the world according to sherimaven

Hi, Wednesday. I mean, Thursday...der. Totally unsure of what day it is but all I really know is it's today and that's that.I was chatting with my sis on email last night and she posed a question as we discussed the Calypso for Target collaboration, which I thought would be nice for a "Thanks for Asking" post:

What do you think about Calypso and others selling at Target?  Brand dilution or brand recognition? I think dilution. Just wondering your thoughts on what Target does to the strength or weakness of the all important BRAND?

I think this is a great question, and one I have often thought (and argued) about. I must admit when I read the news of the latest designer collaboration slated for the Fall (Missoni), I was a bit shocked. In my mind, Target usually picks younger, edgier designers- I'm thinking of Jovavich Hawk, Tracey Feith, Tucker, and scads of others. Yes I know they went very big with Isaac, Jean Paul Gaultier, and McQueen, but I typically think of the young ones as typical Target targets. With the announcement of Missoni coming onboard, it's clear that even the biggest of the luxury brands (Missoni is a family owned fashion empire on all things zig zag), want in on the democratization of fashion, which I am 100% in favor of.

If I look back a bit, I think all of this "accessible luxury" really began when companies like Chanel and YSL started selling cosmetics- you may not be able to buy a $2000 Chanel purse but you could buy a $30 lipstick. I know that's still expensive for a tube of lipstick, but it's a way to treat yourself while still being able to pay for your rent or mortgage. In my humble opinion, it's not all of this lower priced fashion via high end designers that has diluted brands. It's our "sale" culture that has kidn of screwed the fashion business.

If you are a shopper in the US of A, you will no doubt notice the constant "sale" mania we have here- a la Gilt, etc. and all the sales in bricks and mortar as well. if you look at the French, they only have sales twice a year. Anna Wintour acknowledged this some time back and was nearly burned alive by the garment district, whose fear of stopping sales year round will kill the fashion business. I myself will very rarely buy something that is not on sale- why would I? But think of stores like the GAP- why would you pay $69.50 for a dress when you know two weeks later it will be $19.99? And how then do you assess the "value" of the brand when you are constantly placing it on the discount rack? Barney's get's it right -with their twice yearly warehouse sales that reward super fans who wait in line for hours with sweet deals on all of their favorite designers.

I think the Target collaborations allow for brand recognition- the brand loyal will still shop at Calypso but may find it fun to incorporate a piece from Target, while those who can't afford Calypso will be thrilled with the Target sale. And as many of us know, true style is not about wearing designer from head to toe or steeping yourself in expensive gear- true style can be had from a $10 Fruit of the Loom tee shirt- it simply depends on how you rock it.

It just needs to be done with confidence- and really fashion is all about mixing the high and the low- the most stylish people rock a basic tee with an expensive skirt a la Sharon Stone at the Oscars in a Vera Wang skirt and Gap tee. That is true style, kids. I see many people in designer head to toe that may have nice clothes, but have not an ounce of style (trust me, I live in Miami and see this all the time). This is why I have always loved stores like the GAP- I may buy the same white button down as you but I'm going to wear it completely differently than you and you and you. That's what living in a democratic world is all about, and not letting clothes wear you- if you are innately stylish it doesn't matter if you wear a cheap shirt or a couture gown- it will always be there. Viva la democratic dressing (the French do this mix better than anyone...Ines de la Fressange praises mixing cheap with cher to achieve that perfect, effortlessly chic French look).

But I digress- if the goal is to get as many people in Missoni as possible, then they will surely achieve it- and those who wear the real high end stuff will not desert the brand because of it, because the high end stuff is still made much better- with better fabrics and cuts, etc. But at the end of the day, fashion is all about sales, and don't forget there is big money to be made by going mass.Fashion is a business first and foremost, and though you probably won't be able to sell a ton of $1000 knit skirts, you can surel as shit sell a ton of $39.99 tunic tops. (Democracy and capitalism go hand in hand, in case you're taking notes...)

For the snobby amongst you that say only the best will do- lighten up. As in, right this second.

Fashion is meant to be fun after all, and this is a way to buy into the brand without breaking the bank- and times being the way they are, that ain't a small thing.  And Target is a "cheap chic" brand that's respected by everyone- snobby New Yorkers think shopping at Target is fun, and they do have a mega respect for design. If they didn't, this whole model would not be as cool and accepted by the fashion flock as it is. Target made cheap chic, and that's that.

(Addendum to this post: it does not matter if a luxury brand goes mass- what matters is that the core values of the brand remain- Calypso's thing is chic, hippy, sunny beach fashion- whether from Target or Madison Avenue, that tenet remains the same...and that's why it works). :)