On a recent afternoon we found San Francisco’s Union Square nearly empty — not a single pedestrian, car or bus — the streets so eerily silent that all one could hear was the spirited chirps of sparrows. Yes, birdsong in the heart of the City.
Across the United States, vast swathes of urban downtowns are boarded up in an apparent effort to discourage looters during the COVID-19 quarantine, but it made us wonder why so many retailers made no effort to do more with the plywood sheets they so hastily installed over store windows.
The Louis Vuitton boutique attempted to be a bit more cheerful with orange painted boards, along with a rather bleak proclamation applied to the surface: “The journey that was paused will eventually start again, Louis Vuitton wishes you and your loved one’s health and safety.”
In the Pacific Northwest, however, architecture and design employees at Gensler had an entirely different idea.
The Seattle branch had already been working on a project they call Color Speaks, designed to study “how color can bring hope and optimism to the future of our cities.” The COVID-19 pandemic became an opportunity to put their idea into action.
They reached out to all of Gensler’s U.S. offices to encourage their design teams to transform those blank storefronts into bold messages rendered in rich colors and patterns.
It’s already had a tonic effect in some of Seattle’s neighborhoods, where many businesses look so much more welcoming – even if they’re closed.
The team has even created a downloadable paint-by-numbers guide that helps artists navigate the process of developing a design and obtaining permissions from merchants.
We think it’s a genius idea, not only for the businesses, but as an outlet for the many talented people at this global firm whose job it is to envision a brighter tomorrow.
And isn’t that what design is all about?
Gensler photos courtesy of Krista Reeder, Sara Thompson, Giselle Sheeran, and Ryan Collier.
For the last decade, Macy’s has been working in fits and starts at reinventing itself, and most recently this includes buying a stake in Story, the wildly successful New York specialty store founded by Rachel Shechtman.
Shechtman’s concept was launched in 2011 as a 2,000-square foot serial pop-up store in New York’s Chelsea, It was instantly considered groundbreaking for its fanciful themes that were perfect for the Instagram generation.
Macys
Macy’s – and many others – took note: “Discovery.” “Narrative-driven”. “Retail as entertainment.”
Sometimes, it takes a startup to state the obvious.
Now Shechtman is Macy’s “chief experience officer” and her concept has been added to 36 Macy’s stores nationwide.
We always wonder what drives retailers to co-opt another brand’s mojo rather than do it themselves. After all, shouldn’t Macy’s already know how to execute what Story is doing? Apparently not.
Let’s review some retail fundamentals, ones Macy’s should know by heart:
Telling a compelling story is what makes any retailer relevant and enticing. It’s not about window-dressing. It’s about having a point of view that is palpable throughout the store, and across all of the brand’s touchpoints.
Unfortunately, that’s what Macy’s has been challenged with for decades now. It’s why stores feel so disconnected; more warehouse than an actual brand. In-store staff typically know nothing about what they sell. Displays are largely provided by the vendors. Assortments seldom demonstrate a quality criteria.
So while Story might generate a bit of excitement, it’s not going to move the needle to the degree needed to generate a fresh impression of the brand.
But incrementally, and provided they invest in a long-term, strategic reset of the entire customer journey, Macy’s can bring vitality to its DNA if they emphasize retailing experiences as much as products.
It’s a story waiting to happen.
Admit it: Macy’s is a slow sinking behemoth, a Titanic in the world of retail which we all watch sink with a certain reverence, nostalgia, but also a degree of relief.
The truth is Macy’s ship has long since sailed and it probably should have packed it in a long, long time ago. Yet they continue to rearrange the proverbial deck chairs.
Macy’s is a museum to the dawn of the Millenium when a sea change took place and retail changed forever.
That they have continued to try and be relevant is astonishing, giving clear insight into the denial of its board of directors. Terry Lundgren, the now former CEO rarely admitted the obstacles, instead touting that Macy’s would become the model for omnichannel retail.
After Christmas 2017 he touted it’s 1% increase in holiday sales. Lundgren’s big moment was when he announced that the brand would be come omnichannel.
The fact is, Macy’s aging demographic is far from being omnichannel so what makes you think it matters if you are?
When they installed those self-service bar code machines is when they basically told customers to not bother asking for help.
The truth is, Macy’s still feels like it’s lost in time, 1999 to be exact: the massive scale of floors full of vanilla products and brands that are so boring and all-American, staffed by aging and stubborn union employees who know little if anything about the product they sell.
“We don’t have our head in the sand as to the significant challenges we face in getting the business growing again,” he says Macy’s CEO Jeff Gennette.
Jeff Gennette, who earlier this year replaced Lundgren as CEO, seems to know what the brand is up against.
“We don’t have our head in the sand as to the significant challenges we face in getting the business growing again,” he says, in an interview with the Washington Post. “We certainly don’t have all the answers yet, but we are working on them with a sense of urgency.”
I’m not sure which is more alarming: his use of “yet” or “sense of urgency.”
From the company’s 2016 annual report came this optimistic message to shareholders:
“The Company seeks to attract customers by offering most wanted selections, obvious value, and distinctive marketing in stores that are located in premier locations, and by providing an exciting shopping environment and superior service through an omnichannel experience. Other retailers may compete for customers on some or all of these bases, or on other bases, and may be perceived by some potential customers as being better aligned with their particular preferences.”
It’s an oddly knowing statement: starting with an attempt at a positive and ending with a very ominous negative.
Macy’s challenges are formidable and in our view, insurmountable – unless the brand takes a giant step in a different direction.
Here are our reasons why Macy’s needs an aggressive transformation:
1) Amazon is tracking to be the largest clothing retailer of 2017 and 2018, with its growing roster of private label offerings. Keep in mind that the largest profit center for Macy’s is women’s clothing.
2) Every month, two-thirds of Macy’s most loyal customers and 70% of Millennials shop at off-price retailers.
3) Macy’s is so addicted to never-ending promotions and massive discounting that they simply cannot survive otherwise. Customer’s are been trained to expect the discounts.
4) The company is saddled with too much real estate, which alone is worth billions of dollars. Last year’s closing of 100 stores is simply not enough.
Which is why it came as no surprise when following another dismal Christmas season, the company announced the closure of dozens more stores.
So what is the future of Macy’s?
The biggest problem with the Macy’s experience is its vastness, an unattractive warehouse of bright lights and stacks of stuff.
Macy’s could offer a bolder alternative to Amazon as an online retailer coupled with tightly edited dynamic showrooms offering broader buy-online-pick-up-in-store concepts. Imagine Macy’s with an Amazon Locker offer where shoppers could pick up their merchandise in their own neighborhood.
Of course what Macy’s should have done is just merge with Amazon. Late last year that rumor swirled but instead Amazon partnered with Target.
Now, a store like Macy’s is this strange anachronism for a kind of retail that is so irrelevant that it feels almost quaint walking into one of its stores.
But nostalgia is no longer profitable in the age of the Internet and more than likely 2018 will mark a pivotable year for the aging giant. We’re watching.
Never before have we seen a generation so intensely focused on showcasing a kind of perfected lifestyle, whether it be in a coffee shop, where they earnestly watch their coffee being brewed, or a days-long excursion to Burning Man.
Millennials are on a constant quest to do something worth talking about or posting on social media.
While the narcissism of Millennials is well-documented, it’s safe to say that this behavior of self-absorption has become the norm across an ever-widening demographic.
{ It’s safe to say that this behavior of self-absorption has become the norm across an ever-widening demographic. }
Everyone, it seems, is acting like a Millennial.
Yes, you are part of the “Selfie Generation” if you’re documenting and broadcasting what you do, where you are, who you’re with, and what you’re eating.
But for retailers and strategists it’s still Millennials who are driving the market for new ways to express themselves via “wow” experiences: those one-of-a-kind moments that will earn the world’s attention.
Following on the heels of food trucks, boot camps, and survival games comes the latest in fun and games: it’s Pee Wee’s Playhouse on steroids.
{ The whole point of the trend in experience-based exhibitions is that there is only the whiff of “culture” with barely the after-taste of intellect. }
Traveling pop-ups like Color Factory and the Museum of Ice Cream have managed to hit the sweet spot. Consumers are hungry for totally vapid yet deliriously goofy opportunities to behave like overgrown children.
They’re called an “experience”(because just about everything these days is either that or a “journey.”) Color Factory fits the bill with what their PR team describes as a “celebration of color and material.” Now there’s a vague mission statement.
To put it more succinctly: imagine what happens when Fisher Price hooks up with Jelly Belly.
Color Factory (like the Museum of Ice Cream) calls itself art but it probably has as much artistic merit as Stevia has calories. Never mind: the audience is forgiving so long as there’s a place to take a selfie.
Melia Robinson
The Museum of Ice Cream is anything but a museum and encourages visitors to “take as many pictures as you can.”
{ Retailers are taking careful note that more than 3 out of 4 millennials (78%) choose to spend money on a desirable experience or event over buying something desirable. }
It’s essentially the same concept as the Color Factory except you substitute oversized candy and desserts. If you were Hello Kitty you’d be home by now.
This Willy Wonka fantasy barely makes any attempt to educate or inform visitors on the art or history of ice cream — but who cares, right?
The whole point of these experience-based exhibitions is that there is only the whiff of “culture” with barely the after-taste of intellect.
But do not overlook its value. This seemingly innocent trend is the sign of bigger things to come and it’s impacting the existing retail landscape in very real ways.
The numbers are proof alone: more than 3 out of 4 millennials (78%) choose to spend money on a desirable experience or event over buying something desirable.
And 55% of millennials say they’re spending more on events and live experiences than ever before.
FOMO, or “Fear of Missing Out,” is the driving force for why Millennials feel so compelled to demonstrate to the world that they’re engaged in just as many fun and meaningful experiences as everyone else appears to be – maybe more. Afterall, FOMO is a competitive sport.
{ Experiences – especially ones that happen as a group – appear to have greater long-term value than the traditional consumption of goods. }
The success of these enriched and highly designed experiences is that they feel organic yet still deliver the photographic proof necessary to prove that one’s life is an enviable product — not to mention advertising the exhibition.
For the “Me” generation, this has greater long-term value than traditional consumer goods.
Sadly those who are really experiencing FOMO are the world’s long-suffering museums and cultural institutions who are largely lost in time with their staid and serious approaches to storytelling and exhibition.
It’s not their fault: it’s just the times have changed.
The truth is, the vast majority of museum exhibitions deliver relatively passive activities, ones where one wanders through white rooms and stares at works of art on the wall. We are admonished: Don’t touch. No cameras. Quiet, please.
Across the country, museums struggle against the tide of popular culture and a critical demographic that cares little for history or anything that reeks of the past.
It’s for this reason that we have seen so many of the better funded museums turning to increasingly “light” topics — like fashion.
At the Metropolitan Museum of Art, fashion exhibitions have managed to draw thousands, most notably with the record attendance in record 2011 for the Alexander McQueen “Savage Beauty” show, not to mention 2008’s Yves Saint Laurent exhibition.
Which is why going forward, we will see more and more marketers and public-facing institutions struggling to innovate bolder, more colorful ways to engage their target audience.
The soon to open San Francisco Museum of Modern Art is riding high on accolades not seen since the much ballyhooed Mario Botta building transformed the city skyline back in 1995.
But it’s important to remember one’s roots and that for decades, SFMOMA lived in the shadow of New York’s Museum of Modern Art.
Back in 1935 when the museum was established, San Francisco’s upstart museum didn’t see a need to distinguish itself from one on the east coast, especially since that one had only emerged on the scene six years earlier.
More than eighty years later, what started as a privately funded civic institution housed in an unused space of the War Memorial Veteran’s Building, is now one of the most important modern art institutions in the country.
I remember when SFMOMA was the ingénue of the modern art world — and that was part of its charm.
A luncheon with John Diebenkorn (he spoke lovingly of the light of San Francisco), or meeting Jeff Koons (riding high on Michael and Bubbles). I loved an unusual exhibition of Jackson Pollack’s “psychoanalytic work” — esoteric but fascinating nonetheless.
I realize now that these exhibitions defined the museum’s unique personality and distinctly renegade approach to collecting art. The soul of the museum was its quirkiness.
A great modern art museum must not only be aesthetically seductive, it must be functionally relevant to its ultimate purpose: to showcase great art.
When the museum moved t into its new Botta-designed building — a rather “serious” museum in the fashionable, post-modern style — it seemed SFMOMA had finally “arrived.”
Suddenly the city could boldly boast of it’s own MOMA. Ours — not New York’s. But still people were confused. Is this New York’s West Coast satellite?
More importantly, in a relatively short time the new building began to lack the space and flexibility to give the museum the broader stage it needed to showcase its now massive collection.
So in 2009 when Doris and Donald Fisher officially donated their world-famous collection (a mere 13,000 pieces), it was quid pro quo that SFMOMA needed to transform itself into something fitting of such a formidable donation.
But how to adapt Botta’s building and add a massive new wing. More importantly, how would the expansion impact the visitor experience? What are the “roots” of this institution and how should it present its own singular identity?
The winning design firm, Snøhetta, had their work cut out for them.
“The building should open to visitors from all walks of life,“ recalls partner in charge, Craig Dykers, of the initial assessment of the project’s goals.
“It should be inviting to those who may be introduced to modern art as well as those who are more focused art enthusiasts. The building should be familiar in some ways while very challenging in others. It should invigorate and feel authentic and intimate. Its galleries should allow the art to feel natural in the room.”
Creating this kind of new public “face” for such an important institution is challenging. The San Francisco skyline is already clogged with buildings. To essentially “add on” to an existing landmark takes a bit of arrogance and cunning. No doubt this weighed on the Snøhetta team.
Like a journey through the city, the museum’s passages lead us through distinct exhibition paths but also allow us to discover.
Every architect hopes – even if secretly – that the building they design will become “iconic.” Consider the Guggenheim Bilbao, which practically overnight became a world-famous icon and turned a sleepy Basque industrial town into a household name.
While this wasn’t Snøhetta’s goal, the hope is that they could do what Botta arguably hadn’t done with his building. Indeed, Botta created a new icon for the city’s skyline, but it didn’t necessarily propel SFMOMA’s reputation to the heights it had hoped. Snøhetta worked from the inside out, making art the heart of how they solved a problem.
“Most museums do not have very much glass and have few windows, since natural light can harm delicate works of art,” says Dykers. “By creating the undulating, white exterior we created a situation where, as the sun moves through the day so does the play of sunlight on the surface. At night the ripples capture the ambient light of surrounding buildings, or from the night sky.”
It’s only natural that such a building would become the target of critics. The London Guardian uncharitably called it “a giant meringue with a hint of IKEA” while the San Francisco Chronicle tried to be generous and called it “no masterpiece but it has real joys.”
Architects are used to critics — it comes with the job.
Where before, museums were static and didactic, new museum design emphasizes art as a personal experience that doesn’t always need to be prescribed.
Nevertheless, I would argue that Snøhetta has delivered a building that, while not a groundbreaking architectural icon, offers a far more compelling art experience than Botta’s brick bunker, which was stunning from the outside but remote and lonely on the inside.
“The new multiple entries, glass facades, and exterior stair and terrace are an invitation to visit the museum,” says Elaine Molinar, Snøhetta’s managing director.
Snøhetta came up with the idea of two entrances, with one on Howard Street bookending the existing entrance on Third Street. Each entrance showcases a collection of works that are free to the public, a kind of tasting menu that invites them to go further on to the main galleries.
“The design of the galleries was very deliberate in terms of bringing the art into focus,” says project architect Jon McNeal.
Like a journey through the city, the museum’s passages lead one through distinct exhibition paths but also allow us to find inspiration on our own.
“We worked very hard to eliminate as many details and equipment as possible from the floors, walls, and ceilings. Ceilings in the core galleries are designed with a cove to provide ambient light with a hidden light source which greatly reduces the number of exposed spotlights.”
Molinar explains that rather than disguise the connection between the “new” and “old” buildings, Snøhetta sought to make the transition distinct and to some extent, obvious. A window is built into the expansion joint that links the two structures together.
Snøhetta sought to deliver a distinct visitor experience that mirrors the city with its hills, bay views, and promontories. Like a journey through the city, the museum’s passages lead one through distinct exhibition paths but also allow us to find inspiration on our own.
“The expansion offers the visitor a gradual experience of ascending and descending through all the galleries: a change in direction, unique views of the city, a chance to pause and reflect, and to step outside. There’s a sense that you are on an adventure.”
Several weeks before the museum opened, the museum hung its new visual identity which baffled some who were stunned that the Botta-inspired logo featuring stout and solid, post-modern sans-serif typography had been forsaken for something altogether different.
We wanted the identity to reflect our mindset—one that is open, surprising, and welcoming,” explains Jen Sonderby, SFMOMA’s design director. “For this reason the new identity is designed to move, literally opening up just as our building now does to the city, and welcoming visitors to a wide variety of experiences.”
The letters are at once, floating and moving — Sonderby uses “kinetic” — simultaneously expressing the movement and the change of San Francisco, and the climate and environment that is very much its signature.
“One of our formal goals was to have all three letter groups equally weighted so that the ‘SF’ was essential to the ‘MO’ and the ‘MA,’ and which will also help dispel the myth that we are the San Francisco branch of MoMA NY.”
As we know, content is king, and here is where the museum must beat its own path towards a new identity. With a two-year calendar full of prestigious exhibitions, this will be the museum’s chance to dispel that myth and command its own identity.
The past several months have been a revolving door of creative directors moving from one label to another, with major fashion houses trading designers like stock options. The designer who stands alone without the control of a luxury conglomerate, does so at their own risk.
That isn’t the case with Derek Lam, who has managed to avoid the high stakes drama of late and after nearly fifteen years, continues to work quite happily on his eponymous line and a bridge collection called, Derek Lam 10 Crosby.
While he does have investors, they are minority shareholders.
His perfectly edited collections deliver a restrained modernism that consistently resonates with his loyal customer base.
As a designer, Derek is a rare bird. He is warm and instantly approachable, with not an ounce of the pretense that is so common with other designers. He also doesn’t court celebrities or go overboard on social media, which in this day and age, is practically sacrilegious.
He has been with his domestic partner, Jan Hendrik-Schlottmann, for nearly twenty years and together, they launched the company that bears Derek’s name.
Other than the occasional party – like tonight’s at Barneys New York — they live quietly at their home in Manhattan’s Gramercy Park. He took time away from the event to explain the strategy behind the brand.
BERTRAND PELLEGRIN: When you first launched your own label, to what extent was the idea of “branding” a part of your vision? Did you really think to yourself, “what is my brand”?
DEREK LAM: Yeah absolutely, when I started with my partner, we thought about building a brand rather than, “I want to be a fashion designer.” It was more about how do we create a company that talks about values that are interpreted through product. So it was very important to think about the brand and what we stood for and what we believed in. At that time it was a moment when fashion for American designers was very much a “personality” kind of game, big personalities and I felt that product was secondary to all that. I wanted to move towards what I loved which is creating beautiful product and dialing back this celebrity persona kind of thing.
Which is hard to do, even at the time when you started, people want to put you in this box of “the Derek Lam brand.”
I don’t think people think of Derek Lam the brand as being about a particular personality – me – or about me being a celebrity, it’s really about my work and that’s really kind of what we wanted to concentrate on.
You started in 2003, as the brand developed did you find yourself needing to create certain reference points in order for the customer to understand what the brand was about?
Absolutely. I create clothes that are very much about a lifestyle and understanding and addressing how a woman lives her life. It’s rooted in American Sportswear that to me is still the most modern philosophy of clothing. What does that mean? It means creating pieces for her wardrobe that she doesn’t have to think about, like “Oh, I’m going to save that for a special occasion” or “I need to save that for this moment in my life” it’s really about reaching into her wardrobe and finding pieces and saying “I can wear this through my life, through my day.”
It’s a concept that has transferred now to European designers, hasn’t it? They call it ready-to-wear but that’s essentially what it is. When you look at Yves Saint Laurent, that’s really what he was making a nod to, it was the idea of American Sportswear.
Absolutely. It’s about versatility.
Still, you wear two hats: you’re not only Derek Lam the designer, you’re also the businessman, along with your partner. That’s not something that all designers have done very successfully. Do you find that hard?
It can be challenging. because as you said, you have to wear two hats and know when to take one off and put the other one on, sometimes when you want to wear the creative hat, you really have to be paying more attention to the business side of it. For me it goes back to the philosophy that I want to dress not just one specific woman but many women, and in order for me to know that I’m reaching her, it’s to know that people are buying the clothes. It isn’t something that where I want to be in the store, it’s really something I believe in.
What was the impetus to create Derek Lam 10 Crosby?
At that time there was a huge discussion about, fashion not being democratic enough, because of the price point and this old-fashioned style of distribution – this is before online business.
So there was this idea of injecting this youthful spirit with a lower price point into the collections and I tried that but I didn’t feel like I was reaching that woman, the woman who is looking for that might not go to a designer floor, or they might be intimidated by a designer floor, so it was really important that I create a contemporary collection that can stand on its own and is more approachable both in style and price.
How do your two brands intersect, how do the two collections speak to each other?
I think the Derek Lam collection is more of those rarefied pieces that you might want to collect, but with 10 Crosby, it’s a little bit more casual, it’s what you grab day in and day out to wear.
Back when you started, in 2003, it was still the very early days of the Internet and social media, Today, all that has changed and social media plays a huge role. How do you address that?
I love the reach of the Internet and I can’t imagine not being involved in it, I think a lot of times designers aren’t the greatest communicators because we believe our work should communicate for us but that’s not enough for us anymore. We not only need to be out and about at events like tonight’s Barneys event, but we also need to create a story that can come alive online and attract people to the brand.
Nevertheless, there are designers out there who make themselves so much a part of the story and use social media and celebrities to such an extreme that it almost borders on the obscene. At a certain point, you must have made a decision and said: that’s not who I am.
Well I don’t really tap into celebrity because it’s not really relevant to what I do nor how I want to present my work. It’s a slippery slope. I’m 50, so I’m a different generation than a lot of those Millenials where social media is their third arm. I’m still navigating what’s right for me and what’s right for our brand. And I guess so far, I haven’t been wrong, so I feel very happy with where we are.
>> Click here to see Derek’s collection available at Barneys New York.
It was Target Corp. that started the whole concept of the limited edition designer collection sold to the masses, products that caused customers to queue up for days in advance just to get their hands on some strange designer interpretation of a pot holder, candlestick, or beach towel.
Come April 17, it’s Marimekko’s turn, a Finnish brand best known for big bold prints that make their way onto towels, plates, and clothes.
It’s hard to believe that Target’s first experiment with designer exclusives was 17 years ago (1999’s Michael Graves collection) but it was 2011’s Missoni partnership that revealed what a profitable marketing concept they had.
Products flew off the shelves in a matter of minutes (while online shoppers were met with a crashed website), and even weeks later, there were lines of people waiting to see if anything made its way back as a store return.
That hasn’t always been the case. A disastrous Neiman Marcus collaboration reminded Target executives to choose those partners carefully.
Overall, the collaborations renew brand awareness (Target’s) and have a ripple effect on other store products and departments. More importantly, they help underscore Target as “cool” — even if a lot of that cool has, er, cooled off.
Let’s face it, seventeen years ago – even 8 years ago – a lot more people talked about shopping at Target than they do now.
My question is, who is really benefiting from these collaborations – Target or the guest brand?
I’d say Target, simply because the guest brand probably isn’t looking to establish a long-term relationship with the Target customer. Instead, it’s about recognition.
Do you think very many of the people who bought Missoni at Target went on to become Missoni loyalists, buying from the brand’s seasonal collections at full retail? Not likely.
For them, the goal is to leverage the mass retailer’s marketing and build on an image of being an “iconic” or “cult” brand (ergo, why Target only chooses cult or heritage brands with whom to partner with).
So should brands jump at these collaboration opportunities?
I’d say sure, but plan carefully the product concepts you hand off to Target (or H&M, or Uniqlo…) and consider the backfire potential: will your loyalist feel disappointed and even disgusted that their “real” designer goods could be mistaken for a replica? What’s your long-term plan for reaching the mass-market customer – is it because you want to launch a bridge line or some other opportunity to grow a lower-priced product category?
In the meantime, get ready to see a lot of people wearing flowered muumuus, because they were pushing that hard at the press preview.
>> Brian Valmonte is partner and business strategist with b. on brand. email him at brian@bonbrand.com
“Newness” is one of those words that fashion directors like to use a lot, especially when things aren’t going well.
There’s not a lot of newness this season.”
That usually means that designers presented collections with no coherent message or obvious best sellers with which to tell a story on the sales floor.
In an effort to fan the flames against an increasingly fragile consumer economy, luxury brands are producing collections that are either vaguely arty or downright cartoony, and consumers love it.
From Valentino to Saint Laurent to Gucci to Prada, every label is creating the kind of kawaii (“cute” in Japanese) characters and graphics that typically appeals to the… Japanese.
Two years ago, Fendi found wild success with its Peekaboo bag and all of its iterations of furry “bag bugs,” that retail for up to $700 (after you already spent up to $5,000 on the bag.) Now the Fendi monsters have become its own category for the brand.
Or take Saint Laurent’s new intarsia T-Rex sweater, which looks vaguely like something we would have worn to elementary school. It retails for over $1,000 – if you can find it. It’s completely sold out.
Saint Laurent’s designer, Hedi Slimane, who’s obsession with the L.A. rock scene is well documented, shocked many when he not only changed the name of the brand moved all of its creative to Los Angeles instead of Paris.
Even Valentino succumbed to this genre of children’s fashion for adults, with a 2014 Snow White collection. Winsome, isn’t it? But that’s the point.
So what’s the motivation?
With so many aspirational and bargain brands elbowing into luxury territory and offering the same or similar looks at a fraction of the price, luxe leaders are once again, co-opting the downtown cool of club kids in an effort to make their brands feel more authentic and earnest.
More importantly, with Millenials being such a key market, why bother with ordinary suits and gowns? Now more than ever, “youth” is a fashion look, and it starts with being ironic.
The young, upwardly mobile fashion consumer seeks edgy urban looks that say, “it might be from a thrift store, but if you’re cool, you’ll know it’s Hedi.” Why else would Jennifer Lawrence wear a Alexander Wang denim jacket that says PERV on the back (other than to give the paparazzi a piece of her mind)?
This spring it’s Gucci that’s getting the biggest buzz, all thanks to designer Alessandro Michele. He shrewdly made the strategic move of adding a huge dose of irreverence and Italian loucheness to the formerly ho-hum brand.
Gucci’s blatant grab for the respect of the bourgeois glitterati is largely thanks to graffiti artist Trevor Andrew, who’s “GucciGhost” can be found in all of the fashionable alleys of New York’s lower east side. Michele even went so far as to make Andrew an official member of the Gucci design team.
For luxury brands, this kind of street-savvy bravado is fairly typical and it works – for a while, at least. Just ask Louis Vuitton, who scored all kinds of cred thanks to its collaborations over the years with Stephen Sprouse, Takashi Murakami, and Yayoi Kusama. But admittedly, that stuff always felt too corporate, especially when you saw your secretary carrying a bag with cherries all over it.
At it’s core, however, these self-consciously irreverent pop culture collections become more marketing exercise than anything, since in the end, there’s still a much larger collection of other merchandise that needs to sell in order for a brand to turn a real profit. An iconic look may get them in the store, but will they really buy more than what they came for?
Target, Inc. continues to work to establish itself as a lifestyle authority, this time in the technology space with Target Open House, a custom-built retail space, lab, and demonstration zone dedicated to innovations in the growing market for the “connected home.”
Smart appliances in particular are forecast for continued growth. In 2014, about one million smart appliances were shipped worldwide, but by 2020 that number will soar to 223 units. Add to that smaller devices like coffee machines and toothbrushes and the number is more like 700 million.
The market, dubbed “the internet of things” or IOT, is a key focus for Google, Apple, and Samsung, each with aggressive plans to embed computing chips into just about anything to make them smarter and more interactive. IBM is even going so far as investing $3 billion over the next four years to build its own Internet of Things division.
San Francisco is the first of Target’s Open House concepts, which was installed in an unused space directly beneath the brand’s downtown CityTarget store at the Metreon.
The space is designed to resemble a house, and made of translucent acrylic etched with the flourishes of a traditional San Francisco Victorian. The effect is like that of a hologram, with rear-projection video displaying information on how various smart products work in each of the “rooms” of the house.
“Putting a house in the space, we felt, was the most relatable and welcoming way to introduce these products,” says Todd Waterbury, Target’s chief creative officer. “What we’re trying to do is humanize and personalize the benefits of these products, as well as show them working in concert. It’s really about relevant storytelling and creating a destination for engagement and discovery.”
Let’s add a purchase to that discovery, shall we?
Located only steps away from Target’s giant dollhouse are some traditional, table-top displays of the products with specs and pricepoint, while sales associate drift nearby, ready to swipe your card.
Truth be told, Target could have been a bit bolder in the scope of their storytelling and for the most part, there aren’t any products we haven’t seen before.
The Nest thermostat seemed to be their hero product throughout the display, and the customer journey could be a bit more interactive than standing around watching a jumbo screen connect the dots about how one technology responds to another.
Still, Target isn’t off the mark and more and more customers will demand an even array of products that they can control with their smart phone. Remote controlled door locks, lighting, and other security features are just the beginning, while smarter — and please, I beg you — better looking appliances will be the functional fashion for the home.
For the past several years, Macy’s CEO Terry Lundgren has boasted of the massive insight and strategy in place to drive Millenials to Macy’s. Only problem is, it’s not working. Macy’s is… well, Macy’s. The fact is, most department stores and shopping malls are still moving at a snail’s pace when it comes to innovating their customer experience.
Not so for San Francisco’s Westfield Mall, who, along with developers Forest City launched Bespoke, a co-working and retail incubator located on the fourth floor of its historic building on Market Street. The target audience for Bespoke is – you guessed it – the thoroughly modern Millennial. Two weeks ago, the so-called “innovation generation” was handed the keys to a new playground, one where, as is now de rigueur in the tech industry, the office is both a place to grow new ideas, network, and play. Call it the new country club.
Bespoke is a big, flamboyant roll of the dice for Westfield Group, who worked in partnership with Forest City to mastermind what may be the most luxurious and high-octane model for co-working and innovation the world has ever seen.
But they don’t see it as just a gamble. Look past the obvious cliches — phone booths, designer furniture, open kitchens brimming with snacks — and this could be something that might just help animate the dull shopping mall in a whole new way.
Bespoke is not another experiment in “pop up” retail; rather, it is a very serious strategy to innovate retail from pop up to beyond.
“This presents a ripe opportunity for established retailers to reimagine their in-store experiences and infrastructure,” said a Westfield Corporation spokesperson. “It also serves as a unique testing ground for companies new to physical retail that want the chance to pilot new, exciting retail products and monitor their sales performance.”
As expected, the space makes more than a few nods towards some of Silicon Valley’s celebrated tech firms and their now-famous offices full of comfy furniture, limitless meal service, and multiple work spaces that conform to any given mood. However this 37,000 square-foot space steps it up a notch with a more sleek, contemporary vibe that feels equal parts boutique hotel and nightclub, making Google and Facebook HQ’s look more like Sesame Street (which they kind of did anyway.)
All work and no play? Not here. Here you’ll find a bocce and croquet court, a climbing wall, and sleeping nooks.
The Westfield Mall building was formerly the historic Emporium department store, and Steven Lowy, co-CEO of Westfield, called Bespoke a natural part of the trajectory for the legendary retail space.
“Westfield is one of the greatest downtown retail experiences in the United States. Here the physical, the digital, the retailer and the consumer are all in one place. To take an environment like this that has a history and move it forward is incredible.”
Sound enticing? You’ll need to know now that, with the wild demand for San Francisco office space, there is practically no room at the inn: virtually all of Bespoke’s private offices we saw were full, although Bespoke’s press rep assured us that “office and desk availability are always changing due to Bespoke’s unique flexibility.” Sounds like another way of saying: are you on the list?
Current retail tenants include StyleLend, a peer-to-peer garment lending company (which sounds dicey and makes me itch just thinking of it), Shoes of Prey, a customizable shoe brand, and Rovie Entertainment, Ltd., makers of Angry Birds, who is offering a virtual reality experience of it’s best-selling game.
But this isn’t just for show. Westfield’s strategy with Bespoke is not just to create an incubator for new business but also for new business practice and insight, which is why firms like RetailNext, Inc. are getting the red carpet treatment, and housed in one of the larger private corner offices. Westfield’s aim is to harvest insights that eventually can be applied to its other malls around the world.
“As I think about the future of retail, places like bespoke are going to help that evolution,” said Forest City president and CEO, David LaRue, to a standing room-only crowd of attendees at Bespoke’s lavish opening event. “We want to take the best of what we learn here and translate it into other communities.”
Bespoke’s programming includes four separate retail storefronts that back into the co-working zone, becoming essentially a live focus group for startup executives seated on the other side of the glass.
Across the central esplanade and escalator hall is Bespoke’s huge event space, featuring interactive screen technology and all the amenities one could want for impressing the first-round investors. The space even has the capacity to present runway fashion shows.
The spaces can be rented by the day, week, or month with a wide variety of packages for those who simply want to drop in and work at one of the open desks. With prices hovering around and even above the market rate for San Francisco, Bespoke is no bargain, however for many, it’s an efficient way to bypass typical business startup costs and get in where the action is – especially if that action comes with built-in strategic networks and plug-and-play retail.
>> Learn more about Bespoke at www.bespokesf.co.