Views│What is the Future of Luxury Brands?

By Christine Tsui

Translated by Rachel Wang


In this essay, I would discuss the future of luxury brands, for the first-half-year financial reports of most luxury brands, including both the top ones, like Chanel, and the entry luxury brands, like Michael Kors, indicate the downturn of the whole industries, though the brands, having changed the development patterns, of Gucci and LV still performed well. Nowadays, with the unsatisfactory performance, where should the luxury brands go?

In my view, what makes the luxury brands luxurious lies in the following factors:

1. The scarcity of materials.

In the selection of materials, luxuries would use rarer materials than common ones: crocodile skin as different brands use, the luxury brands would only choose the Himalayan crocodiles; fibers as they use, the top brands would only accept a certain type from unique animals from Latin America. So, the scarcity is a key feature for luxuries.

However, along with the technology developments, the scarcity advantage has been diminished now.

2. Unique communications with the public.

To maintain a kind of mystery, luxury would like to stand high above the customers, which has been a common style for these brands. Nevertheless, that is exactly what the generation of 90s hold repulsion on.

Meanwhile, the designs of the brands, to reserve the classic elements of brands’ traditions, fail to cater for the young customers in the market.

It has been noticed that the terms of “grace and elegance”, worshiped by Gucci before, are fading out. On the contrary, the fresh designer’s affiliation to Gucci introduces the new sports elements, with animated colors and street-fashion styles, into the traditional brand. Though there still are signs of grace and elegant elements in the looks, the trend has been reversed.

In addition, the silhouettes of clothing are changes obviously. In the Tom Ford period, Gucci was featured with fit clippings to outline the curve of women. But now it turns to the oversize style, utterly different from the designs before.

Not only Gucci draws close to a younger customer group, but LV also cooperates with Supreme, a French street-fashion brand, aiming to attracting more attention from young people.

The current young people have no interest in high-fashion or aloof designs, which leads the designs and marketing methods of LV and Gucci rejuvenate a lot. The brands refusing this trend, Chanel for example, receive gloomy results, only to prove their insistence a mistake.

In conclusion, how can the luxury brands find the way out? In my points of view, the luxury brands should be more amiable to customers, which is not only a direction to pursue, but also a challenge to overcome. Only in this way, the luxury brands can re-gain a firm foothold in the increasingly young market.

Q&A│Is Luxury Discrimination Common in This Era?

By Christine Tsui

Translated by Rachel Wang


A question goes that “Is luxury discrimination common?” on the, the Chinese Quora.

The questioner puts his question in this way: “A colleague recently brought a handbag for his college-graduating son, but only to get refused. The boy said he would be discriminated by the peers if he, at his 20s, used the LV things.

It is said that the college guys would judge the LV consumers are tasteless parvenus,showing off with luxuries. However, as I know some craftsmanship of the luxury brands, especially that of Hermes, I admire them a lot. So I feel such a pity that the society, to some extent, discriminates luxuries, and I would like to put up with the questions:

1. Why some people would take the person with LV handbags or Hermes belts as lacking taste?

2. As a customer of LV handbags, what kind of outfit could diminish the parvenus style? How can I avoid the blame of showing off?”

This phenomenon is quite interesting. Most people would explain it from the views of their observations or senses, so I, hoping to be inspiring, prefer a more academic approach to this issue.

Fashion is associated with class, which has been proved by many socialists, anthropologists and psychologists. You can find the reference from the following classic works.

The Psychology of Clothes  by J. C. Flugel

The Theory of the Leisure Class  by Thorestein Veblan

La Distinction : Critique sociale du jugement  by Pierre Bourdieu

Fashion and Its Social Agendas: Class, Gender, and Identity in Clothing  by Diana Crane

Besides, System de la Mode by Roland Barthes is also worthy to read.

This book reveals the methods of brands or fashion medias to confirm the readers that their social attributes, such as status and class, can be reflected by their clothing. Barthes classify clothing into three types. The clothing of material attributes, on the fabric, craft and colors, is the first type. Another type is the imaginary clothing, existing in the fascinating descriptions or pictures on fashion magazines, which persuades the customers to feel themselves sexy, slim, tasty, and belonging to a certain class or social positions. It is the clothing of symbolic meanings, embracing certain spiritual meanings. The last one should be the clothing which have been worn.

Among all three types, Barthes focuses on the imaginary type.

For example, the term of “a printed silk dress” can only indicates the material attribute of clothing.

When it comes to “a printed silk dress of grace and elegancy”, the readers would weave the “grace and elegancy” with this dress. The power of language may goes beyond our imagination. In this dress, people would label themselves with “grace and elegancy”, so these two words can represent the dress in the imagination.

In a word, it has been proved that fashion can never separate from class and status.

Now we can go back to answer the question that why does “some people discriminate luxuries”?

Above all, as an academic researcher, I would not take it as a common phenomenon. As the questioner mentioned it was his son who sniffs at LV handbag, I prefer to owe it to the diversity of consuming propensity deriving from the change of population structures. Though the age of the son is not mentioned, we can approximately calculate that he should be one of generation after 90s, even after 1995.

Actually, this generation are not as eager as their parent generation for the luxuries, which does not necessarily mean discrimination.

1. These youngsters have not experienced material shortages. They have a wide vision of handbags and clothing. The rarer the stuff is, the higher the price goes. Now that luxuries are not rare to them, they would not take luxuries seriously.

2. This generation are less restrained by other’s judgements. Their parents may deliberately show off the luxuries to prove themselves in a certain class, status or tastes. But, being more sensitive to their own feelings, the young people now would like to take the dressing issue as a personal one, nothing to do with others.

3. Luxury brands intend to be conservative to maintain an image of classics and traditions keeper. The conservation makes them lag behind the recent fashion trends and the consuming preference change. For instance, the generation after 90s are fond of the fashion-sports styles, blurring genders and going for mix-and-match dressing instead of the traditional ones, away from the classic and elegancy routine that the luxury brands emphasizes on. So, for the youngsters, luxuries are too old for their styles, or to say, more suitable for their parents.

Indeed, the luxury brands are currently challenged by a younger market, but it would happen every time the population structure fluctuated in the history. So it does not mean these brands are doomed to death. Besides, LV, as a single case, is affected severely by fake products issues, which cannot be extended to all the other luxury brands.