A Shrewd Fashion Tactician: The Long-Term Ball Game For A Fashion Designer

Quick & Easy Illustrations by Mai Manaloto 
http://instagram.com/MaryAnnClothing

As the saying goes, talent knows no boundaries. The fashion industry's main asset is creativity, therefore having a designer with an innate appreciation of artistic oeuvres is crucial. However, fashion is not an art but rather "creation applied to garments and accessories which must be sold successfully" as elucidated by J. Andrews (2004). In short, fashion is the commerce in creativity. To stay on top, it's not enough to just have a talented designer. An inspired management is necessary as well because while the creative process is disorganized, the production aspect must be rational. 

Just like a super model or a pop star, a fashion designer needs a good manager. The reality of the industry is that a designer alone won't be able to cope with all the pressures that come with the business of fashion. Based on countless fashion studies, there was hardly any example of a success story that is not based on a foundation of two individuals - one with a creative or design background and the other who has experience with business or management. The challenge is sustaining the relationship along the journey. 

Many individuals who pursue their artistic ambitions leave college with a dream of establishing their own label. So to work for an existing brand is a detour towards that dream. On the other hand, not working for a famous fashion brand might consign a designer to poverty and irrelevance. One solution to this type of dilemma is for a designer to be allowed to have their own label while still working for an established brand. For this type of set-up to work a designer must respect the brand's signature aesthetic and in turn, the brand must repose faith in the designer's interpretation of its DNA. If a designer rejuvenates a brand, s/he now becomes a figurehead, and if a brand wishes to secure the collaboration then this new designer must be granted a share of a company's profit. In other words, a designer's loyalty has to be bought by the brand. 

Reaching the top mount entails more than just having a talented designer and manager brimming with ideas. Control of the brand is always essential. This means selling products mostly through directly owned stores and limiting licensing of a brand name to others. Adding to the repertoire of the brand is necessary, ensure that your eggs are not all in one basket - mixing hard goods such as watches and jewelry with soft goods which include clothing, scarves, perfumes and such. This is guarantee that whatever vicissitudes may afflict the world of luxury, some parts of the empire are bound to be making money. 

Brand integrity is the indefinable aura that convinces an individual to pay a large sum for an item that can be purchased elsewhere for a lower price. This is another crucial aspect to consider in the luxury-goods market. Brand dilution, on the other hand, is the opposite of brand integrity - it is the negative side effect of popularity. If majority of the masses can afford a particular good, then it is no longer exclusive and is therefore no longer worth its lofty price tag. Luxury must avoid becoming too common for many high-fashion customers. 

A fashion house must also control its own distribution, meaning having its own exclusive store and limiting licensing. The rationale behind this is simple. "Instead of selling at wholesale prices to a department store, the fashion house can use its directly owned shop to sell at a retail price" as mentioned by Andrews (2004). It controls the markup or discount it gives. While also promoting the brand image through a chic and exclusive shopping experience, creating a personal and warm ambiance at exalted locations. This builds a concomitant experience that allows a brand to get to know it's customers better. The downside of this is the burden of fixed costs such as rent and employees. Having a footfall is a way to constantly make a profit. These are affordable and small fast moving items that easily lure customers to buy. This is the reason why department stores often place cosmetics, perfumes, and watches at the center opening of the ground floor. 

Licensing occurs when designers grant someone else the right to produce and sell products under their name and in return receive an up-front fee followed by a royalty of 3-8 percent of gross sales. This guarantees profit, however, the brand image may suffer when licensing goes awry.  The licensee bears the risk while the designer reaps a reward. The problem here is the long term effect on the designer’s name. If a licensee lowers its quality and often sells at a discount at the wrong place, then the brand integrity suffers. Nonetheless, licensing has its uses. Being a designer does not always entail that you know how to make shoes or perfumes, so why not hire your name to someone who does. 

As a takeaway, always keep in mind who you are designing for. There is no reason in creating clothing that is not practical with the exemption of runway pieces (these are made for the sake of the show, read more on Couture Trade: The Universal Benchmark Of Fashion). Be sure to be consistent with the brand image (the thread that links everything together) as you create diverse collections, even when diversifying from high end into more affordable diffusion ranges. Most of all, keep control of your brand. Licensing and franchising can help a business develop, however, keep in mind that no one will look after your name as much as you do. A vertically integrated supply chain where every aspect of the design, from manufacturing to distribution and retail is controlled, is ultimately the correct strategy for long-term brand prosperity. But first, you must establish the brand. 

Source: Extracted from J. Andrews (2004), "Rags and Riches: A Survey of Fashion," in The Economist (March 6): 6-8. The Economist Newspaper Ltd., London (March 6, 2004).