March 29, 2007
Material Girl Gives Fashion a Whirl
By Tom Ryan
Joining a parade of celebrities with their own fashion lines, Madonna last week launched her highly anticipated “M by Madonna” collection at fast-fashion Swedish retailer, H&M (Hennes & Mauritz).
Heralding its significance, Women’s Wear Daily ran a three page article detailing the legions of fans lining up in the darkness of the early morning hours outside stores from Berlin to Los Angeles for last Thursday’s launch.
“There is going to be lots of interest for Madonna’s collection, but it will also contribute to more interest in H&M in general,” Stefan Stjernholm, analyst at Swedbank, told Reuters.
Celebrity endorsements aren’t new in the fashion world. Golfer Arnold Palmer is credited with launching the trend by licensing his name in the 1970s for a line of golf clothing. Actress Jaclyn Smith, of Charlie’s Angel’s fame, followed suit in the mid-eighties with a line of women’s clothing for Kmart. In fragrances, Elizabeth Taylor’s “White Diamonds” has sold more than $1 billion since its launch 15 years ago.
Typically, though, it was the “washed up” celebrity licensing his or her name to make some money. Today, launching a fashion line has become a “statement” for celebrities. Moreover, some of the recent ones have been wildly successful.
The biggest have come from the hip hop world. Brands from rappers or urban producers – particularly Sean John, Rocawear and Phat Farm – have recast the men’s collection area at department stores. For the women’s market, collections from singer/actress Jennifer Lopez as well as pop singer Gwen Stefani have become big winners for department stores. A children’s line from the Full House twins, Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, has become a huge hit for Wal-Mart.
These
successes have led to a flood of lines from other celebrities, including Beyoncé Knowles, Jessica Simpson, Kelly Osbourne, Mandy Moore, Bono, and Justin Timberlake.
Hillary Duff last year launched an exclusive tweens collection for Target.
For the consumer, demand for star-spun fashion has been increasing with people’s growing appetite for celebrities and celebrities’ lifestyles.
Marshall Cohen, chief industry analyst for the NPD Group, said consumers will pay up to 25 percent more for celebrity branded products.
“Celebrity business has grown in the past decade tenfold,” Mr. Cohen recently told CBS News. “Years ago, there was less than 100 celebrity brands in a multitude of different industries. Today, there are well over 1,000 brands that have celebrity ownership and/or partnerships that cross all kinds of industries.”
Not many celebrity launches, however, get the red carpet treatment. According to NPD, most celeb lines only last two years.
Problems frequently surface. For instance, Jessica Simpson was recently sued by her line’s manufacturer, Tarrant Apparel Group, for $100 million after she told an interviewer her favorite jeans were True Religion rather than her budget collection, Princy.
And many feel the cache of celebrity brands will become diluted as more reach the market. (In just women’s fragrance, celeb brands include Jennifer Lopez, Sarah Jessica Parker, Hillary Duff, Sean John, Daniel Steel, Paris Hilton and Britney Spears.)
But celeb lines keep coming. Besides Madonna, highly anticipated clothing lines are due this year from waif supermodel Kate Moss and British actress Sienna Miller. And former Sex and the City star Jessica Parker last week announced plans to launch her own clothing line at discounter Steve & Barry’s.
“Every year I think we’re saturated,” Claire Brooks, president of brand consulting company ModelPeople Inc., told The Washington Post. “And every year it gets worse and worse.”
Discussion Questions: What do you think of the trend toward celebrity fashion lines? What does this say about the American consumer? What are the opportunities and risks for retailers exploring celebrity collections?
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Poll
Industry watchers still tend to lump celebrity-designed brands (ala Gwen Stefani’s L.A.M.B./Harajuku Lovers) and celebrity-endorsed licensed brands that are designed by others (Sarah Jessica Parker’s deal with Steve & Barry’s) together. That said, it’s no coincidence that celebrity brands are thriving at the same time that vertical retail and private label are proliferating. Vertical players like H&M need short-term celebrity and designer alliances to keep up the cool factor and drive higher price points. Season after season of H&M runway interpretations, no matter how accurate, would get pretty dull and Steve & Barry’s went from “$10.00 and below” to “$20.00 and below” the minute they signed Sarah Jessica. And, as retailers keep pumping out margin-plumping private label and proprietary brands, they too need to spice things up and keep shoppers interested. Celebrity brands to the rescue!
Celebrity name brands and celebrity endorsements come and go. Silent movie stars in the 1920s endorsed cosmetics and tobacco products. M by Madonna might work for H&M for awhile, and when it slows down, it will disappear. (The John Malkovich line, Uncle Kimono, is dead, for example.) Larger chain stores license exclusive endorsements to protect their private label margins. For the chains, the key is to keep the license fee as low as possible to prevent the margins from getting hammered. No one expects celebrity endorsements to have long term longevity, even though it happens occasionally.
Am I missing something? Is this a new trend? Didn’t Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Tommy Armour, Liz Taylor (to name a few) do this years ago? Why the sudden concern? Why should this change things? If the names are recognizable and there is a big fan base that wants to be like their favorite celebrity, this will continue. If the star power wanes, the label disappears. It’s called, as Yogurt said in Spaceballs in 1989, “merchandising!”
Celebrity and fashion these days are inextricable. Celebrities are the conduit to the public for fashion; their celebrity itself has taken on the characteristics of fashion–some are enduring fixtures of our cultural landscape and others come and go with the season. Celebrities are designers, designers are celebrities and the lines between them are blurred.
Celebrity lines are incredibly fast sellers in the UK as well although I did read last week that the M range was the first such not to sell out instantly, leaving several items still in the store at the end of the first day (as opposed to having been purchased and immediately offered up to the god of eBay). As someone who resists ever wearing a visible name label (and it does get harder, making my wardrobe almost vintage), I hate the way that people dash out to wear what they think someone famous (for what?) is either wearing or endorsing. Few celebrities, as I understand it, actually design anything. In fact, again going by press reports which may or may not be true, several of the most famous names have launched collections based on what they like to wear themselves. Which implies there is an element of copycat-ism (if not actual plagiarism) involved. As for bad reputations harming sales, it doesn’t seem to happen–all the baddest boys and girls get rapidly forgiven and their bank balances only fatter for the sensationalism.
American consumers are obsessed with fame and celebrities. Madonna is a good bet and I’d place good money on her chances for success because she has persevered extremely well and has marketed herself every few years with just enough change and updating to in front of the camera and in the eyes of America, let alone, the world. The celebrity appeal will continue to grow even stronger in the years to come because media coverage of Hollywood is strengthening and in itself becoming more obsessive. The truth is, people are getting what they want. However, I caution retailers to do the due diligence on celebrity lines the same way I always encourage them to look closely at licensed products, in that some will be evergreens, some will be passing trends, and some will be volatile from the first day. Know the differences and make lots of money with the Hollywood momentum.
Mainstream retailing in the US has become quite predictable…we know what American Eagle, Talbots, A&F, Gap, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, etc. are going to look like before we go to the store. Real fashion gives fresh, unexpected surprises and creates traffic and sales as well as a more interesting, rewarding store experiences. Stores like H&M, Zara, and Mango do significantly more per square foot than our retailers because they embrace fashion and embrace continual change of the type that name designers and celebrities provide instead of locking in on a look and never letting it go as our branded stores tend to do.
Celebrity Fashion lines are, as Bernie states, nothing new. However their proliferation and increasing ownership on the retail floor is consistent with American’s increasing ‘sound-byte’ and instant gratification lifestyle.
Brands aren’t of the moment, celebrities are. Brands are less associative with current trends, celebrities are. Brands are in it for the long run, celebrities are flash and fizzle. Brands build image over time, celebrities can create it over night. Brands seek longevity, celebrities seek more immediate payback. Brands are exclusive while celebrity product is immediately and widely available.
While I am not so sure that Celebrity brands carry a 25% premium, I might agree that in their relatively short lifespans that they may run a higher sell-through percent in the short run. The end of the lifespan, however, can be a real bloodbath for retailers.
Bernie is right. This isn’t a new trend, although I’m personally still waiting for the George Anderson collection.
This is hardly a new trend, and the rapid pace of pop celebrity-endorsed fragrances (to cite one example) indicates that the life cycle for these products gets shorter and shorter. In this case, Madonna has over 20 years of staying power as a pop-culture figure so the association with H&M is a typically smart move allowing her to stay relevant to a new generation of consumers. Whether the merchandise will blow out is another question…reaction appears to be mixed so far among the H&M target shopper.
I agree with most of what has been said so far. I would add that we can expect Madonna’s line to last, just like she has. I cannot claim to be a fan, but the woman knows how to keep reinventing herself, and that is an important quality in apparel retailing. I’m kind of surprised it took her this long actually.
Celebrity endorsements are a double-edged sword (and nothing new as has been pointed out). What the celebrity gives with one hand (glamour, panache, etc.) can be taken away with the other (arrest, scandal, disgrace). And, in most cases they are not cheap, many times costing upwards of seven figures. Marketing dollars might be more effective spent elsewhere.
Material Girl goes “material” in this new launch with H&M. Its success remains to be seen, but my guess is it will be popular for a period of time. I have no idea what the clothes will look like, but as a mother I question what messages a line of clothes from Madonna might communicate to our daughters, and to society in general. Surely, I’m not the only one to feel this way.
Retail is a very risky business and one must be proactive in attempting to reduce the risks.
The ways of approaching these risks must include a serious assault on the promotion of new properties. This can be addressed by introducing hot-celebrity appearances as an endorsement of the property immediately as the property is released. If you have your target demographic clearly defined (and you better have this completed), have these icons positioned to endorse whatever you are selling. It is also imperative to include these celebrities on your website.
Promote, promote and promote some more and do this in a way such that the results are measurable–and if you are using a licensee, it is always necessary to keep your eyes on the licensee. This has to be done as a means to safeguard trademarks and logos; nobody wants to be subjected to infringement or copyright piracy as their horse leaves the gate.
More Discussions
Is Five Below Poised For Even Greater Growth?
Five Below is hitting serious growth numbers. Can this trend continue?Should IKEA Be Flattening Management?
Should IKEA be trimming down its management headcount?Is Legislation the Answer on Visa, Mastercard Swipe Fees as ~$200 Billion Record Is Set?
Is lawmaking the way forward on swipe fees?
Industry watchers still tend to lump celebrity-designed brands (ala Gwen Stefani’s L.A.M.B./Harajuku Lovers) and celebrity-endorsed licensed brands that are designed by others (Sarah Jessica Parker’s deal with Steve & Barry’s) together. That said, it’s no coincidence that celebrity brands are thriving at the same time that vertical retail and private label are proliferating. Vertical players like H&M need short-term celebrity and designer alliances to keep up the cool factor and drive higher price points. Season after season of H&M runway interpretations, no matter how accurate, would get pretty dull and Steve & Barry’s went from “$10.00 and below” to “$20.00 and below” the minute they signed Sarah Jessica. And, as retailers keep pumping out margin-plumping private label and proprietary brands, they too need to spice things up and keep shoppers interested. Celebrity brands to the rescue!
Celebrity name brands and celebrity endorsements come and go. Silent movie stars in the 1920s endorsed cosmetics and tobacco products. M by Madonna might work for H&M for awhile, and when it slows down, it will disappear. (The John Malkovich line, Uncle Kimono, is dead, for example.) Larger chain stores license exclusive endorsements to protect their private label margins. For the chains, the key is to keep the license fee as low as possible to prevent the margins from getting hammered. No one expects celebrity endorsements to have long term longevity, even though it happens occasionally.
Am I missing something? Is this a new trend? Didn’t Arnold Palmer, Jack Nicklaus, Tommy Armour, Liz Taylor (to name a few) do this years ago? Why the sudden concern? Why should this change things? If the names are recognizable and there is a big fan base that wants to be like their favorite celebrity, this will continue. If the star power wanes, the label disappears. It’s called, as Yogurt said in Spaceballs in 1989, “merchandising!”
Celebrity and fashion these days are inextricable. Celebrities are the conduit to the public for fashion; their celebrity itself has taken on the characteristics of fashion–some are enduring fixtures of our cultural landscape and others come and go with the season. Celebrities are designers, designers are celebrities and the lines between them are blurred.
Celebrity lines are incredibly fast sellers in the UK as well although I did read last week that the M range was the first such not to sell out instantly, leaving several items still in the store at the end of the first day (as opposed to having been purchased and immediately offered up to the god of eBay). As someone who resists ever wearing a visible name label (and it does get harder, making my wardrobe almost vintage), I hate the way that people dash out to wear what they think someone famous (for what?) is either wearing or endorsing. Few celebrities, as I understand it, actually design anything. In fact, again going by press reports which may or may not be true, several of the most famous names have launched collections based on what they like to wear themselves. Which implies there is an element of copycat-ism (if not actual plagiarism) involved. As for bad reputations harming sales, it doesn’t seem to happen–all the baddest boys and girls get rapidly forgiven and their bank balances only fatter for the sensationalism.
American consumers are obsessed with fame and celebrities. Madonna is a good bet and I’d place good money on her chances for success because she has persevered extremely well and has marketed herself every few years with just enough change and updating to in front of the camera and in the eyes of America, let alone, the world. The celebrity appeal will continue to grow even stronger in the years to come because media coverage of Hollywood is strengthening and in itself becoming more obsessive. The truth is, people are getting what they want. However, I caution retailers to do the due diligence on celebrity lines the same way I always encourage them to look closely at licensed products, in that some will be evergreens, some will be passing trends, and some will be volatile from the first day. Know the differences and make lots of money with the Hollywood momentum.
Mainstream retailing in the US has become quite predictable…we know what American Eagle, Talbots, A&F, Gap, Ralph Lauren, Tommy Hilfiger, etc. are going to look like before we go to the store. Real fashion gives fresh, unexpected surprises and creates traffic and sales as well as a more interesting, rewarding store experiences. Stores like H&M, Zara, and Mango do significantly more per square foot than our retailers because they embrace fashion and embrace continual change of the type that name designers and celebrities provide instead of locking in on a look and never letting it go as our branded stores tend to do.
Celebrity Fashion lines are, as Bernie states, nothing new. However their proliferation and increasing ownership on the retail floor is consistent with American’s increasing ‘sound-byte’ and instant gratification lifestyle.
Brands aren’t of the moment, celebrities are. Brands are less associative with current trends, celebrities are. Brands are in it for the long run, celebrities are flash and fizzle. Brands build image over time, celebrities can create it over night. Brands seek longevity, celebrities seek more immediate payback. Brands are exclusive while celebrity product is immediately and widely available.
While I am not so sure that Celebrity brands carry a 25% premium, I might agree that in their relatively short lifespans that they may run a higher sell-through percent in the short run. The end of the lifespan, however, can be a real bloodbath for retailers.
Bernie is right. This isn’t a new trend, although I’m personally still waiting for the George Anderson collection.
This is hardly a new trend, and the rapid pace of pop celebrity-endorsed fragrances (to cite one example) indicates that the life cycle for these products gets shorter and shorter. In this case, Madonna has over 20 years of staying power as a pop-culture figure so the association with H&M is a typically smart move allowing her to stay relevant to a new generation of consumers. Whether the merchandise will blow out is another question…reaction appears to be mixed so far among the H&M target shopper.
I agree with most of what has been said so far. I would add that we can expect Madonna’s line to last, just like she has. I cannot claim to be a fan, but the woman knows how to keep reinventing herself, and that is an important quality in apparel retailing. I’m kind of surprised it took her this long actually.
Celebrity endorsements are a double-edged sword (and nothing new as has been pointed out). What the celebrity gives with one hand (glamour, panache, etc.) can be taken away with the other (arrest, scandal, disgrace). And, in most cases they are not cheap, many times costing upwards of seven figures. Marketing dollars might be more effective spent elsewhere.
Material Girl goes “material” in this new launch with H&M. Its success remains to be seen, but my guess is it will be popular for a period of time. I have no idea what the clothes will look like, but as a mother I question what messages a line of clothes from Madonna might communicate to our daughters, and to society in general. Surely, I’m not the only one to feel this way.
Retail is a very risky business and one must be proactive in attempting to reduce the risks.
The ways of approaching these risks must include a serious assault on the promotion of new properties. This can be addressed by introducing hot-celebrity appearances as an endorsement of the property immediately as the property is released. If you have your target demographic clearly defined (and you better have this completed), have these icons positioned to endorse whatever you are selling. It is also imperative to include these celebrities on your website.
Promote, promote and promote some more and do this in a way such that the results are measurable–and if you are using a licensee, it is always necessary to keep your eyes on the licensee. This has to be done as a means to safeguard trademarks and logos; nobody wants to be subjected to infringement or copyright piracy as their horse leaves the gate.