New ad Campaign not your mother’s Tiffany

[Bagatha Christie]

Tbh I don’t understand the ad at all! In my area many teens/20 somethings wear Tiffany. Of course it is mostly silver but that is expected at the price point. Are they marketing to late 20s/30s who wear Cartier Love instead? If that is the case then stating “not your mom’s jewelry” means what if you are a mom or in an age group you may want a family. Also, if they are going for the Cartier Love purchaser than they need to really focus on the more modern design pieces. Victoria and Bone Cuff (though I love both) may not be doing the trick. Plus wearing basic white button downs and jeans does not feel modern or “youthful” at all.

Yes it’s so weird. It’s like they think that older millennials are still the current teens and we are still all about Calvin Klein & the return to Tiffany tags. But then if they wanted to try and catch the 90s\00s trend among the teens they should have had some Tik tok celebs in the tag chokers. Have they not seen how many teens have the Westwood Pearl choker?

As you say if they want some of that millennial demographic I think they do need some new designs to get us away from loving the Cartier love.
But I don’t think it’s about being modern - I think the clue is in the name- the love range is all about aspirational romance. It is not about being too cool for school.
if Tiffany could bring our something with that love/commitment angle I think they would have a hit.

 

[Jahpson]

So I was looking at some of the other ads- and I have to admit I chuckled a little. The Bone Cuff - which I want and adore (almost 40 btw) was advertised as Not Your Mother’s. Technically mothers (and grandmothers) could have been wearing it since the 1970s. So- the Bone Cuff is “My Mothers, Grandmas and My” jewelry ad

Lol! They could call it “Twinning with My Mom”.

My mother definitely wore a gold cuff in the 70s according to some old photos.

I think the marketing is off. When I was in high school, the only jewelry I cared about was the Return to Tiffany line.

Instead of 'Not your Mothers' it could be like "The legacy continues" and then issue ads showing an older woman gifting a younger woman jewelry. The younger woman could look really classy instead of wearing head to toe denim. Who does that?

 

[millivanilli]

I don't think it's ageist, but probably I don't get it.

I "read" the ad in another way, namely that normaly (please don't consider me an expert on that mother - daughter topic) daughters tend to lend pieces from their mothers and this ad motivates young women to buy their own piece of silver, which imo is empowering young women and not degrading their mothers?

That said, the campaign isn't aesthetically pleasing to me, but hey - I am one of those "mothers" age-wise and I tried to talk my daughter into a tiffany piece, (yes, the bracelet with the"return to Tiffany" tag) which she didn't like at all - she prefered the items shown in the ad. So there is a shift in "what's hot and what's not"?

 

[SnowBlossom]

Feminism today is more and more focused on intersectional empowerment. It celebrates different bodies, skin tones, abilities, ages, and the wide spectrum of gender and expressions of femininity. I find this ad campaign to be quite tacky and poorly done, and it puts me right off shopping in their stores. Someone needs to tell them that this old-school Victoria’s Secret, male directed, skinny, light skinned, every-model-looks-the-same thing is played out. I want to celebrate all women, not put them down.

 

[papertiger]

I’m waiting for the day, if it ever comes, that Louis Vuitton and Tiffany do a marketing campaign collab. LV clothes, bag with Tiffany jewelry.

You may change your mind. Check out Gucci X Bal hack

Gucci AW Aria collection Vs Bal SS22 Clones collection

Related but only to follow on:
Not that I don't like lots of things within these collections, but when luxury mega-parent companies really open-up that there are only truly 3 companies in the world LVMH/Kering/Richemont (+ Chanel and Hermes) and the amount of horizontal/vertical integrated jigsaw/juggling integration/supply/distribution that goes on between, it would kill-off a to of the mystique/individuality/histories of the specific brands.

 

[papertiger]

Tbh I don’t understand the ad at all! In my area many teens/20 somethings wear Tiffany. Of course it is mostly silver but that is expected at the price point. Are they marketing to late 20s/30s who wear Cartier Love instead? If that is the case then stating “not your mom’s jewelry” means what if you are a mom or in an age group you may want a family. Also, if they are going for the Cartier Love purchaser than they need to really focus on the more modern design pieces. Victoria and Bone Cuff (though I love both) may not be doing the trick. Plus wearing basic white button downs and jeans does not feel modern or “youthful” at all.

You are so right.

I have have very few Tiffany pieces, all gold and all only bought in the last few years. If I was advising Tiff, I'd go up-market, personal and arty, not try to lure young women into spending their disposable income wearing multiple mainstream designer goods and emulating fast-fashion.

LVMH needs to realise it's the VCA/Cartier 'entry level' $1-5-10K that's the biggest change in the jewellery/watch market right now. Women have enough bags/shoes and are buying their own statement pieces for expression in signifying status, high-fashion, trans-seasonal investment.

 

[AntiqueShopper]

You may change your mind. Check out Gucci X Bal hack

Gucci AW Aria collection Vs Bal SS22 Clones collection

Related but only to follow on:
Not that I don't like lots of things within these collections, but when luxury mega-parent companies really open-up that there are only truly 3 companies in the world LVMH/Kering/Richemont (+ Chanel and Hermes) and the amount of horizontal/vertical integrated jigsaw/juggling integration/supply/distribution that goes on between, it would kill-off a to of the mystique/individuality/histories of the specific brands.

Good point!

 

[etoile de mer]

Just jumping in after having a look at the campaign, and not having had a chance to read many of the posts here. The look and feel of these ads seems at odds with what LVMH stated when the sale went through. They said they wanted to focus more on higher end pieces, and distance themselves from lower priced jewelry. If that's their goal, it seems a fail, these ads do not convey luxury to me.

And, this campaign would not have appealed to me at any age, as I don't find the ads to be aesthetically attractive, creative or interesting. If I knew nothing of Tiffany, these ads would not have entice me to buy.

 

[Bagatha Christie]

I was actually looking at the silver on Tiffany’s website today - which is something I don’t normally do as I don’t suit white metal & I saw that the prices were crazy- 1k for a silver tag necklace! DBTY silver diamond solitaire (0,7) is £770 !

This is just insulting the intelligence of women at every age bracket.

Everyone knows that silver is not that valuable a material and that they definitely weren’t charging these kind of prices when the silver got popular in the 90s

Meanwhile, over at Cartier I can get
a 18k chain & tiny diamond (0.4) pendant for £770. Obviously it’s ‘dainty’ but at least there’s some innate value to the materials & the brand.
Equally, at VCA I can also get a Alhambra MOP butterfly on a gold chain for 1.2k.

So it seems to me that Tiffany are playing games here. Silver is nice but you don’t need to be a material scientist to recognise this is a big disparity even considering the mark up on precious metals to begin with.

I’m actually kind of cross with this tbh. It’s so patronising they are trying to push for younger buyers with these silly prices on what we’re brought out as affordable lines.

 

[AntiqueShopper]

I was actually looking at the silver on Tiffany’s website today - which is something I don’t normally do as I don’t suit white metal & I saw that the prices were crazy- 1k for a silver tag necklace! DBTY silver diamond solitaire (0,7) is £770 !

This is just insulting the intelligence of women at every age bracket.

Everyone knows that silver is not that valuable a material and that they definitely weren’t charging these kind of prices when the silver got popular in the 90s

Meanwhile, over at Cartier I can get
a 18k chain & tiny diamond (0.4) pendant for £770. Obviously it’s ‘dainty’ but at least there’s some innate value to the materials & the brand.
Equally, at VCA I can also get a Alhambra MOP butterfly on a gold chain for 1.2k.

So it seems to me that Tiffany are playing games here. Silver is nice but you don’t need to be a material scientist to recognise this is a big disparity even considering the mark up on precious metals to begin with.

I’m actually kind of cross with this tbh. It’s so patronising they are trying to push for younger buyers with these silly prices on what we’re brought out as affordable lines.

The prices in the US are different.
Tiffany:
Silver DBTY .07 - $550
Oval Tag Necklace- $675
Gold DBTY .05- $850

Cartier
Legers .04- $910

Van Cleef
Sweet Butterfly- $1450

 

[AntiqueShopper]

Just jumping in after having a look at the campaign, and not having had a chance to read many of the posts here. The look and feel of these ads seems at odds with what LVMH stated when the sale went through. They said they wanted to focus more on higher end pieces, and distance themselves from lower priced jewelry. If that's their goal, it seems a fail, these ads do not convey luxury to me.

And, this campaign would not have appealed to me at any age, as I don't find the ads to be aesthetically attractive, creative or interesting. If I knew nothing of Tiffany, these ads would not have entice me to buy.

I agree! The ads focus on “more affordable” designs.

 

[etoile de mer]

I agree! The ads focus on “more affordable” designs.

You know, I had to go back and look at the pics to see the pieces featured. I found the presentation so unattractive and cheap looking, I didn't really focus on the jewelry! And, I'm still not sure what emotion the tag line is meant to evoke. Mine is probably not the type of reaction their advertising dept. had hoped for.

 

[AntiqueShopper]

You know, I had to go back and look at the pics to see the pieces featured. I found the presentation so unattractive and cheap looking, I didn't really focus on the jewelry! And, I'm still not sure what emotion the tag line is meant to evoke. Mine is probably not the type of reaction their advertising dept. had hoped for.

I’m still not sure what age group they are going for. Most 20 somethings don’t dress like the ad. I get the focus is on the jewelry. However, with a slogan like that, the ad should reflect the age group it is targeting.

 

[Bagatha Christie]

The prices in the US are different.
Tiffany:
Silver DBTY .07 - $550
Oval Tag Necklace- $675
Gold DBTY .05- $850

Cartier
Legers .04- $910

Van Cleef
Sweet Butterfly- $1450

Wow that’s so interesting. So Tiffany is considerably marked up in the U.K./EU. I guess it makes some sense as an import but I think it is silly strategy to make the silver so expensive anywhere

 

[lill_canele]

I believe that LVMH is definitely trying to do something different with Tiffany's marketing.

My SA told me yesterday that last week, LVMH told them, they did not want a Tiffany Cafe at all!
So the Tiffany cafe at SCP is actually closed and all the cafe employees for the Tiffany cafe at SCP were laid off. .
He doesn't know what they're going to do it with it! He also doesn't know what is going to happen to the Tiffany cafe at the NY flagship store.

Really such a shame. I was looking forward to going to that cafe. And to me, it would not be a matter of price. We all know it's going to be expensive and overpriced. I wanted to go for that Tiffany luxury experience and a cool throwback to the history of Breakfast at Tiffany's....sigh...