Fashion Notebook

Breaking News: Halle Berry Inks Fragrance Deal With Coty, But Is the Timing Right?

According to a WWD report, actress Halle Berry has signed a
fragrance deal with Paris-based Coty, that will include
several scents, as well as the actress playing an (obvious) role in the forthcoming ad campaign.

"Halle is an iconic actress and symbolizes beauty to many generations," Steve Mormoris, senior vice president of global marketing at Coty Beauty US, told WWD. "She adds another dimension to the celebrity fragrance market. Halle has always been a little more mysterious, not quite as open with her personal life as some other stars. Her fragrances will allow her to present another facet of her personality to her fans."

Um, ok. I guess we'll buy it. Except for the fact that senior NPD beauty analyst Karen Grant told us a short while ago that the celeb fragrance industry was not such a hot spot, and definitely taking a back seat to the designer business. And we quote:

"We have not seen any increases in the women's celebrity business, which had double-digit declines in 2006, and, while not as much, declined somewhat in 2007," Grant told us. "It's hard to say whether [that trend] is over yet or not—it depends on who the celebrity is. There are still celebs with a lot of power, for example, in our apparel studies, we see tremendous success for Sarah Jessica Parker's "Bitten" [collection for Steve & Barry's] and Jessica Simpson's [eponymous] footwear line. Right now it's soft in the fragrance industry, but that doesn't mean it can't pick up."

So it sounds like developers should be less than bullish, and we have to wonder what kind of buzz factor Halle Berry actually offers to the fragrance counter. On the plus side, she's an Oscar nominated and awarded (for Monster's Ball, 2001) actress, but we don't get the sense that consumers see her as much of a style-leader or trend-setter, versus contemporaries such as Angelina Jolie (currently repping St. John), Scarlett Johannson (who repped for Louis Vuitton), or even Queen Latifah (who repped CoverGirl before—Why God? Why!?—switching duties to become the new celeb face of Jenny Craig).

WWD said that the scent is will debut in spring 2009.

Lessons in Branding: Making Sense of Louis Vuitton's First TV Spot, "Where Are You Going?"

If you haven't seen, first check out the 90-second spot from Louis Vuitton, "Where are you going?", the brand's first-ever TV ad, teased in the most recent earnings report. Creative per Ogilvy, Paris.

OK, what to make of this? First, our impression:

This feels a lot longer than it is. The existential question—"What is a journey?"—is explored through some pretty engaging imagery, and we have to admit, we watched all the way through to the end, and probably would have done the same had we seen it on TV (we don't have cable folks, we read). It recalls the print campaign, featuring Catherine Deneuve at a train station, lots of fog and smoke, revealing and concealing the lensman's subjects. And the soundtrack gets us in the mood for an Alejandro Iñárritu film. We're pleased to see that we're not bogged down with a bunch of branded product, and indeed feel that the spot makes an emotional connection. It's really a beautiful spot in a world full of uglies, and doesn't come off as pandering or offensive.

But the problem we've got, ultimately, is the branding part. We have to feel that people for whom "The journey is life itself," probably aren't the same ones who want to shell out thousands for a suitcase. In fact, they'd probably spend the money that a Vuitton steamer trunk would cost on a fairly comfortable trip to Africa or Asia. Unless, of course, they're among those who prefer custom Vuitton luggage, and travel to India on a half-spiritual journey to connect a dysfunctional family (er, in case you hadn't already caught on, we're talking about The Darjeeling Limited here). So the message seems to be a disconnect with the product,  n'est pas?

And, now, point-counterpoint from two recent critiques:

From BryanBoy.com (AKA the twink blogger who actually got Marc Jacobs to create a handbag named after him): "I *LOVE* the commercial! It's quite moving and touching. In fact, the message is crystal clear to me. IMO, the folks at luxury powerhouse Louis Vuitton went back and paid homage to their roots: the art of travel. Afterall, travel is an integral part of the brand's DNA. Nowhere in this commercial you'll find the usual flash flash "bling" stereotype the average Joe associates with Vuitton. I think it's a nice little  flashback to the bygone era where only the traveling set knows about the historical and cherished by millions monogram."

From Pam Danziger (of luxury analysis firm, Unity Marketing, Stevens, Pa.): "It's atmospheric and evocative, yes, but LV has fallen into a trap that can catch many heritage-rich luxury brands, and that is thinking that brand image is the ultimate reason why people buy. In my research into the mindset of the luxury consumers, brand image plays a supporting, not a leading role in why people buy.  When affluent consumers buy a luxury brand, first and foremost they want outstanding quality.  Image may be a primary motivator for the 'aspirational' consumers who want to put on the trappings of a luxury life they have not yet attained, but not for the affluent shopper who has already made it. It is even questionable that the company's target consumers will get the brand identity message that is this commercial's primary objective.  When I viewed this ad, all I had were questions, but no answers.  'What is a journey?' is the question poised in this commercial, but the answer about why I need the Louis Vuitton brand to accompany me on my journey was left unanswered."

Anyhow, at least the ad has people talking, which is always good in this biz. Of course, Vuitton doing its first TV ad would naturally have every one talking. What remains to be seen is, as Danziger notes in her review of the spot, whether or not consumers (and critics) will go from talking to buying.

Research Desk: NPD Study Finds Consumers Not Changing Where They Shop, But Increasingly Looking For Sales

So there's good and bad news in a report released today from NPD Group, Port Washington, N.Y.

First, the good news. While 79% of the survey's 772 respon- dents felt that we are either in, or headed for, an economic recession, the majority aren't really changing where they shop given economic woes.

According to the study, "Fast Checks: Consumers Speak Out on the U.S. Economy," 55% of respondents said that today's economic conditions had "No impact" on where they shop for products. Meanwhile, 26% said that the economy has had "little impact" on where they shop, meaning that they'd changed on or two of the retailers from which they previously shopped. Another 15% said that they have changed "many" of the retailers they shop, while only 4% said that the economy has impacted their buying habits so drastically that they've changed all of the retailers they used to shop.

"Even with all the media attention on the economy, consumers still seem to be focused on their needs and desires," said Marshal Cohen, NPD's chief industry analyst, in a statement. "Consumers are tuned into news about our economy, but they aren't so quick to change what they are doing, including where they shop."

So knowing that the majority of shoppers have experienced either no impact, or very little impact, to their where they buy goods should have retailers breathing a sigh of relief, particularly after a rough round of earnings, right? Well, sort of.

The study also found that consumers are increasingly looking for promotional events to help keep costs down in the shopping cart. According to the survey, 50% of respondents said that they were now more likely to take advantage of store sales than they were six months ago. Of those polled, 38% said that they would be more likely to use coupons, and 8% said that they were more likely to participate in discount and/or membership programs.

According to Cohen, the results indicate that consumers are still going to be moving through retail doors, but that "the retailers are going to have to do more to get them."

"Certainly, promotional incentives of all kinds will be key, but how you market and communicate will help seal the deal," he added.

UPDATE: Target Prez Says Analysts "Over Representing" Significance of Isaac Mizrahi

We had a feeling the top dogs over at Target would have to  respond to designer Isaac Mizrahi's jumping ship to head design over at Liz Claiborne's women's division.

As we said in our previous post, Mizrahi reportedly brought in about $300 million in annual sales to the retailer, which reported annual sales of $61.5 billion yesterday.

Here was the statement regarding Le Mizrahi's defection, from Target President Gregg Steinhafel.

"As it relates to Isaac Mizrahi, we've enjoyed a terrific five-year relationship with Isaac, and I think you all are over representing what it means at Target," Steinhafel said, in an earnings conference call. "It's approximately 3% of our apparel and accessories business, and we really view his strength as a niche contemporary collection, and any efforts that we have had to move beyond that were unsuccessful at best. And so, when the contract became renewable, we had the opportunity to, he had the opportunity to broaden his involvement with an apparel company, and we took it as an opportunity to move beyond this partnership, because we did not want to pass on higher royalty rates to a small collection business within the stores."

OMG, this is like sooo totally high school, and Target's all, like, pissed, because they got dumped first. So then they fire back, like, well, whatever we didn't really like Isaac that much anyways. But wait, it gets better.

"We're focused on our Go International and our Emerging Designer strategy," added Steinhafel. "WE can very easily replace these four or five racks on our apparel floor in the small section that we had in accessories and footwear with these new emerging designers, which frankly have been very successful, and we've got a terrific portfolio of new emerging designers coming on-stream this year, which we'll share with you as the year progresses."

Oh snap! Burn!

Ok, so maybe we did overestimate Isaac's influence, and while $300 million sounds like a lot to our poor Brooklyn writer budgets, it pales in comparison to $61.5 billion.  But still, the guy added a great personality to the floor at Target, and that's not so easy to replace. Plus, we still firmly believe that consumers connected to Isaac in a way that they will have trouble connecting with designers who are in for one quarter and out the next. But hey, what do we know? We're not making $61.5 billion a year.

While you ponder your own thoughts, here's a video clip for you to enjoy, and remember the personality that once lived at Target. Clip is from The Isaac Mizrahi Show, in a segment featuring Rufus Wainwright, the über-gay singer/songwriting, and full-time Judy! Judy! Judy! fan, who is now starring in H&M's "Fashion Against AIDS" campaign. (Seriously, how can you not love this guy? Enjoy!)

Lessons in Branding: Members Only Reexamines the Lookbook

Normally, lookbooks are the run-of-the-mill press materials that you  throw into a trusty bin (or, in our case, an unused aluminum beer cooler) and forget about until you need to do a trend report or look up the name of a garment that appeared in an ad.

Spiral bound, velo-bound, perfect bound, matte, natural or glossy, they're all pretty much the same. Which is why this one from Members Only—that brand you wore in the early the 80s, when we were still drooling and incoherent (it wasn't the cocaine honey, we were babies!!)—caught our eye.

It's done up as a scandalous spread from US Weekly or Life & Style or Star (whichever you like best), with the product previewed throughout the shoot and called out in caption boxes.

This approach works for two reasons:

1. It gets the attention of editors and industry types who normally have to sift through a bunch of crap from countless companies. We're not used to seeing this kind of stuff, so at the very least, it gets us to spend an extra few seconds (crucial!) looking through the materials before chucking it into the aforementioned trusty bin.

2. It lays out the looks in a lifestyle manner, practically doing the work (though none will admit so) of the stylist his/herself. Essentially, it gives us an idea of how the clothes would look in real life and suggests some styling options that seem viable.

But that's not to say that there aren't a few drawbacks to this more inventive format, chiefly that it's not necessarily very user friendly. For instance, it's not easy to flip through this for reference. The format requires the editor's eye to  jump to all manner of text boxes, which is detrimental for those editors trying to pull together a trend report or merely browse product to see what would be appropriate for an upcoming shoot. With the lookbook, utility cannot be underestimated.

Also, this male model is hideous. I mean, they're not all to our taste, and that's cool, but we're just not feeling this guy (and we LOVE skinny hipster guys). Also, "Poppi" was the best name they could come up with for the girl? Finally, the models appear to have like zero chemistry, which actually makes looking through the spreads all the more interesting, even if it's because we're laughing at the "Make Me a Supermodel" antics.

Still, it's a refreshing take on an industry standard that actually got us to take a look, and, well, write about it. Check out one of the spreads from the book, below. (Click to enlarge) 

Financial Desk: Target Treads Water With Q4 Sales, Earnings Fall 8%

Another retailer, another disappointing earnings release. Seriously
folks,  we might just have to turn off our stock ticker for the rest of the day.

Target reports flat sales for the quarter ended Feb. 2, at $19.34 billion, though year-end sales grew 6.2% to $61.5 billion. What?! No sales losses!? This is great news!!

Well, it would be if Target hadn't also posted earnings of $1.03 billion, pr $1.23 per share, down 8.2% from last year. For the full year, the brand only moved the needle 2.2%, growing income to $2.85 billion, or $3.33 a share.

Below, the most obvious conclusions from Target's top dog.

"Our  financial performance in 2007 fell short of our expectations as the pace of sales and earnings slowed considerably in the second half of the year," said Bob Ulrich, chairman and CEO, in a statement. "As we enter 2008, we remain keenly focused on the disciplined execution of our core strategy, positioning Target to deliver improved financial results, even in the face of continue challenges in the current economic environment."

Unfortunately, Bob doesn't elaborate (and we're still waiting for the conference call where, you know, he actually might give us more color on this bland statement) so we don't know what kinds of tricks he's got up his corporate sleeves.

The report also makes no mention of the loss of designer Isaac Mizrahi to Liz Claiborne. Of course, Les Mizrahi's goods will still be sold through the retailer until the end of 2008, but nonetheless, his defection to Liz Claiborne was a major hit.

The designer's namesake collection for the brand brought in a reported $300 million in annual sales, in addition to have a sales-halo effect on the other brands in the store. Given his name and popularity, we get the feeling that it's going to be rather hard to replace him, and certainly the one-offs for the Go International collections which have featured up-and-coming designers probably won't make up the sales loss. Moreover, the collection might not pull in as much this year, given that Target isn't likely to promote it since they won't have the goods after the holidays.

For more on the Mizrahi switcheroo, check out our previous post, here.

Financial Desk: On Q4 and FY07 Losses, Macy's To Investors: "Hey, We're Not Doing As Badly As The Others!"

It's not a good day for retailers, with many reporting sales
and earnings slumps.

In its report this morning, Macy's appears to be hoping that they might at least look better than the competition.

"While a weakened economic environment led our industry to softer financial results than initially expected, Macy's, Inc. did outperform most of our primary competitors in the fourth quarter," said Terry Lundgren, chairman, president and CEO, in a statement. "We also generated significant cash flow despite weaker-than-expected sales trends. Going  forward, we are aggressively pursuing our recently announced market localization initiative to drive future sales and earnings."

What's he talking about? Well, earlier this month, the brand announced that they would be consolidating their various Macy's regional divisions into three primary groups: Macy's East, Macy's West, and Macy's South. Within each of those divisions will be 20 "districts," each consisting of about 10 stores, governed by a new workforce of about 250 managers. The thought is that by having more management in more localized markets, the company will be able to make much more specific marketing appeals to its consumers, tailoring everything to their particularly tastes, whims, or geographic proclivities. Of course, that consolidation also includes the downsizing of some 2,550 jobs across the previous geo-divisions. More on that, here.

 

Oh, and also, Macy's announced that it will no longer be reporting same-store monthly sales figures, which, you know, are the clearest indicator of a retailer's performance inbetween earnings reports. Oh, and another thing, they're not going to be giving anymore estimates about sales and earnings for the future. That certainly sounds like an underwhelming vote of confidence in the company's ability to perform.

"In total, 2007 was a year of significant strategic progress," added Lundgren, in a statement. "We successfully launched exclusive new brands such as Martha Stewart Collection, invested for continued growth in the direct-to-consumer business, expanded Bloomingdale's, changed our corporate name, and launched a breakthrough new marketing approach under the umbrella of 'The Magic of Macy's'."

You probably remember that particular campaign from the holiday season, when you were besieged by a commercial with a melee of images of Donald Trump, Sean Combs, Martha Stewart (who almost seemed warm and whom we were also relieved to see unshackled from KMart), and mental eyesore Jessica Simpson hawking their products sold through the mega-retailer.

Lay your chips down, folks, we're betting on Martha as the sales driving leader in the full collection category this year. Hopefully, for Macy's she'll be "a good thing."

Financial Desk: Despite Q4 Weakness, Nordstrom Rolls on With Seven New Stores for 2008

Another sign that the luxury market might be buckling, Nordstrom reported declines across the balance sheet for the fourth quarter.

Net sales dropped 4.4% to $2.51 billion for the quarter ended Feb. 2, and net earnings declined 8.6% to $212 million, or 92 cents a share. For the full year, sales increased 3% to $8.83 billion, and earnings rose 5.5% to $715 million, or $2.88 per share.

The declines were caused, in part, by a "trailing effect" from the previous quarter, according to President Blake Nordstrom's statements in a conference call.

"[That trailing effect] coupled with the softer environment impacted our bottom line," he added, noting that the first half of the year had been, "in terms of sales," successful. "As we look ahead to 2008 and beyond, we are focused on executing our long-term strategy of increasing market share with our core customers by offering great service and the best merchandise the market has to offer. We are in a position of strength financially, which allows us to take advantage of opportunities that may come our way, as well as weather any current challenges that we may face."

Increasing market share with  core customers, boosting service and merchandise, eh? Seems that's exactly what Milton Pedraza, of The Luxury Institute told us was precisely the strategy the luxury market needed to combat the pending/current recession.

While the year-end increases do support Nordstrom's contention of his company's strong financial position, we have to think that moving ahead with the retailer's growth plan is unwise at this time. Nordstrom plans to open seven more stores this year—in Honolulu, Hawaii; Burlington, Mass.; Clinton Township, Mich.; Thousand Oaks, Calif.; Indianapolis, Ind.; Pittsburgh, Pa.; and Naples, Fla.—in addition to the 165,000 square foot store it opened Feb. 15 in Aventura, Fla.

No notes about changes to their marketing plan that we've seen yet, but those cartoonish inserts they've been running for a while now certainly haven't made us want to shop there.

Oscar Wrap-Up: Why Marketing Was the Night's Most Interesting Star

So if last night's ceremony, presenter banter, and Jon Stewart had us yawning in our
seats, at least the marketing plugs were there to wake us up! In fact, we might go so
far as to say that marketing was the real star of the show.

Things kicked off with some good designer plugs in the women's dress category. Headline news: Cotillard up, Kidman down. For a more comprehensive breakdown, check out our previous Oscar post, here. (Or, er, scroll below!)

But we left one of those ladies out of the line-up, because she was just such a good piece of marketing collateral that we thought her more appropriate for this part of the wrap-up. Drum roll please: Heidi Klum in that gorgeous red dress by John Galliano, a philanthropic tie-in for Coca-Cola, which ran its Red Dress campaign spots during the event. The dress (pictured, with Klum, below) will be auctioned off on MyCokeRewards.com, with proceeds going to the charity Heart Truth, which raises awareness about heart disease in women.

Then there were the commercials, and I have to say that the fashion set more than represented. The new J.C. Penney ads for the "American Living" collection seemed to translate well (at least, among our viewing audience last night in a cramped Brooklyn apartment), and everyone seemed pleasantly surprised by the American Express ads with Diane von Furstenberg. Both ads got some prominent sponsorship play before the commercial break had even commenced.

So for the fashion marketers, it seemed like the night sailed on smoothly, unlike Cameron Diaz's attempt to pronounce such difficult words as "cinematography" (again, we still don't understand why she gets Galliano's Dior dresses!).

And then there were these weird product plugs.

Here's Jon Stewart bemusedly futzing with his iPhone. If ever there were a completely smooth pitchman, Stewart's not one of 'em. In a lame segue, he talked about getting to catch up on all of the year's great films right there at the podium. (Because, you know, the square inches of the iPhone really help to communicate the Old West grandeur of "There Will Be Blood." Seriously, has Stewart even used this device?). Then of course, he announces that they're better viewed in widescreen. He turns the phone horizontally and the camera pans in for a great shot of the iPhone and Apple logo. In the end, it's not a bad plug, it's just, well, kinda shameless and we're sure that even those who aren't marketers recognized this little bit for the sham it is. Kind of like the Bluefly.com "Accessories Wall" in Project Runway or the numerous mentions Coke gets during American Idol.

And then there was this COMPLETELY SHAMELESS PLUG for the Nintendo Wii. Coming back from commercial, Stewart and the little girl from that Gospel choir, were engaged in a heated game of Wii Tennis, projected on enormous screens for the whole audience to see. No joke followed, no setup really introduced the plug. It was suddenly just there.  Check out the video below.

Do marketers seriously think the American public is this stupid that they wouldn't know a complete corporate shill when they see it? Why not give away sponsorship titles for the awards at this point? And the Oscar for the Coca-Cola Best Actress goes to... Marion Cotillard! Just think of it! She could thank Diet Coke, of course, for all of those days on set when she needed a fizzy drink that calmed her stomach but didn't contribute to any stress-induced weight gain. Well, that's if San Pelligrino doesn't get the award sponsorship first.

Now that we're mulling it, is this a bad idea? Everyone knows these shows are rigged shams anyways, I don't care how many staged videos I have to see of Frank Pierson being denied at the doors of Price Waterhouse Cooper.

Oscar Wrap-Up: Which Actresses Repped Their Brands the Best on the Red Carpet

So we're back after a late night staying up for that tired annual awards show: The  Oscars. (We know the show ended just after 11:40 our time, but we stayed up late bitching to our bicoastal friends about lame montages, good/bad dresses, and, like everyone else apparently, Diablo Cody).

Seriously, if it weren't our job to stay up  until the wee hours tracking who was wearing what, how they wore it, and how brands made their way onto the stage or in the commercial slots, we would have wrapped this up by 9:00 pm EST and sailed off to bed on a few DVR'ed episodes of "Paula's Home Cooking."

But, for better or worse, we stayed up, enduring less-than-pithy commentary by John Stewart, and some heartbreaking losses ("Surf's Up" losing out to "Ratatouille" for Best Animated Feature and "There Will Be Blood" losing out to "No Country For Old Men" for Best Picture). And it's a good thing we did, because the marketing, as far as we're concerned was the star of this year's drag-along show. But let's kick it off chronologically, with some of the more notable carpet dress-vertisements. (Note: All pictures per WWD. "Fierce Factor"s, our own judgment of how well the star wore her particular dress, set against how likely the placement is to boost the brand, are awarded on a 1.0-5.0 scale.)

Name: Amy Adams
Film: Enchanted
Dress: Proenza Schouler
Fierce Factor: 4.0
Our Take: Aesthetically, this is the perfect pairing. Adams' red hair and ivory white skin work wonders against the emerald gown. The edgy, classic appeal evokes a more colorful version of John Singer Sargent's "Madame X" or the femme fatale of H. Anglada- Camarasa's "Retrato de Sonia Klamery." Unfortunately, points off for that eye-gouging performance, though the girl did have to pimp her movie. Also, she's not that high-profile. 

Name: Penélope Cruz
Film: No noms this year, most recent was "Volver"
Dress: Chanel
Fierce Factor: 4.5
Our Take: Even so-so dresses look amazing on Penélope Cruz. Not only does the girl have extracurriculars to add to her hotness (Cruz speaks four languages! Name one of her American contempos that can claim that), but she can pull off designs that would look perhaps silly on a lesser body. Straight up: she's a stunner every time with no bad publicity to drag her down. With her small frame and captivating gaze really pronouncing this dress, Karl gets the most out of a rather ho-hum haute couture look.

Name: Cameron Diaz
Film: No noms this year, er, like every other year. Most recently, "Shrek The Third"
Dress: Dior by John Galliano
Fierce Factor: 3.0
Our Take: We will never understand why Diaz always gets Mr. Galliano's best. Don't get us wrong, the girl has a great frame, an established bold-faced name, and she photographs well. That, in and of itself, is worth the plug. But c'mon! Certainly the upper crust clientele doesn't want to share threads with Hollywood's leading empress of the Ditzy Dame shtick, right? And we're not going to hate on the pleats, like E! did. But, at the end of the day, it's a rather dull dress, on a very dull girl.

Name: Marion Cotillard
Film: "La Vie En Rose," WON: Best Actress
Dress: Jean Paul Gaultier
Fierce Factor: 5.0
Our Take: Perfect storm here, folks! Not was this fish-scale detailed mermaid dress equal parts daring and stunning for the red carpet debut, but its wearer walked away with the Best Actress award. And did so with one of the most genuine speeches we've seen in some time from the Oscars! As an added bonus for Mr. Gaultier, she's been the talk of the papers this morning, with pictures abounding. What she'll also likely add to that nice stew is that her figure looks like a real woman (admittedly, a thin woman) and she fills out the dress in a wonderfully tasteful way. This is as good as it gets!

Name: Nicole Kidman
Film: "The Golden Compass"
Dress: Balenciaga
Fierce Factor: 2.5
Our Take: What goes up must also come down, and the real low point (ok, with some obvious exceptions that we'll note later, we're lookin' at YOU, Diablo) came with this unfortunate placement on Nicole Kidman. Even preggers, she has the kind of body (read: alien model-esque) that could really show off some of Nicolas Ghesquiere's more ambitious designs, easily clinching the press coverage for the next day. Instead, she walked the carpet as a pretty, pregnant girl in a pretty boring black dress. And that diamond necklace just looked like a sad, glittery trapeze.

In summation, these were just a few of those that stood out to us last night. But we would be remiss if we didn't mention that, while Keri Russell looked great (as we imagine all women do) in the Nina Ricci gown, we were stunned that the label couldn't get more of an A-lister to work a look, especially following that stunning little yellow dress that worked so well on Reese Witherspoon last year! Also, all of our friends were screaming (screaming!) about Diablo Cody, and not in a good way. The dress was terrible, no wonder the maker has not appeared in any credits we've seen, and she looked like so many tired Betty Page-hipster-wannabes that we see most nights at Beauty Bar. (But we'd like to submit, for the record, that we liked "Juno".) Also, Tilda Swinton didn't do much for that Lanvin dress and that really makes us sad, because we love both of those names! We'll have to chalk that up, like the Kidman debacle mentioned above, to a stylist just making a poor choice, one for which the brand will suffer, or at best, not get any brownie points for.

But hey, we're not bitching in a vacuum people. Drop us a line and let us know what you think, either here, or in the comments below!

AmEx Continues Its Fashion Push, With Diane von Furstenberg Starring in New Campaign

Off the heels of the New York Fashion Week initiative
where it offered streaming runway shows among other goodies, and a $500,000 donation to the CFDA/Vogue
Fashion Fund, American Express is continuing to deepen its fashion industry connection.

The credit card company announced that designer Diane von Furstenberg (she old the large dots and wrap dresses) will star in the latest "Are You a Cardmember" campaign, per Ogilvy & Mather, New York, which breaks during the Oscars on Feb. 24. See a still from the TV spot, right.

No doubt the campaign seeks to create more brand affinity among female consumers (also the general goal of the company's effort within the fashion industry, according to Jessica Igoe, director of sponsorship and event marketing at American Express, New York), and given von Furstenberg's longevity in the industry and reputation as a fiercely independent designer and businesswoman, it should resonate fairly well.

Indeed, von Furstenberg's own statement seems to play right into that angle.

"Women inspire me and I inspire them to be independent and free, which is how I feel when I use my American Express card," said Von Furstenberg. "American Express represents a sign of independence and freedom and if you have your card, you can do anything."

See what we mean? Though we must admit, that the feeling of freedom that our credit cards (of all stripes) have given us only resulted in vast numbers of consumers in our age group (let's say 20-30 years old) entering into not-insignificant personal debt. After all, we just had to have that Vuitton throw rug and somewhere along the way, trips to Sephora seemed, well, like a necessity no matter how much they squeezed the budget.

Directed by "Capote" chief Bennett Miller, the TV spot follows Von Furstenberg from the inspirational Winter Wonderland of her backyard, through the design process in her studio. The print ads were shot by—who else?—Annie Leibovitz.

UPDATED: The Freestyle World Tour and Reebok's Search for Female Consumers

UPDATE!: Reebok flacks reassure us that "Framed" is full speed ahead. And, what's more, it's now available on Yahoo!Sports and behind-the-scenes footage has been, er, Flickr'd. Congrats! Now, what about that whole "Your Move" campaign?

For those new readers who walked into this convo like a child wandering into the middle of a movie ("You're out of your element Donny!"), check the rhymes below. Note: There won't be any more Big Lebowski references from here on out, for better or for worse...

Been around the world and I, I, I... I can't find my
Reeboks?

Forgive the indulgence of a song we've had stuck in our heads this morning (sometimes shower song sessions can drag into the work world, even for business-minded journos like us!), but it kinda, sorta ties into Reebok's new Freestyle World Tour launch that kicks off Feb. 21. Once again, it's a puzzler. But first, the deets.

Again going after the women's market, Reebok is taking a Nylon-style tour de monde with a new collection of apparel and footwear that will incorporate the particular modes of fashion capitals including Tokyo, Paris, New Delhi (huh?), Madrid, London and New York. Starting tomorrow, the first style, a send up of Tokyo street style with inspiration taken from the city's subway map hits stores. Future releases for each city will roll out as follows:

March 2008—Freestyle Paris, which references the "Can Can" in red, pink and black
May 2008— Freestyle New Delhi, featuring embossed satin and Bollywood-style vibrant color patterns
July 2008—Freestyle Madrid, which references flamenco dancers
Setpember 2008—Freestyle London, featuring an embroidered raven on the heel
November 2008—Freestyle New York, which references our city's unmistakable taxi cabs

All shoes will retail for $85, and the apparel collections that accompany them, which include hoodies, tees, and track jackets, will retail for $28-$75.

The global ad campaign, for which spend was not revealed, will include print, in-store and digital efforts. Somehow "global" just doesn't ring right without the  "TV  spots" tag, but hey, we're traditionalists. Reebok spent $27.5 million on measured media advertising in 2006, and for the first 11 months of 2007, has spent $16.6 million. Below is a list of the pitch women the brand has signed  for the campaign. Full disclosure: We had to look them all up too, so feel free to click the names if you're unfamiliar!

Tokyo—Ai Yasuda                                Madrid—Bimba Bose
Paris—Yelle                                         London—Nikki Beatnik
New Delhi—Sagarika Ghatge                New York—Sheetal Sheth (above, in a spot for the NYC collection)
 
 Since none of the girls here are names that we've heard of—and we'd like to think we're pretty up on things—the campaign is a bit of a puzzler unless they're going for super underground authenticity appeal. But isn't that the kind of marketing that a big brand like Reebok should avoid? Shouldn't Reebok be looking for bigger sales, to grab a larger share of the market and turn around their banking books?

What happened to Scarlett Johannson? And what about that IFC film series, "Framed," that they launched not too long ago.  

And what about the "Your Move" campaign we heard about back in September, when CMO Uli Becker (a straight-talking Adidas alum), told us the following:

"We need our marketing to appreciate where the consumer comes from and make them king of the whole thing as well," Uli Becker, head of global marketing, explained of the brand's "Your Move"  campaign. "It brings the message into one campaign context. Whether we're talking about running or women, we're playing into one equity image of the brand with that single slogan."

For a brand that said it was going to focus on a single, streamlined marketing approach, it doesn't seem to be delivering. "Framed", the "Kool-Aid" collection and, now, the Freestyle World Tour seem diametrically opposed to Becker's statement about a unified message. In fact, it seems like the same kind of mixed messaging that he said, at the time, had been detrimental to Reebok in the past.

Speaking of "Your Move" campaign, why haven't we seen it anywhere yet? Has "Your Move" moved on? Trust that we're on the hunt to find some answers here.

 

Old Navy Prez Dawn Robertson Exits, Wyatt Named Interim Prez

Just over a year after she joined as president at Old Navy,
Dawn Robertson is headed for the door.

Taking over in her absence, which went into effect yesterday, will be Tom Wyatt, president of Gap Inc's Outlet division. Also a relative newbie to the company, Wyatt joined in 2006 following a stints at Saks Fifth Avenue and  pres/CEO post at Cutter & Buck.

The company was scant on the details concerning Ms. Roberston's departure, saying that it was a mutual decision and proffering this curt quote from Gap Inc. CEO Glenn Murphy:

"I appreciate Dawn's hard work over the past 16 months and wish her all the best," Murphy said, in a statement. "We're fortunate to have someone of Tom Wyatt's caliber and experience, as both a president of our Outlet division and a former retail CEO to guide Old Navy during this transition."

For the full story, see here (via WWD).

The Big Bang: J.C. Penney's Biggest Launch Ever for "American Living," (And Why It's Smarter Than You Skeptics Might Think!)

J.C. Penney is really going whole hog with the
marketing push behind its new "American Living" collection!

While we hear a lot of "biggest push ever" b.s. from marketers, this one's the real deal:

-First TV spot hits Univision, in Spanish, for the "Premio Lo Nuestro a la Musica Latina" Awards, on Feb. 21
-Mass-market TV spot to make full debut during the Oscars, on Feb. 24
-Month-long run on prime-time TV slots
-A 60-second in-cinema spot at an estimated 14,000 theaters for all PG and PG-13 features
-Print campaign in the usual barrage of consumer pubs (see example, right).
-Direct mail with 12 different specialty catalogs
-In-store promotions, including fixtures and themed uniforms for employees
-AmericanLiving.com dedicated Web site.
-Creative shot by Bruce Weber (sufficeth to say, ain't cheap people!)

The brand and the campaign, both by Polo Ralph Lauren's Global Brand Concepts group, will be the biggest in the company's history, according to CMO Mike Boylson. The imaging is meant as an emotional play that connects consumers with images of Americana and family.

While some may doubt the strategy of going big during a time when consumers feel like they're going bust—and Boylson said he's heard more than a few naysayers—the strategy actually works in their favor, according to Patricia Pao, of The Pao Principle, New York, who told me that J.C. Penney could potentially triple their media spend value given that they will be one of the few people making a real push.

And even though she felt the price points for the collection—a broad swath covering $24-$500 goods—might be a bit too aspirational for the times, WSL Strategic Retail's Candace Cortlett told me that the big campaign is still a good investment in the brand.

"[This effort] will live beyond the hard times," she said. "The worst thing to do is to put all of the energy into developing a brand like this and then just letting it sit on the shelf. That was Sears’ mistake when they got the Land’s End franchise."

Check out the full story here.

Financial Desk: Abercrombie Posts Gains in Q4, But Notes Problems with Ruehl Line

Seems like Abercrombie's still on top, no pun intended. 

The New Albany, Ohio-based company posted an 8% sales increase during the fourth quarter, reaching $1.23 billion, and a 9% boost in net income, which registered at $216.7 million. For the full year, sales grew 13% to $3.75 billion, and profits rising 12.6% to $475.7 million.

While the picture was pretty glossy for the most part, the company did note a slowdown in sales for its Ruehl line, according to statement from CFO Michael Kramer, in a conference call.

"Unfortunately, sales productivity declined in the second half of 2007, as we began to anniversary markdowns  from fiscal 2006," said Kramer. "We anticipate lower sales productivity compared to last year through most of the first half of 2008 as we continue to anniversary the high markdown levels associated with Ruehl...Until we can establish Ruehl as a proven  concept we will moderate the pace of new store openings."

But despite that bad news, it was all sunshine and rainbows from Chairman/CEO Mike Jeffries.

"Our brands represent high productive, consistent businesses that are the result of an unyielding focus on merchandise quality and customer experience," said Jeffries, in a statement. "We continue to make strategic investments in the business to sustain and to enhance brand quality and to support future growth, both domestically and internationally."

Well, at least one of those "strategic investments" includes a $300 million initiative to remodel existing and construct new stores in 2008, as well as the brand's decision  to bring back its porn-a-log, A&F Quarterly, which has raised eyebrows in the past for its debatably pornographic imagery, not to mention its lack of actual clothes on lifestyle models. (Well, some things never change in that department.)

The new Quarterly has puzzled us for a while too, and not just for the obvious reasons everyone else seems to have cited which include, chiefly, that the guys aren't wearing underwear in their dungarees. What's gotten us stumped is why the campaign is still all-white.

While we admit we haven't seen  the most recent installment, the images on the brand's Web site include the same line up of idealized white models that were featured (although they have changed the bodies they're using, natch, since the shelf life of fashion models is relatively short if you're not of the Naomi ilk) when we were covering their legal discrimination troubles at El Diario/La Prensa (our Spanish-language journo days).

Check out a few shots from the current campaign, below.

Listen, we're no Pollyannas about this stuff, and are well aware that it's widespread issue in the industry, but after so many issues of its own discriminatory mess (remember those "Two Wongs Can Make it White" tees?) we just have to wonder why Abercrombie wouldn't just toss a bone out and include one minority in its prominent imaging? C'mon guys, help colorize our wank bank!

Research Desk: Prestige Beauty Sales Grew 2% in 2007, Sez NPD

The prestige beauty industry—that's the expensive,
marquee stuff y'all—gussied itself up in 2007, according to a report from NPD Group, Port Washington, N.Y.

The category grew 2% overall to $8.9 billion in sales for 2007. Leading that charge were the makeup and skincare categories, where sales rose 4% to $3.4 billion and $2.5 billion, respectively. Makeup still leads in market share, now at 38% of the total beauty biz, just ahead of fragrance, which controls 33% of sales, and skincare, which gets 28% of the cut at $1.2 billion in sales.

And growth in a prestige market despite The Recession! Though, we can't say we're surprised, because, after all, even in the worst of times we'll plunk down the cash to prevent the world from seeing our wrinkly, blemished, pale faces, or smelling our "natural" scent. And hey, if it's got a designer name on the box, all the better! If we're not paying more than $100 for the goods, we usually chalk it up to a normal indulgence, especially when it lasts for a year (Happy Valentine's Day to our very dresser-top fave Prada Amber Pour Homme!).

Seems NPD's senior beauty analyst, Karen Grant, agrees.

"During challenging economic times in 2007, the prestige beauty industry managed to rise above the negatives," said Grant in the report. "Women and men are still willing to spend money on products that make them look and feel better."

However what did surprise us were the rankings of the top fragrances, for both male and female shoppers (keep in mind that females actually buy a greater percentage of men's fragrance than men do):

1. Acqua Di Gio (Giorgio Armani)
2. Beautiful (Estée Lauder)
3. Coco Mademoiselle (Chanel)
4. Chanel No. 5 (Chanel)
5. Cashmere Mist (Donna Karan)

OK, ok, Beautiful isn't a surprise, nor is Chanel No. 5, those fragrances are so classic they're a lock for the top spots. Coco Mademoiselle is an interesting one, since we were sure that everyone was like sooo over their current ad girl, Keira Knightley, but it's obvs just us who thinks she just a poor-man's version of Penelope Cruz with a perma-pout. And Cashmere Mist? We have to think some of those sales were a case of mistaken identity. We've never touched the stuff but the bottle looks like an exotic sex toy.

But the real shocker was No. 1: Acqua di Gio. Seriously!? Acqua di Gio!? We thought that fragrance was hot like, four years ago when we were having our Año Español and all the boys (including us) were awash in that sweet, citrus-y smell. But that was four years ago!

"It's just an easy fragrance, a good juice that easy and likable and that no one is going to hate you for gifting," Grant told us, admitting even she had been surprised that the fragrance had stayed on top for the past several years. "Men can wear it to work and to the club, and women like it, which you know is the number one factor for the guys. It isn't overpowering and its versatile. They've hit on a formula that is working on both the mass and prestige levels."

Grant also told us that a new ad campaign, by parent L'Oréal's agency Publicis, that offered new imagery for the popular fragrance, was well timed to continue the momentum of the brand last year, swapping out male model Larry Scott with Lars Burmeister (pictured above, with product), and bowing a new TV campaign, which you can view, to your water-dripping-on-abs delight, below.

Financial Desk: Pre-Announcement of Dismal Q4 and Fiscal 2007 for Liz Claiborne

Ruht-roh...

That's the feeling we get from the latest announcement from the financial office over at Liz Claiborne.

A pre-announcement of Q4 and full-year 2007 earnings forecasts greater-than-expected profit losses prior to the official report due out Feb. 27.

Bear with us as we go through the details. It gets foggier than Pynchon prose at times as you roll down the balance sheet expectations.

For the fourth quarter, the company said it now expects losses of $0.90 to $1.00 per share, with earnings per share of $0.15 to $0.25, compared to earnings  of $0.71 per share in the year-earlier period. Net sales for the fourth quarter are projected at $1.21 billion, down 3% from the prior year.

For the full year, expects losses of $0.25 to $0.35 per share, on the assumption of posting earnings of $1.25 to $1.35 for 2007, a serious dip from earnings of $2.46 a share in 2006. Net sales for 2007 are estimated at about $4.6 billion, down 1.4% from 2006.

It's important to call out that the projects don't include any impact from the sale of the Ellen Tracy brand today, which went to Radius Partners LLC, Westport, Conn., for $27.3 million (plus up to $15 million more, depending on how the brand performs over the next four years). That adds some dollars to the coffers that could help offset some of the expected weakness.

But it's equally important to remember that the  projections don't include the impact of costs associated with the company's efforts to "streamline operations," the shuttering of some of its cosmetics brands, as well as what appear to be the weakened status of those 16 brands the company had under review.

But well, let's let CEO William McComb sort it out. Here's what he had to say.

"While 2007 marked a very difficult period, we see the fundamental in this company heading in the right direction," McComb said in a statement. "This conservative view we are taking in our 2008 guidance-specifically around our Partnered Brands performance—is only prudent given the challenging retail environment."

He also added that "markdown pressure" hit those Partnered Brands—which include Liz Claiborne and Dana Buchman—hard during the quarter, but that they're going on the offensive with recent design deals for Claiborne that include Isaac Mizrahi tackling the women's end and John Bartlett handling men's, as well as licensing Dana Buchman out to Kohl's. For more on that, see here.

On a positive note, it looks like Juicy Couture is doing well, with Q4 comp store sales expected to be up 25%, while the brand jump 23% in sales for the full year. The Lucky brand remains flat against year (hey, it's better than being in the red, people!), though Mexx was down 3% for the quarter and 2% for the year.

John Varvatos Goes Back to His Record Collection For Spring 2008 Campaign

It's always been clear where designer John Varvatos
gets his inspiration: his record collection.

Growing up in Detroit, Varvatos became infatuated with the slew of 1970s-era rockers that defined the music scene of the time (and, obvs, continued to influence for many years to come), and that infatuation has become the flashpoint of influence across not only his collections, but also his advertising creative. Recent spots have included Alice Cooper, Iggy Pop and Aerosmith's Joe Perry, alongside more modernist rock figures such as Chris Cornell, and the Scott Weiland-fronted and Slash-anchored Velvet Revolver.

So another season, another rocker and this time from the vinyl bin, Varvatos, and the team over at Yard, New York, have unearthed another vintage treat: Cheap Trick. Check out one of the spots above (click to enlarge), which feature members Bun E. Carlos, Rick Nielsen, Tom Petersson and Robin Zander (can you believe they're all still alive!) racing along on, what else, 1970s-era vintage two-seaters.

The creative, steered by Stephen Niedzwiecki, the creative director over at Yard, was inspired by boardwalk and carnival imagery (why do we always think Diane Arbus when we hear these words?) from the 1940s and 1950s.

"The Cheap Trick guys have an almost uncontainable energy," said Varvatos, in a statement. "This season is one that embodies a freewheeling style that is so quintessentially America. The campaign continues to be about iconic rock n ' rollers caught in real moments."

Real moments? I'd definitely classify this as stylized fantasy. I mean, honestly, when's the last time you saw a bunch of guys pushing into the stretches of old age racing around on bikes in full evening wear? (And if you have seen such a phenomenon, frequently, let me know where you live because it sounds like an interesting vacation spot!)

We also have to wonder if this campaign doesn't make Varvatos' brand feel too old. While we loved the campaign with Iggy Pop (who, let's face it, is no spring chicken himself, with wrinkles that recall Varvatos' own pricey, aged leather carry-alls), that campaign had a youthful exuberance that we just don't feel from the shock-white heads of the Cheap Trick-ers. This could also be a function of the fact that our eyes automatically gravitate to Rick Nielsen in the spot above; his bandmates do look more youthful on second consideration.

Regardless, the aging rocker-as-posterboy works for Varvatos, solidifying his brand's musical heritage, and, here's the big bonus: he'll never get accused of just tapping somebody because they of-the-moment (looking at you Versace with your robotic Jonathan Rhys Meyers ads). And double bonus: these guys probably come pretty cheap.

  You know what would make our day, though? If Varvatos' next campaign featured T. Rex's Marc Bolan (pictured, left). C'mon John, you know you love him too! This guy is the original unicorn... Just imagine that sex bomb in a Varvatos suit!

Has Converse Lost Its Edge? A Look at the Latest "Get Chucked" Campaign

Maybe a few more looks will mellow us out,
but we're not stoked about the latest " Get Chucked" campaign for Converse by John Varvatos (see, right). Which is upsetting, because we used to really love these print and outdoor spots.

It seems the brand has gone Hollywood in the few years since its launch, and by "Hollywood," we mean mainstream, away from its grittier New York roots.

Take a look at one of the print spots at right. The campaign, shot by photog Ryan McGinley and created by Yard, New York (which did the previous campaigns as well), takes place at what the release calls "a Spanish-style house tucked away in the Hollywood Hills." See? We were dead on about the whole going Hollywood thing. Literally.

The photos are technically  good—we're actually fans of McGinley's work, which you can see here, particularly the way he captures youthful nudes in their un-Photoshop-ed beauty—but they just don't seem to have the punch that the campaign from spring 2007 did. Those ads featured cheeky shots suggestive of public urination, summer BBQ spots (see both, left), and "subversive" messages like "Legalize Everything" and "Sexy Mess" and "Social Discomfort."

The campaign that followed, for fall 2007, seemed definitely more toned down but still had an edge, documenting a young rocker couple's decadent weekend in a (Chelsea?) hotel suite. Nice little quirks, such as "God Save Queens" emblazoned in white paint across an oversized shirt (see, below, right) added that dose of New York grit that still very much said "Get Chucked" to us.