奢华大重置内幕

大家好，我是《时尚商业》的创始人兼首席执行官伊姆兰·艾哈迈德。欢迎收听BOF播客。今天是5月23日星期五。本周我们带来了一些特别内容。

Hi. This is Imran Ahmed, founder and CEO of the Business of Fashion. Welcome to the BOF Podcast. It's Friday, May 23. This week, we have something a little different.

这次我没有像往常一样担任主持人，而是有幸作为嘉宾接受了《System》杂志主编乔纳森·温菲尔德的采访，与伯恩斯坦公司高级研究分析师卢卡·索尔卡一同亮相本周首发的《System Collections》创刊号。我们共同探讨了重大变革如何影响全球奢侈品市场、人们对高价格和批量生产日益增长的厌倦，以及为何商业与创意领导层之间的战略协调比以往任何时候都更为关键。

Instead of my usual place in the host seat, I had the pleasure of being a guest for an interview with Jonathan Wingfield, editor in chief of System Magazine, alongside Luca Solca, senior research analyst at Bernstein, as featured in the debut issue of System Collections out earlier this week. Together, we explore how major shifts are impacting the global luxury market, the growing fatigue with high prices and mass production, and why creativity, innovation, and strategic alignment between business and creative leadership are more crucial than ever.

这些公司由人类运营，如果不给人们改变的激励，他们就会...你知道，如果你看到自己赚的钱和预期一样多，业务一如既往地好，那么你可能不会做出太大改变。我认为适应更常态化的环境正在引发许多深刻反思，让这些公司重新回到正轨。

These companies are run by human beings, and if you don't give people incentives to change, they will go you know, if if you if you see that you're making as much money as you like and, the business is as good as it ever was, then you probably will not change very much. I think that adjusting to a more normal environment is causing a lot of soul searching and is getting these companies back in line.

品牌表现最佳的时候，往往是创意领导层与商业领导层完美协调的时候。最近我们看到钟摆已经摆向另一个方向——实际上时尚的创意层面已沦为商业层面的下游。需要说明的是，我们的对话录制于3月14日，大约在唐纳德·特朗普突然宣布对包括中国在内的多国实施所谓'对等关税'的两周前。为了探究奢侈品牌如何应对经济逆风、消费者价值观转变以及创意革新的迫切需求，下面是我与卢卡·索尔卡和乔纳森·温菲尔德在BOF播客中的对话。

Where brands work best is where there is that impeccable alignment between the creative leadership and the business leadership. I think what we've seen recently is that the pendulum has swung the other direction and that actually the creative side of fashion has become downstream the business side. Just a note, our conversation was recorded on March 14, about two weeks before Donald Trump's shock announcement of so called reciprocal tariffs on countries around the world, most notably China. To examine how luxury fashion is navigating economic headwinds, shifting consumer values, and the urgent need for creative renewal, here's my conversation with Luca Solca and Jonathan Wingfield on the BOF Podcast.

我们直接开始吧。卢卡、伊姆兰，再次感谢你们抽空参与。距离我们上次对话还不到两年，是在2023年。当我思考今天要讨论的内容时，突然想起上次交谈时，伯纳德·阿尔诺还是官方认定的世界首富。

Let's kick off straight away. So Luca, Imran, thanks so much again, committing your time again to this. We're not two years on from the last time that we spoke, a little bit less, was in the 2023. And it struck me when I was thinking about what we're going to talk about today. The last time we spoke together, Bernard Arnaud was officially the wealthiest individual on the planet.

当时中国奢侈品消费正处于历史巅峰，美国市场也显得相对温和。我的开场问题是：过去两年中，哪些具体的全球事件和经济因素对时尚产业产生了最剧烈的影响？卢卡，从你开始。

Chinese consumption of luxury fashion was booming, probably at an all time high. And America felt like a relatively benign presence. My question to start with is which specific factors in the past two years world events global economy are having the most acute impact on the fashion industry right now? Luka, let's start with you.

我认为最关键的因素是中国房地产市场的下跌。这严重打击了中国消费者信心，使他们始终处于守势——所有人都感觉自己变穷了。他们开始大量储蓄且持续至今，不再像过去那样热衷非必要消费，也完全不像欧美民众在后疫情时期展现出的那种'享受生活'的消费动力。这绝对是目前最重要的影响因素。

I think that one of the most important factors has been the fall of the real estate market in China. This has caused a huge dent in Chinese consumer confidence and has kept Chinese consumers on the back foot as they all felt poorer. They saved a lot of money and they're still saving and not committing to discretionary spend as enthusiastically as they've done in the past and definitely not showing the same drive to enjoy life that people in Europe or in The US have shown getting out of the pandemic. I think that this has been by far the most important factor.

你认为中国房地产崩盘是必然结果吗？还是说它的突发性让连带影响也显得意外？

Did you sense there was an inevitability to the housing crash in China or did it come somewhat unexpectedly and therefore the knock on repercussions are as unexpected?

考虑到房价承受力早已不堪重负，某种程度上崩盘是意料之中——警示信号早已显现，市场终需调整。我们在西班牙等小国和日本等大国都见过类似危机。我认为矛盾迟早会爆发，现在只是应验了。虽不意外，但奢侈品牌仍需艰难适应。他们尝试了多种应对方案，比如更精准地锚定富裕消费者。

I think that the affordability was very stretched, so it was a surprise to a point that this was, that the writing was on the wall, that at one point the market would have to correct. We've seen crisis like those in other countries as well, in smaller countries like Spain, in bigger countries like Japan. I believe that at one point pushing was going to come to shove and so it did. So not a big surprise, but clearly a major factor for the luxury goods brands to get adjusted to nevertheless. They tried I think several ways to address this issue by for example becoming far more relevant to rich consumers.

过去五年这个消费群体显著壮大。通过重点开发长期被当作第二优先级的美国市场，目前策略已取得显著成效——尽管2024年的行业增长更像是为前几年的高速增长'赎罪'。

Think that in the past five years there's been a significant development of this consumer cohort and by focusing on The US as, let's say, a growth market that was kept on the back burner and as a second priority for a long time, this seems to be working to a large extent, albeit with the 2024 industry growth being a bit of an atonement from what growth was produced in the recent past few years.

伊姆兰，你怎么看？对此你有什么具体想补充的吗？我接下来的问题是，关于这些市场数据背后的叙事，特别是在中国，你能告诉我们些什么？情况是否像头条新闻暗示的那样充满不确定性？

What about you Imran? What's your sort of take on that? Is there anything specific you want to add? My next question was, what can you tell us about the narratives behind these market figures, particularly in China? And are things as uncertain as the headlines suggest?

显然，你在BOF的角色正是解读市场并向行业传递真实的叙事和信息。那么你对这一切有何见解？

And obviously, you know, your role with BOF is really about deciphering markets and actually sharing genuine narratives and information with the industry. So what's your take on it all?

关于中国现象，我想在卢卡所说的基础上补充一点：这里很大一部分问题在于，中国约80%的财富与房地产相关。因此，当中国出现房地产崩盘或调整时——想象一下如果我们中任何人80%的净资产都锁定在房产上，而突然看到房产价值急剧下跌——这会严重影响我们的整体信心。这种状况对中国消费者的影响程度非常耐人寻味。与此同时，正如卢卡提到的，这些中国消费者仍在储蓄。

Well, on the China phenomenon, the one thing I would add to what Luca said is that a big part of the issue here is that something like 80% of the wealth in China is associated with real estate. So, when you have a real estate crash or correction like we've seen in China, imagine if any of us had 80% of our net wealth locked up in our property, and all of a sudden we started to see the value of that property drop pretty precipitously. That would impact our overall sense of confidence. And so the degree to which this has impacted the Chinese customer is really interesting. Alongside that, as Luca alluded to, these Chinese customers are still saving money.

由于他们对房地产投资组合的价值缺乏信心，消费意愿就降低了。所以我们看到储蓄率在上升，这意味着未来某个时点可能有机会释放这部分价值。卢卡，你似乎对此还有补充？

So because they don't have confidence in the value of their real estate portfolio, they're not spending as much money. And so what's happening is we're seeing kind of the savings rate grow, which means at some point there may be an opportunity down the road to unlock some of that value. And I don't know, Luca, it seems like you might have something to add to that.

不，完全同意。我认为关键在于，当中国消费者消化了房产新价值后——特别是如果房价能企稳——他们存在银行的大量资金就可以释放出来消费。

No. No. Absolutely. I'm totally on the same page. I I I think, you know, the only thing is at at one point when Chinese consumers digest the new value of their property and if, especially property prices were to find, support, there's a lot of money that they have kept on the sides and, that they can go out and spend.

所以我绝不会从中期视角看衰中国消费者群体，只是复苏可能会呈U型曲线。

So I wouldn't definitely write off the Chinese consumer cohort with a medium term view, except probably this recovery is going to be u shaped.

是的。另一个问题是：他们恢复消费后会买什么？这引出了我要对约翰尼说的下个观点——全球奢侈品行业在疫情期间经历了疯狂消费（当时除了奢侈品别无选择）后，我们看到美国、欧洲等地的消费者开始将奢侈品支出转向旅游、餐饮、健康等体验型消费。我认为这才是行业必须应对的长期趋势，因为疫情后那段疯狂消费期只是异常现象。

Yeah. I guess the other thing is it's like they're going to spend again, but what are they going to spend on? Which kind of brings me to my next point, Johnny, which is I think what we've seen in the industry around the world after what you might call the pandemic gorging of luxury goods when there were no options but to spend on luxury products. Customers in other parts of the world, in The United States, in Europe, elsewhere, they're kind of trading off their spending on luxury products with other things, whether that be travel or dining or health and wellness or other things that are more experiential in nature. And I think this is the longer term force that the industry has to grapple with because there has been, for a, you know, a short period of time after COVID when everyone was consuming like crazy, like, that was an aberration.

那只是短暂阶段。但许多奢侈品牌却将疫情期间的爆发式增长视为常态来规划业务，做出的决策如今反噬自身，最典型的就是涨价。当消费者面对曾经半价现在却要1万欧元的手袋时，这些品牌的价值主张就站不住脚了。如果再加上这些高价产品动辄数十万甚至百万的产量，差异化缺失会让人质疑：为什么要花大价钱买人人都有东西？正如卢卡所说，这迫使品牌聚焦于服务那2%-5%却贡献30%-40%营收的核心客群，试图提供差异化体验。

You know, that was a short period. And I think what happened is a lot of luxury brands began planning and operating their businesses as if that pandemic surge was going to continue, and they started making decisions that have come to bite them in the back, most notably the increase in prices. And so when customers are now making those trade offs and they're looking at a €10,000 bag that used to cost half of that, there's a real pressure that these brands are now facing because the value proposition just doesn't add up. If you combine that with the fact that those €10,000 products are made in the hundreds of thousands or sometimes millions of quantities, then also there's a lack of differentiation and people are wondering, why would I spend so much money on something that everybody else has? Which has put a lot of focus in these brands, as Luca is saying, to try to deliver something different, to entertain this particularly important cohort of, say, two to 5% of luxury customers that drive something like 30 to 40% of the revenues in the industry.

疫情后爆发期遗留的诸多问题，现在正成为行业必须面对的课题。

And so there's a lot of things that happened in that post pandemic surge that I think the industry is now having to reckon with.

你是否感觉到存在某种奢侈品疲劳？你提到消费可能转向体验型，但就奢侈品本身而言，是否会出现难以恢复昔日狂热的需求疲软？

I mean, do you sense there is any kind of feeling of luxury goods fatigue? I mean, obviously, you talked to him around about, you know, maybe towards a shift towards more experiential purchases. But in terms of actual luxury goods, could there be a sense of fatigue that would have crept in and that may not return certainly as voraciously as before?

我认为存在一种疲态。我甚至可以说，在某些情况下，这是对奢侈模式的拒绝，对一些消费者而言，这种模式已不再合理。而且，你知道，价格因素、批量生产的奢侈品，再加上围绕某些道德问题和供应链的质疑，以及一些品牌通过可能不太道德的制造实践获得的超高利润——其中部分问题在去年的意大利调查中曝光。我的意思是，这其中有很多因素在起作用。我认为在某些情况下，消费者会说，好吧，我不再买这个了。

I think there is fatigue. I would go so far as to call it, in some cases, a rejection of the luxury model, which for some customers just doesn't make sense anymore. And, you know, the combination of pricing, mass produced luxury goods, combined with that, the questions around some of the ethics and the supply chains, the extraordinary margins that some of these brands are earning on potentially less than ethical manufacturing practices, some of which came out in the Italian investigation last year. I mean, there's a lot of factors at play. And I think in some cases, customers are saying, well, I just don't I don't buy this anymore.

所以这不仅仅是疲态，它比疲态更深刻，更像是完全拒绝这种模式。

So it's it's further than fatigue, it's deeper than fatigue, it's more like a rejection of the model altogether.

我不确定我是否完全同意这一点。我认为奢侈品公司确实有很多功课要做。在疫情后的繁荣期，他们忙于赚钱，忙于满足需求，以至于试图通过提价来平衡供需。他们忘记了更新和升级他们的款式，让毛利率飙升。

Don't know that I would necessarily fully agree here. I think that for sure there's a lot of homework that luxury goods companies have to do. In the post COVID boom, they were so busy making money, they were so busy trying to satisfy demand, that they tried to increase prices in order to equalize supply and demand. They forgot to update and upgrade their styles. They let their gross margin explode.

所有这些肯定不能继续下去。我们已经看到最好的品牌在解决这些问题。看看路易威登的橱窗，你会发现那里展示的包现在都在2000到3000欧元之间，这是它们应有的价位。同时，我们看到创意总监的职位发生了大量的变动。人们想要新鲜的东西。

All of that definitely cannot go on. And we've seen the best brands already tackle these issues. Just look at the Vuitton windows and magically you see that the bags displayed there are all now between 2,000 and €3,000 which is where they should be. At the same time we've seen a huge amount of musical chairs when it comes to creative directors. People want new stuff.

如果他们需要支付这些价格，他们需要感到兴奋。他们需要有一种感觉，觉得自己还没有这些产品，还没有见过它们，并且渴望拥有它们。所以我认为这种创意总监的轮换游戏只会继续下去。我们看到许多创意总监被解雇，也有许多被任命。但我不确定我们是否应该将我们行业内部的深刻理解与更广泛的消费者对奢侈品的喜爱和接受相提并论。

If they need to pay these prices they need to be excited. They need to have a feeling that they don't already have those products, that they haven't seen them yet and that they desire them. So I think that this musical chair game will only continue. We saw a significant number of creative directors being excused and a significant number being appointed. But I'm not sure that we should necessarily draw a parallel between our own understanding at you know deep within the industry and having a lot of sophistication on what the industry model is and the broader consumer audience liking luxury goods products and embracing luxury goods products.

我受邀参加下周的一场辩论，讨论奢侈品危机是否是结构性的。我支持它是周期性的一个论点是，在摩洛哥索维拉的一个洞穴中发现的第一件奢侈品可以追溯到14万年前，那是一条贝壳项链。你知道，事情可能会改变，但人类对能提升外观、增强感知地位、确认身份认同的产品有一种根深蒂固的欣赏。我不认为这会消失。

I've been invited to a debate next week to discuss whether the luxury goods crisis is structural. One of the points I'm making in there in order to support the idea that it's cyclical is that the first luxury goods product that was found in a cave in Essaouira in Morocco dates back to 140,000 years ago and it was a shell necklace. You know, things could always change but there's a deep rooted appreciation of the mankind for products that enhance their appearance, enhance their perceived status, reassure their sense of identity. I don't know that that will ever go away.

我和卢卡一致认为，行业的新焦点必须放在创造力和创新上，而这在近年来严重缺乏。不仅很多地方的产品系列没有创新或更新，而且品牌与顾客互动和沟通奢侈品的方式也变得非常公式化。所以我对未来几个月的时尚界感到非常兴奋，我一直在想2026年春夏时装周，届时我们将看到许多品牌的新设计师首次亮相，无论是香奈儿的马蒂厄·布莱斯，还是迪奥可能的变动，吉尔·桑达的新设计师，范思哲的新设计师，古驰的新设计师。品牌们似乎都意识到，他们需要为这些品牌注入新的创意能量，让顾客再次兴奋起来。我不确定的是，当前的定价方式以及围绕道德的一些问题，行业在过去五到十年中的存在方式，是否也需要一些结构性变革。

Where Luca and I are aligned is that the industry's new focus has to be on creativity and innovation, and that's been sorely lacking in recent years. Not only has the range of products not been innovated or refreshed in a lot of places, but the formula around the way brands engage with customers and communicate about luxury has become very formulaic. And so one of the reasons I'm so excited about the coming months in fashion, I just keep thinking towards fashion week, spring summer twenty twenty six, when we're gonna have the debuts of so many new designers at so many brands, whether it's Matthieu Blaise at Chanel or possible changes at Dior, a new designer at Jill Sander, you know, new designer at Versace, a new designer at Gucci. Mean, what the brands seem to all be coming around to is the fact that they need to inject new creative energy into these houses to get customers excited again. What I'm not convinced of is that the current approach to pricing and some of the questions around ethics, some of the questions around the way the industry has tended to exist over the past five or ten years, whether that model doesn't need some structural change as well.

然后，你知道，这将非常有趣。我认为我们正进入一个非常、非常激动人心的时刻，一个有趣的转折点。所以我完全支持，并期待看到一切如何发展。对于像卢卡或我这样工作围绕分析一切发生的人来说，这将非常有趣。这确实是一个非常有趣的时期。

And then, you know, it's gonna be really interesting to see. I think we're entering a very, very exciting moment for our industry, an interesting inflection point. So I'm all for it, and I'm looking forward to see how it all develops. It's gonna be very interesting for anyone like Luca or myself whose job is built around analyzing everything that's happening. It's a very interesting times indeed.

但我也同意你的这一点。我认为价格确实需要调整。调整的一部分是在你销售的产品中投射更高的价值，可能是因为你使用了更好的材料，可能是因为你提供了更多的功能。例如，我看到Witona推出了一款可逆的Neverfool，给人一种买两个包的印象。但肯定的是，我认为还需要大量工作来推出新的企业产品，因为价格已经高得离谱，如果你要服务于地球上的人，它不能保持在那里。

But I agree with you on this point as well. I think that indeed pricing has to be corrected. And part of the correction is to project a higher value in the products you sell, maybe because you use better materials, maybe because you give more functionality. I saw that, for example, Witona's launched a reversible Neverfool that gives people the impression that they're buying two bags. But for sure, I think that there's also a huge amount of work to introduce new enterprise products because the pricing has gone to heaven and it cannot stay there if you have to serve people living on earth.

我认为迪奥的新包是一个正确的方向。同时，我们看到珠宝的性价比变得非常有吸引力，因为珠宝的价格没有上涨那么多，现在看起来便宜很多。但我怀疑，奢侈品品牌是否会醒悟过来，调整乘数回到可以维持的水平。我认为8到12倍已经足够高了。我也同意伊姆兰的观点，在口头承诺工艺、道德和可持续性标准之后，上游制造整合方面还需要做更多工作。

And I think that the new bags at Dior are a step in the right direction. In the meantime, we've seen that value for money for jewelry has become very attractive because jewelry, as it didn't go up as much in pricing, seems a lot cheaper today. But I wonder if, you know, self luxury brands will not wake up and smell the coffee and adjust the multipliers back to where it's possible to keep them. I think eight to 12 times was rich enough. And I also agree with Imran that, you know, after giving a lot of lip service to craftsmanship and to ethical and sustainability standards, a lot more has to be done when it comes to upstream manufacturing integration.

若要让你的营销叙事成真，就必须采取更直接的行动。我认为这就是未来的趋势。

If you have to come true with your marketing narrative, then you need to be carrying out a lot more directly. And I think this is the shape of things to come.

除了品牌创意方向的转变，我知道要预判市场动向如同占卜水晶球。但你认为中国市场会持续当前这种严峻状态吗？品牌能承受这种反增长态势多久？它们无法维持以往盈利水平的情况还能持续多长时间？这是否需要它们在运营方式上做出重大转变？

Besides the creative direction shifts in the brands, I know it's impossible to look into a crystal ball and foresee what's happening in the markets. But do you think the Chinese market will continue to be in a similarly dire place that it is now? And how long can the brand sustain this sort of anti growth? How long can they not be carrying on making the sort of levels of money they were before? And does that require a significant shift in the way that they operate?

与其说是道德层面，不如说是运营层面的问题。说实话我很惊讶，似乎很少有人预见到这种情况——正如你所说卢卡，他们只顾着趁势牟利，根本没意识到这些变化。但说他们只是赚钱太开心而忽视危机，是否过于简单化了？

Not so much from an ethical perspective, but actually from an operational perspective. I mean, I was obviously amazed that it seems that so few actually saw this coming and that they, as you say, Luca, they were sort of so busy making hay while the sun shines, they weren't really aware of these things happening. But was it as simplistic as that to say that they were just so happy making money that they didn't sort of foresee these things happening?

要知道这些公司都是由人经营的。如果不给人们改变的动机，他们就会...如果你看到自己在赚取满意的利润，业务一如既往地好，你很可能不会做出改变。我认为适应更常态的环境正在引发深刻反思，让这些公司重回正轨。这完全合理——我完全同意伊姆兰的观点，后疫情时期的繁荣还源于我们都庆幸劫后余生，想要享受生活，消费不再受限。及时行乐吧。

You know, these companies are run by human beings. And if you don't give people incentives to change, they will go you know, if if you if you see that you're making as much money as you like and, the business is as good as it ever was, then you probably will not change very much. I think that adjusting to a more normal environment is causing a lot of soul searching and is getting these companies back in line. I think that this was absolutely appropriate and it's I couldn't agree more with Imran that the post pandemic boom, which was also dictated by the fact that we were all very happy to have survived and we wanted to enjoy life and spending money was no longer a problem. Let's enjoy while it lasts.

没人想当坟墓里的首富。这种亢奋情绪正在消退，人们开始回归常态。不再担心明天就会死去，因此恢复了更正常的 discretionary消费意愿——这需要奢侈品行业乃至其他行业付出更多努力来说服人们掏钱。比如我注意到，纽约有不少人发起'餐厅罢工'，因为菜价飞涨但品质却未同步提升。

Nobody wanted to be the richest man in the graveyard. I think that this euphoria has been dying down and now people are getting back into the swing of things. They're no longer fearing that they will die tomorrow and, as a consequence, they went back to a more normal discretionary spend willingness, which requires a lot more work from companies in the luxury goods industry, but in other industries as well. Let's be clear, to convince people to part with their money. I see that, for example, I think I was reading in New York, a number of people have decided to go on restaurant strike because prices at restaurants had gone up so much and the quality didn't go hand in hand with that.

所以之前存在某种普遍存在的过度兴奋，现在需要收敛，让人们重回现实。

So there there was a bit of a widespread overexcitement that has to be, reigned in and people need to go back, to planet earth.

约翰尼，从运营角度看，这种现象意味着我们现在讨论的是一个争夺市场份额的战场。品牌不能再指望行业整体增长带动发展——如今潮水静止，要想增长就必须另辟蹊径，从现有竞争者手中夺取份额。确实有些品牌在平静水域中保持稳定增长，甚至呈现爆发态势。

I think operationally, what that phenomenon means, Johnny, is that we're talking about a game or an industry now where people are fighting for market share. They just can't ride the wave of widespread industry growth where the rising tide raises all the boats. The tide is very still at the moment, which means in order to grow, you need to be doing something different. You need to be finding an opportunity to take market share away from existing players. And there's certainly some examples of brands who, despite the still waters, are growing steadily and, in some cases, astronomically.

看看爱马仕、Loro Piana、Brunello Cucinelli这些品牌的稳健增长，它们提供的产品仍能引发消费者共鸣。还有像缪缪这样的品牌——在整个行业增长极其缓慢的情况下，年增长率竟达90%。这种增速即使在增长型市场也令人惊叹。这说明消费者仍会因特定原因被某些品牌吸引。去年底我与一位奢侈品百货高管交流，询问他关于'安静奢华'现象是否会持续。

You know, just take the steady growth of Hermes, Loro Piana, Brunello Cucinelli, whose brands are offering something that cut that still resonate with customers. And also brands like Miu Miu, which despite the very, very slow growth of the overall sector, is, you know, growing at 90% per year. I mean, those kinds of growth figures would be even impressive in a growing market. And so when you see that happening, you know that customers are still drawn to certain kinds of brands for certain kinds of reasons. I was having a chat with a luxury department store executive late last year and asking him about the quiet luxury phenomenon and if that if that was going to continue.

他的分析很精辟：'伊姆兰，就男性市场而言，安静奢华仍在蓬勃发展。男性倾向于重复购买心仪单品，会买不同颜色和款式。'

And he said he broke things out quite nicely for me. He said, you know, listen, Imran. When it comes to the men's market, quiet luxury is still booming. You know, men tend to buy things in multiples so that when they find something they like, they'll buy it over and over again. They'll buy it in multiple different colors and, you know, styles.

但对女性而言，安静奢华风潮确实在衰退。极繁主义的回归和秀场上看到的表达欲说明，女性又开始追求与众不同、更有趣的东西——这正是我们之前谈到的创意创新将发挥作用的地方。所以有些品牌正在运营层面取得成功，但这是因为它们从竞争对手那里夺取了份额。

But for women, the quiet luxury phenomenon is really on the decline. And this return to maximalism and the kind of expressiveness that we've been seeing on some of the runways, You know, women are looking for something different, something more interesting again, and this is where all the creative innovation that we were speaking about earlier is going to come in. So there are brands that are operationally succeeding, but it's because they're winning share from their competitors.

更广泛地说，在整个行业中，作为一个大型奢侈时尚品牌，当公布业绩下滑高达20%时会发生什么？我的意思是，你们会挺过这场风暴吗？显然，伊曼提到过，其中一项策略是从竞争对手那里夺取市场份额。但从运营、物流和财务角度来看，你们是否感觉到品牌正在裁员？

And kind of more broadly across the industry with the brands, as a large scale luxury fashion brand, what happens when you're posting results which are up to 20% down? I mean, do you weather the storm? I mean, obviously, Iman, you said, you know, one of the things is to go and grab market share from your competitors. But operationally, from a logistics perspective and from a financial perspective, do you sense that brands are are they slashing workforces?

他们是否

Are they

关闭门店？他们是否被迫采取其他措施？

closing stores? Are there other things that they're being forced to do?

是的。有些品牌正在大幅缩减门店规模——卢卡可能比我更清楚。比如古驰在中国就正在收缩，有人告诉我他们计划关闭约50家中国门店。从品牌在非必需项目上的预算也能看出端倪。

Yes. I mean, there are brands out there, Luca will probably know better than me, that are cutting their store footprint significantly. I think Gucci is one of those brands in China that's paring back. Someone told me something like 50 stores in China are gonna be closed for Gucci. You can also see it in the budgets that brands are spending on discretionary things.

时装秀规模正在变小，一方面是为了营造亲密感，但更因为成本考量。过去几个月我们看到许多品牌将男女装发布会合并，因为他们突然意识到当初分开举办的战略决策并不正确，现在需要统一视角。这些现象很大程度上反映了行业正在寻求降本之道。

Fashion shows are getting smaller, yes, for intimacy, but also because it costs less to stage them. We saw a lot of brands in the past few months combine their men's and women's shows because they suddenly felt like their decision to separate the two brands was not the right strategic decision, and what they needed to do was combine them to have a unified perspective. I think a lot of what we're seeing is a reflection of trying to find ways to cut costs.

完全正确。必须考虑到这个行业的成本大部分是固定的，销售成本中的可变部分相对较小。当销售额下滑20%时，就必须削减固定成本——包括租金和人力架构。至于可自由支配的销售管理费用，同样需要压缩。

Totally, totally. You need to take into account that a lot of the costs in this industry are fixed. The cost of goods sold and the variable element is relatively small. So when sales decline as much as 20%, you really need to cut the fixed portion of your costs, which means rental costs, which means your own organization. And as far as the discretionary SG and A portion is concerned, you also need to tune that down.

正如伊姆兰指出的，我们看到许多大型活动转向小型化以控制成本。但以古驰为例，这种措施对利润的保障有限——经营利润率从接近40%跌至20%出头，这正体现了行业运营杠杆的反向作用。

We saw major events and I suspect this year we'll have a lot of intimacy, as Imran is pointing out to, as a way to try and bring those costs line back into order. But you also saw clearly, if you look at the likes of Gucci, for example, that this protected the bottom line to a point. You went from operating profit margins in the high thirties to operating profit margins in the low twenties, and that is, you know, unfortunately, the operating leverage of this industry kicking

除了中国市场遇冷，虽然为时尚早，但大洋彼岸的特朗普政府似乎正在疏远欧洲。关税威胁不绝于耳，实际影响尚未显现。你们是否认为这可能间接影响美国消费者购买欧洲奢侈品的心理？考虑到奢侈品很大程度上构建于欧洲梦之上，这会冲击欧洲品牌吗？

in reverse. Besides the calling off of the Chinese market, and I know it's still early days, but on the other side of the world, President Trump's American government seems to be sort of turning his back on the idea of Europe. We hear a lot of threats of tariffs and you know, the reality of that has yet to truly sort of made itself clear. But do you sense that maybe that will then have a knock on effect where it may permeate the psyche of the American consumer when it comes to buying European luxury fashion. Do you think that that may hit the European brand, you know, given that so much of luxury fashion is based on sort of the European dream?

我认为最大的风险不是关税，而是民族主义——不仅在美国，中国乃至全球范围内——发展到将一切外来事物妖魔化的程度。但愿不会如此，否则我们可能步入战争前厅。奢侈品作为全球化产业，其繁荣依赖于市场开放和各国参与全球经济。但民族主义情绪比25%的进口关税更危险——毕竟奢侈品公司通过转移定价（通常是批发价的40%）向美国子公司供货，25%关税相当于零售价上涨10%，虽不理想但并非灭顶之灾。

I think that there's a risk, which I think is the most important risk here more than tariffs, but nationalism, not only in America but in China as well and in other parts of the world, rises to a level that anything that comes from abroad, anything that is foreign, becomes bad by definition. Hopefully, we're not gonna go there because the moment we go there, then we could potentially be in the anti chamber of war. But the risk is definitely there and it is quite clear that luxury is a global industry and it has thrived on the back of markets opening up, on the back of globalization, on the back of more countries participating to the global economy and benefiting in terms of increasing their GDP factor and creating audiences for luxury goods to be consumed. But I think it's the nationalist element of the most potentially dangerous import tariffs even if they were in the 25% that President Trump has mentioned and let's see if after declarations get decisions in this line. But we need to take into account that luxury goods companies would be selling to their own American companies at transfer price and transfer price would in most cases be wholesale and wholesale is 40¢ to the dollar.

因此进口关税的威胁，实际上不如民族主义升级可能带来的影响令人担忧。

So even if it was 25% additional import duty, this would mean another 10¢ that you could potentially offset by increasing retail prices by 10%. Not ideal for sure, but not the end of the world either. So import duties, I think, less of a concern than what the nationalist escalation could in fact potentially provide.

我认为随着局势升级，过去几周观察这场新兴贸易战的动态时，我发现有时事态会演变成非理性反应。就在前几天，为回应欧盟对美国钢铁关税的反制，特朗普宣称要将欧洲烈酒和香槟的关税提高到200%。现在的情况是，人们把这些关税当作复杂谈判策略中的筹码，但这可能失控。尽管卢卡提出了一些合理的警示。

And I think along with that escalation, I guess my one observation and having seen the dynamics around this emerging trade war over the last few weeks has been that sometimes things move to an irrational response. And so just the other day, I think in response to the EU responding to American tariffs on steel. You know, Donald Trump said he was gonna put the tariffs on European spirits and champagnes to 200%. And you're getting to this point where, you know, people are using these tariffs as bargaining chips as part of a very complex negotiating strategy, but it it can get out of hand. And I think notwithstanding some of the kind of caveats that Luca's, you know, rightfully put forward.

我担心我们正进入一个非理性时期。与非理性者谈判往往难有善果。作为加拿大人，我密切关注着事态发展。加拿大人素来不算特别爱国，自1995年魁北克试图独立以来，我从未见过如此强烈的民族主义情绪在全国蔓延。

I just worry that we're entering this period where, you know, things are just gonna become irrational. And when you try negotiating with irrational people, you often go don't get a good outcome. And so, you know, as a Canadian, I've been watching everything that's been happening as well. And, you know, Canadians are not the most patriotic bunch of people. I've never seen a very strong nationalistic surge in Canada since Quebec tried to separate from Canada in 1995.

那是我唯一一次见到加拿大人挥舞国旗、公开表达对祖国的热爱——我们虽深以为豪却惯常含蓄。但当我母亲发短信说要抵制美国货、拒绝赴美旅行时，你能感受到这种情绪已席卷全国。这种集体自豪感前所未见，我们必须密切关注事态发展。

It's the only time I've seen Canadians waving flags and kind of around the country, you know, professing their love for our country, which, you know, we're all very proud of, but we're very quiet about. But, you know, when my mom is sending me text messages about not buying anything American, not wanting to travel to America, you really see this surge has happened across the country. And I think there is this kind of sense of pride. So we're gonna really have to monitor how this whole develops. It's something I've never seen before.

稍后继续BOF播客的更多内容。

We'll be right back with more on the BOF podcast.

我是Bernard Hickey。作为财经记者，我逐字聆听此类播客。若想了解这些动态对亚太地区的影响，请每日清晨收听ANZ银行的《五与五》——这档简短的播客提供专家洞见，如ANZ亚洲研究主管Kun Goh来自新加坡的独家分析。

Bernard Hickey here. And as a financial journalist, I hang on to every word of podcasts like this. But to learn how these stories will affect us here in the Asia Pacific, start each workday with five and five with ANZ, a bite sized podcast with exclusive insights from experts like Kun Goh, ANZ's head of Asia research in Singapore.

全球金融市场的波动往往最先在此显现。因此作为跨国企业的区域枢纽，新加坡堪称理想的经济晴雨表。

Shifts in global financial markets can be picked up here first. Hence, as a regional base for multinationals, Singapore is an ideal economic barometer.

点击描述区链接，用ANZ《五与五》开启您的工作日。

So click the link in the description and start your day with five and five with ANZ.

现在让我们聚焦品牌。Imran你先前提到多个品牌更换创意总监的现象——我们正面临三大品牌（迪奥、香奈儿、古驰）处于创意重启前的过渡期，还有Versace、Celine、Balenciaga、Loewe、Margiela、Jil Sander等各层级品牌。这种变动显然会对行业各领域产生连锁反应。

Let's turn our attention now to the brands. And you'd alluded to it before, Imran, when you were talking about many shifts now towards different creative directors. And I was curious to know, you know, we have three huge brands, right, Dior, Chanel and Gucci, who are all sort of in this holding pattern, awaiting their own respective creative reboots. And then we have brands of varying other scales, Versace, Celine, Balenciaga, Luave, Margella, Jossandre, the list goes on and on and on. And obviously, then how that then has a knock on effect across the industry in many different sectors in the industry.

你刚参加完2025秋冬时装周——是否在T台内外感受到这种不确定性？设计师们是否直接回应了全球局势与行业动荡？

My question is, is that you've just returned from the fashion shows for this season, AutumnWinter twenty twenty five. Did you sense that any of this sort of uncertainty and this imminent change was reflected on the runway and what you were seeing on and off the runway? You know, did you sense that there was a direct response to kind of world affairs and industry turbulence?

确实如此。本季有两个重要首秀——虽非古驰/香奈儿量级，但Givenchy（LVMH旗下被忽视的品牌）和Tom Ford（美妆业务庞大但时装业务较小）的发布会，让我们这些每季要看四五十场秀的人感受到强烈的创意与情感共鸣。当Hyder Ackerman和Sarah Burton这样的设计师为品牌注入深度思考时，与那些只会推出同质化奢侈品的发布会形成鲜明对比——T台上确实能感受到对时代的回应。

I mean, yes, obviously, there were two important debuts that happened this season, not at brands of the same scale or note as Gucci or Chanel or Dior, but the debuts at Givenchy, an underloved, neglected brand within the LVMH portfolio, and Tom Ford, which is a big beauty business and, you know, small fashion business. Both of those debuts had such creative and emotional resonance with those of us who go to forty, fifty, sixty, seventy, maybe a 100 fashion shows in a season. And, you know, it really brought my love for fashion back. I feel like the shows that I've been going to where designers are turning out the same heavily merchandised collections focused on copycat luxury products that aren't distinctive. When you see people, designers like Hyder Ackerman and Sarah Burton, you know, two very talented designers, put real thinking, emotion, and consideration into what brands like Givenchy and Tom Ford can stand for in the context that we're all operating in now, yes, there was absolutely a feeling that there was a response on the catwalks.

如果今年后续系列都能投入这种程度的努力、深思、情感与热爱，我认为时尚界将迎来一波创意热潮。这对行业是极好的，因为——说来遗憾——作为已连续十八年参加时装周和发布会的人，疫情后的这几年时尚界实在乏善可陈。而我个人非常期待九月的所有动向。这些品牌集体首秀的时装月将是史无前例的，我现在几乎按捺不住激动。

If that kind of effort, thoughtfulness, emotion, and love is put into the collections that we see coming down the pipe for the rest of the year, I think the industry is gonna have a surge of creative excitement. And I think it's great for our industry because, sadly, you know, as someone who's now been going to fashion week and attending fashion shows for eighteen years, the past few years of post pandemic fashion have just not been very exciting. And I, for one, am very much looking forward to everything that's gonna happen in September. I don't think we will have ever seen a fashion month like this with debuts at all of those brands. Like, I can barely contain myself right now.

所以我对即将发生的一切感到无比兴奋。

So I'm I'm really excited about what's going to happen.

伊姆兰，2023年对话时你提到'品牌创意策略取决于商业策略'，这句话在当前环境下令我印象深刻。你认为现阶段商业策略是求生、成本削减还是复苏？这会如何体现在创意策略中？

When we spoke in 2023, Imran, you said, I think a brand's creative strategy is a function of its business strategy that stuck in my mind, especially now in the current climate. Would you say the current business strategy is survival? Is it cost cutting? Is it regrowth? And how might that manifest itself in creative strategies?

一方面我们看到立竿见影的短期策略，比如路易威登与村上隆惊艳的联名复刻系列大获成功。但反过来说，正如你所言，在追求品牌差异化的当下，是否更需要大胆的创意表达？你认为品牌差异化会成为未来几季的关键因素吗？

You know, on one hand, we have sort of the surefire temporary things which can happen like the I saw the Louis Vuitton, very impressive re edition of Murakami, the collaboration, which was a fantastic success. But conversely, is this the time where, know, as you said, more audacious creative expressions are actually required when you're searching for brand distinction? And do you think that brand distinction will become a key factor in the coming months and in the coming seasons?

是的，这要回归我之前提到的市场份额

Yes, I think it goes back to that point I raised earlier around market

问题。

share.

争夺市场份额时，需要确立竞争基础——我认为多数品牌会以创意和创新为竞争点。有些品牌在业务增长中保持创新，有些正试图扭转颓势，像爱马仕则维持稳定增长。不同品牌争夺市场份额的方式各异。

So when you're trying to win market share, there's a basis for competition that you need to look for, which is and I think a lot of the brands will be competing on the basis of creativity and innovation. Now some of those brands are doing that while still growing their businesses. Some of them are trying to execute a turnaround. Some of them are trying to continue steady growth like Hermes. So, like, not every brand is gonna approach that fight for market share in the same way.

但普遍规律是聚焦创意、设计、创新与品质。当消费者权衡价格与品质的价值比时，他们会考量：设计有多独特？工艺有多精湛？产品稀缺性如何？

But I think one general rule is there'll be a focus on creativity, design, and innovation, and quality. All of these things that when a customer is weighing the value ratio between price and quality, they'll be thinking about it. So that means how unique is the design? How well is the product made? How available is it to everybody else?

本质上就是：商品的特殊性是否匹配其定价？这个性价比等式成立时，消费者就会买单。而其中很大程度取决于设计与创意。

Essentially, how special is the product I'm being asked to buy vis a vis the price I'm being asked to pay? And where that ratio adds up for people, they will buy. And where it doesn't, they won't. And I think a big part of that is gonna come down to design and creativity.

卢卡，关于集团现金牛的问题——上次我们讨论过LVMH的路易威登、开云的Gucci、历峰的卡地亚。昨天刚宣布丹尼尔将接手Gucci，今天开云股价暴跌12%（这未必准确反映市场反应）。当Gucci这样的现金牛出现重大亏损时，这对整个集团意味着多大程度的生存危机？

Right. Luca, I have a question for you about, we talked last time about this idea of the cash cows at the groups, know, Louis Vuitton for LVMH, Gucci for Caring and Cartier for the Richemont Group. And obviously, it was announced yesterday that Denner, the designer was going to be taking over at Gucci. We've read today that the Kering shares plummeted by 12%, which may or may not be an accurate representation of kind of, you know, how that information was received. But my question is, when a cash cow like Gucci for the Kering Group is operating a pretty significant loss, how much of an existential crisis does that represent to across the group?

当集团中的一个大品牌在亏损时，这对中型品牌的资金支持会产生多大程度的影响？

And when a big brand in the group is bleeding, to what extent does that impact the kind of the funding of the midsize brands?

我认为很难低估这个问题对开云集团的重要性。古驰必须重振旗鼓，而且必须尽快，尤其是在开云集团已承诺进行重大并购——收购Creed和华伦天奴，以及重大房地产投资的节骨眼上。同时，像圣罗兰、葆蝶家这样较小的品牌可能也需要重新规划。曾有观点认为它们需要实现30%以上的营业利润率，但要在规模相对较小的情况下达到这一水平，它们不得不大幅削减成本。而在当今市场，偷工减料是行不通的。

I think it's difficult to understate how big this problem is for Kering. Gucci has to come back and it has to come back sooner rather than later, especially at a juncture when Kering has committed to very significant M and A with the acquisition of Creed and the acquisition of Valentino and also very significant real estate investments. And also at a time when the smaller brands like Saint Laurent, Bottega Veneta probably need to go back to the drawing board. There was this idea that they would need to produce operating profit margins in the thirties, but in order to get to that level with that relatively small size, they had to cut a lot of corners. And, in today's market, you cannot cut corners.

无论是旗舰店的质量、产品品质，还是投入传播与营销预算的金额，都必须执行到位。这是一场注意力争夺战，在传播量级中，真正起作用的就是你投入的资金规模，因此在这方面不能吝啬。这对开云而言是个极其关键的转折点，这就是为什么古驰新任创意总监的任命备受关注，也是为何我认为市场对公布的人选表达了失望——某种程度上，开云股价此前因可能任命更具说服力的人选而上涨，市场期待这一变动能为古驰带来转机。

You need to execute properly when it comes to the quality of your flagships, when it comes to the quality of your product, and so on. So and also, the amount of money that you commit to your communication and marketing budgets. This is a fight for attention and in a communication volume what counts is indeed the sheer amount of money that you bring, so you cannot be saving on that. So, this is a very, very important turning point for Caring, which is why there was so much attention on the new creative director appointment at Gucci, and which is why I think the market today is expressing, some disappointment about the name that has been brought forward. Also because to some extent the Caring Shares price had started to rise on the back of the appointment potentially being more convincing and on the back of the change potentially opening up an opportunity for Gucci to improve.

市场对自救故事的好消息反应极快。看看去年九月以来巴宝莉股价的走势：新CEO上任、公布合理的新战略、向市场传递令人信服的新讯息，股价基于‘这一切都将奏效’的承诺已翻倍。而这次，承诺似乎缺乏说服力，股价今日下跌，因为市场普遍认为这可能不是合适人选。《时尚商业》在Instagram发起的调查显示，在9000名受访者心中，Demna是否适合担任古驰创意总监的答案似乎非常明确。

Markets react very quickly to good news when it comes to self help stories. Look at what happened since September to the Burberry share price. As a new CEO came on board, a new strategy was announced, it made sense, new communication was brought to the market, which also sounded convincing, the share price has doubled on the back of a promise that this is all going to work. Here, the promise doesn't seem to be particularly convincing and the share price is down today because I think the market in general is thinking maybe that is not a good fit. And, Business of Fashion was carrying out the survey on Instagram and I think that the outcome of that survey, Demna is the right creative director of Gucci or not, at least in the minds of the 9,000 people that responded.

结果已经非常清晰。

That seems to be very clear.

有趣的是，我写了一篇将于明早发布的编者按，正是探讨这个话题。我谈到股价暴跌，也提及Instagram上的调查。但经过更深入思考任命Demna的决定后，我理解开云的考量。业内兼具品牌改造实绩、行业知名度、以及Demna这般资历的设计师屈指可数——他在Margiela和路易威登与Marc Jacobs、Nicolas Ghesquière共事的经验，创办颠覆行业的初创品牌Vetements，将巴黎世家打造成价值数十亿欧元的品牌。

It's interesting. I've written a, editor's letter, which will go out tomorrow morning, which addresses this very topic, and I talk about the market plunge. I talk about the survey, indeed, on Instagram. But, you know, having reflected on the decision to appoint Demna a little more, I understand where caring is going. There are so few designers in the industry that would be available who have the proven ability to transform a brand, who have name recognition in the industry, who have the caliber of experience that Davna has at Margiela, at Louis Vuitton, working alongside Marc Jacobs, and Nicolas Gesquer, having run a startup company that disrupted the industry, Vetemont, having transformed Balenciaga into a multibillion euro brand.

Demna本就隶属集团的优势在于，无需受竞业条款拖延进度。尽管七月他还要负责巴黎世家高定秀，仍可同步规划古驰。若能尽快推出作品，结合所有因素考量，我认为对开云真正的考验——我同意Luca的观点，这某种程度上是生死攸关的选择——在于Demna能否超越他在Vetements和巴黎世家形成的标志性美学？这是我眼中的核心问题。过去十多年间，我见证了他从初露锋芒到不同阶段的成长。

The fact that Demna was already inside the group means they could take him without having to deal with pesky noncompete clauses that would slow down their progress, which means that although he's going to be working on a couture show for Balenciaga in July, he can still work on his plans for Gucci. So, hopefully, they can bring something to market soon. And so when you consider all of the factors, I think the real test for caring, and I agree with Luca that this is somewhat an existential choice for them, is can Demna move his aesthetic and his design look beyond what he has become known for from Vetmont and Balenciaga? That for me is the fundamental question here. And having spent some time with Demna over these last ten or twelve years since he first burst onto the scene across varying steps in that journey.

我真心认为他是真正具备实力的设计师——业内最具思想性、才华与颠覆精神的人物之一。我们的行业有幸拥有他。问题在于：他能否兑现承诺？能否改变古驰？

I, you know, I really think this is a designer who has the real ability. He's one of the most thoughtful, one of the most talented, one of the most provocative designers we have in our industry. We're lucky to have him. And so the question is, like, can he deliver the goods? Can he change Gucci?

他能否突破自我？这才是关键所在。

And can he change himself? That's what this all rests on.

你认为除了他的创意投入外，是否还需要集团和古驰品牌本身的大规模投资，来支撑这个可能相当激进的新愿景？这不仅涉及传播层面，更深层次的问题包括：门店是否需要重新设计装修？伴随而来的其他成本如何？对于古驰这样规模的公司，做出这个任命决定后，是否面临额外压力——这位设计师的愿景必然带有颠覆性。古驰的承受力如何？在投资与耐心方面需要达到什么程度才能实现这一转型？

Do you think coupled with his own creative input will be the requirement for, well, on one hand significant investment from the group and from the house of Gucci to allow what could be a radical new, quite a radical new vision, right for the brand. And for that to play out in terms of communications, but also in a more deep rooted way towards would stores need to be, you know, redesigned, refitted, and all the other costs that you know, that go with that? Do you sense that that puts an added pressure on a company of Gucci's scale to say, we've made this decision to hire this person, this person's vision will certainly will be, know, in some ways disruptive. What's the appetite for Gucci? And what's the necessity in terms of investment, but also patience to actually see that through?

要知道，回顾之前的案例，比如Hedi Slimane入主Celine时，他们不得不或者说主动选择了彻底颠覆原有客群并重塑品牌。当然最终取得了更大成功，但必须投入巨资才能触发这种长期效益。卢卡，你对此怎么看？

You know, when we think about some of the previous examples, you know, Hedi Slimane came into Celine, he had to or he chose to, they collectively chose to completely disrupt the existing customer and reconstruct it. And of course, it became more successful, but they had to invest heavily to actually trigger that long term success. So what are your thoughts on that, Luca?

我认为在当前节点，他们必须非常务实。Gucci承受不起彻底推倒重来，开云集团也无力在未见转机前投入巨额资金。若要使局面向好，必须找到在不消耗过多资金的前提下重燃消费者对Gucci兴趣的方法——毕竟现在资金紧张。事实上我赞同伊姆兰的观点，在讨论门店之前，我们首先要考虑Deimer将为Gucci带来怎样的新美学？这种美学能否为品牌重新注入颠覆性元素？Sabato时期缺失的正是这种颠覆性。

I think that in this particular juncture, they will have to be very pragmatic and very practical. I don't think that Gucci can afford a complete overhaul and I don't think that Caring can afford to commit huge investments before we see a turnaround. There must be a way if indeed things have to play out in the right direction to re energize the consumer interest for Gucci without committing too much capital at this stage because capital is short. And, so indeed, I agree with Imran even before we look at the stores, we need to take into account what kind of new aesthetics is Daimler going to bring to Gucci and is that going to have the power to add back to Gucci a twist? I think that what was missing under Sabato was the twist.

过去二十五年间，Gucci之所以能持续吸引消费者，正是因其总以某种极致姿态出现。即便这次转型方向看似突兀，Tamna确实有可能带来这种颠覆性转变。他在巴黎世家的表现已经充分证明这点——当时那些引发市场轰动的设计，比如宜家购物袋造型手包或是垃圾袋手袋，都运用了反讽手法和打破偶像的创作思路。

Gucci has been relevant to consumers in the past twenty five years when it was over the top one way or the other. And, for sure, even if this is once again an abrupt move in terms of, how and where Gucci has to go, Tamna is one that could potentially be providing this twist and, this, disruptive element. Definitely, he was able to do so in spades at Balenciaga Balenciaga and what he was doing back then resonated with the market enormously. His approach, I think, was to use irony and, a sort of iconoclastic approach. Think about the IKEA bags or, the garbage bag, handbag that they launched back then.

这让我联想到Moschino品牌中的戏谑精神。虽然他也大量运用街头元素，但我不确定这两种手法对当下的Gucci仍适用。首先Gucci体量庞大，过度显眼的反传统设计未必是重振品牌的最佳配方。

It reminded me to some extent of Moschino and the irony within that brand. He also used a lot streetwear. I don't know that, either of those two approaches would be relevant for Gucci today. First of all, because Gucci is very big. So I don't think that, being too visible with something which is iconoclast is necessarily the right recipe to make Gucci relevant again.

况且街头风潮已成昨日黄花，必须创造新元素。这正是创意总监在我们行业如此重要且高薪的原因——眼下这个挑战才是关键。等品牌热度回升后，我们才有余裕讨论其他。

And my impression is that streetwear is yesterday's story. So you will need to invent something new. And that is why creative directors have such an important role in our industry and why they're paid so much. So, at the end of the day, this is the challenge ahead. And then when the heat comes back, we can talk about everything.

届时可以讨论门店升级、传播策略等等，但首要任务是止住品牌自然下滑趋势，重燃市场热度，否则根本无缘顶级阵营的竞争。

We can talk about making the stores nicer. We can talk about communication and whatever, but the heat has to come back to the brand and the organic decline has to be stemmed if we need to have a chance to play in the top tier.

广告之后，BOF播客将继续为您呈现更多精彩内容。

We'll be right back with more on the BOF Podcast.

让我们暂时转向另一巨头LVMH。伊姆兰，上月你在BOF转发的彭博社那篇探讨路易威登可能从LVMH分拆的文章很有意思。当然这仅是假设性探讨，没有证据表明阿尔诺高管层有此打算，但文章核心观点是分拆可能提升整体市值。

Let's turn our attentions to the other group, LVMH, for a moment. Imran, I read a really interesting, it was an article that had been written on Bloomberg that you posted on BOF last month, in which the writer explored the possibility of Louis Vuitton splitting and becoming a separate entity from LVMH. Now, obviously, was a very, you know, it's a very significant thing. There was no real actual proof that this was in the mind of executives and Bernard, no. But the idea that obviously was that it would increase the overall market value.

文中提到：'LMS市值在二月中旬触及3000亿欧元，逼近LVMH整体估值。这或许会让伯纳德·阿尔诺思考：长期作为优势的集团架构是否已成阻碍？'这个观点确实发人深省。你对此有何见解？

And in the article, said, LMS's market capitalisation touched 300,000,000,000 in mid February, edging closer to LVMH's overall valuation. That may focus Bernard Arnaud's mind on whether LVMH's conglomerate structure, so long a source of strength, is now a hindrance. And that really is a very thought provoking thing for the person to write. Tell me more about that. What's your take on that, Imran?

我知道卢卡对此必有高见，他写过相关分析报告。我认为重点不在于拆分路易威登，而是优化LVMH整体投资组合，剔除拖累核心利润率的业务。只要阿尔诺先生仍掌舵（可能直至85岁），将LV独立分拆就难成现实。但集团确有表现欠佳的业务，比如依赖中国出境游客的免税零售业务DFS——众所周知这个客群已大幅萎缩。

I know Luca definitely has a point of view on this because he's written some reports on it. I mean, I think it's less about separating Louis Vuitton from LVMH, and I think it's more about refining the overall portfolio and removing some of the underperforming businesses that are dragging down margin from the core LVMH group. I would be surprised if mister Arnaud, at least until he's in charge of that brand, now that's gonna be until possibly until the age of 85, that he would take Louis Vuitton out and spin it off and separate it from the group. I very much doubt that that would be a good strategy. However, there are underperforming parts of that group, namely in the selective retailing category, DFS, the duty free stores, which is really built around that traveling Chinese tourist customer that we all know is not traveling as much anymore and that is struggling.

我十分好奇LVMH旗下香槟与烈酒部门的动向，该部门现由前首席财务官Jean Jacques Guiony与Arnaud先生的第三子Alexandre Arnaud共同执掌。有观点认为，任命Guiony先生正是由于酒精饮料行业正经历结构性变革——尤其是年轻人饮酒量减少——未来可能将该业务剥离。虽然路易威登几乎不可能脱离LVMH集团，但战略性地分拆或出售某些拖累整体利润率的部门或许会获得市场积极反馈。不过这方面我并非专家。

I'll be very curious to see what happens with the champagne and spirits division of LVMH, which is now run by the former CFO, Jean Jacques Guiony, and mister Arnaud's third eldest child, Alexandre Arnaud. Some people are saying the reason they've put mister Guinea into that role is because potentially there's a a way of taking that out of the business because there is a structural change happening in the alcohol sector with a lot of people, particularly young people, drinking less. And so I very much doubt that Louis Vuitton gets taken out of the LVMH group, but there may be opportunistically some parts of the group that get spun off or divested strategically so that they're not dragging down the overall margin of the group. And I think the markets would reward them from that. But I'm not the expert on the market.

Luca，我很好奇你对集团结构性变革的看法。

That's Luca. I'm curious, Luca, what you think about a structural change to the group.

确实如你所说，Imran，我们曾探讨过LVMH分拆（非出售）葡萄酒与烈酒业务的机遇。这类似于历峰集团2008年剥离烟草资产的案例——将其注入特殊目的上市公司，纳入酩悦轩尼诗资产后，按持股比例向LVMH股东分配股份。如此，股东可保留这些股份，我推测Arnault家族也会这样做。

Yeah. We were, indeed, as as you pointed out, Imran, writing about the opportunity that LVMH has spinning off, not selling, but spinning off the wines and spirits business. The same way as Richemont in 2008 decided to spin off the tobacco assets, the idea would be you put those in a special purpose vehicle, that is publicly traded. You put, the Moenesi assets in it, and then you distribute the shares to the LVMH shareholders as a proportion of their ownership of LVMH. This way, if you like, you can keep the shares in your portfolio, and I presume that Yagio and the Anno family will do so.

而多数投资者可能会抛售这些股份，这将使控股股东未来获得更大份额，甚至可能实现业务拆分。烈酒业务不仅表现欠佳，其运营逻辑也截然不同：完全依赖批发渠道，注重产品稳定性而非创新，通过调配工艺确保香槟与干邑年复一年保持相同风味。

And I also presume that many investors instead would not and could potentially sell those shares, which would allow the controlling shareholders to have an even bigger stake down the road and even potentially split that business between them, down the road. The advantage of that is that, Wether Spirits, is not only under performing, but also operating under a completely different logic. It's all wholesale. It's all maintaining product rather newness. You what what they do and what they try and do is maintain the taste of the champagne, maintain the taste of the cognac year on year, blending whatever they need to blend in order to keep that constant.

创新仅体现在包装层面，这与时尚皮具以传播为核心的模式形成鲜明对比——某些市场甚至禁止烈酒广告。二者毫无协同效应，多元化优势也不复存在。十五年前，酒类与时尚皮具对集团的利润贡献尚且相当，如今后者规模已遥遥领先。

And all of the innovation is in the packaging, so, a very different setup. And when it comes to communication, communication is the heart and soul of fashion or leather goods while it is in most cases even prohibited in some markets on spirits. So very different logic, no synergies and not even an advantage when it comes to diversification. Maybe fifteen years ago there was this idea that know wines and spirits on the one side and fashion and leather goods on the other would provide similar profit contributions to the group. But today fashion and leather goods is very big and wines and spirits is very small.

这种实质性的多元化已然消失，而烈酒业务的存在却阻碍了中东市场与ESG投资者的入场。我赞同Imran的观点——Jean Jacques Guiony执掌该部门释放了强烈信号，这位并购专家兼财务高手若趁消费需求回暖之机推动变革，将不足为奇。

So this diversification de facto is no longer there and yet the presence of spirits prevents a lot of investors in The Middle East in the ESG camp to buy the shares. So where is the advantage? And I agree with Imran. What set us off and the reason why we wanted to be upfront with this logic in the market is the fact that Jean Jacques Guiony has become the head of this business and his ability as an M and A architect and as a CFO is unquestioned. So, I wonder if maybe on the back of a slightly better consumer demand environment, this is going to be a priority in due course.

至于其他业务，剥离连年亏损的DFS无疑是明智之举。整合时尚皮具、香化美妆与丝芙兰精选零售形成的三角阵营，更能加速迪奥、纪梵希等美妆品牌的发展。

As far as the rest is concerned, I agree that potentially selling DFS which has been clocking such a significant amount of losses would be a very good idea. Well, to consolidate that sort of triangular force of fashion leather goods, fragrances and beauty and selective retail when it comes to Sephora, which is an accelerator of Dior, Parfums, Givenchy and any further beauty brands that LVMH was to acquire could be a very good idea.

我想请教关于爱马仕、香奈儿等私有企业与LVMH、开云等上市集团的对比。对普通读者而言，当今奢侈品牌上市与否的利弊何在？

I want to ask you a question that was, know, again, it's part of this conversation about Hermes, about Chanel being obviously private companies and then LVMH and Carey. Chanel doesn't have the need to grow in the same way because it's not a public company. The Todd's group has been delisted from the stock exchange with the help from El Katston. To the layman reading this, what are the pros and cons today of a luxury fashion business trading publicly or remaining a private enterprise?

恕我直言，前提有误——上市并非增长的主因。这是固定成本极高的行业，要维持主导地位就必须扩张。小规模企业终将沦为优质并购目标，这正是爱马仕2008年后加速发展的原因：规模不仅能规避收购风险，更能获得应对新兴领域竞争的资源。

If I may, I would disagree with the premise. I don't think that it's the fact that you're public that forces you to grow. I think it's the fact that this is a fixed cost industry that forces you to grow if you want to stay a protagonist of the industry. You might as well stay very small, but in the end, you're gonna risk becoming a high quality acquisition target, which is the reason why since 2008 Hermes has been so eager to beef up its growth because if it gets big, then not only it will be avoiding turning up again as a potential acquisition target but also it will be able to have the funds and the resources required to play on the continuing rise of new fronts that are popping up. You must have noticed that if you are big you can expand competition to other levels.

奥运会赞助、地产扩张、F1合作...若无足够体量，根本无法在旗舰店规模、社交媒体、流动时装秀等维度与行业巨头抗衡。小众品牌如库奇内里或能偏安一隅，但像菲拉格慕这样的主流品牌若缺乏差异化优势，终将因规模劣势被市场边缘化。

Think about sponsoring the Olympics, think about the real estate spending spree, think about the Formula One sponsorship. If you're small, you're going to become invisible because you have no way of playing in the same league in terms of having the same visibility and matching what the leading company in the industry is doing. Bigger flagships, social media presence, influencers, itinerant couture and pre collection fashion shows, you name it every day there's something new that you need to find money to spend on. So if you're small you're dead and at best if you're really differentiated you can be a high quality niche player. If you're Cuchineni say if you are maybe Montclair but if you're just mainstream and you see how it is difficult for Ferragamo to stand out and to sort of find a reason why they should be having a space in the market and that I think comes primarily from a huge scale disadvantage that is continuing to escalate.

这就是我的看法。我认为即便是香奈儿这样的巨头，也无法承受倒退至150亿或100亿规模的代价。即便我们经营良好、保持私有化且不在乎外界评价——不不不，如果你不在同一量级，就根本无法参与竞争。

So that's my two cents. I don't think that even the biggest guys, I don't think that Chanel can afford to go back to, you know, 15,000,000,000 or 10,000,000,000 because, you know, we're good and whatever, and we're private and we don't care. No, no, no, no, no. You will not be able to compete if you are not in the same league.

说得很到位。伊姆兰还有什么补充吗？这番阐述非常精彩。

That's a good point. Anything to add to that, Imran? It was very, very well put.

我想强调的是，正如卢卡提到的所有原因，规模确实至关重要。作为私营企业，你可以采用不同的运营方式——这或许是其中最关键的益处。以香奈儿和Wertheimer家族为例，虽然出于卢卡所说的种种原因仍需要业务增长和盈利，但你可以更专注于长期规划。我认识许多CEO——比如巴宝莉前CEO、托德斯创始人Diego de la Valle——他们都对季度财报如何扭曲决策过程感到沮丧。当你不必面对卢卡的业绩分析报告和各类分析师时，才能真正以中长期视角而非短期思维来做决策。

I mean, I would just say scale really matters for all of the reasons that Luca mentions. I think when you are a privately run company, you can run your company in different ways, which I think is maybe the important benefit to underscore. So if you're Chanel and you're the Wertheimer family, I still think you wanna grow your business and make money for all of the reasons that Luca says, but you can think much more long term about it. I know a lot of CEOs, the former CEOs of Burberry, Diego de la Valle, a lot of CEOs are frustrated by the way short term quarterly market reports impact the way they have to make decisions. And so when you don't have to deal with that quarterly report from Luca analyzing how your business has performed and all the other analysts, it really changes the way you can think about decision making with a kind of a short term versus a medium or long term mindset.

我确信Della Valle先生让公司退市并与L Catterton合作，就是为了获得更长远的视角。但请注意，L Catterton同样期待业务增长和投资回报。这就是我要补充的观点。

And so I think when you have, you know, mister Dilavale, I'm pretty sure he delisted the company and went with El Caterton so he could take a longer term perspective because he felt like they might understand his business better. But let me tell you, Elle Catterton definitely wants that business to grow, and they're going to expect a return as well. So, that would be the one thing I would just add.

在当前格局下，我们讨论过香奈儿、路易威登、迪奥、古驰这些巨头。你们认为中端或小众品牌未来有可能追赶上它们的规模吗？还是说这些巨头已经形成断层优势，其运营模式几乎像是另一个行业——比如与葆蝶家、罗意威或赛琳相比？

In the landscape right now, right, we've obviously we've talked about Chanel and MS and Vuitton and Dior, Gucci, you know, the big businesses. Do you sense there will ever come a time when a mid level or a smaller business would ever be able to catch up with them and operate at the same scale? Or do you think they have now separated themselves, and they're almost operating in a completely different way, almost in a slightly different industry from say, something like Bottega or Loewe or Celine?

目前尚无迹象。这是个很好的问题——我们曾在《挑战者困境》报告中探讨过。杰尼亚曾看似可能超越行业龙头，但这种增长建立在更高风险基础上：过度曝光导致消费者厌倦，或是为增长牺牲品质。

There's no evidence of that. This is a very good question. We wrote a black book talking about the challenger's dilemma. And at one point, Gering seemed to be able to be a challenger growing faster than the leading brands in the industry. But that was coming on the back of becoming more visible and on the back of running a significantly higher risk in terms of at one point potentially getting consumers bored and wanting to go elsewhere and cutting corners in order to get this growth.

古鼎盛时期，皮诺先生确实谈论过赶超路易威登的可能性。但行业本质决定了你必须销售排他性（或至少是感知排他性）。以如今大火的缪缪为例，其成功恰恰埋下了风险——过度曝光可能导致市场迅速审美疲劳。我们见证过许多小品牌昙花一现，比如菲比·菲洛时期的赛琳，最终都因过度成功反噬自身。

And at the peak of the Gucci boom, Monsieur Pinot was indeed talking about a potential catch up of Gucci with Witon. We remember all that distinctively. I think it's very difficult. I think it is very difficult because the nature of the industry is that you need to sell exclusivity or perceived exclusivity if you become like think Miu Miu today, know, Miu Miu is incredibly successful, they are really on the sweet spot, but maybe just because they're on the sweet spot, their risk of tiring the market in one year and two years is very high because they are in a way a lot more visible. We've seen it a number of times that at one point smaller brands hit gold, think Celine under Phoebe Philo, think you know that they have plenty of examples and at one point they are in a way succumbing to that very success because they become too visible and people move elsewhere.

这类品牌往往像流星般转瞬即逝，或面临约20-30亿欧元的玻璃天花板。这是个引人深思的问题，我无法给出肯定答案，但很想听听伊姆兰的看法。

So they tend to be a bit of a flash in the pan or they tend to have a sort of glass ceiling which today could potentially be around 2 or €3,000,000,000 and that is very difficult to break through. It's a very interesting intellectual question. I'm not sure that I would provide an affirmative answer, but I'm very curious to see what Imran thinks about it.

坦白说这非常困难——与卢卡观点类似，规模本身会形成壁垒。当巨头们占据黄金店铺、垄断优质广告位（凭借批量采购优势）、汇聚顶尖人才时——正如我们上次讨论的，后来者想要突破这些壁垒极其艰难。虽然像Jacquemus这样的小众品牌能在短期内做到2.5-3亿欧元营收...

I mean, I think it's very tough, honestly, for similar reasons as as Luca, that once you have scale, you have built in advantages. And trying to get scale when you have these dominant players who have all the best stores, who have a lock on the best advertising pages because they can buy in bulk. I mean, all of the things that matter and and, you know, who work with the top talent. Mean, we we discussed a lot of this last time in our conversation, just how the brands who have scale have such almost you know, the barriers to entry for other players who are trying to, like, compete with those dominant players is very, very hard. I do look at smaller disruptive businesses like Jacquemus, who, in a short space of time, built a, you know, 250, €300,000,000 revenue business, and it happened really quickly.

但很快会触及增长天花板——西蒙因资金不足引入投资者就是例证。时尚品牌似乎总在1亿、5亿等关键节点需要外部助力才能突破瓶颈。

And then he reached a ceiling where, you know, he just didn't have enough capital to continue to grow the business. He had to take on an investor. And, you know, it feels like there's these, like, ceilings that these fashion brands hit that, you know, there needs something at every one of those ceilings to unlock. So that exists that happens at 10,000,000. It happens at 50,000,000.

这种情况发生在2.5亿时，发生在10亿时，正如我们在古驰案例中看到的，甚至发生在100亿时。因此，持续扩大一个时尚品牌的规模极具挑战性，只有极少数企业证明了自己具备这种能力。我曾与路易威登的一些人讨论过这个品牌未来可能达到的规模，或许我们会发现存在一个天花板——超过这个界限后，若想让业务继续增长，就必须使其变得过于普及、过于显眼、无处不在，而这反而会降低其吸引力。

It happens at 250,000,000. It happens at 1,000,000,000. And as we see with Gucci, it happens at 10,000,000,000 even. And so to continue to to scale a a fashion brand is very, very challenging, and only only very few businesses have proven the ability to do it. You know, I did have a conversation with some people at Vuitton about how big that business could become one day, And maybe we'll discover that there is a ceiling at which you just cannot grow one of these businesses any further without making your business so available, so visible, so ubiquitous that it becomes less and less desirable.

卢卡，你之前提到LVMH的烈酒业务时我很感兴趣。你说得很对，年轻一代对饮酒的态度，以及对香槟和烈酒品牌的迷恋程度，与过去几代人截然不同。我好奇的是，随着时间的推移，新一代年轻消费者是否可能越来越不认同大型奢侈品牌的价值观？考虑到他们可支配资金可能也不如前几代人充裕。但我特别关注的是，价值观和所谓的'酷'元素是否仍是商业成功的关键因素？

I was interested, Luca, when you mentioned before about the alcohol and spirits sector of LVMH. And you said, you know, very rightfully that generationally, the relationship that younger people have for drinking alcohol, and the allure of champagne and spirits brands is very different now than it has been in previous generations. And I'm just curious to know, do you think there is a possibility that new generations of young consumers, as time goes on, may feel increasingly less aligned with the values of the big luxury brands. I mean, there could also be the, know, coupled with the fact that they may not have the same sum of funds, you know, available to consume at the same levels as previous generations. But I'm particularly interested in this idea of the sort of the values and, you know, kind of quote unquote cool still a big factor commercially?

这些大品牌是否需要重新思考他们的价值观，以及如何在新兴世代眼中保持酷感和吸引力？

To the big brands, do they need to kind of reconsider what their values are and how they seem to be cool and appealing to emerging generations?

我们深入研究了Z世代如何利用闲暇时间、他们的行为模式和情感状态。一个有趣的现象是，这些年轻消费者与同龄人相处的时间大幅减少，他们不像二三十年前的人那样拥有同等比例的社交体验——比如外出聚会、参与社区活动、加入政党、谈恋爱等等，这些行为都显著减少。更值得注意的是，他们的自我认同感非常脆弱，对'你对自己满意吗'这类问题的评分明显低于过去。我认为社交媒体带来的过度曝光在某种程度上侵蚀了人们的自我认同感。正因如此，奢侈品牌在今天可能更具意义——按照我的定义，它们就像是一种身份支柱。

We carried out an in-depth study of how Gen Z consumers are using their spare time, how they're behaving, how they're feeling. It was very interesting to see that these younger consumers spend a lot less time with their peers, didn't have in the same proportion the same social experiences that people 20 or 30 years older had, like going out, being part of a community, being part of a political party, having a boyfriend, having a girlfriend, everything was further down. And interestingly enough, there was also a very fragile sense of identity and the answer to are you satisfied with yourself, seemed to be, collecting a significantly lower score than in the past. I think that to some extent the very significant exposure that social media has brought to people is corrosive to their sense of identity. And in this respect, I think that luxury goods brands could be even more relevant today because in my definition they're a sort of identity crutch.

你可以因为拥有某个品牌的产品而看起来更好，这在某种程度上支撑了你在所处社群中的身份认同。我认为这反而扩大了人们对奢侈品的渴望和向往，使其比过去更具普遍性。从这个角度看，我反而比较乐观。关于购买力问题，必须考虑到多重变化使人们更能负担奢侈品——尽管这些商品经历了价格膨胀。首先，人们结婚越来越晚，因此可以更长时间依赖父母解决食宿问题，将工资用于 discretionary消费。

You can look better because you have this or that product from a brand and that serves in a way as a support for your sense of identity for who you are in the community where you are. And I think that, this has brought the ambition and the aspiration to luxury to be even broader and more universal than it had been in the past. So in this respect, I'm a bit more relaxed. When it comes to affordability, we need to take into account that lots of changes have converged to make people afford luxury goods products, never mind the price inflation they have experienced. Well, first, people are marrying later and later, and so they can piggyback on their parents for board and lodging for a longer amount of time and spend their own salary for discretionary services and products.

其次是经济领域的'去平均化'现象。现在各种商品都有平价替代品——想想廉价航空、沃尔玛，任何能省钱的选择。还有共享经济的兴起，年轻人不再像过去那样必须承担买车之类的大额资本支出。

Then there's been a huge de averaging in the economy. You have the discount version of this and that. Think about budget airlines, think about Walmart, think about anything that you can save money on. Then there's the sharing economy. Capital expenditure that you would have committed in the past buying a car is no longer the order of the day for younger consumers.

最后是继承财富的巨大影响——在大多数国家人口减少的背景下，年轻一代将从上一代继承更多财富，导致财富更加集中。考虑到这些因素，我认为奢侈品行业的发展基础仍然坚实，甚至可能变得更加重要。伊姆兰，最后一个问题

And then there's the huge effect that is coming from the inheritance that the younger generation is going to get from the previous generation at a time when in most countries the number of people is reducing. So there's a lot more wealth concentration. So with these things in mind, I'm quite comfortable that that sort of the the ground for, luxury is still there to to grow and and to become more relevant. Imran, the last question

我之前正和某人争论这个问题

I was having this debate with someone

我知道这是你经常提出的问题

I know it's a question that you often ask

我们前晚刚与麦肯锡联合举办了活动

we hosted, the other night with McKinsey

关于我们2025年奢侈品时尚品牌的现状，目前正处于

regarding our state of fashion 2025 for a luxury fashion brand right There's now in the current

对我来说，关键在于协调一致

so much To me, it's about alignment

以及未来几个月内将看到的清晰方向。

and clarity going to see after the coming months.

之前你提到我上次关于战略本质的评论

Before you referenced the comment I had made last time around how What does strategy

奢侈品时尚。

luxury fashion.

是商业战略的产物。我认为反之亦然。商业战略也是创意战略的产物。品牌表现最佳之处，在于创意领导力与商业领导力之间达到完美协调。我在时尚行业这些年见证了太多反复。

Is a function of business strategy. I think the reverse is also true. Business strategy is a function of creative strategy. And where brands work best is where there is that impeccable alignment between the creative leadership and the business leadership. And I have seen this yo yo a lot over the course of my time in fashion.

2007年我刚入行时，接触过许多创意人和商人，感觉创意人有些瞧不起商人，认为时尚的商业部分并不重要。他们觉得商业应该完全服从创意。而最近我们看到钟摆摆向了另一端——创意反而沦为商业的附庸，商业方开始主导根本性的创意决策。比如某品牌因百货公司高管的建议，就照搬热销包款造型。

When I first arrived in this industry back in 2007 and I'd meet with so many creative people and business people, I got the sense that the creative people kind of looked down their noses at the business people, that they really didn't think the commercial part of fashion, the business of fashion, was really the important part. You know? They thought, you know, everything on the business side should be downstream from the creative side. I think what we've seen recently is that the pendulum has swung the other direction and that, actually, the creative side of fashion has become downstream the business side, that the business side is dictating and making fundamental creative decisions. Say, like, this brand has a bag of this shape that's doing really well because I heard it from this department store executive, so we need to have a bag of this shape as well.

诸如此类基于市场动向、零售商需求或竞品成功案例的决策，最终导致全球时尚同质化严重。当前环境下，真正的成功需要创意与商业如齿轮般精密咬合——双方共同制定战略，思考如何创造真正独特的产品。当CEO和创意总监达成这种罕见共识时，产生的魔力令人惊叹。但如今多数创意总监的感受恰恰相反。

Or, you know, any number of decisions like that which are made based on what's happening in the market and and what retailers are asking for or what we see as happening is working as other brands. I think that's when we we've ended up in this situation where everything looks the same everywhere. And so what I think it takes to be truly successful in this current climate is having that lockstep alignment, clarity, synergy between the creative and the business side of fashion so that the strategy is coming from both sides together, sitting down and saying, how do we do something that's genuinely special? And in those rare cases where you see that alignment between a CEO and a creative director, it's pretty magical. And I think what we're seeing now, and you talk to a lot of the creative directors in the industry right now, that's not how they feel.

他们感觉大量决策和创意都是被强加的，而非共同探讨的结果。这正是当下需要改变的。之前我们讨论的那些品牌首秀让我兴奋，但要让改革奏效，必须依靠品牌内部创意与商业领导层的完美协同。

They feel like a lot of the decision making, a lot of the creativity is being dictated to them as opposed to it being a conversation with them. And I think that's what we need to see now. So we were talking about all of those debuts earlier and how excited I am about it. But in order to make it work, it's gonna have to come from a really nice synergy between the creative and business leadership at the brands that are gonna be making all of these changes.

你说得对。这种协调确实罕见，但每次出现都能在创意和商业层面产生惊人成果。可惜正因其稀缺才显得珍贵。

I mean, said it right. You said it's in the rare occasions when you've seen it and observed it. Often the results are incredible from a both from a creative and from a business perspective. And yet it's defined by its rarity.

是的。

Yes.

有待观察。有待观察。谢谢，伊姆兰。一直感谢你抽空交流。能和你还有卢卡叙旧真的很有趣。

To be seen. To be seen. Thanks, Imran. Thanks always for your time. Really interesting to catch up with you and and with Luca.

我非常期待看到下一季、接下来几个月会发生什么。我们到时候再聊。

I really look forward to seeing what happens in the next season, the next few months. We'll catch up then.

BOF播客由奥利维亚·戴维斯和埃里克·布雷亚编辑制作。

The BOF Podcast is edited and produced by Olivia Davies and Eric Brea.