Branding the man: why men are the next frontier in fashion retail

With L.L. Bean joining the fray of brand collaborations, I’ve been asked about whether the world really needs any more one-off fashion collections and “updated classics” from another earnest, fashion “collective” or style savant. But it continues, brands and retailers continue to seek out the whiz kids of fashion to help them bring customers back into their stores.

From big box retailers (think Target) to the small heritage brand (think LL Bean), everyone is joining the collaboration club. The majority of the time, though, it’s the fuddy-duddy retail giant who is looking to garner some street cred.

So does it work, and do consumers really respond to it?

Yes and no. The fact is, the goal should not only be to sell product. Most of the time the brands who mate for one night (or one collection) don’t make much profit when it comes to collaborations. But what they gain is consumer insight and awareness. In other words, it’s a relatively cost-effective experiment in brand development.

The aim should be for the major players to gain a different perspective on their business and smaller brands to dip their toe into the waters of mass-market retail.

In the best scenarios, a great collaboration lets both brands share resources and brand equity, and in this economy, who doesn’t need that?

The novelty of say, Sonia Rykiel and H&M, or Thom Browne and Brooks Brothers means customers are inspired to shop, especially when it’s in a store they wouldn’t normally be caught in.

Collaborations also bring a sense of authenticity to a brand because suddenly it isn’t quite so mass-market. It seems special and exclusive. A Goliath like Target gets some boutique brand sincerity and the cachet of “designer” without the sticker-shock.

Of course both brands hope to gain something from the relationship without cannibalizing their audience. There are certainly cases where that’s been true, most notably with sportswear brands.  In the late 1990’s Puma elevated its profile when they collaborated with designer Jil Sander.

And in 2005, Puma opened multi-branded stores where they featured collaborations with Christy Turlington, Philippe Stark, and others. I think the point here is that it spoke of the brand’s stance in terms of innovation: that collaboration is truly collaborative — not dictatorial. Nike kind of missed that bandwagon preferring to be the ne plus ultra of sportswear, “i.e., we don’t need anyone else’s help.” The right move? Well, with so many athletes endorsing their products, I guess they really don’t need any help.

Karl Lagerfeld got to see just how much of a household name he had become when he collaborated with H&M on a capsule collection. Fans lined up around the block (other H&M collaborations weren’t quite so well received, such as the Madonna collection in 2007.)

Brief and copious one offs —  like Levi’s and Opening Ceremony  — are a bit more difficult to quantify, because they are so short term and in the case of Levi’s, they just happen a bit too often. Levi’s has been a bit garrulous about chasing the collaboration train, and it can make some wonder if they’re investing enough in their own heritage and equity. In other words, collaborations shouldn’t replace a company’s ordinary business model. It should be a tool that is used sparingly and carefully to enhance what you already have.

Collaborations are strategic experiments in new business development. That’s already proven itself with Brooks Brothers which has quietly taken Brown’s ideas and integrated silhouette and detailing into its classic label collection.

If the cost of producing an additional collection is daunting, consider media budgets and the cost to launch new products on your own. The cost of producing these collaborations can often be off-set by the amount of pro bono buzz as opposed to traditional advertising channels  — buzz from previously, unavailable channels, such as opinion leaders and early adopters. This kind of presence goes a long way in growing a new customer.

Questionable payoffs do exist though. Consider the Gap and Paris’ trend-setting Colette store. What was the latter’s gain in opening a pop up shop at the Gap’s New York flagship (or Paris’ Merci, who also opened a pop up the following year at the Gap)?

Frankly, I’m really not sure either one got what they were looking for. Instead it felt like a charity case on the part of Colette for the Gap; a brand which has been frantically trying to rebuild its image after too many years of self-sabotage. It was a collaboration that felt more like desperation than innovation.

---

Or why I learned to walk in a Cuban heel

It’s not often that a pair of shoes stops me in my tracks, but Yves Saint Laurent’s Jonny Boot has managed to do just that to me for over the last five or so years.

When I first saw them — under YSL’s previous régime of Tom Ford — they looked far too louche to be taken seriously. Uh.. is that a high heel?

“It’s a Cuban heel,” I was informed. Indeed, according to Kenny Abiog, YSL’s men’s buyer for the U.S., the shoe was not exactly a runaway success for the brand when it was launched in 2004.

“Even I looked at it and thought it was the kind of shoe my hairdresser would wear,” said Abiog, on a recent trip to San Francisco where he (alas) had to help pack up the just-closed YSL boutique.

But in very little time the shoe became one of designer Tom Ford’s most successful pieces, and at one point the Jonny Boot accounted for the lion’s share of the label’s men’s wear profits.

“A store would get a shipment of 24 pairs on a Friday and by Monday there were only eight left,” says Abiog.

Thus even under Stefano Pilati’s current reign as YSL’s designer, the Jonny Boot remains. The boot you see here is an exact reproduction of the original, in buttery soft leather and is currently available in a limited edition of 142 pairs. I have my eye on Number 78.

To stand in these shoes, one must stand tall. Comic relief can be had in watching the uninitiated try to walk in them. Some slouch, others stumble, and those even less fortunate walk as if on stilts.

Just remember,  you’re not wearing a pair of Manolo’s so make sure you swagger. At $795, they’re a small price to pay for a legendary shoe from a legendary house, and trust me, they’ll definitely give you the confidence to strut.

The Yves Saint Laurent limited edition Jonny Boot is available in select U.S. boutiques. For more information call (212) 832 7100.

---

I’m just about to leave for New York for fashion week and to do some press for my book. Going to New York is a kind of pilgrimage — to art, culture, and of course, fashion. In more recent years, my trips to New York are less frenetic and driven. I am less a participant and more an observer.

I like it this way: to be alone and anonymous and observe New Yorkers being… well, New Yorkers. While I love going to museums and exploring the latest shop or neighborhood of the moment, I also love just parking myself somewhere and watching the performance on the street. It always looks as though a casting agent had come along, given them their roles, and a director calls “cue the background!”

Everyone in New York tells you how exhausted they are. I am convinced, it’s because New York is all about the moment — for everything. For everyone. Unlike any other place in the U.S., and perhaps even the world, New York is about the “Now” ; never about the “Before” or even the “Later.”

It is all about what you are doing Now. It is all about who you are Now. It is all about what you are wearing Now. No one really cares about who you were Before, or who you will be Later. Being in the Now all the time is exhausting. For the people who live and love fashion, it is even more exhausting.

But it is also what makes it all so entertaining. A walk down almost any street in Manhattan — a city which, for better or for worse, has gentrified itself nearly to the point that it is rare to discover anything that hasn’t been discovered by everyone else — reveals a parade of people wearing their very best Nows: outfits meant to appear accidental, fabulous, and very much an interpretation of who they are…. now.

See them a year from now and that look will be so yesterday — so… before now.

---