This week's ChicGeek vlog including a review of the Panasonic iShaper trimmer, Dr Perricone's new CBx For Men range, MMUK Man eyebrow products, new UK label, Eiger Classic & Belvedere Vodka's single estate vodkas.
Burberry has to be admired for trying “See Now, Buy Now” - the new way of showing clothes in-season and making them available straight away to buy after the catwalk show. While many brands have used the term or jumped on the bandwagon, they were truly the only global brand to do it on scale and fully commit.
Left - The recent AW17 Burberry Show in Clerkenwell
Other brands have done capsules, collaborations and the like, but on a much smaller scale. Some are still doing it, while others have dropped it already, but, it’s Burberry who we’ve been watching to see whether it works or not.
Burberry has done a great job at the logistics. The job of getting things in place: to drop the minute the catwalk has finished, unveiling online and in their network of retail stores and wholesale partners.
They’ve experimented with it and while they’ve proved they can get things in the right places at the right time, unfortunately, it doesn't make for great clothes.
We are on the third collection now and they are no way as accomplished as the previous out of season shows. They still have the same Creative Director - Christopher Bailey - who I rate very highly, but it just shows that this way of working, restricted by manufacturing timetables, limits the ideas and collections.
With “See Now, Buy Now” you’re alway working backwards. What can we make in time? Can our manufacturers make that, in the quantities we need, in time? No? Then, next idea.
What can we do? doesn't make for the most positive start to any collection. It’s too restrictive. It just makes for clothes that are basics with little details tacked on. The latest collection, shown a couple of days ago, illustrated this, literally. Chinos with doodles on or a let’s stick a silver/crystal thing on a quilted sweat shirt to jazz it up a bit. It’s not starting from a strong design base. You’re always working backwards.
Fashion collections often come together a few days before a show. Stylists or designers often ask for little pieces or accessorises to help form looks which have a clear voice and message and is what many trends rely upon. They worry about making them afterwards. This isn’t possible with see now, buy now, as it has be all signed off and produced months in advance. Burberry has over 500 shops in 50 countries. That’s a lot of product. Admittedly, the catwalk makes up a small percentage of the business, but it still has to be in the windows etc.
These clothes are also being made upfront. Many brands use a show to gage demand and then order accordingly. You either have a lot of wastage or you’re very conservative in your ordering of the more difficult and interesting pieces. This leads to boring stores and products.
Right - Burberry - White T-Shirt With Crystal Brooch - £495 - See Now, Buy Now isn't making for the best clothes says TheChicGeek, do you agree?
It’s time to ditch see now buy now. Burberry are good at deciding to drop things when they don't work. They tried to go it alone with their beauty offering, but realised things are too tough out there on your own and have now gone in with beauty giant, Coty.
If it’s any consolation, they can be confident to know that if they couldn’t make it work, then nobody could make it work and can be very proud of themselves for trying something that many thought too difficult and didn't even entertain.
Like all new ideas, some are more successful than others. This is one to put down to experience and it's time to let Christopher Bailey do what he does best.
A "rip-off" is defined as a fraud or swindle, especially something that is grossly overpriced or an inferior imitation of something. Sound familiar? The two meanings have become somewhat intertwined in the crazy world of modern luxury fashion.
Okay, let’s talk about that cap. Vilified, objectified and chastised, the Burberry check cap has been waiting for its reintroduction since we saw the preview of the Gosha Rubchinskiy SS18 Burberry capsule in St. Petersburg where he’s produced a capsule collection based around the famous beige “Horseferry” check.
Burberry once wanted to distance itself from its famous check, using it instead for discrete linings and the like. But, now it’s back and they’re are trying to champion or own the new chav-chic look dominating fashion. Worryingly, the vast majority of people have missed the Burberry in between - which was rather good.
Left - Burberry - Vintage Check Baseball Cap - £195
Burberry are playing catch up and I put that down to “See Now, Buy Now”, but that’s a whole other #ChicGeekComment.
Anyway, the cap got me thinking. The cap is kinda cool, but not the real one. It’s cool to have the copy, the naff pastiche, the nod to, the rip-off, because ultimately you’re getting ripped off with both.
With the rip-off you’re in on the joke, proud of the made in China label and almost taking the chav-factor to the max. Buying it from a stall on Oxford Street and not a store on Bond Street is truly in the spirit in which the item was intended. You’re playing with it, subverting it and not blinding paying nearly £200 for a cap. #ripoff
The same could be said for the new Dune London “Gucci” loafers. The Gucci loafer really is a classic in the pantheon of fashion, but obviously has been everywhere recently due to Gucci’s huge success. Getting a real pair just feels a bit lacking in imagination.
It’s not even about the money. The Dune rip-off makes you part of the current fashion, but it’s more laissez-faire and carefree and makes you a member of fashion’s great unwashed rather than inspiring to own a piece of footwear inspired by the British aristocracy’s love of horses.
Are those Gucci? No, they’re Dune. There’s something confident about being okay about wearing a rip-off. Just think about all the money you're saving too.
Right - Dune London - Pinocchio - Classic Snaffle Loafer Shoe - £100
Guys, listen up. As you’re probably wearing trainers or sneakers, right now, you’ll probably want to know the direction your next pair is coming from. Think of the worst pair you can imagine, double it and then sprinkle on another cup of ugly and you’re there.
Left - Vetements X Reebok Instapump Fury Canvas Trainers - £610 from matchesfashion.com
Gone are those minimal, sleek cup-soles, that have, let’s be honest, had a good run for their money, to be replaced by the fugliest fuckers to hit the pavement.
Right - Raf Simons X Adidas Ozweego III Low-Top Trainers - £285
This is all part of our addiction to bad 90s style and everything of dubious taste. You better start planning the rest of the outfit!
Below Right - Eytys - Angel Low-Top Chunky-Sole Leather Trainers - £265
Below - Nike Air More Uptempo Triple Black - £140
This is the only suit you’ll need this season because it’s ticking a lot of boxes. Green, tick. Pink details, tick. Retro, tick. Comfortable, tick.
You should probably know by now I’m crazy about forest green and also Fila’s vintage inspired sportswear ATM. This perfectly combines the two and is exclusive to Urban Outfitters.
Wear together or separately. It won’t hang around, so get moving.
Left & Below - FILA Johnson Forest and Pink Velour Tracksuit Top - £65 FILA - Johnson Forest and Pink Track Pants - £6
See more "Prawn Cocktail" inspired menswear here
Nobody does ginger like TheChicGeek, so, with 2017 officially the year of the #Gingervidual, it would be rude for him not to show you how it’s done!
Stone’s Ginger Wine is encouraging the nation to declare their love for everything ginger - thought we already knew that?! Embracing the ‘spirit of ginger’, a Gingervidual is someone who stands up for what they believe in and isn’t afraid to be different. Gingerviduals don't conform to the norm, and they don't follow trends, they create them.
Picture the scene: on a beach, somewhere in the Caribbean, things getting tropical with a jug of cocktail on the go. And relax! (Even if you are just sitting in your back garden in Croydon. FML!).
So, enjoy the last rays of Summer and try one of Stone's Ginger Wine's cocktails created by one of London’s leading expert mixologists.
Here’s the recipe for The #Gingervidual
- 50ml Stones G.W
- 10ml Elderflower cordial
Pour the ingredients into a highball, add some ice cubed, stir and top with soda
water. Garnish with cucumber strips and raspberries.
Can be served in a carafe or jug for sharing. Same method: 250ml Stones GW, 50ml of elderflower cordial, top with soda water.
Are the wheels coming off at Topman? From zero to hero, Topman is the poster boy of how brands, thanks to fashion and the sponsorship of fashion weeks, can go from uncool to cool in little over a decade, but, has their run of dominance on the men’s high-street come to an end?
Topman recently had a clear out of the top brass and creative. Gordon Richardson, who served as Topman's head designer for the past 17 years, has been pushed out along with many others within the Arcadia group. This is usually a sign of trying to stop the rot and starting something new.
Left - Will you be buying your tracksuit from Topman this season?
Taveta Investments, Arcadia’s parent company, doesn't break out individual figures for their brands, but financial figures released in June 2017 showed a 16 per cent drop in profits for the year to August 2016. Taveta Investments, indicated that annual profits plummeted to £211 million, while sales dropped 2.5 per cent to just over £2 billion. Taveta Investments, derived £1.7bn of revenue from the UK in 2016. That marked a fall from £2.2bn a year earlier, although up to £370m of that related to discontinued operations such as BHS, which was sold in 2015.
That’s a huge drop of £500 million or £130 million, if you take out BHS. That’s still a lot of clothes not sold.
So, what do we think has happened at Topman? Is it a case of these runs can’t go on forever and or is it something more serious?
One things for certain, it’s much more competitive than when Topman started out on its journey. Whether selling fashion or basics, there is much more choice, both offline and online.
Did they over expand? We know that Australia has struggled, with their franchise partner going into receivership recently, and the big push into America hasn’t really stuck as they don't seem to understand how fashionable us Brits are. American teens, in many cities, have nowhere to wear this kind of stuff.
Right - Has Topman peaked and how can they get their spark back?
Did it get too expensive? With labels like ‘Topman Design’ pushing the upper price points there is a perception that Topman was expensive, especially when compared to other high-street retailers. I’ve spoken to mums of teenage boys who say they leave Topman until last on a shopping trip as it’s usually the more expensive.
Topman’s buyers never committed to ‘Topman Design’. We had the shows, we had the collections, but when it hit the stores or online it was very bitty. They’d only make the trousers of a suit, for example, or items that didn’t really go with each other and the pricing was into three figures.
I think Topman has fallen into that gap of not being fashionable enough and not being cheap enough on basics and is falling into the void in the middle. They’ve lost the energy to ASOS, Boohoo and New Look.
I think there was a case of Topman believing their own hype too. You can’t afford to be arrogant in fashion and thinking you’re the coolest kid on the block, because things move fast and this will quickly bite you on the arse. The campaigns were a little too editorial and not relatable enough.
Fashions have changed too. Topman practically owned the skinny, three-piece suit and was selling volumes of a more expensive product. Now, the kids want sportswear and retro looking basics. It’s not the go-to place anymore. It’s lost its USP.
What are they doing? They’ve hired David Hagglund, known within fashion circles for founding a Stockholm-based creative agency which includes H&M and Hugo Boss as clients. He was also art director at Vogue Paris. David Hagglund is replacing Ms Phelan - Topshop head creative - and Mr Richardson in a 'newly created position' of creative director across both Topman and Topshop. Is combining Topman and Topshop a good idea? Or is this further cost cutting? It’s interesting they’ve given this important job to an Art Director type and it’ll be interesting to see whether Topman will get as much focus as Topshop. I doubt it.
The danger is, as they wobble they go safer, which is the wrong direction. Admittedly, Australia is having problems and America isn’t as fashionable as Europe, but young men want fashion and know it. Brands like ASOS and Boohoo are really pushing it, New Look has got a hell of a lot better and newness is the drug on the high-street.
Topman Design became a bit formulaic and they need to commit to it or scrap it. I think they’re going to find it hard to get that spark back. It’s very hard to do when you’ve lost it, but they’ve done it once before, so why not again.
There’s the juxtaposition between men’s basic and fashion led clothing. Basics are so competitive and difficult to make money from unless you’re doing huge volumes and buying basics from Topman is, well, a bit basic. Maybe they should leave that to Primark and Uniqlo and stick to making fashion.
I think they need to think more inclusive and not try to be too cool without losing the trends. Look what happened to American Apparel when they tried that achingly cool model. You need to be the coolest of the mainstream and, especially in Britain, have fun with it.
I think what we’ll see is, as leases run out, stores will close and they’ll be a renewed focus and growth of online. Topman needs to tighten up its collection and re-educate guys about what they do. As fashion cycles move, they need to aim for a new USP and focus on that. You can't be all things to all people today.
Note - A friend just mentioned on Facebook about the 'Philip Green Effect' and people boycotting his brands due to his handling of the sale of BHS and the hole in the pension fund. This could definitely be having an effect on Topman as many people are aware that he is the owner.