18 March 2013

Jacobs by Marc Jacobs for Marc by Marc Jacobs in collaboration with Marc Jacobs for huff....

I will let you read it by yourself.

OK. So let's try again.


Don't you think this is the longest brand ever? And why people like Marc Jacobs (who doesn't know him?) need to use such single endless brand?

It came to my mind recently, that most of, if not all, big fashion houses are named after the founders. Maybe few exceptions like Costume National or Proenza Schouler. See Chanel, Dior, Alexander McQueen, Prada, Gucci. Like Yves Saint-Laurent, who actually is already super well-known with trio letter YSL, with it's insane business plan to change it to Saint-Laurent,they still retain the name of the founder, and (thank God) not replacing it with something else which not mention Yves's name.

Marc Jacobs, the creative director of Louis Vuitton, who created the brand's first women ready-to-wear collection in 1997, one-hundred-forty-three years after it's founded, has become one of the most influential designers of all time. With such big name as LV's helm and his own name for Marc Jacobs collection running in New York Fashion Week, I don't think that the brand Jacobs by Marc Jacobs for Marc (oh, should I repeat it again?) bla bla bla should be launched.

Or maybe I'm wrong. It's a complicated matter. Branding is as ancient as business. As early as 1780, shoes, hats, and mass-produced clothing have borne an identifying inscription, or label. When Charles Frederick Worth founded his own couture house in 1858, he continued the need of labeling by sewing onto his clothing's waistbands in gold capital letters saying "Worth & Bobergh" (his business partner). In 1910, Paul Poiret attached an embroidered rose created by an illustrator Georges Lepape on his label. Chanel created interlapping Cs, making it one of the most recognizable fashion logo. People study branding for years to learn how to make a good memorable brand. Business products especially in fashion need an image, a brand, which will represent the whole idea of the collection. It's like Armani. When you buy a pair of pants of Armani Exchange, it's not that you're part of the PrivĂ© (consider the price is waaayyy different) or made-to-measure line with its crazy precision, but it's still Armani, with maintained-high quality standard of the company, which at least Giorgio Armani knows that it exists, either he designs it or not. So when Marc Jacobs, whose his latest bag many times becomes the most-wanted bag, launches a new line carrying along his other lines,  it is questioning his brand identity. One line means one label, meaning one soul. Or maybe he's just too genius to handle few labels only, like Karl?

In my opinion, strengthening what you have created instead of creating a new line would be more effective, if your intention is to make established brands. If you want to make a good business, well, expansion is never a wrong choice, as long as you don't neglect the others that you have had in hands.

What about Jacobs by Marc Jacobs for Louis Vuitton? Or simply, MJ for LV?

Signorefandi, People will still stand in queue...