The Debrief

In March, H&M released financial results alongside its annual sustainability report, presenting two seemingly contrasting narratives. The company reported a 34.6 percent reduction in emissions from 2019 levels and also noted that 91 percent of its materials are now sustainably sourced. However, this environmental progress occurred alongside a 1 percent dip in sales, raising questions about the commercial viability of its green strategy.While many industry peers are backing away from environmental messaging to focus on the bottom line, H&M is arguing that sustainability is not in tension with profit, but is rather a "core driver of future growth". On The Debrief, we examine whether this decoupling of growth from environmental impact can truly resonate with consumers, or if it remains a purely internal metric.Key Insights: As a fast fashion brand, H&M understands that sustainability alone is not going to win back shoppers. Instead, Walid says the company is trying to translate its recent efforts into something more tangible at the point of purchase. The pitch is not that consumers care about emissions reporting in itself, but that sustainability can function as a marker of quality. As Leyla Ertur, H&M’s Head of Sustainability, told Walid during their conversation, “Our customers don’t care about our Scope 3 emissions going down. What they care about is what they’re buying.”Walid suggests that one of H&M’s biggest challenges is the disconnect between how the company sees itself and how customers perceive it. “When we say H&M, I think people are thinking of H&M, the brand … But when H&M talks about itself, they’re talking [about] the whole conglomerate,” she says, pointing to brands like COS and Weekday, which occupy a more elevated position. While those labels may successfully compete with higher-end high street players, that distinction is largely invisible to consumers, who still associate H&M with “fast fashion … something cheap for an occasion.” As a result, while the group may understand how to build more premium propositions across its portfolio, Walid argues that the core H&M brand itself has not yet meaningfully shifted perception.  For all the company’s investments and emissions reductions, the core contradiction remains that H&M is still producing and selling huge volumes of clothing. Waleed is explicit about that limitation: “They’re not addressing the overconsumption and overproduction problem in fashion.” At the same time, she notes that H&M is one of the few large players still investing at scale in decarbonisation, water reduction and supply chain upgrades.H&M is investing across sustainability, brand elevation and new channels like resale, but Waleed cautions that it is still too early to judge whether these efforts are working. “They use all these different levers that don’t come into one … There needs to be a way to bring that together,” she says. Initiatives like fashion week shows, collaborations and younger-facing campaigns are designed to re-engage consumers, but “I don’t think people have caught traction … just yet.” For now, the strategy remains a long-term bet rather than a proven turnaround.Additional Resources:Exclusive: H&M Says Sustainability Is Good for Business. Can It Get Shoppers to Care?BoF Analysis: The Rise of Ultra-Fast Fashion PlayersThe Game of ‘Selling’ Sustainability Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For years, Revolve was fashion retail’s byword for influencer marketing, particularly around its over-the-top Coachella event. But as the Instagram aesthetic matures and the cost of human-led marketing rises, the company is pivoting. The new mandate? To become as much an AI powerhouse as it is a party-hosting fashion giant. In a recent conversation with Retail Editor Cathaleen Chen, Revolve founders Michael Mente and Mike Karanikolas argued that AI isn't just a buzzword for the board; it’s the engine that will sustain their multi-billion dollar dominance.Chen joined The Debrief to talk about how Revolve is pushing the limits of how AI can be used in retail, and whether its strategy is working. Key Insights: Revolve was founded by software engineers who viewed fashion as an e-commerce "white space,” setting it apart from rivals that invested in new technologies only after establishing themselves in the marketplace. "While Revolve looks like a Shopbop or a Net-a-Porter... Revolve is actually built like a data science company." said retail editor Cathaleen Chen.Revolve differentiates itself by building its own tools where possible, rather than buying off-the-shelf software, including the product search on its website. Using AI, Revolve has moved beyond literal keyword matching to a system that understands the vibe or occasion a customer is shopping for. By analyzing image attributes, the site can surface the perfect "party dress" even if that specific tag doesn't exist, explains Chen. "What their AI tool is able to do is pull up anything that is sequined... or textured... it is anticipating the desire."Revolve fosters a "bottom-up" environment where every employee is encouraged to experiment with AI. They aren't just looking for "moonshots"; they value any application that moves the needle even slightly. "Eeven if something improves efficiency or output by just 1%, that's considered a success,” said Chen.Additional Resources:Why Revolve Can’t Stop Talking About AI | BoFWhy Fashion Doesn’t Talk About How It Uses AI | BoFWhy Revolve Is Embracing Brick-and-Mortar | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For years, European luxury brands set the pace in fashion, while American labels were often dismissed as overly commercial and too broadly distributed to compete at the highest end of the market. But that balance is shifting. As many European luxury houses struggle with slowing demand, price resistance and creative inconsistency, a group of American brands is seeing renewed momentum. On the episode, Diana Pearl joins Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack what those brands are getting right, and why their recent success may offer a useful playbook for the rest of the industry.Key Insights:Pearl argues that part of the shift comes down to timing. American brands like Coach, Ralph Lauren and Tory Burch went through their overexposure phase years ago and were forced to correct course, while European luxury brands are only now grappling with the consequences of aggressive growth. “European brands maybe got a little cocky,” she says. “They raised prices too much and maybe let the creative slide a little. I think as those businesses have grown, it just became more about sales and less about focusing on the core of the business.” By contrast, American brands “really had to recalibrate, pull back, think about who is our core customer and laser in on that message.”Pearl presents Coach as the clearest example of how this American reset has worked. Instead of chasing quick expansion, the brand spent years refining its identity, sharpening its offer and building around a defined consumer. “They want to be that first luxury bag purchase that someone makes when they’re in high school, when they get their first job and save up to buy a nice bag,” she says. That focus shapes everything from product to casting to marketing tone. Just as importantly, Coach stopped cycling through products too quickly. Rather than dropping a hit bag and moving on, “when they see these silhouettes start to pop off, they find ways to iterate them,” Pearl says, pointing to the Tabby and the Brooklyn as examples.Pearl says European luxury’s current problems are not just about price, but about value and treatment. Consumers have become more sensitive to whether products feel worth the money and whether the shopping experience feels inviting. “People don’t want to spend their money at a place where they feel like they’re being mistreated,” she says, referring to growing frustration with intimidating store environments, long queues and rigid service hierarchies. She also argues that “cachet can only get you so far,” especially when shoppers no longer feel that the biggest European brands are producing the most desirable or practical items.Another theme in Pearl’s reporting is consistency. Several American brands now doing well are still shaped by founder-led or founder-adjacent creative visions, and she suggests that stability matters. “Even if consumers don’t necessarily know that creative directors are changing, they see it in how a brand feels inconsistent from season to season,” she says. With Tory Burch, Ralph Lauren and Khaite, the creative point of view feels legible and sustained. That makes it easier to build a coherent world around the brand and evolve it gradually, rather than asking consumers to reset every few years with a new designer era.Additional Resources:What European Luxury Can Learn From American Fashion | BoF The Great Fashion Reset | How to Fix Luxury’s Trust Issues | BoF The Great Fashion Reset: Can Designer Debuts Revive Luxury? | The Debrief | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Fragrance is booming, but the way consumers discover and buy scent is changing fast. While scent has traditionally relied on in-person testing, more than half of fragrance purchases in the US now take place online. As department stores decline, brands are leveraging new technologies and creative storytelling to reframe perfume less as a single signature scent and more as an accessory, a collectible and part of a wider personal style. On the episode of The Debrief, BoF beauty correspondents Daniela Morosini and Rachael Griffiths unpack how short-form video, AI tools, layering trends and packaging are reshaping the category. Key Insights: Morosini argues that fragrance’s online shift reflects both the broader movement of beauty sales online and the weakening dominance of department stores, which historically anchored prestige fragrance. What has changed more recently is that digital content has become better at translating scent into something consumers feel they can understand. “Fragrance has historically been a difficult category to sell because so much of the marketing around it… how do you explain to somebody at home what a fragrance really smells like?” she says. Short-form video, she adds, has helped “bridge that gap” by making it easier for people to imagine “if I buy this perfume, I’m going to feel like X or Y.”Griffiths explains that terms like “fragrance wardrobe” and “layering” are not just consumer buzzwords – they signal a real shift in how brands are selling scent. Rather than persuading shoppers to commit to one signature fragrance, brands are encouraging them to build collections, combine scents and buy multiple formats. “A fragrance wardrobe is effectively your fragrance collection,” she says, but the word wardrobe is important because it “hints at that fashion-to-fragrance relationship.” She adds that layering has become a community-building tool because “there’s nothing more niche than when you layer certain things in a way that nobody else has” and create “your own signature scent.”As fragrance becomes more visual and more digitally merchandised, bottle design and format matter even more. Griffiths says packaging remains central because it helps fragrance function like an accessory, whether that is a solid scent compact pulled from a handbag or a bottle photographed for a shelfie. “The packaging is really important,” she says, especially when consumers want products that “look nice for you to slink out of your bag.” Morosini makes a related point: design can also tell consumers how a scent is meant to make them feel. She recalls how Paco Rabanne’s One Million was intentionally packaged like a gold bar to communicate aspiration, wealth and fantasy before anyone had even smelled it.Additional Resources:Prestige Fragrance’s Online Shopping Problem | BoF How to Sell Fragrance Like a Fashion Accessory | BoF Why Fragrance Is the Latest Red Carpet Accessory | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As conflict between the US, Israel and Iran escalates, the threat to shipping through the Strait of Hormuz has pushed energy prices sharply higher. That matters to fashion far beyond the pump: oil and natural gas helps power factories, move goods and produce synthetic fabrics used across the industry. Shayeza Walid and Cathaleen Chen join hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to explain how the immediate pressure of spiraling oil prices is showing up differently across the supply chain and in consumer markets, and why even a short-lived shock can deepen existing strains on manufacturers, retailers and shoppers.Key Insights:The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has immediate and severe consequences for Asian manufacturing hubs, which rely on the Gulf for approximately 60 per cent of their crude oil. Walid notes that for many producers, “it’s a supply issue and a logistics issue before it’s a cost issue right now.” She continues: “Every single person is dealing with the fact that oil and gas supplies are not coming through to their countries.” In that sense, the first pressure point is not simply higher prices, but whether manufacturers can secure the energy needed to keep production moving at all. Beyond the physical scarcity of fuel, the lack of insurance for shipping companies has created a logistical bottleneck that prevents essential energy supplies from reaching factories in China, India, and Bangladesh. As polyester and other man-made fibres are intrinsically tied to oil, manufacturers focused on synthetics are feeling the pressure quickly. Walid says the impact is already visible in India and China, where producers are seeing both reduced supply and rising prices. “Man-made fibre prices were already going up,” she says. In some Indian manufacturing clusters, she adds, “those areas could very well be crippled if the crisis continues because they only use that type of fabric.”Chen argues that the more immediate consumer effect is not necessarily higher apparel prices, but weaker confidence. She points out that many retailers are still working through existing inventory, so any inflationary effect on clothing would likely come later. “The more immediate effect on the consumer economy is simply psychological,” she says. Even before prices move materially, “consumer anxiety around inflation, even if inflation isn’t here yet, that’s going to affect how much they’re willing, how much they’re happy to spend on things like a pair of jeans.”Both reporters suggest fashion is more used to volatility than it was before the pandemic, but this kind of disruption still reveals how exposed supply chains remain. Chen says many companies have become “very nimble in the situation of crisis”, while Walid points to the need for more durable supplier relationships and stronger local support. “It’s increasingly important to consider local dynamics for their suppliers and where their clothes are being manufactured,” she says.Additional Resources:Oil Shock: What Fashion Needs to Know | BoF War in the Gulf Tests Resilience of a Rare Bright Patch for Luxury | BoF When War and Luxury Collide | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Hip-hop has served as a primary pipeline for fashion’s entry into pop culture for decades, transitioning from organic street-level references to high-stakes global partnerships. Brands have historically leaned on a select group of superstar "style icons" to drive visibility, with A$AP Rocky emerging as the definitive case study for this crossover. However, as Gen Z consumer habits shift and the traditional music-to-market pipeline evolves, the industry faces questions about its over-reliance on a few familiar names.Takanashi joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to discuss the tension between the safety of established stars and the cultural necessity of finding fresh voices.Key Insights:Takanashi positions A$AP Rocky as the case study of hip-hop’s interaction with fashion, whose organic love for runway brands transformed him into a definitive bridge between hip-hop and luxury. He recalls how Rocky name-checked designers in his breakout moment, and how that shifted what young fans even understood as fashion. “On this breakout single ‘Peso’, [Rocky] said that he was into Rick Owens and Raf Simmons,” Takanashi says. “He came out the gate as this rapper who really declared that he was into high fashion.” This authenticity created a bridge that allowed luxury brands to feel comfortable moving beyond traditional streetwear.However, fashion houses frequently default to known quantities like Pharrell, Travis Scott, or A$AP Rocky because their long resumes provide predictable results for risk-averse marketers. This creates a feedback loop where the same faces appear across multiple, sometimes competing, brand categories. “A marketer can just point to several examples they’ve done in the past and they could see the result of it,” Takanashi explains. The industry’s tendency to "glom onto certain familiar names" risks diluting the unique identity of the brands themselves.On the other hand, niche fan bases offer a more potent alternative to mainstream superstars. Some of the most successful recent collaborations have bypassed the Billboard charts in favour of artists with highly engaged, specific communities, such as Action Bronson with New Balance. Takanashi highlights that there is “a lot of strength in just kind of collaborating with artists that aren’t necessarily like charting super high.” Smaller artists with highly engaged and loyal fans can move the needle more effectively than a mass-market star who may feel interchangeable.While brands are happy to dress rising talent for red carpets or front-row appearances, the leap to a global campaign remains a "slow burn." Takanashi points out that many decision-makers lack a deep investment in the culture, leading them to extract value rather than nurture new talent. “Fashion is a business that extracts culture, but doesn’t necessarily give back to it as much as we’d like,” he says. Without more diverse perspectives in positions of leadership, the industry struggles to identify which younger artists possess genuine, long-term cultural resonance.Additional Resources:How Fashion Picks Its Hip-Hop Style Icons  Breaking Down Chanel’s A$AP Rocky Partnership What’s Next for Hip-Hop and Fashion  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nearly a year after President Donald Trump’s “Liberation Day” tariffs sent shockwaves through the fashion industry, the Supreme Court ruled he did not have authority to impose the sweeping levies. For an industry that imports billions of dollars in clothing, footwear and accessories into the US each year, the decision initially felt like relief. But that optimism narrowed almost immediately as new tariffs were introduced at 10 percent, with Trump indicating they could be raised to 15 percent over the weekend.Key Insights:While a drop to a 15 percent tariff technically represents a rate reduction, the sudden policy reversal has plunged the industry back into a state of operational paralysis. Executives are struggling to form long-term strategies when the foundational rules of global trade shift from week to week. “The problem isn’t even the difference in the rate of tariffs,” Chen explains. “It’s that the uncertainty makes decisions so much harder than if we knew exactly what that rate was going to be, even if it was higher than before.” This volatility forces companies to make reactive, shipment-by-shipment choices rather than fortifying their businesses for the future.The sheer scale of the disruption means that import duties can no longer be managed as a siloed logistical issue. Navigating the changing rules requires constant, cross-departmental negotiation to align product adjustments with consumer messaging. As Bain notes, “In the past, with something like this you would talk to your supply chain manager and come up with a plan with them. Now, you get everyone in the C-suite together into a war room … it’s just constant negotiation within your company and with your consumers.”  Despite social media chatter suggesting that brands and consumers are owed money for the now-illegal tariffs, the reality of recouping those funds involves a looming legal nightmare. The government is expected to aggressively fight payback efforts by demanding extensive paperwork or proof that costs were not passed onto shoppers. “Refunds are a possibility, but it's not going to be a simple process,” Bain says. “It's not like returning your e-commerce order online where you fill out a form and you get a bunch of money back.”Fashion has experienced significant sticker shock over the past few years, but brands that successfully raised prices without losing consumer demand are unlikely to surrender those gains now. If the cost of production decreases under the new tariff structure, powerful labels will likely absorb the difference to improve their margins. “I think it's a possibility that some brands and retailers will lower their prices, likely in the form of discounting, rather than lowering retail prices,” Chen says.Additional Resources:The Supreme Court’s Tariff Ruling: What Fashion Needs to Know | BoF US Supreme Court Overturns Trump’s Emergency Tariffs | BoF Will Prices Come Down With Trump’s Tariffs? It’s Complicated | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

After raising prices aggressively during the post-pandemic boom, luxury brands are now confronting slower growth and a shrinking aspirational customer base. According to Bernstein, average luxury price hikes reached 36 percent between 2020 and 2023, with Dior and Chanel raising prices by 51 percent and 59 percent, respectively. Now, as Bain estimates that more than 50 million aspirational shoppers have left the category, both houses are adjusting their pricing architecture and product mix in an attempt to rebuild volume without sacrificing exclusivity.BoF reporter Joan Kennedy joins The Debrief to unpack how Dior and Chanel are recalibrating pricing and product strategy to win back aspirational shoppers. Key Insights:Dior and Chanel are among the brands that leaned hardest into post-pandemic price increases, prioritising margin expansion and high-net-worth clients. That strategy helped fuel growth at the time, but it has also intensified the industry’s current reckoning. “Pricing has really emerged as this key concern,” Kennedy says. “At Dior and Chanel, prices rose 51 per cent and 59 per cent, respectively.” Products that once served as entry points are increasingly out of reach for aspirational shoppers: “The Chanel medium flap has nearly doubled in price since 2019,” she says.To pull aspirational shoppers back into stores, Dior and Chanel are rebuilding the lower end of their offer – from small leather goods and accessories to playful add-ons. As Kennedy puts it, “brands have been introducing these fun little whimsical items at the bottom, which have a good psychological effect on all shoppers.” And even when the ticket doesn’t shift, brands are trying to make the value proposition feel stronger through newness and storytelling: “maybe the price isn't changing, but it’s trying to hammer home that there's a little bit more value … and really ride the momentum brought by these new creative directors.”Even if excitement around creative directors Jonathan Anderson and Matthieu Blazy reignites interest, the economic backdrop may limit how far that enthusiasm translates into sales. “It’s definitely a big open-ended question – how much of this is a problem with desire versus ability to purchase?” Kennedy says. “Maybe a lot of these shoppers do want these products and are really excited by them, but just don’t have the ability.” In that sense, the reset is only partially in luxury’s control. Products can restore aspiration, but macro conditions ultimately determine movement.Additional Resources:How Dior and Chanel Are Tackling Fashion’s Pricing Problem | BoF The Great Fashion Reset | Can Designer Revamps Save Fashion? | BoF Ready for Relaunch? Jonathan Anderson’s Dior Challenge | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

While the Olympics remain one of the world’s biggest sporting stages, they are also one of the most tightly controlled marketing environments. Rules limit how sponsors can interact with athletes and advertise during the Games. As a result, fashion and sportswear brands are finding alternative ways to capitalise on the moment, from outfitting national teams and launching capsule collections to sending squads of influencers to experience the Games.BoF correspondents Haley Crawford and Mike Sykes join Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin on The Debrief to unpack how the winterwear boom is reshaping the Olympic marketing playbook. Key Insights:Musician Bad Bunny’s choice of Zara for his Super Bowl halftime show outfit crystallises a broader tension in fashion marketing: the balance between cultural relevance and commercial perception. Whilst Sykes acknowledged the pushback from critics who found the use of a fast-fashion Spanish brand on such a global platform surprising, he also notes the strategic logic. “This performance is supposed to be about inclusivity, and part of that is accessibility and affordable products. And plus, Zara is also a Spanish brand... It makes more sense considering the cultural magnitude of the performance,” Sykes says.Crawford argues the Games are no longer just about logo placement on performance gear, but a broader spotlight on winter fashion as a growing category. “We've seen that consumers are interested, not only from a performance perspective, but also from a fashion-forward perspective, in having gear that's equally stylish as it is performance driven on the slopes,” she says. But Olympic marketing comes with strict limitations. As Crawford explains, official sponsors can use Olympic branding, but others must tread carefully. For non-sponsors like Canadian label Roots, that means linguistic gymnastics: using phrases like “rooting for Canada” without explicitly referencing the Games.With broadcast advertising and official branding tightly controlled, being visibly present at the Games can be the most direct route to global reach. Sykes points to Adidas’ scale: “We’ve seen a bunch of brands like Adidas…that launched this 700-piece collection.” Even if it is not a traditional campaign, the visibility is enormous. “Just to have your logos on some of these athletes as they perform, while millions of people are watching across the globe, that is the sort of marquee way we’re seeing brands participate,” he says.As leagues and federations try to expand their audiences, fashion-forward fan wear has become a strategic priority. Crawford says Off Season’s approach to Team USA illustrates the shift: rather than just jerseys, brands are creating “wearable jackets and sweaters and things that fans can actually wear in their day-to-day.” Sykes sees the trend as part of a wider evolution across sport. Off Season’s product “reminds me of what the Starter jackets used to be in the 90s,” he says, predicting that more brands will build momentum by “taking team logos and putting them on unique products that aren't just a jersey.”While the Olympic window is tightly controlled, brands often see their biggest opportunities once the closing ceremony ends. Crawford points to the Paris Olympics breakout star Ilona Maher, who “popped off for creating all this viral behind-the-scenes content in the Olympic village,” then landed deals with Maybelline and Paula’s Choice. For fashion, Suni Lee is a recent template. After Paris, she started campaigns for LoveShackFancy and Victoria’s Secret Pink and attended the CFDA Awards with a designer partner. “She really built this whole other part of her public persona,” Crawford says – showing how medals and momentum can translate into longer-term brand equity.Additional Resources:How the Winterwear Boom Reshaped Fashion’s Olympic Playbook | BoF Which Winter Olympians Will Score Beauty Deals? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Influencer marketing in 2026 is a different beast. Once dominated by follower counts and splashy sponsored posts, the sector is now shaped by richer performance data, new monetisation models and growing consumer scepticism toward overt selling. As BoF publishes a new case study on the creator economy, Pearl joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack how creators and brands are adapting to a more disciplined, competitive and AI-saturated landscape.Key Insights:One of the most profound shifts in influencer marketing is how success is measured. Where follower size once acted as a blunt proxy for reach, brands now have access to granular data that shows who actually drives traffic and sales. Pointing to platforms like ShopMy and LTK that allow brands to see “exactly what creators were driving sales for them,” Pearl says that visibility has reshaped spending decisions. She explains: “Having more data has totally changed the game. It really is incredibly varied today and there is no one baseline KPI. It’s really just about what are your goals and who’s the best to help you achieve that.”As consumers grow wary of constant selling, trust has emerged as the defining asset creators bring to brands. “Trust is the most important thing,” Pearl says. “If you don’t have your audience’s trust, nothing else matters.” What brands are really buying is not visibility, but a relationship. “What a creator really brings to the table is not necessarily the size of their following; it’s that relationship they have with their audience,” Pearl explains.As the sector professionalises, creators are actively reducing their dependence on single revenue streams. Affiliate marketing, subscriptions and owned platforms are increasingly central to sustainable creator businesses. “Affiliate marketing really provides that base foundational income that you can rely upon,” Pearl says. Substack, meanwhile, offers something brands cannot. She explains: “It brings back some of that intimacy and community that they felt was missing in this TikTok/Instagram world.” This diversification also changes the power balance. “They don’t want to rely too much on one particular partnership,” Pearl says. The upshot is a creator economy that is less fragile – and less easily dictated by brand budgets.Pearl argues the relationship between brands and creators is moving from transactional campaigns to longer-term collaboration. As creators become central to marketing in fashion and beauty, brands are changing how they work with them – and what they ask them to do. Brands can no longer dictate terms “like they used to,” Pearl says, because creators are now “recognised as being a really important part of the marketing puzzle.” That recognition is also changing what brands value: “You’re not just hiring this person for their following… you hire them because they’re a creator. They create great content. They know how to engage an audience.”Additional Resources:From Hype to Discipline: The New World of Influencer Marketing | Case Study Why There Are So Many Influencer Collaborations Right Now | BoF How Creators Can Avoid Being Replaced by AI | BoF Examining 20 Years of Fashion’s Influencer Economy | The BoF Podcast  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Across fashion, companies that once embraced remote or hybrid work are increasingly pushing employees back into the office, with some moving towards four or even five days a week. At the same time, competition for jobs, particularly at entry level, is intensifying amid layoffs, slower industry growth and the rise of AI. On this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF Careers’ Sophie Soar to unpack why the power balance has shifted back to employers, how different generations feel about being in the office, and what practical routes still exist for early-career talent trying to get a foot in the door. Key Insights:During COVID, companies found people could be “just as, and in some cases, more productive” at home – but that was when productivity meant output. Now, Butler-Young argues that employers are widening the definition: “Productivity should also include collaboration, morale, people being together… face time with leaders.” And with the labour market tightening following economic pressure, layoffs and AI taking some jobs, leaders have more leverage to enforce it. “In 2025 and now into 2026, it’s looking more like an employer’s market,” Butler-Young says.While some executives argue that in-person work improves collaboration and reduces errors, Butler-Young warns that motivations are not always benign. She points to a growing sense that mandates can act as a quiet form of workforce reduction. “One way you can get people to effectively fire themselves is to make them come to the office,” she says, noting that some companies may prefer attrition to public layoffs. She also cautions against copy-and-paste policies. “If you’re seeing productivity high and morale high at one to two days a week, you need to ask yourself, what am I hoping to accomplish if I move it to four or five?” Despite a difficult labour market, Soar stresses that fashion companies have not stopped hiring altogether. Instead, they are being more selective, particularly when it comes to junior roles that can be automated. "There definitely is a squeeze on the ones that are considered more rote work,” she says. “Those are the roles you could potentially automate or replace with AI.” However, some employers are still investing in early-career talent. “Those who are still hiring for entry-level roles recognise the benefit that that talent can bring,” Soar explains, pointing to diversity, long-term retention and fresh perspectives.Additional Resources:Fashion Is Done With Remote Work | BoF How to Get Ahead in Fashion’s Stagnant Job Market | BoFHow Fashion Brands Are Making Remote Work Permanent | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Sneakers have driven growth for the sportswear industry for decades, in recent years accelerated by the pandemic and work-from-home culture. However, a recent Bank of America report sparked debate by suggesting the sneaker boom may be nearing an end, including a rare double downgrade of Adidas. On The Debrief, sports correspondent Mike Sykes joins hosts Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young to examine whether slowing growth marks a genuine reversal of casual dressing, or a return to more sustainable demand shaped by price sensitivity, comfort and experimentation rather than hype. Key Insights:The Bank of America report struck a nerve because it questioned a decades-long growth story about the sneaker industry. “This one was the first one in a while that seemed to spell a bit of doom and gloom for the industry,” Sykes says. “Everyone has been on pins and needles for the last couple of years as Nike has been in its downturn… and Bank of America is saying, yeah, it’s over.” The double downgrade of Adidas amplified that anxiety. “If Adidas is getting the double downgrade here, what does that mean for everyone else?” Sykes asks. The implication was not just brand-specific weakness, but the possibility that the sneaker cycle itself had run out of road.However, slower growth does not necessarily mean sneakers are ‘over’. Instead, the data may reflect a market adjusting after years of abnormal acceleration. “Everyone else seems to feel like things are going at least okay,” Sykes says. “Maybe not perfect, but nothing is perfect in this economy right now.” He notes that among the analysts and industry figures he spoke to, there was little appetite for declaring the trend finished. “People are still into sneakers,” says Sykes. Sneakers and sportswear have lasted because they are easy to understand, easy to buy and relatively affordable compared to many fashion categories. “Sneakers are generally just accessible for people. It’s an easy trend to follow,” Sykes says. “You can easily spot which ones are cool and it’s very easy to hop on the bandwagon.” That accessibility matters even more in a strained economy. As Sykes highlights, with consumers weighing “do I wanna buy this next outfit or do I want to buy groceries,” sportswear’s practicality continues to anchor demand.For the sneaker cycle to truly turn, something has to replace it – either a new hit product within the category or a different footwear trend entirely. Right now, what is emerging is not a shift toward formality, but a widening of what casual footwear looks like, as displayed by the popularity of Nike’s ReactX Rejuven8 recovery clog. “Speaking to people who have wanted this shoe, it’s mostly about the comfort,” Sykes explains. “As far as ending the casualisation trend, this is not a shoe that would do that. This is a shoe that would entrench it.”Additional Resources:Have Sneaker Sales Finally Peaked? | BoF The Sneakers That Mattered Most in 2025 | BoFSneaker Resale Isn’t the Business It Used To Be | BoF   Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Saks’ bankruptcy was widely expected, yet still felt like a shock to the fashion system. The department store giant’s Chapter 11 filing outlines $1.75 billion in restructuring finance and $3.4 billion owed to as many as 25,000 creditors – including $136 million to Chanel alone. Who will get paid, and what Saks looks like at the other end of the bankruptcy process, is an open question. Former Neiman Marcus chief Geoffroy van Raemdonck will lead the reset. As BoF’s retail editor Cat Chen puts it, Saks will need to “shrink in order to grow,” curb discounting, and rebuild trust through clienteling and service.Key Insights:Missed vendor payments undermined confidence in Saks Global soon after it acquired Neiman Marcus and Bergdorf Goodman. “Even after Saks created these new payment terms, they weren’t able to stick to their instalments,” Chen says. Labels “stopped shipping to Saks entirely,” creating “a death spiral where Saks wasn’t getting good inventory, and this hurt their ability to attract customers,” and sales slid further.When Saks Global acquired Neiman Marcus, both companies were extremely levered going in, with savings being swallowed by interest. The plan pitched $500 million in cost savings, but Saks Global took on more debt — $2.2 billion in bonds. As Chen explains, with margins in multi-brand retail already slim, “they were ill-fated because… a chunk of whatever sales or savings they were able to generate would be going toward interest payments.” As Saks has 10,000 to 25,000 creditors, owed $3.4 billion, bankruptcy court will approve a list of critical vendors that are essential to Saks’s business. While conglomerates will cope, “it's really the smaller independent brands that might be owed less money, but the amount that they're owed are just so much more critical to their business operations. These are the players that are the most vulnerable right now,” Chen warns — and it’s not just brands. A model shared she’s “owed $46,000...and can’t pay rent now.”Now, Saks must reset its business. Van Raemdonck “took Neiman Marcus in and out of bankruptcy,” yet Chen is blunt about the reality of the situation: “Saks Global will have to shrink in order to grow.” That means closing stores, stabilising cash flow and getting ruthless about discounting. From there, Chen says Saks has to compete on experience, delivering the best customer service and catering to their VICs. Additional Resources:Saks Global Files for Bankruptcy After Monthslong Hunt for Cash | BoF Chanel, Gucci and Capri Holdings: The Brands Topping Saks’ Creditor List | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

2026 opens with real movement in beauty deals. As first reported by The Business of Beauty, Estée Lauder is exploring a packaged sale of Too Faced, Smashbox and Dr. Jart to free up cash and refocus the portfolio. Who’s next? Colour fatigue is depressing makeup valuations, while fragrance, bodycare and haircare are drawing the most credible buyer interest, particularly from beauty conglomerates.  Executive editor of The Business of Beauty, Priya Rao joins Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young to unpack what this year of beauty deals has to offer. Key Insights:With Estée Lauder exploring a bundled sale of Too Faced, Smashbox and Dr. Jart, this portfolio reset signals a valuation reality check. The goal is to free up cash and refocus on culturally relevant, digital-native brands like The Ordinary and Le Labo. As Rao notes, “Deciem sells more skincare products than all of Estée Lauder’s other skincare brands combined,” and “Le Labo is also continuing to be on fire, even though Santal 33 has been around for 15 years.” Colour fatigue is depressing valuations in makeup. Over the past few years, artistry and colour brands have gone to market to find a buyer, but quickly found a landscape already flooded with similar offerings. “There were so many colour brands on the market. People were waiting for the next great one, so they weren’t willing to make a bet on any of these brands until the full slate was out,” says Rao. The result was some colour brands being left in the market, on and off, for over a year. She explains: “It’s kind of like buying a house – why am I going to buy this house at a premium when I could be buying at a discount?”Fragrance, meanwhile, remains a booming, high-margin lane. “All these other beauty businesses – hair care, body and fragrance – are more incremental to a strategic,” says Rao. While private equity is trying across the board, Rao advises that “if you want L’Oréal, LVMH or Estée Lauder, you have to be in categories that add incremental value, rather than ones they’re still trying to figure out.”Haircare offers the clearest near-term upside for acquirers. “Amika has the number one or number two dry shampoo at Sephora,” and its move into Ulta taps “a huge haircare business because of their back bar program”, says Rao. In mass hair care, Not Your Mother’s, which has had its longevity questioned in the past, shows durability and runway. Focused on styling and texture, Rao notes that it “hasn’t even played with shampoo and conditioner yet – in mass hair care, that’s where you play to make the big bucks.”Additional Resources:Exclusive: Estée Lauder Companies Has Put Three Brands Up for Sale | BoF Prestige Hair Care’s Shampoo Problem | BoF Why Fragrance Is the Latest Red Carpet Accessory | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

BoF and McKinsey’s annual State of Fashion report finds the industry entering 2026 with caution: 46 percent of executives expect conditions to worsen, citing geopolitics, macro volatility and the risk of shoppers pulling back. Yet there is also a pulse of optimism around AI-driven efficiency, luxury’s creative recalibration and fresh consumer interest in categories from smart glasses to fine jewellery.Tariffs remain the dominant near-term swing factor. Brands mitigated pain in 2025 by pulling forward inventory, but as that cushion runs out, the full impact shows up in 2026 in costs and pricing. More broadly, luxury’s era of price-led growth has run its course; as BoF correspondent Marc Bain puts it, if you ask customers to pay more, you have to “actually offer the value for the price.”Key Insights:The mood has shifted from “uncertain” in 2025 to “challenging” in 2026. Companies feel better equipped but are bracing for a tougher year. “Uncertainty was ‘we don’t know what’s going to happen’. The challenge is, we know what is going to happen and it’s going to be tough,” says Bain.Tariffs will continue to bite in 2026, and price hikes will be part of the playbook. Brands used a mix of mitigation tactics in 2025, but many still expect to pass on costs. “The strategy that the highest number of executives said was their way of mitigating the tariff impact was raising prices,” Bain notes. “To some degree, there's just no way around that. You can do it strategically, but at some point you're probably going to have to raise prices.”Jewellery is the consumer bright spot for the year ahead, as the category has steadily outperformed thanks to steadier, more gradual price rises, exciting design and a strong perception of value retention. “It’s hard luxury… you can wear it a lot and it can still be in good shape,” Bain says, adding that more women self-purchasing are reinforcing demand, with maximal accessories over minimal wardrobes adding another tailwind. He adds, “It sounds almost silly in 2026, but a big shift has been that more women are actually buying jewellery for themselves.According to Bain, 2026 is the year AI gets embedded into the fashion ecosystem. Expect a ‘two steps forward, one step back’ year where efficiency wins drive adoption even as mishaps make headlines. “Companies don’t feel like they can sit out AI,” Bain says. “It’s not like everyone by the end of next year is going to be using ChatGPT instead of Google, but the expectation is it'll be a significantly higher number than [2025]. And at a certain point, even if it's 5 percent of shoppers … it's still enough that you as a business have to start accounting for it.   Additional Resources:The 10 Themes That Will Define the Fashion Agenda in the Year Ahead | BoF The Perfect Package: What It Takes to Be a Fashion Leader in 2026 | BoFThe Top Trends That Will Define Beauty in 2026 | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Choosing “sneaker of the year” has rarely been this contentious. In 2025 the debate has splintered opinion between incumbent players like Nike and contenders from Vans, Converse and New Balance as consumers test the field.Whilst Nike’s shadow looms and expands with new silhouettes, real-world volume is being driven by ‘regular’ pairs like ASICS’ black-and-silver GEL-1130.In this episode of The Debrief, BoF’s Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin sit down with Mike Sykes to unpack the data, the storytelling and what this year signals for 2026.Key Insights:In a widening market, this year’s debate has splintered opinions. Unlike typical years with “two to three shoes,” 2025 felt like “it’s five, it’s six, it’s seven, it’s eight,” says Sykes. He frames it as consumers testing “Nike versus the field,” with many deciding, “I’m actually gonna try the field for once,” which explains why we have seen credible contenders from Vans, Converse, New Balance and more.At the same time, reports of Nike’s demise are overdone. “Nike has always – and, in my opinion, probably will always – be the industry standard. The company is just too big at this point; it makes too much money. Even when it fails, it’s still a notch above its competition,” says Sykes. The real question now is which Nike silhouettes win attention. A few years ago it was largely Jordan 1s, 3s and Dunks, however now styles like Infinite Archives 17, Awake’s Jordan 5, and Nigel Sylvester’s Jordan 4 are all taking space.Hype is increasingly powered by storytelling that feels personal rather than driven by pure scarcity. Nigel Sylvester’s Jordan 4 showed how “over the top” yet authentic activations made fans attach to Nigel beyond the sneaker. “He’s riding his bike, kissing babies, shaking hands,” says Sykes. It’s “absolutely marketing” but designed to connect on emotion.On sneaker resale marketplace StockX, beneath the headline-grabbing premiums, Asics is moving serious volume with everyday pairs. As Mike notes, “the black and silver Asics Gel-1130 is just a common shoe that you could probably just go to your Foot Locker and buy,” yet he sees “people just buying the shoe up.” Set against hype, the GEL-1130 shows how “regular everyday shoes that look cool” can dominate real-world sales even when they’re absent from sneaker-of-the-year shortlists.Additional Resources:The Sneakers That Mattered Most in 2025The Kicks You Wear: The Collab of the Year With Bimma WilliamsThe Kicks You Wear: The Death of Sneakers Is Overstated Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Collectively, Clare Waight Keller and Maria Cornejo have over two decades of experience in the fashion industry. Waight Keller’s impressive career includes roles at Givenchy, Chloé and Gucci — and today, she serves as creative director at Uniqlo. Cornejo’s New York–based label, founded nearly three decades ago, counts Michelle Obama and Christy Turlington Burns among its most devoted fans.From deeply entrenched gender biases to the fear of returning to work after giving birth, women face a number of systemic barriers to reaching senior leadership positions in the fashion industry, insiders say. Today, some women designers have found success launching their own labels — and when they do land leadership roles at major houses, often make it a priority to create opportunities for other women, which remain few and far between.At the VOICES 10th anniversary, Waight Keller and Cornejo speak with senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young about what it’s like to work in an industry where women are the muses and chief customers, but the top commercial and creative roles are dominated by men. Key Insights: Clare Waight Keller says that the inequalities between men and women in fashion are driven in part by the narrative that “men are often seen as the implementers of big change, and women of stability, and so with stability we’re often also cornered into a commercial sense of aesthetic.” Both Waight Keller and Cornejo push back against this notion, saying that women aren’t less creative but simply more considerate of how real women want to dress.Maria Cornejo feels that “there’s a big disconnect in fashion… from what's instagrammable and what is actual reality … all the women I know who have independent businesses… we’re making clothes that women wear.” Both designers say they have encountered inequities as women in fashion, prompting Waight Keller to intentionally assemble an all-women team at Uniqlo. “Women add so much richness into the conversation of clothing, we offer a completely different perspective which is equally powerful and equally relevant,” she says.Additional Resources:BoF VOICES 2025: Finding Connection in Turbulent TimesClare Waight Keller | BoF 500Maria Cornejo | BoF 500 Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Luxury’s most eventful year in some time is closing with a bang. From Prada’s Versace acquisition to Matthieu Blazy’s debut Chanel Métiers d’Art collection, seismic industry developments are landing on an almost daily basis.In this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF’s Luxury editor Robert Williams, who unpacks all of the industry’s most pertinent news, including the strategic implications of A$AP Rocky’s partnership with Chanel, the rise of the beaten up handbag, and the future of luxury in 2026.Key Insights: The luxury market’s forecast is cautiously optimistic, relying heavily on Chinese consumers and designer-led resets to revive the industry. Brands also need to grapple with justifying value after aggressive price increases in recent years. “Pricing’s certainly going to be an issue and it’s going to be a big issue in the US, which is a really key market for maintaining the brand’s top line,” Williams said.With Prada’s acquisition of Versace closing this week, it remains unclear as to whether the brand will continue with Dario Vitale’s new approach to Versace, or steer towards a more classic, glossy aesthetic. “[Versace] has gone through a pretty radical shift over the past couple of months and whether or not [Prada’s] going to want to continue with that is the biggest most urgent decision, and for them to clarify that for the market,” Williams said.Luxury dining is becoming increasingly popular across the world, but can luxury chains like Langosteria remain cool as they expand? “Fashion once upon a time was all made by your local tailor, your local couturier, and once they decided they could scale taste, that was more desirable than just having something that was more small-scale … In food it seems like it’s kind of the opposite,” Williams said.Originally inspired by Jane Birkin and Mary-Kate and Ashley Olsen, beaten up bags are everywhere in luxury fashion today. “There’s something about the fact that, no matter how much you wear out that bag and trash it, it’s still not going to break and fall apart. I think it just makes it a really cool style gesture. It shows you’re not someone who just bought into it yesterday,” Williams said.Additional Resources:Prada’s Versace Acquisition Closes, Now the Real Work BeginsHow Beat-Up Bags Became a Luxury Status SymbolBreaking Down Chanel’s A$AP Rocky Partnership Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As the holiday shopping season approaches, consumer sentiment is slumping, yet spending is bifurcated – the top end keeps buying while the bottom 80 percent is more cautious. With Black Friday looming, brands are recalibrating promotions around value, desirability and hero products rather than blanket discounts. In luxury, upheaval at several department stores has created white space for rivals to woo high-spending clients through aggressive clienteling and tighter, faster vendor partnerships. In this episode of The Debrief, hosts Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young speak with BoF reporters Cat Chen and Malique Morris about how brands are planning the season.Key Insights: Consumer spending hasn’t vanished, but it’s shifted toward shoppers who still feel flush. As Chen notes, “people are not really feeling rosy about the state of the economy, but the irony is that they’re still spending money.” Since Covid, “spending has been driven by the wealthier segment,” and it’s clear that “what consumers want is value… they want to get a good deal, but they don’t want to buy a cheap product.” For retailers, that means “more sophistication around price architecture” and using AI “to price products perfectly.”“Black Friday–Cyber Monday is not a fix for a mediocre year,” says Morris. Instead, winners are “prioritising desirability over discounts,” introducing “new products specifically for this time” and pushing “hero best-selling product.” The old playbook is out, and “slapping a 50% off everything discount on Instagram is not gonna cut it,” says Morris. In the “age of curation,” even deal-hunters expect editing, storytelling and reasons to stop scrolling.Morris argues that even in a discount-driven moment like Black Friday, shoppers still want offers to feel edited and intentional, and brands are responding with more curated tactics rather than blanket markdowns. “We’re in the age of curation and so even when people are expecting deals, they don’t want to feel like they’re just getting slopped,” says Morris. Tariffs and margin pressure mean many brands cannot afford a race to the bottom, pushing them to plan inventory more carefully, introduce new products specifically for this period and reserve discounts for hero items.Chen explains that this holiday season is especially high stakes for luxury multi-brand retailers because a few big players are stumbling – and everyone else is trying to capitalise. “Saks and SSENSE and Luisa Via Roma are three players that have faced pretty bad challenges this year,” she says. “They have opened up white space for their competitors on healthier financial footing to come in and basically eat their lunch and acquire their customers, acquire their sales.” The response is an aggressive push on clienteling and talent: retailers are not just targeting wealthy individuals, but also the salespeople and stylists who already manage those relationships.Additional Resources:Brands Try to Get the Tone Right for Holiday 2025 | BoF Inside Luxury Retailers’ Bare-Knuckle Fight to Win the Holidays | BoF Black Friday Beauty Goes Beyond the Discount | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As COP30 gets underway in Belém, a port city on the edge of the Brazilian rainforest, the mood is sober. A decade after the Paris Agreement was adopted internationally to limit global warming, many of the world’s largest fashion companies have fallen short on emissions cuts — and some are moving in the wrong direction, emitting pollutants at an even higher rate than in previous years.In this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF reporters, Sarah Kent and Shayeza Walid, to examine why progress has stalled, how fast-fashion growth is reshaping the landscape, and what practical steps — from decarbonising supply chains to adapting factories to extreme heat — are needed next. Key Insights: Kent says, “I would not say any brand has a credible pathway right now to meet their targets for 2030,” “Even companies that have shown that they’re able to reduce their emissions to date, driving down their carbon footprint over the next five years is going to be harder, more complex and more costly… and really no one company can do that alone.”Kent highlights the industry’s deep structural bind: “The fundamental conflict at the heart of the fashion industry’s climate commitments is that you’ve got a business built on extracting stuff and producing stuff and selling stuff. The more stuff they sell, the better the business does, but the worse the environmental impact is,” “Profitability and sales growth are fundamentally at odds with the environmental commitments companies have made.”Short-term thinking still in the boardroom locks in higher climate impacts, adaptation costs and supply-chain risk. As Kent puts it, “On climate, if you don’t act, you don’t have to make these big investments, and you can keep growing your business and things will trundle along for some time. But the longer you wait to act, the worse the climate impacts you’re going to have to deal with are going to be, and the higher the cost of mitigating them, adapting to them, and trying to continue this business in a climate-constrained world.”Voluntary commitments aren’t enough at fast fashion’s scale. Walid points to Shein: “Shein’s case is very instructive. There’s limits to voluntary commitments, which is what the majority of these brands have made.” She continues, “When the business model is built on speed and volume… it just shows that voluntary commitments are maybe not enough for a fashion brand – especially a brand as big as Shein – to actually tangibly reduce its emissions when its entire business case doesn’t stand for that.”Climate impacts are now serious human and corporate risks. “It’s not just a corporate issue anymore,” says Walid. “People who have the visuals recognise the reality of what’s happening in these factories and the people who are making clothes at the end of the day.” Kent adds: “People who are suffering from heat stress are not as productive… floods are disruptive to production, to logistics, to supply chains. Just because we have not yet seen a major disruption to the apparel supply chain from these climate crises yet is more luck than anything else.”Additional Resources:Can Fashion Still Meet Its Climate Promises? | BoF The Frayed Edge: Is Fashion Quiet Quitting on Climate? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Colourful charms, Labubu-laden handbags and a ring on every finger – accessories sales are booming. A surge of necklace stacks, playful rings and quirky charms is being driven by Gen Z’s push for personal style, using add-ons to customise minimalist wardrobes on a budget. With apparel prices up, accessories act as “little luxuries” and entry points into brands. Retail is responding, with buyers widening small-leather-goods assortments and e-commerce shoots now styling bags with charms to encourage add-on purchases. BoF reporter Diana Pearl joins The Debrief to unpack what’s fuelling the accessory pile-on, how labels are capitalising on it, and how far the trend can go before the cycle turns.  Key Insights: According to Pearl, Gen Z is reaching for accessories as a way to personalise their minimalist wardrobes. “Gen Z, which is really looking to define their sense of personal style, is leaning on accessories to do so, especially because minimalism in clothing is still very popular… but they also wanna have a little more fun and accessories are a way to do that,” she says. Regarding the longevity of this trend, Pearl adds, “I think we'll see a consumer that is primed to think of accessories as a more important part of their wardrobe – not just like a finishing touch, but a core element of it.”The Labubu craze captures the mood of the accessories trend – playful, collective and endlessly customisable. “There’s so many different Labubus. There’s a bit of that thrill of the hunt to try to find the right one. You can add it to an Hermès bag or a $100 leather tote from J. Crew,” says Pearl. For many shoppers, she says, “it really speaks to that desire for fun and adding a personal touch. People want things that make them feel good.”While luxury houses profit from entry-level add-ons, Pearl sees independent makers riding the wave. “I think it probably is helping luxury brands but I think even more than that, it’s helping small brands that really can make these cute accessories that feel distinct and different from what everyone else has, because I think a huge part of this is that quest for personal style, wanting something unique,” says Pearl. Pearl frames the moment as a behavioural shift rather than a transient trend. She argues, “trends go away, but they never fully go away. I think every trend leaves a lasting impact or impression on us.  Maybe Labubus, toe rings, and bag charms won’t be quite as popular, but maybe they’ll evolve.” Crucially, “I think that this has unlocked something in people… it will have a lasting after effects of this trend, even if not everybody is wearing five necklaces at once in a year from now.”Additional Resources:How Far Can Fashion’s Accessory Obsession Go? | BoF Why Jewellery Feels Like a Better Deal Than a Handbag | BoFLuxury’s Untapped Opportunity in Men’s Jewellery | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In late August, the US doubled duties on Indian goods to 50 percent, in what President Donald Trump described as a punishment for India’s purchases of Russian oil. Brands reacted immediately, postponing or cancelling orders and leaving factories in hubs like Tiruppur and Bengaluru half-filled. With shifts cut and workers laid off, the shock ricocheted through India’s export economy, exposing how little protection garment workers have while relief talks and trade diplomacy drag on.Senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF reporter Shayeza Walid to trace how trade policy in Washington quickly impacted the lives of India’s garment workers. Key Insights: The tariff that came into place at the end of August led some suppliers to feel “punished for something they didn’t have any hand in,” as Walid puts it. She adds: “That penalty was linked to India’s continued purchases of Russian crude oil,” and “it hit very fast because brands immediately reacted to it once the 50 percent came into place.”The disruption hit export hubs first and hardest. With brands reluctant to absorb the shock, factories have been left to “bear the brunt,” passing the pressure onto the most vulnerable link in the system. The result is workers facing furloughs, layoffs and open-ended uncertainty. “These workers are largely migrant workers who… don't have the power to collectively bargain and kind of demand what they have the right to”, says Walid. As a result, migrant garment workers are bearing the brunt through layoffs, furloughs and lost income. The response from Western brands has been silence and arm’s-length accountability, as most work through layers of sub-contractors in India. Walid says that, despite public rhetoric on labour rights, “in practice, there's not anything in place that would fix … these short-term contracts and brands not knowing where subcontracting factories are connecting with suppliers.” During Covid, watchdog pressure pushed some labels to repay cancelled orders, but “at this moment, that’s not something that we’re seeing,” Walid notes. In the meantime, a few large exporters are temporarily absorbing parts of the tariff to keep relationships alive – an approach suppliers themselves say is unsustainable – while smaller factories shut and workers absorb the shock.Beyond geopolitics, commercial terms and supply-chain opacity push risk onto workers. “It’s really the purchasing practice and the way contracts work in the supply chain. In the exporting industry, that leaves workers in this really helpless condition,” says Walid. Complexity of the system also weakens accountability: “It’s really extraordinarily difficult to get data and direct kind of causality from a particular brand,” and in hubs like Tirupur, “subcontracting factories are essentially the main suppliers to these bigger factories because they just get such large volumes.”  Additional Resources:India’s Garment Workers Are Paying the Price for Trump’s Tariffs | BoF  Trump’s 50% Tariff Sows Fear Inside Indian Apparel Hub | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A new wave of AI shopping agents has emerged as Big Tech and start-ups alike vie for dominance of this new market. OpenAI, Google and Perplexity are experimenting with search-to-checkout, while fashion-specific entrants like Vêtir, Phia and Gensmo are learning users' tastes before recommending and purchasing across retailers. But before they get off the ground, trust, accuracy, privacy and simple usefulness remain open questions.Senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF reporter Malique Morris to map the agentic ecommerce landscape. Key Insights: AI shopping agents aim to move beyond static recommendations to truly act on a shopper’s behalf. As Morris explains, “traditional e-commerce has algorithms that recommend items based on what you’ve already browsed or purchased,” whereas “an AI shopping agent is supposed to learn the shopper and can act on their behalf,” handle “very specific prompts” and, ultimately, complete the transaction.Agents are trying to replicate the best in-store experience for the ecommerce space. “They’re supposed to be about replicating the in-store salesperson, surfacing the right piece based on the conversation that you might have,” says Morris. As a result, “it’s not calling for brands to rethink how they’re designing their goods,” but more about tools that “help them sell them better and help them get into the hands of the people who are actually really going to want them.”Early users are avid shoppers who love new technology. Morris doesn’t expect a sudden tipping point, but rather gradual mass adoption. “Agentic commerce is [already] here because the tools are being built and experimentation is happening,” he says. “People are going to be conditioned the same way that they were conditioned when Netflix  rolled out their algorithms, the same way TikTok and Instagram have with ‘for you’ pages. It’s here, it’s happening and it’s only going to get more efficient.”While the consumer should benefit from this new suite of AI shopping agents, Morris is blunt about power dynamics: “Outside of ‘the consumer is going to win,’ I think it’s going to be who has the resources to perfect this.” Consolidation is to be expected as many smaller platforms are “probably going to get consumed into an OpenAI or a Google or an Amazon. Those already huge [players] are probably going to be the ultimate winners.”Additional Resources:What It Will Take for Consumers to Let AI Shop For Them | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This fashion month, models walked the tightrope between fantasy and function. On the runway, spectacle was dialled up to 100: Alaïa’s armless “straitjacket” dress, Margiela’s metal mouthpieces, and Jean Paul Gaultier’s naked male body prints were among the pieces to spark a wider debate. Some critics have asked what feels like an obvious question: do designers actually understand — or even care — how women dress in their real lives?BoF’s Diana Pearl and Cat Chen join senior editor Sheena Butler-Young to examine why criticism is intensifying now, the role of authorship and how brands can balance showmanship with wearability.Key Insights: Designers face backlash when spectacle eclipses women’s realities. As Pearl observes, “designers weren’t really designing for actual women — or at worst, designing clothes that felt almost disrespectful.” To Pearl, many runway moments “felt either like it was erasing the woman or immobilising them… like fashion is a form of torture.” Even if looks are “dramatized for the runway,” she says, “there’s still a message being sent” that can be interpreted as designers not respecting women. Chen doesn’t see this season as uniquely outrageous in a vacuum, but says context matters. She adds that criticism hits harder now amid other external circumstances, one of which is that many brands are struggling financially. “The fact that these designers had a commercial incentive to be more resonant with consumers and then created these collections that didn't hit at that level, I think that made these collections so much more perceptible to be criticised in this way,” says Chen. Body diversity is the more urgent gap to fix. Pearl says the ultra-thin casting “adds insult to injury… a parade of models that are all extremely thin and… unattainable,” compounding the sense that runways aren’t made with real women in mind. Chen goes further: “the lack of body diversity on the runway is a huge problem,” noting data that shows representation “falling straight down from 2023 to 2025.”Pearl notes perception shifts with who’s in charge: “Women aren’t represented at the top, so it makes us more primed to look at a mouthpiece and feel it’s sexist because it’s coming from a male designer.” Still, she points to shows that balance both: Chanel’s debut “felt very wearable” while staging delivered “otherworldly” theatre, and Khaite’s runways pair mood with pieces that, also, “feel very wearable.” Chen adds that smaller, women-led brands win by staying close to their customer: “It’s really not about spectacle, it’s about being in the same room as their customers.”Additional Resources:Does Fashion Know What Women Want? | BoF Fashion’s Musical Chairs Ends — With Men in Almost Every Seat. | BoF The Emerging Designers Pushing Fashion Forward | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Retailers are racing to repackage shops as “third places” — low-pressure spaces to linger between home and work — as post-pandemic footfall softens and social isolation rises. Sociologist Ray Oldenburg’s original idea centres on civic, low-barrier hubs like cafés and libraries rather than commercial destinations, yet brands are now adding seating, listening bars and in-store cafés to nudge dwell time, loyalty and favourable word of mouth. The best versions use subtle amenities that keep people comfortably in the space, but the sales impact is yet to be proven.In this episode, BoF retail editor Cat Chen joins The Debrief to unpack why scale matters, how to measure success beyond sales, and where third-place experiments risk sliding from community into pure branding.Key Insights: In their efforts to create third places, retailers are utilising food and beverage as subtle amenities that keep people lingering: it’s ‘not about creating food and beverage as a destination, but about simply getting people to spend more time in the store,’” says Chen. Done well, that “authentically [creates] a community,” and “when you have this really positive experience in their ecosystem, you will feel very positively about the brand.” Still, she cautions: “The idea of a third place as a way to drive sales for retailers is an unproven theory.”“Community building is authentic and not a branding exercise,” Chen says. The worst versions of third places feel “branded to death” and designed for photos more than social connection. “At the end of the day, it's not about the social experience of being there, it's about taking a photo of it and being able to consume this luxury brand. That's akin to the first step of being able to afford their $3,000 handbag.” It all goes back to commerce and “is very much the opposite of what Oldenburg meant.” Practical amenities in stores build goodwill. Western outfitter Tecovas’ “radical hospitality” includes a lounge and a free bar inside its store, Sephora succeeds with a hands-off approach when customers are trying samples, and Apple allows patrons to charge their phone or use the bathroom — a small service that leaves a positive halo. As Chen puts it, food and beverage in a third place should be low commitment, cheap and have a low barrier to entry. “There have been a lot of thinkpieces about private members’ clubs popping up in New York and how this is tied to this desire for third places. Private member clubs are not third places, they are the antithesis of third places."  Additional Resources:Can a Store Ever Be a ‘Third Place?’ | BoF How Brands Make Community More Than a Buzzword | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

From team-branded fashion shows to tunnel-walk capsules and luxury watch deals, sport and fashion are converging at speed. The NFL has rolled smaller licensing tie-ups into marquee partnerships, while the WNBA is emerging as a fertile ground for inventive brand-player collaborations. But alongside the growth is bloat: logo-slap collections, clearance-rack remnants and fuzzy KPIs.Senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin are joined by BoF sports correspondent Mike Sykes to map the deals that resonate and the ones that miss — and how success of these partnerships are being measured beyond the momentary halo.Key Insights: The WNBA is a collaboration engine because players are the drivers, not passengers. “I think the WNBA right now is a breeding ground for some of these deals in part because the players are eager to find these other opportunities to spread their portfolio,” Sykes says. That unlocks new formats: partnerships “not just between teams and brands or the league and brands, but players themselves and the brands [that] manifest in really cool and unique ways.”Name, Image and Likeness (NIL) has supercharged women’s sports, and fashion is part of the bargaining. Sheena points out the 2021 shift when “college athletes could not monetise their name, image, or likeness” and then stars like “Angel Reese and Caitlin Clark were becoming brands in their own right.” That changes how teams and leagues engage players: “fashion deals can be a bargaining chip on both sides of that equation.”As sports and fashion collaborations become more ubiquitous, authentic propositions are needed to cut through the noise. As Butler-Young puts it, the best examples “take the collections seriously. They treat it like a real fashion product. ‘Anything will do’ – people see through that.” Sykes agrees: “To work with players, you have to work with teams that really want to do things the right way.” It has to make sense for the consumer, and when it doesn’t, the audience calls it out. “The Chelsea and OVO collection was kind of a logo-slap.  Even the fans were like, ‘This isn’t it.’”  For some brands and athletes involved in these collaborations, partnerships are judged on reach and relevance rather than immediate revenue as the key marker of success. Sykes points to the NFL x Veronica Beard blazers: “There’s still some of that product left and it’s 75 to 80 per cent discounted … you have to look at that as a failure.” Yet the league “takes a holistic view,” he says: even if one capsule doesn’t sell through, lessons on “what you produce, how much, where you produce it, who your core audiences are” feed the next partnership.Additional Resources:Sports and Fashion Are Tighter Than Ever. But Who’s Really Winning? Has Fashion’s Convergence With Sports Gone Too Far?  How WNBA Players Are Using Merch to Underscore Their Value   Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Brands like Bubble, Starface and Byoma rode TikTok-native aesthetics to win Gen-Z hearts and Sephora shelf space with plush mascots, playful stickers and sensorial jelly textures. Founders close in age to their audience moved fast, crowd-sourced ideas and mastered algorithms. Now the oldest Gen Z consumers are nearing 30 and looking for fewer gimmicks and more proof that formulas work.In this episode, senior beauty correspondent Daniela Morosini unpacks what still resonates, where the “dopamine” look carries a credibility tax, and why channel strategy, product performance and smart casting matter more than ever.Key Insights: Gen Z brands broke through by moving at internet speed and co-creating with their audience. “These brands are all just so digitally native… and for a lot of them the founders were quite young themselves,” says Morosini. They were “small, scrappy businesses [with] shorter product launch cycles [and] really savvy marketing.” Crucially, they “did a lot of crowdsourcing, social listening, and were really plugged into internet forums,” so products felt made with, not just for, their audience.The ‘fun’ factor worked best online as visuals drove discovery: “Goopy, gloopy, sticky things… look good in a video. You see someone put that on their face and then you want to try it.” At the same time, expectations have climbed as “people are really quick to reject a product if it doesn’t perform exactly the way they want.” And bright, playful packaging can backfire for results-seekers: “Colourful, bright things we associate with play, silliness, youth and frivolity… you might think, ‘this is not a serious product.’”If stalwarts like Neutrogena and Clearasil have long dominated the teen aisle, why can’t today’s Gen-Z-first labels simply stay youth brands rather than trying to age up? As Morosini puts it, legacy names “have definitely ceded market share to some of these newer indies… these are brands you can find in every drugstore… [they’re] most teens’ or tweens’ introduction to the beauty category.” But “those brands are not cool,” and the Gen-Z pioneers “really want to be cool… and relevant,” not just “the thing that your mum might pick up… when you’re complaining about having a spot.” The challenge is clear: “it’s hard to be both legacy and cool.”Some labels are widening reach by changing where and what they sell. “Byoma went into some more premium retail pretty quickly,” Morosini notes, adding that “retailers really function as a marketing engine.” Others are broadening beyond a single hero. Ultimately, Morisini says survival hinges on utility. “It will come down to the brands that truly have replenishable products differentiated enough, at the right price point, and genuinely offer unique enough results that people will continue to return to them once any maybe the noise around the texture or the packaging has died down.”Additional Resources:Bubble Was Built on Gen Z. Now, It Must Grow Up. | BoF The Gen-Z Whisperer: How Julie Schott Made Acne a Laughing Matter | BoFHow to Keep the Gen-Z Fragrance Boom Going | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Luxury is struggling to connect with Gen Z, a cohort raised on TikTok and YouTube who research before they buy, shop vintage and resale as a first stop, and question whether soaring prices match product quality. While Millennials fuelled the last luxury boom via streetwear crossovers and scarcity-led drops, today’s younger shoppers are more value-driven and sceptical of polished brand theatre. In-store, rigid service models feel alien to a generation used to conversational creators.This episode of The Debrief explores what “worth it” means to Gen Z and how brands can earn it. Greater transparency on materials and craftsmanship, content that feels real rather than aspirational, and participation in the second-hand ecosystem will be critical to rebuilding trust and lifetime value with younger consumers. Key Insights: Gen Z are not tuning out of fashion, they’re interrogating it. As BoF correspondent Lei Takanashi puts it, “[Gen Z] are so savvy.  They can just look up what the Louis Vuitton bag is made of and see it’s actually canvas… Should I really spend a thousand dollars on that? Is there an alternative?” The backlash is philosophical as well as financial. Editorial apprentice (and Gen Zer) Jessica Kwon says there’s a pervasive idea that luxury conglomerates are just trying to squeeze as much profit as possible. “There is real ire and resentment among Gen Z around price hikes. I think we’re a generation that cares a lot about value for dollar,” she says. When the price, materials and narrative do not align, younger shoppers default to vintage, resale or opting out.Price justification starts with transparency and proof. “Whether it's a thousand-dollar handbag or a $100 candle, you have to explain why luxury costs what it costs, that there’s this craftsmanship and heritage,” says Takanashi. But storytelling alone will not close the sale. “Even then, it’s just so hard to convince that customer that craftsmanship is worth the money. You also have to play into their cultural interests and what they’re passionate about.” That means moving beyond heritage talking points to show living communities, real processes and credible creatives who make the brand feel current.Digitally native Gen Z want real content, not polished marketing campaigns. “Our generation grew up on YouTube, ‘how to build an outfit 101’ – that’s how we got our style advice, not from magazines,” says Kwon, which is why they still “look to influencers and social media for trend analysis.” The tone matters as much as the channel. Takanashi argues that content should “feel real, like an unboxing, not a glossy marketing campaign. … Something that just feels like anyone could make it.” The formats that win are lo-fi, conversational and useful, with creators who will praise and critique in the same breath.Many first encounters with luxury now happen through second-hand, so brands need to embrace that ecosystem and give clear on-ramps back to full price. The product and the pitch must both feel meaningful. Kwon says Gen Z still wants “a very beautiful story” and to “feel like they’re a part of a movement.”Additional Resources:Why Luxury Needs to Rethink How It Speaks to Gen Z | BoF The Great Fashion Reset | When Will Luxury Bounce Back? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Department stores and major e-tailers once incubated new labels with consistent buys and patience; today those channels are shrinking or unstable. Social platforms still create viral moments, but conversion is patchy and fast-fashion copycats shorten the runway for hit products. Against that backdrop, some designers are rewiring distribution, tightening assortments and adding more accessible entry points, while cultivating closer, direct relationships with customers and specialty boutiques.The stakes are high industry-wide: without a healthy pipeline of young labels, fashion’s creative engine risks stalling. On this episode of The Debrief, BoF correspondent Joan Kennedy joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young to discuss how emerging designers are rebuilding their product pipeline around creativity to survive the great fashion reset.Key Insights: Multi-brand partners that once incubated emerging brands are now demanding instant results, just as e-commerce economics have worsened. As Kennedy puts it, “Wholesalers and retailers want to see performance from the get-go. There's more pressure to just be in a store, be slotted in, immediately perform. At the same time, we've seen e-commerce fall apart under the rising costs of everything.” The pressure is systemic: “These retailers are really under pressure. After a few decades of being willing to take more risks, investors haven't seen the return on that. So it's hard to blame anybody; it's just what fashion is going through right now.”Visibility can soar while sales lag, creating a conversion gap designers must close with clearer paths to purchase. “Fashion has been this industry of smoke and mirrors, but in recent years that's been really exacerbated by the fashion hype machine,” Kennedy says. “It has led to this moment where designers have a lot of awareness on social media, not much of a business.” Many have “built these really big audiences online, [who] don't have ways to buy into the brand, or just don't buy the brand.”Without dependable wholesale, labels are rebuilding their direct-to-consumer pipeline through smaller boutiques and sharper merchandising. “A trend I've noticed is that more brands are going back to the trunk shows and creating intimate moments with their shoppers,” Kennedy notes. “Specialty stores and independent boutiques have a very close relationship with their own shoppers, too. It's a little bit closer to demand and you can build a good relationship with the buyer there.” On product, brands like New York-based Area, known for its crystal-embellished clothing, are adding accessible entries: “They’re introducing this line of basics with little rhinestones on them. It’s just more fun dresses at a more accessible price point.”As this fashion season unfolds, Kennedy points to creativity as the competitive edge. “The source of optimism is how evident the importance of creativity is to this industry and how key that is to fueling sales and building good businesses,” she says. “You have to have a very specific product and focus your offering,” and remember that “if [consumers] are going to spend, they want to spend on something that means a lot to them and really stands out – something that is really unique.”Additional Resources:The Great Fashion Reset | Is Fashion Failing Emerging Designers? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

This fashion month arrives after years of post-pandemic boom giving way to a sharp slowdown in luxury demand. Weaker consumer confidence in China, pressure on aspirational shoppers and a wave of price hikes have left many brands struggling to keep momentum. To win back customers and justify higher prices, luxury houses are turning to new creative leadership. Runway debuts won’t provide complete solutions, but they will offer early signals of strategy, with some brands leaning into craftsmanship and heritage while others chase louder fashion moments.Alongside executive editor Brian Baskin and senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young, luxury editor Robert Williams details why the real test will come in the weeks after the shows, when follow-through determines whether excitement lasts.Key Insights: Creative resets are a response to macro pressure and price inflation, not just consumer fatigue. “This isn't just about people being tired of the way fashion looks or the kind of designs a designer was showing us but maybe more about the wider context in which those designs exist,” says Williams. As prices climb, luxury houses need to add tangible value: “the prices for luxury brands have been hiked up so dramatically over the past few years, either the quality or technical craftsmanship … needs to be improved, or the creative.”The role of the creative director is more constrained than ever before. As Williams explains, brands must excite new customers without alienating existing ones. “You can't necessarily count on the fact that if you lose an old client from the previous vision, you're going to be able to get two more because you've got something fresh and new.” Unlike in earlier eras, “brands that have tried to scrap their old business and just count on a new one coming in — they've been burned in recent years.”Williams warns not to expect complete strategy blueprints on day one. “I don't think we're gonna get a fully realised vision for how any company plans to totally turn itself around. But there's certainly gonna be some hints,” he says. Some houses may skew to visible craftsmanship and codes, as Bottega Veneta has done under the new hand of Louise Trotter. Others must take a different route. “It will be quite interesting to see what Gucci and Dior do,” says Williams. “Celebrating heritage is not what anyone is looking for them to do in the current market.”Some brands have had “one really hot day” but then consumers quickly lost interest, while others managed to “milk the content cycle for days and days and really make a big arrival,” says Williams. What matters next is sustaining attention: “Are they able to keep the excitement alive in the days and weeks following the runway show?”Additional Resources:The Great Fashion Reset | Can Designer Revamps Save Fashion?Ready for Relaunch? Jonathan Anderson’s Dior ChallengeWhy Gucci Picked DemnaWhy Chanel Chose Matthieu Blazy Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Ssense’s bankruptcy filing makes it the latest in a long line of online luxury retailers to find itself on the brink. In an internal memo, Ssense co-founder and CEO Rami Atallah blamed US tariffs for creating an “immediate liquidity crisis.” But as BoF correspondent Malique Morris details, the real damage pre-dated the latest trade shock: years of training a young audience to wait for markdowns, overexposure to the US market, and leadership inertia as luxury slowed industry-wide.With hosts Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young, Morris unpacks how Ssense won indie labels and cultural clout but dulled its edge as discounts became the default. They also explore whether Ssense can keep its cool factor while courting full-price shoppers, and which outcomes will best protect the fragile ecosystem of small brands that rely on the platform.Key Insights: Ssense’s strategy of serving younger, aspirational shoppers worked until markdowns became the main event, teaching customers to avoid full price and dulling the platform’s authority with brands. As Morris puts it, “Ssense has been really smart about targeting this younger, aspirational luxury consumer … but over time it turned into this cornerstone for luxury discounting online.” He continues: “It just became associated with being the sale place, which then curbs credibility with designers.” The business model that once drove growth ultimately undercut it.Relying on a Canada-based warehouse feeding a majority-US customer base left Ssense acutely exposed to cross-border friction. Compounding the risk is the fact that it targets young, aspirational shoppers. “Those shoppers’ pockets aren’t bulletproof in an economic downturn,” explains Morris, so demand proved more fragile just as costs rose. Tariffs were the catalyst, not the cause, of pre-existing vulnerabilities.Even as conditions worsened, decision-making lagged. “I think internally what’s happening is that they’re not acting fast enough to respond,” Morris says, adding that industry-wide pressures “have fallen onto them in a particular way.” Slow moves on initiatives like personal shopping and incubation left Ssense leaning further into discounts, accelerating the slide towards creditor protection.  According to Morris, a reset doesn’t require abandoning the brand’s cultural core; it requires focusing it. “What’s working well in e-commerce is having a niche and being clear in how you’re going to serve the best customers within that cohort,” Morris argues. “In my mind, Ssense needs to refine its niche and make sure that it's attracting the consumers who will purchase without the need for always-on sales. … There are shoppers in that Gen Z group, many of whom are almost 30, who have the pockets and the temperament to be seduced by curation and not by the fact the next Essence sale is going to ‘hit different’.”  Additional Resources:Ssense to File for Bankruptcy Protection After Creditors Push for Sale | BoF Ssense: What Went Wrong | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Performance basketball shoes have long been embedded in fashion culture, from the iconic Air Jordans of the 1990s to the stylised sneakers worn in NBA tunnel walks. But over the last decade, interest in basketball shoes waned as sneakerheads turned to minimalist silhouettes, running shoes and fashion collabs. Now, a new wave of signature athletes, innovative design from emerging and legacy brands and growing energy around the WNBA are bringing basketball sneakers back into the fashion spotlight.In this episode of The Debrief, BoF correspondents Lei Takanashi and Mike Sykes join hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack what's changed, what's still missing and what the future might hold.Key Insights: Basketball sneakers lost momentum with consumers when design became too functional and aesthetics too uniform. "All the styles just seemed kind of homogenous... There wasn't much difference there," said Sykes. "If you're not going to give us anything that looks different or anything that's unique, then people are going to go back and look into the past." This lack of innovation pushed sneakerheads toward nostalgic retro styles rather than new performance models.New stars like Anthony Edwards and Shai Gilgeous-Alexander are reigniting interest in signature sneakers, not just through performance but personal style and personality. "He's got the bravado. He's like everything that you want from a signature athlete," said Mike of Edwards. "A lot of these new players... they have this grip on the culture," added Lei, referring to how their on-screen charisma and tunnel fits are helping bring basketball sneakers back to relevance.The women’s game has long been rich in style and creativity — a fact the market is only now starting to catch up to. "Just seeing the creativity and the colour that has always been around the women's game when it comes to the sneakers that they've worn," said Mike. "It just makes it all the more disappointing... if we saw what we see today maybe five or 10 years ago, then the market right now would be completely different."In the past decade, attention shifted away from professional athletes and toward celebrity collaborators like Kanye West and Travis Scott. That dynamic is beginning to change. "From a brand perspective, the athletes just weren't the interesting players in the field," said Mike. "And so now I think the brands are circling back around and recentering athletes in a way that I think we haven't quite seen in a long time."Additional Resources:The Fashion Revival of Basketball Sneakers | BoFHow Soccer Conquered the US Sneaker Market | BoF  Sign up to Mike’s newsletter - Sports by Mike D. Sykes  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In the five years since the pandemic, fashion and beauty workplaces have undergone seismic change. Amid mounting economic uncertainty, geopolitical instability and the ongoing climate crisis, a workplace reckoning is underway. Employees are re-evaluating what truly matters at work and for many, that means reassessing everything from their employers’ values to compensation and flexibility.According to BoF Careers’ 2025 global survey of over 1,000 professionals in 74 countries, only 15 percent of respondents said they were satisfied in their current roles. Meanwhile, 45 percent are actively looking for new jobs and workers today are prioritising fair pay, career progression, flexibility, value alignment and transparency over legacy prestige or perks.On this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young speaks with BoF’s commercial features director Sophie Soar to explore what talent really wants today and what employers need to do to attract and retain the best.Key Insights: Employees don’t just want transparency; they expect it as a foundation for trust and progression. From salaries to promotions, clarity enables professionals to visualise their future and stay engaged. “Transparency allows people to see their career trajectory at a business, as well as really visualising their future there and what it will look like,” said Soar. “Maybe they don’t find that motivating, but it can also set clear expectations and goals for them to work towards.”Hybrid work remains popular, but it’s not just about flexibility. Without visible leadership, the in-office experience falls flat and fails to deliver meaningful career support or culture. “If you are just providing a space that has a few desks and Wi-Fi, that is not creating the right kind of environment, the right set-up for community, as well as a comprehensive and effective working culture,” said Soar. “If you want employees to be back in the office, then leaders need to be there as well. They need to lead by example.”While high-profile brands still appeal to candidates, they’re no longer enough on their own. Employees are increasingly prioritising ethics, compensation, and leadership over legacy status. “When we were asking individuals as a part of the survey to share which companies they would most like to work for within the fashion and beauty industries, leaders were quite often called out by name,” said Soar. “Lina Nair at Chanel and Brunello Cuccinelli, they were called out individually as being very inspiring to individuals and a very motivating reason to want to work at a company.”As jobseekers increasingly rely on tools like ChatGPT to craft their CVs and cover letters, authenticity and personalisation are becoming critical differentiators. Top employers aren’t looking for generic admiration; they want thoughtful, tailored applications that clearly map experience to the role. “You kind of need to emphasise past the point of saying, ‘I love your brand, and it would be great if I could work at your brand’ – that is really not going to resonate with individuals hiring,” said Soar. “I would highly recommend making sure that if you're using this technology, you try and think about how you can put yourself into it.”Additional Resources:What Fashion and Beauty Professionals Want From Employers Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The luxury industry trades on a carefully constructed marketing image, deeply linked to artful claims of exclusivity, craftsmanship, and impeccable standards. But a slew of Milanese court cases linking some of luxury’s biggest names to sweatshops on the outskirts of the fashion capital have sent uncomfortable shockwaves through the sector. Last week, LVMH-owned cashmere brand Loro Piana became the latest company caught up in the scandal. According to prosecutors, inadequate supply chain controls meant thousands of the brand’s cashmere jackets were made under exploitative conditions in illegal workshops. The scandals raise critical questions about luxury’s supply-chain integrity at a time when trust in the sector’s value proposition is already eroding.This week on the Debrief, chief sustainability correspondent Sarah Kent joins Sheena Butler-Young to unpack the investigation and what it means for brands and consumers.Key Insights: Prosecutors in Milan argue that luxury brands’ links to local sweatshops are a feature, not a bug in the system. Companies are negligent in how they monitor their supply chains and routinely turn a blind eye to red flags in order to maximise profits they say. "The crux of these cases is that big luxury brands are not really doing their homework," said Kent. Brands caught in the investigation say they have strong systems of controls in place and that they have cooperated with authorities to understand where things went wrong. Loro Piana, a brand long considered the pinnacle of luxury craftsmanship, is the latest — and perhaps most surprising — name to be swept up in the investigation. Renowned for its control over production and its sourcing of rare materials like baby cashmere and vicuña, Loro Piana sits in one of the most exclusive tiers of fashion, alongside labels like Hermès.Brands caught up in the scandal have been placed under court oversight to ensure they tighten up their supply-chain controls, but the broader systemic issues revealed by the Milanese investigations have no easy fix. "There are deep-seated economic challenges for an industry that is still largely very fragmented, made up of mom-and-pop shops competing on a global stage with countries that have much lower labour costs," said Kent. Manufacturers are under intense pressure on price, speed and flexibility, conditions that have helped give rise to “a cottage industry of cut-price suppliers that are not meeting Italy's own labour laws," she said.In the past, luxury brands have proved remarkably resilient to such scandals."What feels different this time is there is more jeopardy than there has been historically,” said Kent Hefty price increases over the past few years coupled with online complaints about declining quality are already fuelling a noisy debate about whether luxury brands are really worth the money. The sector’s alleged sweatshop links are “feeding into a bigger conversation that's already happening in a dangerous way,” said Kent. “This is not just a one-off scandal affecting one brand that can fade into the background.”Additional Resources:How Loro Piana Was Linked to Labour Exploitation | BoF If You Can’t Trust Loro Piana, Who Can You Trust? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In nearly two decades since the first “Real Housewives” franchise debuted, reality TV has moved from the fringes of entertainment to become a major cultural force. Today, “Housewives” stars are influencing fashion trends, driving sales, and making inroads into luxury circles that once ignored them. Brands previously wary of the stigma around reality TV are now leveraging the passionate and loyal fanbase of the franchise, positioning these women as both influencers and aspirational figures.Senior news and features editor Diana Pearl joins The Debrief to explore this evolution, uncovering how and why fashion has finally learned to love “The Real Housewives.”Key Insights: Reality TV's path from lowbrow entertainment to cultural staple can partly be credited to the Kardashians, whose acceptance by fashion opened the door for shows like “Real Housewives”. “The Kardashians, for a long time, were not embraced by the fashion industry, and then in the 2010s that started to change,” says Pearl. Even when the fashion industry hesitated publicly, its insiders were already hooked privately. “People started watching the shows themselves… That guilty pleasure has just sort of come out of the shadows,” Pearl explains. Fashion has become integral to the storytelling on “Real Housewives.” What started as subtle displays of wealth, such as Chanel bags or accessories, has evolved into head-to-toe designer ensembles and full-blown fashion storylines. “They’re all decked out in designer looks and it’s like the designers play a role in the show. There’s plot points around, ‘This dress costs this much money,’ or ‘Did you buy that diamond necklace?’” Pearl says. “People are more into the Housewives’ clothes now. It’s just become much more a part of the fabric of the show.”The demographics of the “Housewives” audience significantly overlap with those targeted by fashion brands. The fanbase, consisting largely of women and gay men, is aspirational, engaged and passionate about style. “People of all stripes like reality TV. Lots of luxury customers watch reality TV,” says Pearl. “If you want to connect with consumers, you have to meet them where they are.”Despite increased acceptance, luxury brands remain cautious about fully embracing “Housewives,” partly due to cultural and geographic divides. “The Real Housewives is a very American show. A lot of the luxury industry is in Europe,” Pearl notes. Yet, she adds, embracing these stars can pay off: “When we've seen brands embrace the Housewives, I think the fans reward them for that.”Additional Resources:How Fashion Learned to Love The Real Housewives | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

After years of disillusionment with fashion tech, investors are once again excited about its potential, but with a very different mindset to the hype-fuelled boom of the last decade.From AI-powered personal styling apps to virtual try-on tools and personalised search engines, a wave of start-ups is gaining traction – and big backing – by offering real technological solutions to long-standing fashion industry problems.In this episode, senior e-commerce correspondent Malique Morris joins The Debrief to explore how fashion tech is finally growing up, and which companies are leading this more grounded, results-driven wave of innovation.Key Insights: In the previous fashion tech boom, investors were heavily investing in e-commerce startups with little true innovation. “DTC brands … positioned themselves as tech companies because they sold goods online, but there was nothing really revolutionary about them listing products on a website. And I don't know how investors didn't cop to that,” says Morris. Today’s backers are more discerning, favouring startups with clear technical roadmaps and founders who can evolve their product in meaningful ways.Investor interest in fashion tech reignited thanks to the rise of generative AI. As Morris explains, venture capital had been sitting on the sidelines during a broader funding freeze, but AI’s real-world applications reignited excitement. “Startups like Daydream are building a platform for personalised search using AI tools from companies like OpenAI and Google, and they want to be the ChatGPT for fashion and be disruptive in the way that ChatGPT has changed how we use the internet,” says Morris. “What was once a dream is now closer to being tangible and investors want to be the first ones in on that.”Today’s investors are looking beyond flashy pitches and prioritising founders with real technical know-how. “Something that is really separating the people who are just trying to raise money and not breaking through from those who are, are having some sort of technical experience, technical expertise,” says Morris. With the complexity of AI and other advanced tools, investors want to back teams that can build efficiently and with minimal lift. “They want to back founders who know what they're doing,” he adds.While new fashion tech apps offer highly personalised experiences, their complexity may limit mainstream appeal. The question of scale is still unanswered: “There may be a billion people out there who want to do that… There may only be a million. We don't know that just yet.”Additional Resources:How Investors Fell Back in Love With Fashion Tech | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As major luxury brands struggle to maintain momentum amid an industry-wide slowdown, one category is bucking the trend: jewellery. While demand for handbags and apparel softens, fine jewellery sales continue to rise, driven by consumer desire for lasting value, emotional resonance and self-expression.Simone Stern Carbone and Joan Kennedy join The Debrief to discuss how independent jewellers are thriving with creativity and personality, the rising popularity of novelty pieces, and why jewellery is uniquely positioned to attract buyers in today's luxury market.Key Insights: Despite slowing luxury sales, jewellery sales have continued to boom. As Stern Carbone notes, consumers perceive luxury jewellery as an inherently safer investment. She says, “Instinctively, a lot of people associate jewellery – especially if it's got gold, gemstones or diamonds – with something you would dish out more money for more readily than for a handbag potentially made out of nylon.”While big jewellery brands are growing, smaller competitors are booming as they foster deep customer relationships and maintain flexible, manageable supply chains. Stern-Carbone highlights, “Jewellery is so personal. When you have a very distinct aesthetic, you really connect with your customers long term, potentially for life. This is a really personal relationship that smaller brands can capitalise on.”Kennedy emphasises that modern jewellery marketing resonates by being accessible and relatable. “One designer I spoke to puts her charm necklaces next to candy necklaces, so that feels fun,” she says. “A lot of these designers are doing things that are very lo-fi. It’s like a picture of a wrist on Instagram. And then they reply to DMs, like, ‘Hey, show me that bracelet with something else.’ So the way that they present it is also really relevant to shoppers, versus the very high-gloss and traditional style of high jewellery.”Novelty jewellery began gaining popularity post-Covid. “People were buying camp jewellery, but they were paying $50 for a funky, colourful ring. And then more recently, people are like, okay, let’s bring in the value piece of this,” says Kennedy. Novelty jewellery has surged as consumers seek personal expression in response to uniform dressing and quiet luxury trends. Kennedy continues, “You're leaning into things that are uniform dressing, so how do we spice that up? Let's go for more novelty in jewellery.”Additional Resources:Why Jewellery Feels Like a Better Deal Than a Handbag | BoF Who Would Pay $20,000 For a Hamburger Ring? | BoFHow Small Jewellery Brands Are Seizing The Moment | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Earlier this month, cities across the US saw the most significant wave of demonstrations since the 2020 protests following George Floyd's murder. These latest protests have been sparked by immigration raids conducted by the Trump administration, and while some of those enforcement actions have targeted garment workers, the fashion industry has mostly stayed silent. Executive editor Brian Baskin, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young, and retail editor Cat Chen explore the reasons behind the industry's cautious stance, whether fashion can find a new way to engage with politics, and practical steps brands can take to support vulnerable workers.Key Insights: During the Black Lives Matter movement, fashion brands were quick to voice support. Today, in the face of immigration raids affecting garment workers, many brands are noticeably quiet as companies now worry that taking a stance on divisive political issues could trigger backlash. “There's a lot of anxiety and discomfort and frustration behind the scenes, but there is also this other piece of the pie, which is fear of retaliation from the Trump administration,” says Chen. Despite the fear of retribution, Butler-Young also notes how the lack of response is being interpreted outside of the industry: “I think that people see the industry as acting cowardly as an industry that does rely on immigrant labor, legal and otherwise.” Fashion isn’t providing much concrete support behind the scenes, either. “I think another huge issue is that people are feeling really helpless in the sector. There aren't any resources,” says Chen. “We're not seeing trade organisations emerge and come up with guidelines for what employers can do in case of a raid.” She adds, “You have these executives who are operating very blindly.”Brands that lean too heavily on public declarations of diversity and inclusion without backing them up are losing credibility with values-driven shoppers. As Butler-Young explains, “The liberal consumer is just a little bit over hearing companies say something and then not do it.” Instead of splashing their values across LinkedIn or homepage banners, she notes that “some of the brands that are doing a good job by doing the work internally first and then talking about it.” The focus should also shift from performative allyship to practical, on-the-ground support—ensuring that businesses are equipped to respond meaningfully when their workers are directly impacted by policies like immigration raids. As Chen points out, “The most vulnerable people right now don't need big brands to post something on social media or grand political gestures. What they need is a solution to the problem. What they need is for their employers to be prepared.” Additional Resources:Garment Workers Are at Risk. Fashion Can’t Afford to Look Away.Five Years After George Floyd: Can Fashion Still Stand for Something?  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Nike has been synonymous with sports for decades, but that cultural and commercial cachet has mostly been driven by male athletes like Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods (Serena Williams being a prominent exception). As a result, despite substantial sales, Nike historically struggled to resonate authentically with women, and has at times faced pointed criticism from female athletes, employees and consumers. That appears to be changing. Nike’s “So Win” campaign, which launched with the brand’s first Super Bowl ad in decades, centres entirely on female athletes. A’ja Wilson’s sneaker release was a smash, and a new brand with Kim Kardashian’s Skims will be out soon. The head of Nike Women’s now leads the entire Nike brand. Key Insights: Nike’s current momentum comes after past attempts to boost its women’s business, including a failed 2005 campaign involving catalogs and dedicated stores. Defections by prominent female athletes to rivals, and media investigations into gender equity issues prompted Nike to rethink its approach starting about five years ago. Sheena explains, "They started a think tank with women athletes and women consumers, and what they heard was that women wanted more from the company. This marked the beginning of initiatives driven by women's opinions and taking more women into leadership roles to guide efforts that would genuinely resonate with women."  Featuring her first signature shoe, the Nike A'One, WNBA star A’ja Wilson’s campaign was the latest and biggest in a string of successful marketing and product initiatives targeting women, including maternity lines, leak-proof activewear, and technical collaborations like supporting Kenyan runner Faith Kipyegon’s quest to break the four-minute mile. Sheena emphasises, "Nike’s investing end-to-end. They're not just investing in her wearing the logo at a race someday—they're actually supporting her personal goals."The recent appointment of Amy Montagne as Nike’s first female brand president symbolises substantial internal change. Sheena highlights, "Having a woman lead as Nike brand president is another way to activate that lever and get after women's." But consistency remains crucial for lasting success. Sheena stresses, “They've taken their swing before, but it's like the follow-through that counts. Consistency will be the most important thing. If they don’t keep doing all the right things, it could easily shift back.”Additional Resources:Why Women’s Basketball Stars Are Finally Getting Big Sneaker Deals | BoF Nike Forms New Team for Secretive Brand With Kim Kardashian | BoF Is Nike Finally Winning With Women? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Bieber, a celebrity and influential beauty figure with a strong Gen-Z following, launched Rhode just three years ago, quickly distinguishing the brand with minimalist product offerings closely tied to Bieber's personal aesthetic. She just sold to E.l.f. Beauty for $1 billion, even as rival celebrity beauty brands struggle to grow sales or attract buyers. Priya Rao, executive editor at The Business of Beauty at BoF, joins the Business of Fashion's Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young to discuss how Rhode distinguished itself in a crowded celebrity beauty landscape, why E.l.f. Beauty saw strategic value in the acquisition, and what this landmark deal signals about the evolving beauty industry.Key Insights: Rhode’s clean, minimal brand aesthetic also mirrors e.l.f.’s broader mission, albeit at a different price point. "There’s something about Rhode’s branding that really makes sense with what E.l.f. already does. They both want to be accessible but aspirational," Rao notes. Like Rhode, "E.l.f. has always had a really good sense of what young people want," says Rao.The success of Rhode demonstrates that differentiated, clearly communicated value propositions continue to resonate strongly in the beauty market. "From the consumer side, this just shows that the right brand can find the right price at any time, as long as you're able to point and show you offer something different," explains Rao.Rao highlights how rare it is for a celebrity beauty brand to resonate beyond hype. "Most celebrity beauty brands are not succeeding at this level," she says. Rhode’s limited and focused product assortment have also contributed to its success. "She's not launching everything under the sun," says Rao. "She’s focusing on what she knows and what her audience connects with, and that’s why it’s working."The acquisition isn't just about short-term gain – E.l.f. sees lasting value. "This isn't a flash in the pan for them," says Rao. "They’re betting on Rhode being a long-term growth engine, not just a trendy pick-up."Additional Resources:E.l.f. Beauty Acquires Hailey Bieber’s Rhode Skin for $1 Billion | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The beauty sector historically thrived during economic downturns, earning a recession-proof reputation encapsulated in the “lipstick index.” However, recent earnings from major beauty conglomerates like Estée Lauder, L'Oréal, Coty and Shiseido indicate that beauty’s resilience is being tested. Sales are declining, layoffs are coming and consumer habits appear to be shifting dramatically. BoF Senior Beauty Correspondent Daniela Morosini joins Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young on The Debrief to examine what's driving this slowdown and how the industry is adapting.Key Insights: Traditionally, small luxury purchases like beauty products thrived during economic pressure. But the landscape has changed. “Prices have really, really grown, and there's just so much more to choose from,” says Morosini. The combination of escalating prices, excessive market saturation, and a shift to online platforms like Amazon and TikTok has diluted the impact of small luxury indulgences. "It's really hard to get seen. So even if you have a more affordable product that more people can afford, you still have to get people to come and look at you and come and interact with you," she adds.Brands once benefited from consistent replenishment and customer loyalty. Today, consumers are more transient, constantly seeking newness. “Customers seem to have this insatiable appetite for more products and more newness,” Morosini notes.  But after years of heavy consumption, shoppers are starting to tire of new for the sake of new. “Something that’s really starting to come into focus is that, specifically, American middle-class shoppers are starting to buy fewer beauty products – and that’s having a big knock-on effect.”As consumers become more price-sensitive, brands need to redefine value beyond just pricing. Morosini suggests brands return to basics, emphasising their core strengths and fostering loyalty through consistent, quality products rather than frequent launches. "People are really, really attuned to perceptions of value," says Morosini.Additional Resources:The Beauty Slowdown, Explained | BoFThe End of the Lipstick Index | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

As inflation bites and politics polarise, the fashion industry in 2025 is facing unprecedented pressure to hold onto its customers. Brands are looking to community as a deeper and more emotional form of engagement. But building true community takes more than buzzwords. In this episode, BoF correspondent Lei Takanashi joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack his case study on what it really means to cultivate community in fashion and how brands are navigating the pitfalls.Key Insights: In a time when consumers are thinking hard about every purchase, community offers a sense of connection and meaning that goes beyond the product itself. "When I'm shopping today, I'm thinking more about what eggs I'm going to buy this week than the latest release from a brand," says Takanashi. "What really now drives me to make a purchase is like, what does this brand represent? What are its values? How has it improved my life beyond just something I wear?"Different communities serve different purposes, each demanding a unique approach. Takanashi outlines three community types: activity-based, personality-driven and values-driven. Activity-based communities are rooted in shared interests or habits, such as running, where engagement happens naturally through events or clubs. Personality-driven communities hinge on a founder’s charisma and relatability: "People have to see that founder story and kind of see themselves in their shoes." Values-driven communities connect through shared beliefs and causes, but those values must be dynamic. “Your definition of a value can’t be rigid,” says Takanashi. “You have to adapt to how consumers perceive these things.”As brands grow, scaling community takes local focus to remain authentic. "As long as you stay committed to a localized approach and understand that it’s not one size fits all," Takanashi says, pointing to Arc'teryx and Supreme as examples of brands that scale through local relevance and hiring. In addition to staying local, real-world interaction matters and brands shouldn’t rely solely on digital engagement. “You should really be there in person at pop-ups, shake hands with people, talk to the customer... Every brand I spoke about in this case study made some effort to show up in real life."Additional Resources:Case Study | How Brands Build Genuine Communities | BoFWhat Makes a True Community Brand? | BoFHow Brands Make Community More Than a Buzzword | BoF Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

On May 12, the US and China reached a deal to temporarily reduce tariffs for 90 days, offering a breather from an escalating trade war. Stocks surged on the news, but experts warn this relief might not fully resolve deeper industry uncertainties or consumer anxieties. BoF retail editor Cathleen Chen and technology correspondent Marc Bain join hosts Brian Baskin and Sheena Butler-Young to unpack the ramifications of the tariff pause and what the fashion industry can expect moving forward.Key Insights: Tariffs have reduced, but costs still remain high. The Trump administration’s initial 145 percent tariff effectively banned imports from China, a situation now alleviated but not fully resolved. "Lowering that to 30% is a different situation," Bain explains. "It's saying, go ahead, import your stuff, but it's gonna still be expensive."The tariff pause offers temporary clarity, but major production hubs like Vietnam and Cambodia face continuing uncertainty. "Depending on what happens with those negotiations, the whole landscape could shift," Bain notes, as retailers remain cautious about long-term production decisions.Tariffs are not the industry's only concern as consumer sentiment will significantly shape demand. "Beyond what's going to happen with tariffs with dozens of countries, there's also the issue of consumer confidence and sentiment and whether there will be demand to drive sales for the products that do end up in the U.S.," Chen highlights, questioning the robustness of future sales.Despite an easing in the tariff rate for small shipments from platforms like Shein and Temu, the overall uncertainty around the future of the “de minimis” loophole might dampen consumer enthusiasm. "All the news about Shein and Temu has been enough to just keep that customer away," Chen suggests. "I feel like there might be this attitude of, we had a good run of really cheap stuff for a couple of years and maybe you've had enough of it now."Brands should focus on diversifying their supply chains and strengthening industry partnerships. Bain advises brands to "have some redundancy built in. So if one location becomes untenable, you can shift to another spot." Meanwhile, Chen emphasises the importance of collaboration: "Now is a really great time to forge stronger ties to your suppliers, your vendors, even your retail partners," ensuring shared responsibility and minimised impact on consumers.Additional Resources:With the Trade War on Pause, Here’s What’s Next for Fashion | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

A strange new genre of TikTok videos is challenging long-held assumptions about how luxury products are made. Often shot in anonymous Chinese factories, these videos claim that the so-called "superfakes" flooding the market are indistinguishable from, and sometimes made in the same factories as, high-end bags from the likes of Chanel or Louis Vuitton. While all evidence points to these claims being false, the repetition of these videos has amplified a growing narrative: that luxury pricing is inflated, quality is slipping and production secrets are being exposed. Fuelled further by the U.S.-China tariff dispute and the allure of buying a $10,000 bag for $300, this narrative is resonating with a social media audience increasingly disillusioned with luxury’s mystique. In this episode, BoF's chief sustainability correspondent Sarah Kent joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to break down what’s really happening behind the scenes – and why silence might not be a viable strategy for brands much longer.Key Insights: TikTok's "superfake" narrative may be fiction, but it's feeding real consumer doubt. While only a few viral TikTok videos explicitly claim to produce fakes in the same factories as luxury goods, that idea has travelled widely and taken root. "It is supremely unlikely that any factory that had a real relationship with any luxury brand would go on TikTok to market superfakes," Kent notes. Yet the repetition of these claims underscores luxury's ongoing transparency issue. In the absence of accessible facts, falsehoods thrive.Today’s best craftsmanship isn’t always in Europe as high-quality manufacturing has shifted globally. “For instance, if you were making performance footwear or sneakers in particular, China, Cambodia, and Vietnam are probably the best factories you can find in the world to do that,” Kent explains. “If you want to make a luxury product of that quality, you probably don’t want to make that in France or Italy."  The fake bag narrative is irresistible but damaging to luxury. Even those who know the claims are likely untrue find them hard to shake. "It's a delicious narrative," Kent says. One that plays into an existing story of overpricing, declining quality, and aloofness in luxury. Brands have long relied on mythology and mystique. But as Kent notes, that strategy is less effective in a social media age, where misinformation travels fast and reputations can erode overnight. Consumers are questioning whether luxury is worth the price and Kent says consumer doubt "isn’t going away". Luxury brands need to explain more clearly why their products carry such high price tags to slow this erosion of trust that has accelerated since the pandemic, as prices rose and quality concerns mounted. "If brands aren't giving compelling information that explains where their stuff is made and why it’s valued in this manner then those questions aren't going to fade," Kent warns.Additional Resources:Luxury Has a Fake News Problem. Is Silence the Right Strategy? | BoF  Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The Costume Institute's 2025 exhibition, "Superfine: Tailoring Black Style," celebrated its opening at the annual Met Gala, marking the first menswear-focused exhibit in two decades and the first ever centred exclusively on Black fashion. Inspired by Monica L. Miller's seminal work on Black dandyism, the exhibition took a scholarly approach to exploring the historical and cultural significance of Black tailoring. The gala’s official dress code, "Tailored for You," provided a broader and more personal prompt, encouraging guests to interpret tailoring through their own unique perspectives. DTC correspondent Malique Morris and joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and executive editor Brian Baskin to reflect on the night’s boldest looks, the broader discussion on representation and inclusion at the event, and how the prestigious gala could evolve to better support diverse talent.Key Insights: The Costume Institute's 2025 exhibition emphasised fashion as a powerful tool used by Black communities to assert dignity and counteract societal prejudice. Organised into 12 sections, each exploring a different aspect of Black dandyism, it thoughtfully included historically significant garments, like abolitionist Frederick Douglass's tailcoat, underscoring the profound role that meticulously tailored attire has played in activism and representation. "It showed how our activism, while not reduced to an aesthetic, is indeed linked to how we wear beautifully cut clothing,” explains Morris.Natural hair was heavily featured in this year’s gala looks. "Black people's natural hair has always been up for debate, especially when it's of tightly coiled texture. Doechii said so much by wearing that beautiful crown on fashion's biggest night,” says Morris. “Redefining, but also defining what is so natural to us is absolutely stunning and worthy of praise at the utmost event like the Met Gala.”The presence of influencers at culturally prestigious events like the Met Gala remains contentious. Morris questioned the necessity of influencer inclusion, advocating instead for prominence to be given to figures whose cultural impact is undeniable and long-lasting. "The people who were actually shifting culture in a really meaningful way, who have stood the test of time and are icons, it makes a lot of sense for them to take up so much oxygen,” he says. “With this Met specifically, when we're talking about the designers and them having more of a buy-in and them having more of a presence, we're moving in the right direction.”Meaningful progression for the Met Gala, and similar institutions, involves sustained and systemic representation rather than temporary or symbolic inclusion. Morris advocates for lasting change, suggesting a shift towards consistent visibility for independent designers from diverse backgrounds. "I want indie brands having an outsized presence at the Met Gala to be endemic," says Morris. “I think that will be the progress.”  Additional Resources:Black Beauty Excellence Was the Star of the Met Gala At the Met Gala, Dandies Owned the Night  Rethinking Luxury’s Relationship With Black Consumers Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.