Princess For a Day

The Fashionomist is NOT jumping on the bandwagon of fashion blogs drooling over Kate Middleton's (excuse The Fashionomist, Duchess of Cambridge) dress.  [If you must know, the lace sleeves have caught her fancy, but the cut is a bit disappointing, particularly from the house of Alexander McQueen].  But the economics behind THE DRESS (as it has come to be known) are amazing.

Yes, to ruin your entire royal fantasy, there is an economics to THE DRESS.

The New York Times recently posted a fascinating article on the copycat process of spitting out replicas of THE DRESS, just in time for spring/summer wedding season (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/04/24/fashion/24knockoff.html?_r=1&emc=eta1).  Some designers have decided to simply imagine the design from before and sell dresses based on their conception of what Princess Kate would be wearing.  Check out designer Don O'Neill's eerily similar forecast of what the newest lady-in-waiting would don.

But the more intriguing process lies in how quickly information will travel from first viewing of the bride to retail stores.

“When that dress hits, we’ll be right on it,” said Jim Hjelm,  a bridal designer in New York.  “We’ll be on the computer that afternoon, sending a sketch.”  The company’s factory in China will return samples for approval within 24 hours, Mr. Hjelm said. Equipped, like its competitors, with high-tech computer programs, the factory can approximate a design from a sketch or a Web page, with no need to pull apart the seams of an actual garment.  “We’ll probably gamble and have a dress or even three styles out before October,” said Mr. Hjelm, for shipping to stores in February. “But there are plenty of people who will have the dress within a day."

Which means, dear reader, should you have the itch to marry in THE DRESS next fall, or perhaps next Saturday suits your schedule better, you can look like a beaming queen-to-be --- and cheaper, to boot.

And therein lies the magic of easy access to information.  Think back to the last royal wedding, when Prince Charles and Princess Diana vowed everlasting happiness (or something like that).  What did one do in the 1980s in terms of access to information?  It was a television spectacle, to be sure.  But as a designer, if one desired to create a prototype of the dress and have it released to the public as quickly as possible, the process of sketching, designing, purchasing fabric, pinning, sewing, adjusting, manufacturing, price fixing, retailing, advertising, and selling would take at least a month, if not more.  The Internet wasn't there for lightning fast correspondence across the pond, and designers separated from the manufacturing and business aspects of dressmaking had, at best, phones to communicate with.  Scanners, email, and smartphones were still Jetson-speak.

The speed of communication, in other words, has made fast fashion possible.  It's reduced the cost of clothing for consumers who wish to have the latest fashion, allowing fashion to be broadened in its reach.  Even better for consumers is the fact that with the ability to have more input in design (instead of being limited to a certain designer in a certain place due to geographic obstacles, one could have this dress with creative and physical input from across the planet), consumers are getting a better product of better quality.  British design will be transmitted to American business fashion markets, where prototypes will be sent to production in China, whose dresses will be flown over the world.  The speed of the process and ability to use comparative advantage in bringing about the best product possible is simply astounding.

It's not just designers getting in the trend:  fast fashion is jumping the gun and creating designs in time for prom (that big spring event of American teenagers).  A three week turnaround is expected from today to being able to shimmy in a ballroom with your fellow high-schoolers donning THE DRESS.  David's Bridal is planning on releasing a prototype by the end of the weekend.  Internet retailer Light in the Box will have prototype of THE DRESS out tonight and ready to purchase by mid-June.  So fear not, fellow Americans - you too can look like a non-Disney princess.

The Fashionomist apologizes for spoiling your good royal fun and dampening your admiration of THE DRESS with economics, but isn't that her job?  After all, a fairy-tale wedding will be influencing trends for years to come - it's an economic trend with lasting power.  Perhaps the American recession should look into the business of royalty for an economic boost?

Best wishes to William and Kate.


*The Fashionomist*

Post-Edit:  It took just 5 hours for THE DRESS to be replicated!  
http://royalwedding.yahoo.com/blogs/kate-middleton-wedding-dress-recreated-8467

Casual Friday

A few days ago, The Fashionomist was digging through her parents shared closet, attempting to discover some new vintage gem to be refashioned into a quirky outfit.  Instead, she found hangers upon hangers of her father's ties - striped, spotted, dark, light, silk, cotton, embroidered, printed, and beyond.  The Fashionomist remembered her father dressing up for work everyday in a proper pant/shirt/tie get-up, but noticed that trend had disappeared; indeed, her father usually wears slacks and a shirt Monday through Thursday, downgrading to jeans and a polo on Friday.  "Does anyone at your company wear ties anymore?"  The Fashionomist queried her father.  "No," he responded.  "Unless we're meeting a client, there's no use for ties."

 

 

When did dressing up for work disappear?  Isn't work the one place one should be creating an image of professionalism?

 

 

In the name of the banquet tonight at The Fashionomist's university's department and the invitation's request that all attendees dress in "business attire, please," (and in the name of avoiding the dreaded microeconomics homework that looms angrily in The Fashionomist's weekend horizon... sigh), The Fashionomist decided to investigate this phenomenon.

 

 

Lo and behold, The Wall Street Journal has been wondering the same exact thing (http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704013604576246911629008064.html).  Well, not exactly, though they look at the fading away of dress codes at fine dining establishments.  The people at WSJ link this trend up to President Obama, who did away with George W. Bush's strict code of no "jeans, sneakers, miniskirts, tank tops or flip-flops for visitors" (even dressing up is politicized!).  But the restaurant business points instead to the recession.  That big cloud of economic doom has meant that restaurants who wish to stay afloat during hard times have had to sacrifice their dress code to attract business.  Proof?


"Steve Cuozzo, the New York Post's restaurant critic, said that many formal-attire eateries in Manhattan today 'are so desperate for business they'd probably let Times Square's Naked Cowboy in.'"

The Naked Cowboy?  Ouch - that's pretty desperate.


So the economy is a big deal in restaurants.  The Fashionomist gets it.  But what about the work world?  After all:

"The benefits to formal dressing outweigh the negatives. 'You'll look terrific, and miles above those slobs. And you'll get more respect. Formal dress really has social impact. You'll be treated with greater deference than the 45-year-old guy dressed like a rock drummer.'"

 

 

Here is a theory The Fashionomist has:  It's all about image.  Granted, walking down financial plazas in any major metropolitan center will garner you looks if you don't have proper anything on.  But, corporate America aside, if you're working for a smaller business or a place that does not require looking tip-top for a potential client, you can get away with, even enhance your prospects, with the casual look.  Why?  It makes the company look familial, homely even.  Forget about the fact that you hate your boss's guts:  the image presented by "business casual" is "We take business seriously, but not so seriously that we won't have the occasional pizza party or allow a worker to take care of an ill child."  Business casual gives the aura of a company that isn't misguided about priorities and work - a company that is grounded enough to let its employees have a family life and focus on work during work while offering benefits and compassionate understanding for the home and individual.  In an economy where the recession is drowning worker morale, giving workers the ease of not dressing uptight and giving a sense of comfort is beneficial for employer and employee - or so the thought goes.  And a sense of worker morale may help a company in the long run in terms of productivity and avoiding turnover.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Will the tie ever make a comeback?  The Fashionomist sure hopes so - it's a classic finishing touch to menswear.  No man ever looked terrible in a tie.  Or woman, for that matter.

*The Fashionomist*

Where in the World is The Fashionomist?

Dear Fellow Fashionomists,

The Fashionomist would like to apologize for her now week-long absence from the blogosphere.  Graduate students notoriously disappear from the face of the planet on November and April, when final projects and exams and papers and all sorts of other grade making/breaking shenanigan due dates loom over the horizon.  I, too, have followed this path, holing myself in an ugly cement building and solving equations for hours at a time.  Hopefully, The Fashionomist can sneak in a post by the end of the week (so much is happening in fashionomics!), but she hopes that you understand her plight.


*The Fashionomist*

Dressing for Success

Normally, The Fashionomist focuses on clothing as her topics, but she found an intriguing fashionomic trend yesterday (muchos gracias to the folks at Wall Street Journal:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703806304576243184005228532.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLE_Video_Third).

Trying on clothing has classically been a wrenching practice:  the initial thrill of donning a new garment is shot by dingy, dark rooms, where that fabulous outfit looks less so.  And what if you are a new mother or with a group of friends but are separated by fabric walls?  Takes all the fun out of shopping.  And apparently, poorly designed dressing rooms takes the fun out of an inflow of cash to whatever (un)lucky retailer you may be visiting:  67% of people who pay a visit to the dressing room are likely to purchase their wearable goods (compared to 10% of non-dressing room visitors).  Oddly, however, stores typically only dedicate 20% of their store space to dressing room area.  Alas, the dressing room is an important link in getting the shopper from browser status to customer, and retailers are realizing the advantage of sprucing up the dark corners in the back.

 

Dressing Room Superheroes have taken this issue to heart.  Noticing groups of girlfriends shopping together, Anthropologie has created larger dressing rooms to accommodate the mass changing/judging/ooohing-aaahing that seems to accompany such outings.  Old Navy took insult to its dressing rooms being referred to as "dungeons" and redesigned their dressing rooms to cater to their core demographic - yuppie moms on a schedule.  Now, when a mother tries to balance a crying baby and a potentially flattering top, she can do so, thanks to "quick change" areas that are essentially half-circle areas for mother and baby to (peacefully?) coexist.

Above:  Anthropologie's newly remodeled, group-oriented changing area; Old Navy's mommy friendly dressing room.

Ann Taylor before; Ann Taylor after.  Ooh-la-la... 

The Fashionomist finds interior decoration's importance to be fascinating.  Dark lighting that often inhabits dressing rooms has been replaced with fluorescent and low-voltage bulbs at Ann Taylor, so your inner movie siren can come out.  Bloomingdale's has gone one step further, installing three-way, rear-lit mirrors, allowing the customer to fully inspect themselves from every possible angle.  Other fancy amenities?  Wallpaper that hides scuffs and leather benches that conceal lipstick for the dual purpose of creating an inviting atmosphere and a sense of maintenance; phones connected to associates to hustle and bring the demanding customer a better fit; and hooks to segregate purchases that have successfully landed in "will be bought" territory and items that will be discarded.  In short, retailers are doing anything possible to make dressing rooms the new attraction variable in an effort to gain customers.


Now if only The Fashionomist's closet space resembled fancy dressing rooms...


*The Fashionomist*

Case of the Lace

Noticed the onslaught of lace lately?

 

 

 

 

The lace hitting markets right now isn't the lace you find in lingerie or veils or doilies, nor is it the lace your great-great-great-grandmother sashayed in.  Indeed, lace has been given new life, and the lace industry is beyond ecstatic about the boom in business.  French lace, especially, is coming back with a vengeance, after nearly a century of lying dormant.

Why did lace take 100 years to come back in fashion?  There are some economic underpinnings of lace production and function that made it impossible for an earlier resurgence.  For one thing, lace is one of those fabrics that is utterly drenched in femininity.  Given the rapid rise of females in the workforce, lace lost favor for women interested more in climbing the corporate ladder and projecting their equal ability with men.  Yet lace is recently receiving a huge boost in popularity due to its juxtaposition of the traditional and modern, a luxurious item that symbolizes the revival of all that is intricate and traditional.

 

 

Lace is also ridiculously expensive, both in terms of time and cost.  French lace, in particular, is made with a tediously slow machine called Leavers.  Lace is an art form that is incredibly intricate, with designs so complex that it isn't unheard of for workers to take a couple days to produce only one yard.  With designers requesting colored lace, chemists are involved in carefully dying the cloth produced.  The lace production process is such that it often takes months to produce - in fact, high-end lace showing up in runways this year were produced last year and won't be expected in merchandise until next year.

 

 

Being as expensive as it is, one would think that cheaper options in today's global market would be available.  And yes, there are such inexpensive options available - the Chinese service much of fast fashion.  Machine-powered and quick, Chinese lace isn't as artistic but churns out lace at a rate that satisfies the average consumer looking to dip their toes in a trend.  Quality, however, is the differentiating factor - Chinese lace is no competition for couture lace, and while it off reduces costs on high-end clothes by hundred of dollars (French lace can cost over $60 a yard compared to its Chinese counterpart, which can be found for $2 a yard), French lace offers a distinctive quality that is stronger, prettier, and more feasible in a variety of textiles.  Even so, lace production isn't a recession-friendly operation - many lace outfits had to drastically cut staff during the recession, a time when opulence like lace were considered recession unfriendly.

 

 

Who would have thought lace would make a comeback?  Not just for romantics or she-rebels anymore - lace is a fun fashionomic trend.


Happy Friday!

Source:  http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471904576230881696059622.html


*The Fashionomist*