Demna appointed new Artistic Director @Gucci

TPF may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, and others

#16
allanrvj said:
Feels very corporate play and also a teeny bit desperate to fast-track Gucci's comeback by betting on Demna’s ability to create viral fashion moments. Gucci’s aesthetic is way too far removed from Demna’s world, at least traditionally. Gucci was always about opulence, Italian glamour, and maximalism, while Demna is all about irony, dystopian fashion, and exaggerated proportions--things that don’t naturally align with Gucci’s past.

But then again, Balenciaga didn't look like that before Demna, either. Would be interesting to see Demna bring his ugly-core, oversized, post-apocalyptic, meme-heavy, inside-joke vision to a house that’s always been about sensuality and luxury.
Click to expand...

Balenciaga figures have not been good for sometime. They are just buried in overall annual reports.

I'm thinking it was a strategic move to not have to fork out too big of a golden handshake for a new well-known figure at Gucci. . I'm sure Demna will be held on quite a short lead too. Demna is ambitious and not stupid.

Meanwhile, Kering will get someone less expensive at Bal. Perhaps Galliano. He's still relatively cheap because he's also a liability. Galliano has enough ego to want to take on the fashion house for high-fashion's sake and he actually has the talent. It would actually be a good move for (his) posterity. Kering have always seen the potential in Bal, Demna has not been pulling the crowds lately.
 
  • Insightful
  • Like
Reactions: Kodi325, maxroxxherhandbags, keodi and 4 others
#17
papertiger said:
Balenciaga figures have not been good for sometime. They are just buried in overall annual reports.

I'm thinking it was a strategic move to not have to fork out too big of a golden handshake for a new well-known figure at Gucci. . I'm sure Demna will be held on quite a short lead too. Demna is ambitious and not stupid.

Meanwhile, Kering will get someone less expensive at Bal. Perhaps Galliano. He's still relatively cheap because he's also a liability. Galliano has enough ego to want to take on the fashion house for high-fashion's sake and he actually has the talent. It would actually be a good move for (his) posterity. Kering have always seen the potential in Bal, Demna has not been pulling the crowds lately.
Click to expand...
agreed. there's only so much iterations you can make on those shoes, and so many gimmicky things (like mud on the runway) before people start to get tired. also I feel like a lot of Bal items are expensive just to be expensive--an over-reliance on the Veblen effect, perhaps.

whenever I pass by the Balenciaga store here in my city, it's mostly empty, even on weekends. and the surprising thing is, there are people lining up in front of Gucci, whose sales are supposed to be the ones suffering. Kering, make it make sense lol
 
  • Like
  • Insightful
Reactions: protein_, Flowerlily, maryg1 and 2 others
#20
ChatGPT is hilarious:

How We Got Here: The Corporate Cycle of Fashion Blunders​


  1. Suits Chase Short-Term Trends Instead of Brand Legacy
    • Kering saw Alessandro Michele’s Gucci printing money (2015–2019) and assumed maximalism = long-term success instead of realizing that Michele’s world-building was a once-in-a-decade phenomenon.
    • Then they overcorrected with Sabato De Sarno, betting that “quiet luxury” would be the next goldmine—but forgot that Gucci’s DNA isn’t quiet at all.
    • Now they’re overcorrecting again by bringing in Demna, chasing “cultural disruption” instead of understanding what Gucci actually is.
  2. They Panic When the Sales Drop
    • Sabato’s collections weren’t flopping, but they weren’t creating buzz either. Instead of refining his direction, Kering likely panicked because Gucci stopped being the “it” brand.
    • Rather than nurturing a long-term vision, they went for a shock-and-awe strategy with Demna to create instant noise.
  3. They Hire a Big-Name Designer for Clout, Not Brand Fit
    • Demna is a great designer—for Balenciaga. But does he actually align with Gucci?
    • Gucci is playful, eclectic, romantic. Demna is nihilistic, ironic, dystopian.
    • The board probably didn’t think beyond "he's a proven disruptor!", ignoring the fact that Gucci doesn’t need disruption—it needs focus.
  4. Investors Freak Out Because They Don’t Understand Fashion Either
    • Fashion people might give Demna a chance, but investors? They only see numbers.
    • They know Balenciaga’s sales tanked after the scandal, so they assume he’s a risky bet for Gucci—hence the 12% drop.
    • The irony? If Demna actually sells a ton at Gucci, these same investors will act like they supported him all along.

Final Thought:​


Kering’s biggest mistake is thinking Gucci needs “a moment” rather than a strategy.
They’re chasing noise instead of building a foundation. And now, thanks to some suits trying to make a viral comeback move, Gucci’s stock is tanking before Demna has even sketched a single look. Corporate fashion logic at its finest.
 
  • Like
  • Haha
  • Thanks
Reactions: staceface01, maxroxxherhandbags, sunrise92 and 6 others
#22
bagnut1 said:
Aren't there any women in lieutenant positions at any of these houses?

I'm not as tuned in to the CD shuffleboard as most of you, but it seems like the recent MO is: a dude comes in, shakes up the champagne (or prosecco) and sprays it all over everything, then moves along when the suits realize that the floor is sticky. Repeat with another dude.
Click to expand...
Agree.

Is Demna commercially successful? Or is he brought in for shock value

@allanrvj , thanks for the laugh

Maybe chatGBT has it right re chasing noise
 
  • Insightful
  • Like
Reactions: keodi, protein_ and allanrvj
#24
papertiger said:
Balenciaga figures have not been good for sometime. They are just buried in overall annual reports.

I'm thinking it was a strategic move to not have to fork out too big of a golden handshake for a new well-known figure at Gucci. . I'm sure Demna will be held on quite a short lead too. Demna is ambitious and not stupid.

Meanwhile, Kering will get someone less expensive at Bal. Perhaps Galliano. He's still relatively cheap because he's also a liability. Galliano has enough ego to want to take on the fashion house for high-fashion's sake and he actually has the talent. It would actually be a good move for (his) posterity. Kering have always seen the potential in Bal, Demna has not been pulling the crowds lately.
Click to expand...
I hate to admit it, but if Galliano took the reins at Balenciaga, I’d shop there again. I’d shop like it was 1997.

I’m weak. And maybe a little nostalgic.

I mean, I feel guilty about it. This is a man with serious substance abuse problems, being thrust into the position that exacerbated them the last time around.

But… maybe it could be a good thing?
 
  • Like
  • Insightful
Reactions: imwiththepilots, maxroxxherhandbags, keodi and 1 other person
#25
Vintage Leather said:
I hate to admit it, but if Galliano took the reins at Balenciaga, I’d shop there again. I’d shop like it was 1997.

I’m weak. And maybe a little nostalgic.

I mean, I feel guilty about it. This is a man with serious substance abuse problems, being thrust into the position that exacerbated them the last time around.

But… maybe it could be a good thing?
Click to expand...
That controversy probably saved JG's life
 
  • Like
  • Insightful
Reactions: imwiththepilots, maxroxxherhandbags, protein_ and 1 other person
#28
I have been deep in the rabbit hole of Hermes forum posts from 2008-2010. This week, I’ve spent more hours than I care to admit to looking at ridiculously expensive weird and wonderful and honestly hideous things.

Which means that I have many opinions on HauteAvante

So why am I talking about H on a Gucci thread? Because, between the 90s and 00s, H did jolie laid very well.

In the last decade, Alessandro Michele occasionally had beautiful items but had become, well, lazy by the end of his tenure. As someone who remembers Gucci in the 70s, he was painfully referential and trying too hard to be Pop Art in a Neo-expressionist world. De Sabato was safe, and elegant, but too commercial to be sellable.

Gucci needs someone who has a firm idea of who the Gucci customer is, and is willing to encourage him and her to try something new. Tom Ford worked because he took house codes, and made them more lavish and expansive - contrast stitching and tassels or oversized or multiple codes mixed together. Frida Giannini took that extravagance and made it tailored but femme.

I’m still lusting, over a decade later, after that linen trench with the oversized flora that started at the hem and grew upward so it looked like a garden but not twee.

That’s the point. That’s the thing Gucci lost over the last decade. How to balance being lovely and a powerful adult and also able to play.

Demna has shown the ability to play, but he hasn’t demonstrated either power or loveliness. Maybe he does have some untapped depths.
 
  • Like
  • Insightful
Reactions: Kodi325, foxylock, bagnut1 and 5 others
#29
allanrvj said:
ChatGPT is hilarious:

How We Got Here: The Corporate Cycle of Fashion Blunders​


  1. Suits Chase Short-Term Trends Instead of Brand Legacy
    • Kering saw Alessandro Michele’s Gucci printing money (2015–2019) and assumed maximalism = long-term success instead of realizing that Michele’s world-building was a once-in-a-decade phenomenon.
    • Then they overcorrected with Sabato De Sarno, betting that “quiet luxury” would be the next goldmine—but forgot that Gucci’s DNA isn’t quiet at all.
    • Now they’re overcorrecting again by bringing in Demna, chasing “cultural disruption” instead of understanding what Gucci actually is.
  2. They Panic When the Sales Drop
    • Sabato’s collections weren’t flopping, but they weren’t creating buzz either. Instead of refining his direction, Kering likely panicked because Gucci stopped being the “it” brand.
    • Rather than nurturing a long-term vision, they went for a shock-and-awe strategy with Demna to create instant noise.
  3. They Hire a Big-Name Designer for Clout, Not Brand Fit
    • Demna is a great designer—for Balenciaga. But does he actually align with Gucci?
    • Gucci is playful, eclectic, romantic. Demna is nihilistic, ironic, dystopian.
    • The board probably didn’t think beyond "he's a proven disruptor!", ignoring the fact that Gucci doesn’t need disruption—it needs focus.
  4. Investors Freak Out Because They Don’t Understand Fashion Either
    • Fashion people might give Demna a chance, but investors? They only see numbers.
    • They know Balenciaga’s sales tanked after the scandal, so they assume he’s a risky bet for Gucci—hence the 12% drop.
    • The irony? If Demna actually sells a ton at Gucci, these same investors will act like they supported him all along.

Final Thought:​


Kering’s biggest mistake is thinking Gucci needs “a moment” rather than a strategy.
They’re chasing noise instead of building a foundation. And now, thanks to some suits trying to make a viral comeback move, Gucci’s stock is tanking before Demna has even sketched a single look. Corporate fashion logic at its finest.
Click to expand...
Lol more or less of what I said:
Demna will create a buzz although he doesn't align with Gucci.

I want to add that he might do gr8 things for Gucci. His avant-garde designs with Gucci's DNA.

Talk about timing, I watched this episode a few weeks ago of The Simpsons about Balenciaga and Demna's in there lol.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: maxroxxherhandbags, keodi, bagnut1 and 4 others
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top