme/bape kids may be annoying, but we also get a new idea market place which is driven more about innovation (or gimmicks, depending on your view) than it is reliability. It's the fall of McDonald's for your next foodie craze.

 

[happyriverz]

There is something to be said about discovering new stuff from B&M stores like @dieworkwear mentioned, but I'm guilty of just going into a B&M store, discover some cool stuff and then immediately going on Grailed/ebay/Rakuten/YJP to see if I can find it cheaper, especially for brands with distinct aesthetics where the style does not change too much from season to season. There's an element of free riding in that I'm waiting for the guy who bought something at full-price to list it on Grailed 6 months later at half the price.

 

[ghdvfddzgzdzg]

What I do hear us all saying is that there's value in the physical availability of retail, even if no one is buying then and there.

I found great value as a consumer in being able to walk into Epaulet when I'd be in New York, and the same goes with shops like Dover Street Market. Even if I've never bought something in person from Epaulet, knowing what the stuff is like in person is fundamental to me buying online. I don't think you can get a feel for a lot of brands without seeing/feeling them in person. Then there are the stores where I bought things in person that I never would have online, like Assembly or Need Supply. Free shipping/returns is great but I'm conscious of the expenses there, and I'm not gonna play what amounts to Yoox roulette on a small store's dime.

The trunk show thing is cool, except that the chance of my schedule lining up so I make it to one is next to zero. Having an office that operates as a by-request visiting space (that's how NMWA works, right?) seems like a good balance. I'm hoping to see some things there in person next time I'm in NYC that I've been curious about.

 

[Fuuma]



I may sound like an old fart by saying it, but I think a big over-reaching problem with B&M shops is that most people who are becoming old enough to shop for their own clothes are used to having most of their interaction with people online; facebook, insta, tinder, styleforum, etc. So most of the population of that generation is completely inept at looking someone in the face and having any sort of human contact.

I'm not sure it is a matter of having no social contact and associated skills as much as not wanting to have any for business/consumer related activities. In other words I find the people who think ordering a taxi by touching a screen versus calling a number is of any import to be extremely annoying but it doesn't mean they suck at personal relationships.

 

[dieworkwear]

Future is all about robot tailors, but still Jewish.


[VIDEO][/VIDEO]