Wednesday, November 18, 2009

Jimmy Choo???

When I first heard about Jimmy Choo and H&M, I thought I might stand fairly alone in the thought that it was tacky. I came to find that people definitely agreed with me. But, one person came up with a very good point. Designers have to appeal to the masses. Though I do agree with this statement, I feel like Jimmy Choo did it all wrong.

Designers tend to come out with a line for the "normal shopper" which ends up in Walmart or Target. A designer definitely has to appeal to all but without ruining the reputation they have created thus far. Buyers can become pretty upset when they find that the shoe they paid $500 for is now being sold for a mere hundred. Example: after owning several pairs of Chip and Pepper jeans ($150 retail) an announcement came out that they were now selling exclusively at Walmart. Well great! That money that was spent quickly turned me into someone who wear Walmart's clothing.

But, there is totally a right way to offer your line to all. And this is the good news for those of us that don't want to pay hundreds for every single item in our closet!

Marc Jacobs vs Marc by Marc Jacobs. Totally different price points and actually totally different designs but still from the same creative mind. The lines are distinct, individual, and both appeal to their own demographic, yet they still hold true to the essence of "Marc Jacobs".

Armani vs Armani Exchange. Here is an incredible example. The price-point difference is insane, yet creating these two distinct lines gives Armani a chance to reach out to everyone in his own way.

Simply Vera vs Vera Wang. Simply Vera will appear at Koels and Vera Wang will appear at boutiques in New York. This is an example I felt almost went wrong. You can tell the difference in quality of the two, but I guess that is to be expected.

Mary-Kate and Ashley. Nope, I am not comparing the two against eachother, instead their ideas together have made them fashion icons. First they came out with their Walmart line. Then they came out with Elizabeth and James. Finally, along came The Row. Now if you want to talk about appealing to the masses and not leaving a single person out, these lines prove to have it all. Low medium to full designer price points give everyone a chance to own part of the Mary-Kate and Ashley design collection. But depending on the price you pay, that's the quality you will get.

So when a brand like Jimmy Choo creates a shoe "just like the others" and sells it for a small fraction of the price, well doesn't that devalue what "the others" are worth?

Not saying that designers can't "appeal to the masses" but in doing so, give it some individuality.

What do think about Jimmy Choo and H&M???


  1. Jimmy Choo is awesome. Yes designers come up with the ready-to-wear lines, but that is the bulk of their business. Then smaller designers create variations of this and it trickles down. I guess this doesn't matter, as I think one's own personal style and choice of what to wear is truly their own anyway. These days the consumer has more choices... and it's all about choices :-)

    I also like the ads for Jimmy Choo. Although I'm not a big fan of the snapshot aesthetic of Terry Richardson, he has created some impressively cool Jimmy Choo ads :-)

  2. Creating something for a high street fashion brand would never reduce the value of the real thing. You cannot possibly expect the same quality if you by in a boutique vs high street shop and every designer knows it well. However, not everyone can afford expensive designer clothes/accessories and will be more than happy with a high street purchase that has a designer name on it. Plus, the designs themselves will be different from the main line of the high street brand and will be in limited qualities.
    Just to sum up, I always remember what Lagerfeld said about his collection for H&M: "You can expect a beautiful item of clothing, but you should never expect the same quality (fabric, craftsmanship etc) if you buy on a high-street because it is not meant to be. You should expect that your "high street brand name" jacket will fall apart in a few years time because this is what you paid for - you buy THE LOOK. However, your Chanel suit will last you forever and this is one of the reasons why it costs so much more."
    I actually think that JC collection looked very nice, however, personally, I would not wear JC for H&M.
    Great thought provoking post, darling!

  3. i completely agree. i think marc jacobs and MK-ashley olsen have done it best

  4. i'm a total shoe snob because i used to sell them. i'm sure that the H&M versions of the designs will be much lower in quality, materials and workmanship. i don't own a pair of Jimmy Choo's, nor will i probably purchase a pair at H&M - the real thing is too much and the knock off will probably not be leather. so i'll shop Cole Haan, Stuart Weiztman, and other quality mid price brands.

  5. Thanks for the responses.

    quite agree there is no way around it-the quality has to be poor compared to the real thing!

  6. Jimmy Choo is not really my favourite brand, I sometimes like the odd pair of shoes but it's not really 'me'.
    I think Marc Jacobs has done the best job with his diffusion line, the pieces are different but have a similar kind of feeling each season as the main line, and they tend to be very fun. =] Love the accessories so much.

    Florrie x

  7. i don't own a pair of Jimmy Choo's, nor will i probably purchase a pair at H&M - the real thing is too much and the knock off will probably not be leather.

    Work from home India

  8. I think the lines by the Olsens and Marc by Marc Jacobs are the best examples on how to appeal to the masses.

  9. Couldn't agree more. MKandA and Marc Jacobs take the cake! They know how to do it all!