disruptfashion

Product placement vs consumer awareness

Among various methods corporations use to keep women hooked to their brands, product placement is on top. Yes, corporations. That’s what luxury conglomerates are. And it gives the pulse on their work.

During the 80s, Giorgio Armani was the first who started dressing Hollywood stars in order to sell to the American middle-class. In a perspective of massive overproduction and an ever-growing economy, perhaps that strategy made sense.
By the way, Armani, followed by all the other designers right away, started giving outfits for free to the stars, and women – the so-called middle class – promptly bought them.

Now the economy is not in good shape, and the middle class swiped away. Most importantly, we opened our eyes, so we are tired of being treated as fishing lures. Therefore we find some specific marketing techniques obsolete, if not meaningless.

What’s the point of stars wearing luxury designer’s clothes on the red carpets when it’s known they don’t pay for the clothes?
Does it still make sense?

Fashion & celebrities marketing

In fact, what makes it sound absurd is that they can afford to pay, but they don’t. In other words, those who can afford clothes don’t purchase them, while those who can’t are supposed to.

There’s no logic in this anymore. What if celebrities purchase their outfits and designers donate the proceeds to charity?

However, we should also dig deeper into those impressed by ‘the rich Milanese’ showing off her outfits on social media. And women promptly buy. Indeed we die a little for this lack of self-esteem.

Since we weren’t all born with good taste, looking for guidance is the right way to avoid weird outfits. But asking for advice is different from imitating someone else’s style.

Marketing has always targeted women because, traditionally, they are considered fragile and easy to influence or manipulate. And the sad thing is that we allowed them to do so.

Let’s evolve now.

Product placement vs consumer awareness Read More »

Not for all – Arrogance or honesty?

When we say that our work is not for everyone, it shouldn’t be seen as a sign of arrogance. On the contrary, if you ponder a little on the true meaning, you will perceive that it denotes a genuine and realistic approach.

Can we truly please everyone? No, obviously, we cannot.
To illustrate, if you usually buy fast fashion, you would never check out our selection. If you like to show off logo emblazoned garments, we are not for you. If you are a passive consumer, perhaps you will not interact with us.

Pleasing everyone is a naive goal, and though it’s impossible to accomplish, the downside of trying is that it generates a bazaar of elements. A fragmented and undefined proposal where everything is possible, but nothing stands out. Because there is no soul. No clarity.
The truth is that you have to be honest to say that what you do is not for everyone.

Over about twenty-five years in the fashion field, we saw the rise and fall of the system. A fast-paced environment in which profit and marketing took over creativity. And ultimately, it led to the exploitation of people and the planet. This system now needs a new air, something more, beyond that glossy facade. Creative visions supported by a conscious approach.

We are a drop in the ocean, but we are trying to bring a different viewpoint, providing a deeper meaning to fashion, and rediscovering its true beauty. And therefore evolve to the next level.

Our selection and thoughts are for those who appreciate the value of unconventional work that falls outside an imposed system. We aim to interact with individuals who are not passive consumers but active thinkers. Those who want to be informed because they are not stuck in the past or constrained by pointless rules but constantly evolving.

Not for all – Arrogance or honesty? Read More »