Canali PR Effort: The Olympics in “Style”

In its August 11, 2008, press release, Canali announced that it has partnered with NBC Sports to outfit the on-camera personalities for coverage of the 2008 Beijing Olympics.  The Canali / NBC partnership was the initiative by the Olympic Primetime host Bob Costas.  As part of the sponsorship, NBC personalities each received several complete outfits including custom made suits, sportswear, and accessories, and will wear Canali for the entirety of the three weeks of Olympics coverage.  “We are proud and excited to have been selected by NBC Sports and the Olympic Games,” said Elisabetta Canali, Global Director of Communications. “We worked closely with NBC and each Olympic broadcast anchor to find the right fabrics and styles that would make them feel comfortable and pleasing to the eye.”

Watching the U.S. Olympic coverage, I cannot help but think how uninspiring the NBC sportscasters look.  Bob Costas’ outfits, in particular, are incredibly dull.  Black suit, blue shirt, red tie or black suit, white shirt, and black tie with white stripes.  How boring.  The jacket fit also leaves much to be desired as evidenced by a  piece of loose fabric on the back when Mr. Costas is sitting.  On the other end of the spectrum is the gymnastics commentator Bela Karolyi who, flamboyantly yet catastrophically, tries to match gingham shirts, odd colored blazers and solid ties.  This leads me to the following question: did Canali provide these men with any guidance on fit, color and pattern matching before allowing them to put the clothes on?  Arguably, even Cesare Attolini provided outfit would look like a mess without proper fit and guidance.

Another minor flaw, although this is more of my personal quirk and probably why I don’t own any Canali suits, is because I am a huge fan of a soft Neapolitan shoulder.  Canali jackets, on the other hand, are too structured for my liking, and the shoulders, in particular, look too boxy.  But I digress.

While I find Canali to be a good maker of mid-upper level Italian clothing, I think the label is trying to become another Armani by its latest attempts to gain popularity in the mainstream media (in 2007, the label provided George Clooney’s suits in Michael Clayton).  Could this trend potentially lose Canali some appeal with the more discerning buyer?  I am not sure.  Whatever Canali decides to do, however, I  hope it does not follow the Armani formula by charging ludicrous premiums on mediocre articles of clothing.  And if it does, so be it; there is always Corneliani, which is as good, if not better.

Leave a Comment

More Browsing in Tailors

I made a promise to myself after I had my last suit made in Hong Kong that I would never buy another suit off the peg. It fit so much better, was so perfect, that every suit or jacket since has felt awkward.

But it does take a lot of the fun out of browsing. If you don’t buy jackets or suits in shops, or shirts for that matter, and you’ve already bought too many shoes this year, there isn’t much else to look at. Ties, socks and handkerchiefs – that’s about it.

As a result I still find myself wandering into Ralph Lauren and browsing the suit rails. I still stroll down the road to Etro and look through their new season’s jackets. I tell myself it’s for inspiration, to pick up ideas for materials, cuts or quirky details that I can ask my tailor to replicate. But in my heart I know I’ll find something that’s too lovely to turn down. It hasn’t happened yet, but it’s only a matter of time.

With this predicament in mind I have a recommendation for tailors everywhere – kit out your shops with more examples of potential suits. Display the greatest range of cuts, materials and quirky details. Make coming into your tailoring studio as pleasant and inspiring as the best of the retailers. Make it more like a shop.

This would obviously entail a cost – most of those items on display are unlikely to be sold. But every off-the-peg retailer faces similar costs each season when it gets rid of old stock, or sells it at extreme discounts. The costs of occasionally rotating display stock at a tailor would be nowhere near as high.

This strategy would have many advantages, but the biggest would be that more people would come and simply spend time in the shop, looking for inspiration or considering a purchase. It is simply an extension of the mannequins that tailors use in their windows, just like any shop, in order to tempt customers in.

High-street retailers know the value of browsers – it is a painless way to create brand awareness and desire in potential customers. Tailors generally generate business through reputation or word-of-mouth. But how about if you don’t know that many people who use a tailor? How do you get a recommendation then? And how do you know they’ll be right for you?

Wandering into a tailors can be intimidating. They need to break down that fear barrier and encourage people to visit. Much of Savile Row is now better at that than it used to be, encouraging communication and even advertising. But there are still few people who wander in off the street.

Give me somewhere I can browse. You won’t be sorry.

Leave a Comment

The Split Yoke

There is almost no good journalism about men’s style these days. Outside of this and a few other websites, no-one produces objective, informed and above all critical writing about clothes, brands and products.

I flicked through a magazine called Man About Town last week (a recent launch in the high-end fashion sector, only on its second issue) and found 20 pages about the business of fashion. Should be interesting, except that it comprised several double-page spreads on brands including Dunhill and Church’s, merely describing their luscious interiors, history of craftsmanship and key pieces.

Not one critical or substantive word about what differentiated this business, about how it communicates its value for money, or about different times and designers have changed what it does. Nothing on what its detractors say about it; or on how much water those detractions hold.

Each piece read like an advert. Which perhaps isn’t surprising, given that those companies advertise in the magazine. But this is what journalism is built on – the integrity that allows you to write fairly and objectively, if critically, about those that fund the magazine itself.

Another example this week piled ignorance onto paucity of journalism. The column Brummell in UK newspaper Financial News recommended a bespoke shirt service called Brass Bones, where you can get shirts made to your size by filling in a form online. Nothing wrong with that; it’s a good idea.

But there’s no journalism here. They haven’t tried the service or cast anything like a critical eye over it. There are several online shirt services that have been around for months, even years, yet they don’t get a mention – let alone a comparison. This service is presented as a one-off.

Such is the presentation of the piece, just like the examples in Man About Town, that it could be mistaken for an advert.

But the worst thing is ignorance about the product they are describing. Aside from a rather casual use of the word ‘bespoke’ (see previous post on Sartoriani), the boys at Brummell insightfully point out that the shirts have desirable details such as mother-of-pearl buttons, gussets and split yokes.

Mother-of-pearl is standard. If they didn’t have that you should send them back. The value of gussets is debateable. But split yokes are the worst. They are an anachronism.

Split yokes used to be a sign of quality because it showed that your tailor regularly adjusted his shirts, altering the length of each side of the yoke to fit the individual customer. This is unlikely to be the case today.

In fact, you could argue that having a yoke that is one piece demonstrates quality, as a bespoke shirt by definition doesn’t need to be split and adjusted. Either way, listing it as a feature hardly demonstrates incisive criticism.

I’d bet a decent sum of money the writers of that piece just copied the list from a Brass Bones press release, with little thought for what it meant. Oh well.

Leave a Comment

Menswear Moving to the Front – Part 2

As we discussed in last week’s column, the New York menswear market is in the midst of renaissance of sorts. But it’s not just luxury brands that are focusing more on the men in their lives; mid market brands are making a statement in the Big Apple too.

J.Crew, a favorite everyday brand of Off The Cuff, is setting up a men’s only shop in the landmark Liquor Store building, at 235 West Broadway at White Street in Tribeca. The men’s store, which will be smaller than a typical J. Crew store, will carry the best of J. Crew’s men’s collection, including their unique collector’s items - upscale, limited-edition pieces like the $800 leather mail bag. According to CEO Micky Drexler, the store is “a very short-term lease,” with “very little investment and risk,” which will allow the company “to fool around and play with a men’s store.”

Additionally, the company has been sending out mini-catalogs that focus only on their men’s clothing and accessories lines. These targeted marketing efforts have been very well received and gives J. Crew the ability to sell its higher end wares directly to their male customers.

This emerging but strong trend toward menswear will likely spread across the retail market. As I have noted before, men are not like women when it comes to shopping, but there has been a distinct shift back toward guys appreciating and seeking out quality clothing and accessories. Though this is most true for “investment” level clothes like suits and other tailored pieces, J. Crew’s men’s store concept is an example of transferring the investment mentality to everyday dressing. It’s sort of a reverse approach to the commoditization trend that has effectively devalued many once exclusive brands. Instead of making their wares more accessible to average consumers, companies like J. Crew are developing limited edition products at very outsized price points and targeted at discerning shoppers.

The company is also taking marketing cues from luxury brands that have long touted things like the prestigious family mills which supply their fabric. J. Crew is busily developing relationships with companies like Baird McNutt, an innovative, family-owned Irish mill in Ballymena known for incredible linens.

What makes this type of strategy successful is that they’re not faking it. J. Crew is seeking out real manufacturers who make really good, exclusive products. It’s authentic and fits very well with their customer base. The real stories and premium price tags are providing the boost that the company wants in menswear. They have also made serious efforts to improve the construction quality of their products, and adding additional practical value to their wares.

“Women’s got turned around, and now it’s time for men’s,” says Todd Snyder, senior vice-president of men’s design for J. Crew. And one way to sell the ongoing J. Crew story of original lifestyle brands is through collaborations with designer-frequented mills. “We say, why spend $1,000 at Bergdorf Goodman for a jacket you can get for $300 here? It’s the same thing.” Customers are recognizing quality fabrics, so Snyder has made it his mission to work with the best in the business. “We’re becoming the biggest customer of mills like Moon and Mallalieus, who work with Dolce & Gabbana, Prada and Ralph Lauren,” he says. “We’re after quality.”

This movement to get men in better sartorial shape isn’t limited to the selling floor. In July, the MTV network is premiering it’s version of a male finishing school. Dubbed, “From G’s to Gents”, this reality-format show to be aired on Fox, is being produced by Hollywood heavyweight Jamie Foxx and hosted by uber-gent Fonzsworth Bentley.

The idea is to try and mold 14 players/tough guys from the street into modern day gentlemen; sort of a realty version of My Fair Lady complete with cash prize and a smart new wardrobe. While as a general rule I despise these types of shows, I find this one curiously interesting. If nothing else, it’s getting on the air speaks to a real societal desire for men to be gentlemen again. I have no illusions about top hats and walking sticks, but for an Academy Award winner like Foxx, a pretty sharp gent in his own right, to see the value in this show makes me want to check it out.

By moving the topic and marketing approach of high-end menswear and gentlemanly etiquette to the everyday guy-cum-MTV generation, the message that dressing well and having some class will reach a heretofore untapped market.

It’s a stylistic approach to vertical integration; to try and capture all socioeconomic levels of the men’s lifestyle market – from Gap to Hermes. That’s the holy grail of any retailer or ad executive, but it seems that our culture may now be at this mythical point. We’ll have to wait and see if the trend truly takes hold, but it appears that while doing so more men will be better dressed and know which fork to use.

Leave a Comment

A Loss to (Sartorial) Language

Recently the UK Advertising Standards Authority took a rather ignorant decision to declare that there is no difference between bespoke and made-to-measure. It is a loss to menswear and to language.

Sartoriani, a suit maker that recently set up on Bond Street with all manner of promotional offers and advertising, proclaimed that it made bespoke suits. It does not. It makes made-to-measure suits, with customers being measured on site and their details used to amend a standard block in a factory.

The advertising claim was challenged by the Savile Row Bespoke Association, an industry group of Savile Row tailors headed by Mark Henderson of Anderson & Sheppard.

Bespoke tailoring requires an individual, specific cut of cloth, by hand. In the eyes of many on Savile Row, it also requires a one-on-one interview with the person who will make your suit for you. So your suit can be (be)spoken for in person. It should also be entirely sewn by hand.

These latter elements are arguable, and have been eroded over the years – the cut-price tailoring offered by Kilgour, for example, which features measurements and fittings in London but sewing in China. But fundamental to bespoke is that the cut of the cloth, the particular pattern, should be yours and yours alone. It should not be an amended block, stitched blindly by a machine.

But the Association lost. Apparently Sartoriani considers bespoke and made-to-measure to be synonymous, and the ASA agrees. This is a loss to menswear everywhere. Once one company can get away with it, everyone will advertise their made-to-measure service as bespoke, and a refined section of tailoring will lose a crucial communication skill.

Consumers already have an increasingly large problem telling the difference between quality and branding (see post on Berluti shoelaces). This decision will only make the situation worse. Even more education will need to be done by an industry that is already pretty poor at it (see post on the BBC Savile Row series).

Almost as importantly, this is a loss to language. The phrases bespoke and made-to-measure are clearly not synonymous. It could be argued that they mean different things to my definitions above. But they are obviously not the same if a whole industry purposefully uses them to separate two processes and products.

Envy and jealousy are not the same thing. One is a desire for somebody else’s possession, the other is a fear of losing your own. The fact that people use them interchangeably is a loss to language – there is now no easy way to express the latter. This ruling deals a similar blow to the language of style.

Leave a Comment