Explorations

Deloitte: Brand Connection – The age of meaningful brands

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Beyond selling — how true relevance is built through authenticity and culture


According to Deloitte’s study, Brand Connection – The Age of Meaningful Brands, a global survey of over 7,000 consumers reveals a significant shift: trust is growing in local businesses (43.1%) and niche brands (39%), while confidence in large brands lags behind (36.9%).

This trend is particularly strong in Italy, where 45.7% of respondents say they feel no strong attachment to any brand — highlighting a high propensity for brand switching.

Andrea Laurenza, Consumer Industry Leader at Deloitte Central Mediterranean, contextualises the data: “In recent years, brands have consolidated their position, but loyalty can no longer be taken for granted. Companies with clear identities, authentic narratives, and direct relationships are rewarded by consumers.”

In an era of consumer volatility, the ultimate challenge is clear: a brand must move beyond mere existence and achieve true relevance.

From visibility to meaning: What brand relevance actually looks like


So, what does this relevance look like when the campaign launches and the social media posts go live? It’s a practice far more nuanced than just being seen.

As Laurenza puts it, “Being relevant for a brand means occupying an authentic space in people’s lives. True relevance is achieved when a brand doesn’t just sell, but takes part in the cultural conversation, remaining faithful to its identity even as the context evolves.”

This means:

  • Resonance over noise. It’s not about shouting the loudest, but speaking with a voice that aligns with your audience’s values and your own core identity.
  • Action over announcement. It’s the difference between a brand making a statement on a complex geopolitical or social issue, and one that aligns its operations with its values. The latter overhauls its supply chain for genuine sustainability. It ensures equitable labour practices from the ground up. Or contributes to humanitarian efforts in ways that feel authentic to its identity. The question is no longer if a brand should take a stand, but how it can do so with coherence, substance, and integrity — rather than merely jumping on a trending topic.
  • Consistency in the conversation. It’s about maintaining a steady voice and set of principles even as trends and algorithms shift.

The Deloitte data confirms it: today, the bond with a brand is built on usefulness, authenticity, and quality. Loyalty is earned, not given.

Brand connection: meaning?


But what do they really mean by meaning?
Have you noticed how some brands use their platform to show solidarity with Palestine or Ukraine?
Have you heard others speak out against social injustice?
Or commit to climate action in ways that go beyond mere greenwashing?
And is simply being on social media enough?

Our search for authentic space


In conclusion, the findings of the Deloitte report resonate deeply with us.
At suite123, we believe in brand connection because we champion meaningful garments — which can only come from meaningful brands.

Naturally, this leads us to reflect on our own path.
How does a small, independent brand like ours — one that chooses depth over noise and purpose over volume — occupy an authentic space?

For us, relevance has never been just a metric for sales. If it were, the journey would be easier, but far less fulfilling.

Our sense of relevance lies in contributing to the cultural conversation with consistency and integrity.
It’s about proving that a brand can be small in scale yet significant in meaning.
It’s about staying real in a world of curated feeds.

And in that space — the space of authenticity, depth, and connection — is exactly where we intend to be.

Deloitte: Brand Connection – The age of meaningful brands Read More »

Fashion subcontracting: new measures to combat labour exploitation in Italy

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

The government’s paradoxical solution: a magic trick that makes accountability disappear down the supply chain


Fashion subcontracting is a hot-button issue, posing significant reputational risks for luxury brands. In response to recent sweatshop scandals, Minister for Made in Italy, Urso, has proposed a controversial solution: exempting client companies from responsibility.

This approach was crystallised in an amendment—nicknamed the “Save Tod’s” clause—following a request for special administration of the Tod’s Group by the Milan prosecutor’s office. Approved last Tuesday as part of the annual law for SMEs, the amendment allows fashion companies to obtain a “supply chain legality” certification. In practice, it absolves top brands from accountability for labour conditions at the bottom of their supply chain.

The legislation, recently approved by the Senate Industry Committee, states that fashion groups are not liable if they had pre-existing “organisational models” designed to prevent crimes, overseen by an internal body with autonomous control powers. The consequence is clear: major fashion houses could soon be completely relieved of responsibility for exploitation within their own production networks.

Confindustria Moda & reputational advantage


Confindustria Moda, which helped draft the legislation, defends the measure: “The enormous pressure on brands creates sector-wide difficulties,” they state. “While it’s right that each leader organises work correctly, we can’t ask for more. Ongoing investigations send the wrong message to workers.”

For fashion brands under recent scrutiny, this voluntary supply chain certification offers a clear exit strategy. Companies can choose to undergo external audits with their suppliers. Once an implementing decree defines the parameters, compliant brands can display a “certified supply chain” mark.

This provides a reputational advantage and, crucially, legal protection. If a certified supplier is later found to have irregularities, the lead company would be shielded from judicial administration.

Fashion subcontracting — critical voices: “A shield for exploiters”


The government’s move has drawn sharp criticism from unions and opposition parties, who accuse it of effectively legalising labour exploitation.

Alessandro Genovesi of the CGIL union called the amendment “a very serious precedent.” He stated, “Faced with judicial allegations of criminal exploitation, the government is erasing the crime. From a tax shield for evaders, we have moved to a criminal shield for those who exploit.”

The CGIL, excluded from government talks with industry representatives, is demanding stricter measures, including verification of worker-to-production ratios, application of collective labour agreements, and limits on subcontracting.

Echoing this outrage, Democratic Party Labour Representative Maria Cecilia Guerra denounced the policy as “a coup that weakens the fight against labour exploitation.” She explained the practical effect: “A company can sell €500 shoes from a contractor paying workers €2.50 an hour, yet face no audit. The client’s responsibility is swept away by a certificate.” She and colleague Arturo Scotto condemned it as “a step backwards by a right-wing party with no interest in protecting job quality or ethical businesses.”

Final thoughts


In conclusion, we must ask: who seeks subcontracting to get the lowest possible production prices? And in that pursuit, what do luxury company owners expect? Can the cheapest labour cost ever correspond to the highest labour standards?

Fashion subcontracting and sweatshop conditions are a critical yet systemic issue. The fundamental paradox of the government’s new measures is that they legalise the very conditions that lead to labour exploitation. The complex subcontracting chains, driven by the luxury sector’s pursuit of the lowest costs, are now being fortified with a legal shield. The proposed “solution” does not raise labour standards, verify fair wages, or limit outsourcing. Instead, it offers brands a path to waive liability, ensuring that the highest standards of luxury can continue to rest on the lowest standards for workers’ rights.

Italy is not solving the crisis; it is guaranteeing impunity for the powerful at the expense of the vulnerable.

In short, the Italian government is offering a false solution. Protection for brands—not for people.

Fashion subcontracting: new measures to combat labour exploitation in Italy Read More »

The Diane Keaton Principle: Androgynous, feminine, free

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

An ode to a woman who defied category—and how her style challenges contemporary female standards


We call it The Diane Keaton Principle: the art of being androgynous, feminine, and free—all at once. Some women change fashion; others change the way we think about it. Diane Keaton was one of the latter—a presence so unique that she redefined femininity without ever trying.

Diane Keaton passed away on 11 October at the age of 79. She was not only an exceptional actress but an exceptional woman—the kind who escaped all traditional definitions. She wasn’t the muse; she was the genius. Her legacy compels us to question what contemporary culture sells as female liberation. Is the performance of sexuality—the revealing clothes, the redone faces—true freedom, or just another cage, designed by patriarchy and capitalism?

Forget the voluptuous silhouette in a seductive pose, which still seems the only accepted way for a woman to succeed. Her signature was self-possession: men’s shirts and ties, timeless turtlenecks, practical loafers, and wide-brimmed hats that concealed her gaze. She didn’t simply wear clothes; she built an armour of elegant intellect.

She was also a natural beauty—no Botox, no plastic surgery, no facelift.

The Diane Keaton Principle: she stands on a flower-filled terrace, exemplifying her androgynous style in a masculine-inspired outfit: a black waistcoat, white shirt, dotted tie, and white pants.

Her answer always lay in her wardrobe. While others chased a narrow, body-centric ideal, Keaton explored the full spectrum of self. Her unmistakable uniform—ties, shirts, blazers, and waistcoats borrowed from the masculine wardrobe—wasn’t a rejection of femininity but an expansion of it. She was wholly, elegantly herself.

This authenticity extended to her face—a map of a life lived without the pursuit of sterile perfection.

She lived by her own words: “What is perfection, anyway? It’s the death of creativity… while change is the cornerstone of new ideas.”
Diane Keaton chose change. She chose creativity. She chose herself.

And in doing so, she left us a masterclass in style—both androgynous and deeply feminine. The Diane Keaton Principle, a rebellion that still challenges what we’re being sold today.

In a world of swollen bodies, grotesque pillow faces, and revealing clothes that nod to pornography more than ever—masquerading as “empowerment,” “feminism,” or “freedom of choice”—we must ask: what kind of choice is it when shaped by systems of power? When “empowerment” becomes just another word for conformity?

Diane Keaton’s style was a subtle revolution. She proved that true freedom isn’t about pleasing the male gaze, but about defining yourself beyond it.

In a culture of duck faces, her thoughtful smile remains a revolutionary act.
Her life proves: style is not a costume to impress, but a declaration of self.

The Diane Keaton Principle: Androgynous, feminine, free Read More »

Luca de Meo blueprint: Putting the customer back in the driver’s seat

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 3 minutes

Speed, data, and customer focus: Is luxury abandoning the creative genius for the customer?


Luca de Meo, the Renault-CEO-turned-luxury-boss, has presented his blueprint for reviving the Kering group. His plan involves a radical shake-up: splitting design between creative vision and consumer goods “common sense”, while dramatically slashing development times.

A new mantra emerges: 20% pure creativity, 80% consumer understanding. Let us explore the plan to put the customer at the heart of the house whilst accelerating its pace. In essence, what does it mean for the fashion industry?

Luca de Meo blueprint: The 80/20 rule comes to high fashion


Central to Luca de Meo’s strategy is a decisive move to “put the customer back at the centre, so as to no longer depend exclusively on the creative director’s vision.” This is not about eradicating creative skill, but about applying it more strategically. He asserts that a designer’s individual vision remains essential—but only for the top 20% of a collection, the “most innovative and iconic products” that define a house’s dream.

For the remaining 80%—the core assortment of small leather goods, footwear, and ready-to-wear—a new discipline is required. De Meo argues it is vital to “instill the common sense that prevails in the consumer goods sector,” grounding decisions in a “precise understanding of consumer expectations.”

This heralds a fundamental shift towards a customer-centric vision. Aesthetic choices will no longer flow purely from the designer’s intuition but will be informed by hard data, including market analysis, sales figures, and direct consumer feedback. The challenge — and the ultimate goal — is to meet these tastes head-on “without sacrificing the identity of the houses”. 

The need for speed: Halving the horizon


A direct consequence of this data-driven approach is a dramatic increase in speed. According to French media reports, de Meo aims to halve product development times, compressing the journey from initial idea to market launch from a year down to just six months.

This rapid acceleration signals a fundamental shift, borrowing tactics from fast fashion and intentionally breaking away from the luxury sector’s traditionally measured, meticulous pace. 

It’s a bold gamble that seeks to make luxury more agile and responsive. 

Final thoughts


The Luca de Meo blueprint presents a pragmatic, if radical, prescription to stabilise Kering. But for the wider world of fashion, it prompts a more fundamental question: what truly defines luxury in the modern age?

On one hand, the logic is compelling. In the face of an industry downturn and global instability, the 80/20 model acts as a crucial safeguard. It is a direct response to the kind of reinvention seen at Gucci under Alessandro Michele—a creative explosion that ultimately saturated the market, turning the brand into a marché aux puces where anything goes. In this context, a disciplined return to steadfast maison codes is a defensible strategy for ensuring brand integrity and commercial resilience.

Yet, this very discipline—with its customer-centric data and relentless push for speed—forces a confrontation with the soul of luxury. Can the core values of creativity, craftsmanship, and exclusivity survive a velocity that halves development times? The strategy seems to accelerate the industry’s existing trajectory towards industrialisation, leading us to a critical juncture: are we heading towards a future of mass-produced luxury? If so, what, then, becomes of exclusivity?

This tension invites a pointed critique, coloured by de Meo’s own background: is this a redefinition of luxury, or simply running a fashion house like a car manufacturer, with seasonal collections rolling off a conceptual production line? The blueprint makes its priorities clear; championing a ‘slow fashion’ paradigm is not part of the equation.

In conclusion, the answer, in de Meo’s vision, is unequivocal. For the architect of this blueprint, there is no room for nostalgia. In the race for the future of luxury, there is no space for slow fashion.

Luca de Meo blueprint: Putting the customer back in the driver’s seat Read More »

The (Un)Sustainable Fashion Awards 2025: Greenwash event at Milano Fashion Week

/ Leave a Comment
Reading Time: 4 minutes

A green carpet during Milano Fashion Week to celebrate fashion’s greatest paradox


On September 27, 2025, the Teatro Alla Scala hosted the CNMI Sustainable Fashion Awards, the official green carpet event for Milano Fashion Week SS26. Its mission: to celebrate the innovators and Italian fashion houses, ostensibly driving the industry toward a sustainable future.

The event, organised by the Camera Nazionale della Moda Italiana in collaboration with the UN Alliance for Sustainable Fashion, promised to honour those distinguished by their “vision, innovation, commitment to craftsmanship, circular economy, human rights, environmental justice, and biodiversity.”

A symbolic green carpet welcomed guests like Anna Wintour and Naomi Campbell, who wore outfits made from sustainable materials, presenting a unified front for a greener fashion industry.

The celebration: Nine green awards 


The ceremony proceeded to distribute nine awards, each targeting a key pillar of sustainability:

  • The SFA Craft and Artisanship Award: Tod’s Group
  • The SFA Circular Economy Award: Regenesi
  • The SFA Biodiversity and Water Award: Ermenegildo Zegna Group
  • The SFA Climate Action Award: Schneider Group
  • The SFA Diversity and Inclusion Award: Willy Chavarria
  • The SFA Groundbreaker Award: Aura Blockchain Consortium
  • The SFA Education of Excellence Award: Kiton
  • The SFA Human Capital and Social Impact Award: Saheli Woman
  • The Bicester Collection Award for Emerging Designers: The Sake Project

The pinnacle of the evening saw Anna Wintour present the New Legacy Award to Giorgio Armani. 

However, by all official accounts, it was a night of triumph—a consolidation of brands’ sustainable missions, widely covered in the press as a positive step forward. 

Yet, according to Ansa, “Prosecutors request judicial administration for Tod’s. The Milan Public Prosecutor’s Office has requested that high-end shoemaker Tod’s spa be put into judicial administration over alleged worker exploitation at factories run by Chinese people in its production chain, sources told ANSA on Wednesday, confirming a Reuters report.”

After all, it’s even ironic with all the brands put under investigation for labour exploitation. Tod’s is simply the last one added to the list. How does CNMI evaluate this particular aspect of “sustainability?”

Sustainable Fashion Awards: What do they even mean?


And so, for one night, all these people wore sustainable materials. The headlines celebrated a green vision. The brands were applauded.

But this is where we must pause and ask: What does any of this actually mean? Does anyone there have an idea of what “sustainable” means? 

Does a single award cancel out a brand’s vast linear production model? Does it justify the immense water and land use of a global supply chain? And does wearing one sustainable outfit on the red carpet make the entire attending house sustainable? Really, what are we talking about?

Sustainability: The uncomfortable truth


The uncomfortable truth is this: true sustainability in the fashion industry, as it currently operates, is a myth.

Celebrating “Sustainable Fashion” at a glitzy awards gala is the industry’s greatest paradox. These awards create the illusion of progress while the core system—built on overproduction, overconsumption, and globalised, opaque supply chains—remains fundamentally unchanged.

A few sustainable collections or material experiments are not enough to offset the environmental and social footprint of a multi-trillion dollar industry. 

In order to be truly sustainable, the fashion industry wouldn’t need awards; it would need to be redone from scratch. The very nature of these ceremonies exposes their inherent contradiction, a point perfectly illustrated by an excerpt including a telling anecdote from our book This is Greenwashing:

“While the name suggests recognition of progress towards circularity or sustainability, these awards rarely go to small, independent brands. Instead, they spotlight the same top fashion houses – the ones with the largest environmental footprints and marketing budgets.
At one edition of the Green Carpet Fashion Awards, designer Antonio Marras presented a dress crafted entirely from recycled fabric. Yet, because the fabrics weren’t sourced from certified sustainable labels, the jury asked him to remake the garment from scratch. The irony of this anecdote is striking—is it about promoting recycling, or ticking certification boxes? And really, is there anything more unsustainable than that?” 

Yet here we are, celebrating something that doesn’t even exist. This story encapsulates the entire paradox. It’s not about substance; it’s about spectacle. With the Sustainable Fashion Awards 25, we are not celebrating sustainability. We are celebrating its carefully branded illusion.

Want to learn how to spot the illusion?
Discover more in This is Greenwashing.

🌍 Buy the eBook (English Edition) on your favorite digital store: https://books2read.com/u/bpgxOX

The Italian Edition will be released in a few days!

The (Un)Sustainable Fashion Awards 2025: Greenwash event at Milano Fashion Week Read More »