Dive into the complete episode list for The Debrief. Each episode is cataloged with detailed descriptions, making it easy to find and explore specific topics. Keep track of all episodes from your favorite podcast and never miss a moment of insightful content.
Rows per page:
50
1–50 of 151
Title
Pub. Date
Duration
Is Fashion Sleeping on Twitch and Discord?
11 Nov 2026
00:26:57
Before Jarod John Leonard became a menswear label stocked at Harvey Nichols, its founders brought together fans of Japanese label Number (N)ine on messaging platform Discord. The group grew from 20 people to several thousand, giving the emerging brand an audience that had been there from the start, weighing in on everything from its first boots to fabric choices. On live-streaming platform Twitch, creators like Kai Cenat are bringing viewers along on shopping trips, sharing how their tastes are evolving and even launching fashion labels of their own.
This week on The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young speaks with BoF correspondent Lei Takanashi about how these platforms build trust and turn attention into fashion influence. They discuss how candid conversations and spontaneous moments help make these spaces so influential, and why brands risk losing that appeal when they try to commercialise it.
Key Insights:
Unlike more public-facing social platforms, communities like Discord can give fashion enthusiasts a space to connect over shared interests without the pressure to perform for an audience. That sense of authenticity can help foster the relationships and shared tastes that eventually form the foundation of a brand. “You could just come as your true self,” says Takanashi.
Watching a creator discover clothes, question prices and decide what to buy gives viewers a sense of how their taste develops. Those spontaneous reactions can also drive purchases. Takanashi points to a Walmart stream where a creator’s enthusiasm for a $25 sneaker encouraged fans to buy it. “Just him saying that this shoe was dope led to tonnes of people picking up this $25 sneaker,” he says. The unpredictability helps distinguish these moments from a planned celebrity endorsement: “You can never tell what’s gonna happen next, Takanashi says.”
The candid conversations that make Discord valuable can be difficult to reconcile with a brand’s desire to manage its messaging. Takanashi argues that companies should recognise the value of communities that develop independently, even when they cannot dictate the conversation. “I don’t necessarily think brands have to control those spaces, but I do think they should just pay attention to them,” he says. Listening gives brands access to feedback that a polished social media presence might miss: “That is where you’ll probably find the most honest opinions about your brand.”
Takanashi sees parallels between streamer Kai Cenat and the late designer Virgil Abloh in their ability to connect with a generation through its preferred platforms and build communities around their taste. “They’re both cultural tastemakers, just in different spaces,” he says. He expects creators to retain influence over the young fans who grow up watching them, while recognising that other customers will continue to take their cues from craftsmanship and independent designers.
Luxury’s best salespeople have always been in demand, but the stakes have changed. As AI automates more of the shopping experience and price hikes strain loyalty, retailers are leaning harder on the one thing a machine can’t replicate: a human salesperson who knows exactly what their clients want. From Nordstrom’s uncapped commissions to Bloomingdale’s dedicated personal shopping suites, the perks on offer for top sellers who can single-handedly move millions of dollars in merchandise show just how valuable the talent has become.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by BoF’s retail editor Cathaleen Chen to discuss why luxury’s top salespeople have become some of the industry’s most coveted talent, the lengths retailers are going to attract and retain them and what the high-profile move of stylist Catherine Bloom from Neiman Marcus to Nordstrom reveals about the increasingly competitive market for elite sellers.
Key Insights:
Nordstrom’s recruitment of former Neiman Marcus stylist Catherine Bloom illustrates just how valuable top salespeople have become to luxury retailers. Nordstrom co-chief executive Pete Nordstrom personally courted Bloom, whose longstanding relationships with wealthy clients made her a particularly coveted hire. As Chen notes, retail remains “one of the last industries where you can start at the entry level and work your way up,” with loyalty and long tenure often rewarded.
Saks Global’s financial troubles, which intensified in 2025 following its acquisition of Neiman Marcus, created an opening for competitors looking to recruit top talent from both retailers. With inventory shortages making it harder for stylists to serve their clients, rival department stores spotted an opportunity to lure away established sellers and their valuable customer relationships. “If you’re not giving your clients top tier merchandise, then you really are not fulfilling your duties and serving them as their stylist,” Chen says, adding that several department store executives described the situation as a hiring opportunity.
Retailers typically take two approaches to building a high-performing sales force: developing talent internally or recruiting established sellers from competitors. Butler-Young, citing luxury recruiter Caroline Pill, notes that the essential hard skills are “experience and the client book,” while the soft skills include “charisma ... diligence ... someone that listens maybe more than they speak.”
Even as AI automates more of the shopping experience, the relationships top salespeople build with their clients remain difficult to replicate. “It’s a people business, it’s AI-proof, it’s a relationship business,” Chen says, noting that the value of top sellers lies in “the books that they keep, their Rolodexes.” Some are even invited to their clients’ birthday parties and travel with them.
Top luxury salespeople can command extraordinary perks, including, in Catherine Bloom’s case, a standalone, appointment-only store at Nordstrom. Butler-Young recounts Pete Nordstrom’s enthusiasm for rewarding high performers: “I think it’s great that commission is uncapped, they deserve to make hundreds of [thousands] of dollars.” But Chen questions whether giving star sellers so much preferential treatment risks creating a “shopper monopoly,” with top associates potentially cannibalising sales from their colleagues.
For years, a coveted pair of Air Jordans could send sneaker fans into a frenzy. But when Nike brought back the black-and-blue Air Jordan 1 Royal this month, the response was muted — days after release, the shoe was still available in several sizes, with some pairs reselling below retail.
BoF correspondent Mike Sykes, who has been reporting on Nike’s search for its next big hit, joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young on The Debrief to break down what the tepid reception reveals about the wider company, and whether chief executive Elliott Hill’s pivot toward sport — in women’s basketball, running and recovery — can translate into lasting growth.
Key Insights:
The muted reception to the Air Jordan 1 Royal exposes a deeper problem than one slow-selling shoe. “There is a very obvious downswing that has happened with… the most popular Jordan silhouettes, these retro Jordans that usually work,” Sykes says. “They don’t really know what it is that people want from them right now. The classic retro styles that worked five years ago, ten years ago just don’t work right now.”
Nike is pulling back on Jordan drops to restore exclusivity, but Sykes doesn’t think supply discipline alone fixes the brand. “Scarcity is not the magic pill that will solve all the problems that Jordan Brand has,” he says. Virgil Abloh’s “The Ten” is held up as proof of what real cultural impact looks like — and how hard it is to manufacture on demand: “Nike could use another version of The Ten right now, but you can’t just pull The Ten out of thin air. That’s something that happens over time.”
CEO Elliott Hill’s bet on women’s basketball and running is showing early signs of life. “With Nike basketball on the women’s side specifically, I think there is a lot of energy right now,” Sykes says of signature shoes for A’ja Wilson, Caitlin Clark and Sabrina Ionescu. Running, meanwhile, is up double digits — though far from uncontested: “I would categorise this as one of the bright spots, but there is a lot of competition in the marketplace.”
Products like the Nike Mind 001 clog and Hyperice gear target the booming wellness category, even if the price tags give Sykes pause. “Would you buy a $250 pair of slides? Probably not,” he says. “But I think that every little bit counts for the space that the brand is in right now.”
Asked for the one signal that would show Nike is turning a corner, Sykes points to resale. “The aftermarket shows me how much people actually covet these shoes,” he says. “And I don’t really see people valuing the brand a lot as it is right now.”
Fashion has long been obsessed with youth, treating young shoppers as both trendsetters and the engine of growth. Yet brands including Evereve, Ulla Johnson, Frances Valentine and Poppy & Peonies are finding opportunities in catering to women in their 40s, 50s and beyond, a demographic with significant spending power and brand loyalty that rarely features prominently in fashion campaigns.
On this week's episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and US editor Diana Pearl examine why brands are still afraid to make the older shopper the face of a campaign, what “multi-generational selling” actually requires, and how founders, sales associates and even a customer’s own social circle can become a brand’s most powerful marketing tool.
Key Insights:
Young consumers may drive fashion’s cultural conversation, but older shoppers wield significant purchasing power. As Pearl puts it: “What [youth] don’t often have is the spending power... there’s so much discussion about how boomers are the wealthiest generation.”
Brands will chase an older customer’s wallet but hesitate to put her face on a billboard. Pearl traces this to “a lot of ingrained misogyny in not just fashion, but in our society,” where women over 40 are seen as less interesting to market to — even though, she argues, “when [we] see older women who are chic, who are beautiful, stylish, who are successful, there’s an aspirational element to that.”
The brands succeeding aren’t just targeting a specific age cohort— they’re building for mothers, daughters and grandmothers at once. “If you can sell to the mother, the daughter, the grandmother... that just gives you access to such a wide swath of consumers,” Pearl says, dubbing it a brand’s “superpower” because it builds “long-term loyalty and deep connection with the brand.”
Long before the creator economy, community tastemakers shaped what women bought — they just weren’t on Instagram. “There’s always been that girl... who always had the best product recommendations, always knew of the hot new cool brands,” says Pearl. Those women, she says, were the nano-influencers of their time — holding “an immense amount of sway over their friends and their communities.”
Many of the brands successfully courting older shoppers are founder-led, with personal connections playing a central role in building customer loyalty. For brands looking to replicate those relationships at scale, store associates can play a critical role. Pearl’s advice: “really educating... store teams, particularly store managers, and empowering them to empower their associates, to build those relationships.”
A $15,000 mechanical bird named Molly has become an unlikely flashpoint for retail. After pop star Kelly Clarkson accused Brooklyn boutique Art of Play of treating her “like Julia Roberts’ character” in Pretty Woman, the dispute ignited a much bigger debate about customer service, training and who bears the brunt of bad retail experiences.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by Jessica Kwon, who recently examined why poor customer service remains so pervasive across retail, and retail editor Cathaleen Chen, who spearheaded BoF’s coverage of the world’s best independent stores. Together, they explore why retailers struggle to get service right — and what it takes to deliver a better shopping experience.
Key Insights:
Kwon connects the Clarkson incident to a longer pattern of retail profiling. “There’s a reason there’s this dedicated phrase, ‘shopping while Black’, that points to this phenomenon of Black customers being disproportionately scrutinized and surveilled,” she says, noting Oprah, Cardi B and Savannah James have all described similar treatment.
Chen is skeptical of the theory that cold treatment drives luxury sales. “I personally find that very hard to believe,” she says, arguing the opposite is now true: “I don’t think that a true luxury shopping environment should make anyone feel intimidated or condescended upon.”
For Chen, salaried-plus-commission models — like those at Elyse Walker — build loyalty because staff see a path up. “The CEO of Aritzia – she started at that company as a sales associate,” she says, tying good service to employees who “feel like they have a stake in the store.”
Chen points to average tenures of five to six months as the real culprit behind inconsistent service. “It’s really not enough time... to soak up the culture of the brand and feel like you are a part of this environment,” she says.
Kwon links pandemic-era social isolation to a generational shift in what good service looks like. “A lot of young people want to be left alone,” she says, adding that attentive service can now read as “a little obsequious.”
Fashion's biggest wave of creative-director musical chairs is now a year or so in, and the early read is starting to emerge. Over a dozen major houses have brought in new leadership, and while the broader luxury market is still sluggish, the areas designers can actually move — product, image, storytelling — are showing real signs of life. On a global scale, Chanel is seeing an immediate commercial payoff under Matthieu Blazy, Gucci looks to be stabilising under Demna, and at Dior, Jonathan Anderson's vision is starting to take shape.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by BoF's Chief Luxury Correspondent Robert Williams, who has spent the last few weeks on the ground in Milan and Paris covering the shows. Williams runs through the designer reboots at Chanel, Gucci, Dior, Celine, Loewe, Givenchy, Balenciaga and Saint Laurent — and separates the resets that are paying off from the ones still searching for a formula.
Key Insights:
Williams calls Chanel's revamp under Matthieu Blazy the standout of the cycle, with sales up around 16 percent in the first half of the year. "It's very easy to understand, to digest. It's very visually him, it's very Chanel," he says. The house’s next challenge, Williams says, is balancing the consistency Blazy has established with newness and innovation: :"There needs to be some kind of a formula... at the same time, they need to always make sure they're investing in having new ideas."
After a polarizing debut in February, Demna's September show for Gucci clicked. "He was able to bring what he's really good at, which is documenting the way people dress in real life," Williams says, though he's candid that the product left a bit more to be desired: "I'm not sure that the product has caught up with the vision... the collection still has a little bit of a ways to go."
At Dior, Jonathan Anderson has sharpened the brand's image quickly, but the clothes are proving trickier to land. Where previous collections felt overcomplicated to some, he sees progress this season: "It felt more cohesive to me and it felt refreshingly just pretty."
At Celine, Michael Rider has taken a more evolutionary approach to the house after Hedi Slimane. Williams says Rider has brought “something looser, more playful … a bit more of a focus on design.” Loewe’s JackMcCollough and Lazaro Hernandez, meanwhile, also resisted a wholesale reinvention after Jonathan Anderson: “They've managed to keep the brand pillars going, but rather than the focus being so much about innovation and intellect, they've moved it to the body, to the senses,” Williams says.
At Balenciaga, as reports mount that Pierpaolo Piccioli could already be on the way out, Williams argues the house got its strategy inverted: "They kept a lot of the merchandising plan, but they changed the message, the values."
At Saint Laurent, with Anthony Vaccarello reportedly exiting after nearly a decade of laser-focused vision, Williams calls it one of the most compelling stories to watch: As luxury fashion became obsessed with relatability and lifestyle, “Vaccarello was running in the opposite direction" The opportunity, and the risk, lies in broadening that identity: "How to build on that without upsetting the apple cart is going to be really risky but also hugely interesting to watch."
Luxury’s Italian Supply Chain Reckoning Isn’t Over
30 Sep 2026
00:26:40
In 2024, Milan prosecutors uncovered sweatshop-like conditions within the Italian supply chains of major luxury brands, revealing that workers faced degrading living conditions, low pay, and 15-hour workdays. Nearly two years later, despite brands strengthening internal controls, increasing audits, and restricting subcontracting, labour groups report little fundamental change on the ground.
This week, BoF’s Sarah Kent and Sheena Butler-Young explore whether the luxury sector's response has addressed the root causes of this exploitation, or merely added layers of compliance to the same flawed business model.
Key Insights:
Luxury’s supply chain problems are structural, not isolated. The 2024 investigations exposed more than a handful of bad factories. Kent says exploitative suppliers had become an “open secret” within parts of Italy’s manufacturing ecosystem, enabled by a fragmented supply chain and commercial pressure for low prices, speed and flexibility. “Everyone knows, no one tells because it is convenient to have them exist,” says Kent. “At its heart, when you really press people, they say it’s because of the price brands are willing to pay for products and the speed and flexibility at which they want them produced.”
Brands have tightened oversight but audits are creating new pressure on suppliers. Luxury companies have increased inspections, consolidated suppliers and restricted subcontracting. But because each brand often uses a different audit system, manufacturers can face overlapping checks and conflicting requirements at a time when margins are already under pressure. “It’s a time cost, a financial cost, and a big burden to have this quite diversified system of audits that’s hitting suppliers at the moment,” Kent says.
Despite tighter controls, there is little evidence that conditions have meaningfully improved for workers. According to Kent, labour groups report little change on the ground, while the luxury slowdown and falling orders are adding more pressure to manufacturers. “ From what I understand from labour groups, there is not a sense that a huge amount has changed on the ground, and I think that's partly because it's quite a complex situation that isn't only linked to luxury supply chains,” Kent says. Without changes to commercial practices that shape working conditions, improvements could remain limited.
Compliance alone cannot fix the economics that helped create the problem. For years, luxury positioned craftsmanship, quality and responsible production as part of what justified premium prices. The investigations exposed significant blind spots in that narrative, particularly where brands knew which factories were producing their goods but focused on product quality rather than labour conditions. “It is very interesting to me that for luxury in particular, which has long spoken about issues of labour abuse or environmental degradation as being a fast fashion issue, to have such apparent blind spots when it comes to its own supply chain,” Kent says.
Industry-wide solutions remain limited by fragmented standards and voluntary participation. Efforts such as the Milan Protocol aim to create common standards and a database of vetted suppliers. But participation remains voluntary and limited geographically, while brands have struggled to align around a single auditing framework. Kent questions: “If everyone’s not on it, and everyone’s not using it, and they don’t have to be on it and they don’t have to use it, how useful is it?”
Fashion brands have long used cafes, restaurants and hospitality to sell a broader lifestyle. Increasingly, they’re looking to a less obvious partner: the gourmet grocery store. From branded smoothies and limited-edition tote bags to run clubs, labels are tapping destinations such as Erewhon, Happier Grocery and Meadow Lane to reach consumers in the course of their everyday routines. The draw is clear: these spaces sit at the intersection of food, wellness and community, while offering a highly-sensory environment for brand storytelling. But as more labels pile in, the challenge is making sure these collaborations amount to more than an expensive Instagram moment.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by BoF marketing correspondent Haley Crawford to discuss why fashion is moving into the grocery aisle and what brands need to do to get it right.
Key Insights:
Tie-ups between gourmet grocers and beauty predate today's boom. Erewhon laid the groundwork with early influencer- and celebrity-driven partnerships — including Hailey Bieber's strawberry glazed smoothie in 2022 — while British handbag label Anya Hindmarch has made custom grocery totes for Waitrose and Daylesford for years. Now, Crawford says, "gourmet grocery has just grown so much that there's a much larger sandbox for brands to play in."
Crawford is skeptical that grocers are fertile ground for genuinely new fashion products. The more successful tie-ups — like On's long-term Erewhon partnership, which paired a running shoe capsule with a run club and a co-branded recovery juice — use the grocer to market products the brand already has. "This is where brands might have more success than trying to force a raffia skirt that has nothing to do with the brand or the grocer," she says. "It really has to lend itself well to the universe of the grocery store."
For most brands, Crawford says the value of these collabs is primarily top-of-funnel – offering marketers a path to connect with customers who may not be ready for a major fashion purchase If they're not ready to shell out $500 for a handbag, they can definitely afford a $15 smoothie," she explains. "That can be something of a revenue driver, but it more so gets them into the funnel and drives that loyalty and brand awareness."
In many cases, brands are borrowing "wellness halo" from these stores, Crawford says. But she warns the format risks becoming generic as more brands pile in: "We've seen it with every brand launching their own café... brands need to be wary of that as they tread into the space so it doesn't just become another hot new trend that they're jumping on."
The strongest partnerships hinge on genuine identity overlap and understanding a grocer's specific capabilities — whether that's Meadow Lane's ability to whip up custom menu items like a trout dip for Dairy Boy, or Happier Grocery's built-in cafe setup, which let fashion brand Nanushka import its own cafe concept to New York. Prada Beauty took a different route entirely, partnering with local design agencies to stage market takeovers in cities like Milan for its Prada Spring Market. . Crawford's takeaway: brands should ask "what can these grocers offer to me?" before chasing the trend.
Behind every luxury handbag, bespoke suit and couture gown lies an intricate value chain powered by skilled artisans. But as master craftspeople retire without successors, fashion faces a growing shortage of skilled workers — US tailoring employment has fallen roughly 30 percent over the last decade. Nordstrom, North America's largest employer of tailors, is funding tailoring programmes at FIT and Seattle Central College with another planned at ASU FIDM. The effort is aimed at rebuilding that pipeline at a moment when skilled trades more broadly are enjoying renewed interest from young people questioning the value of a four-year degree.
In this episode, Sheena Butler-Young is joined by BoF Commercial Features Editor Dan Hastings to explore why fashion’s skilled-trades pipeline has thinned, what the industry is doing to rebuild it, and whether rising tuition costs and anxiety around AI have created a new opportunity to sell young people on these careers.
Key Insights:
As Hastings sees it, today’s shortage reflects decades of consolidation and the shift of more luxury manufacturing outside traditional fashion capitals. In his view, the industry failed to invest enough in training the next generation of skilled craftspeople, leaving many expert artisans nearing retirement with too few successors in the pipeline. The industry, he says, "kept the offices in the West... but we didn't really train that next generation of handicraft people.”
Fashion has long heralded the creative director while overlooking the production side. Hastings argues the industry " venerates the creative director" as its "rock stars," while the people making the clothes remain invisible — a visibility gap that can be compounded, particularly in more junior roles, by pay that doesn’t always reflect the skill required.
Apprenticeship programmes tend to cluster around established luxury hubs, leaving many young people unaware these careers are even an option. Hastings argues that interest is there when people know where to look: “It all comes down to knowing that these programmes exist.” But information about apprenticeships, scholarships and bursaries doesn’t always reach prospective workers.
Short courses can make trade careers look deceptively fast to enter, but true mastery takes decades. Hastings notes that at some fashion houses, reaching the highest levels can require decades of experience, warning that for a generation “raised on instant gratification,” the long runway between entering the trade and reaching real earning power can be a tough sell.
While AI may automate some patternmaking functions, Hastings insists it can't touch the artistry of haute couture. He recalls the tradition of embroidering a strand of hair into a Chanel wedding gown for good luck — “that kind of magic doesn't really happen with AI” — arguing luxury houses will have no choice but to keep investing in training if they want to justify their prices on craftsmanship.
For many shoppers, fashion is now experienced primarily through a screen — discovered on social media, watched on runway livestreams and purchased from a product photo. Fashion critic Eugene Rabkin argues in his new book that this shift has left the industry prioritising a garment's image over the garment itself, hollowing out creativity and quality along the way. At the same time, as AI generated imagery floods the feed, a counter-movement is emerging: luxury brands are commissioning painters and illustrators, hosting phone-free dinners and building hands-on experiences designed to pull customers back into the physical world.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by Diana Pearl, BoF's US Editor, and Marc Bain, BoF's UK Editor and technology correspondent, to discuss whether this renewed emphasis on human creativity and craft is a meaningful response to fashion's image-first culture — or just the next trend cycle.
Key Insights:
As consumers increasingly interact with clothing through small screens rather than in person, Bain explains that subtler markers of quality have lost their power to communicate value. "As we interact more with clothing through imagery rather than the physical garments themselves, the logo becomes more important... Now the logo is just the easiest thing to identify. And that has become the most important thing on a garment."
Drawing on a concept borrowed from French theory, Bain says the gap between a product's online image and its physical reality has left some shoppers disillusioned — a dynamic he says extends well beyond fast fashion. "It doesn't just apply to Shein..Eugene Rabkin's argument is that it's come to apply to a whole lot of fashion, including luxury fashion... There's been this decline in quality over the years."
Bain says and Rabkin are careful not to cast technology as the villain, noting that AI's impact depends entirely on how brands choose to use it. " Technology is amoral. It's a tool..And it's really how it's used that is more important."
Pearl points to a wave of luxury brands hiring painters, illustrators and sculptors as a direct response to overly polished, perfected imagery that technology has made ubiquitous — a trend only accelerated by AI. e. "Being perfect and having just this picture-perfect imagery is no longer seen as aspirational. It's actually seen as, ‘slop’ … having that human-made art... is what feels now aspirational and special."
As brands pull back from influencer-driven content blitzes in favour of intimate, phone-free events, Pearl says the playbook for measuring success has changed. . "It's all representative of this bigger shift that we're seeing away from volume and just get as much content as possible... towards the depth of connection."
Beauty has long been one of the industry’s most reliable growth engines — fragrance boomed post-pandemic, prestige beauty held up better than other categories, and value-driven brands like e.l.f. proved that sharp pricing and marketing could keep consumers spending. But a slowdown that began last year and has only become more pronounced since has challenged that thinking.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by BoF senior beauty correspondent Daniela Morosini to unpack the first half's earnings across the beauty conglomerates — from Estée Lauder and Shiseido to L'Oréal, Beiersdorf and E.l.f. — and identify what’s still driving growth and what’s stalling, as well as what investors will be watching for next.
Key Insights:
Selective Spending, Not Shrinking Wallets: Consumers haven't stopped buying beauty — they've become pickier about where they spend and what they’re purchasing. "People are just getting a little bit more selective," said Morosini. Shopping itself is shifting, too: "Maybe it's not always Sephora and Ulta. Maybe it's TikTok Shop."
Skincare Results, Injectables and the Price-Value Equation: Affordable, results-driven skincare brands are outperforming, while medical aesthetics are surging in parallel. Morosini points specifically to "the derm-backed skincare brands or the dermatological brands, the more affordable ones like CeraVe and La Roche-Posay, alongside the growing pull of the lasers and the injectables."
Hair's Unexpected Boom: Hair has emerged as one of the biggest bright spots this earnings season, driven equally by innovation and a cultural shift around hair loss. Morosini notes, "hair loss has just become so much more of a hot topic and I think a lot of stigma has been removed," while also crediting brands like K18 and Olaplex that “have increased what we expect hair products to do for us."
Estée Lauder's Momentum Question: Lauder posted a 17 percent stock jump on its first results under new leadership, but Morosini cautions the win may be borrowed. "The question is how much has Estée Lauder improved its brand's desirability and how much has it benefited from a rising tide," she says, adding that stripped of Amazon Prime Day effects, US growth was closer to "about two percent."
The Danger of the One-Hero Brand: From E.l.f.'s reliance on Rhode to Beiersdorf's dependence on Nivea, this earnings season exposed how a single hero product can mask underlying weakness. "When that's basically all concentrated around one brand, that makes investors a little bit nervous," Morosini says, noting the read-through for M&A: “At a certain point you have to buy the growth."
For a long time, upcycling sat on the fringes of the fashion industry, a tactic used primarily by small independent designers, niche sustainability labels and in one-off capsule collections. That's changing. At Paris Couture Week this spring, Swiss designer Kevin Germanier closed the season with a collection made entirely from excess inventory across seven LVMH-owned brands. Coach is turning used denim into new bags, and Uniqlo is remaking unsellable and used garments under its RE label.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young speaks to senior editorial associate Shayeza Walid to explore why upcycling brands are increasingly marketing upcycling through creativity and individuality rather than sustainability alone, and what's really driving the shift from new EU regulations to a changing consumer mindset.
Key Insights:
Selling Creativity, Not Just Conscience: Walid points to a fundamental shift in how upcycling is marketed. It's no longer framed primarily as an environmental fix, but as a source of design distinction and story. "It felt like the term was becoming ubiquitous across marketing," she says, noting that upcycling has moved from something "relegated to a certain type of consumer or a certain type of brand" to being claimed by some of the industry's biggest names.
Regulation Is Quietly Doing the Heavy Lifting: Walid connects the timing of the boom to the EU's ban on the destruction of unsold goods, which came into force in July. She notes that Kevin Germanier's LVMH-backed couture collection was deliberately built from unsold stock, not deadstock fabric — a distinction he emphasised on stage. "It also means that they'll have to figure out sustainable and approved ways for using their excess stock, and upcycling is one of the methods for that."
Deadstock vs. Textile Waste — Not the Same Debate: Walid unpacks a live tension among practitioners: using deadstock fabric is being challenged by some critics as not addressing overproduction, since it still puts commercial value on excess production. "With deadstock, it's the same as using new fabric in the sense that they're rolls of fabric... that's not necessarily what upcycling is about," while brands like E.L.V. Denim work directly with used, discarded garments instead.
The Infrastructure Is Finally Catching Up: Sorting, collecting and sourcing — the industry's biggest upcycling bottleneck — is improving. Walid cites organisations like Fashion for Good working on AI-assisted sorting, and platforms such as Nona Source and The Materialist connecting brands to deadstock fabric. "There's a greater design interest in it now more than there's ever been," she says of the shift she's tracked through conversations with suppliers.
The Consumer Wants Range, Not a Label: Walid argues the audience for upcycled product has broadened well beyond the sustainability shopper. "You could have an upcycled Miu Miu product today, and maybe that says that you like high fashion... but also you think it's cool that your product is from an upcycled material," she says, describing a consumer who wants variety in their closet rather than to be defined by one aesthetic or ethic.
Scale Remains the Unsolved Problem: Despite the momentum, there are limits. Sizing and colour inconsistency frustrate wholesale buyers, the process is inherently slower than working with virgin material, and export bans on used textiles in countries like Bangladesh complicate sourcing. She also flags that upcyclers in the Global South — in markets like Kantamanto in Ghana — have done this sort of work for generations but remain largely excluded from the value chain brands are now building.
For years, follower count was the clearest shorthand for a creator's value — more followers meant more reach, more brand deals, more money. But social media doesn't work that way anymore. TikTok's For You page, Instagram's suggested posts and other algorithmically curated feeds mean creators can reach huge audiences without those people ever following them. At the same time, affiliate marketing platforms like LTK and ShopMy are giving brands a much clearer picture of who actually drives sales, with smaller creators often outperforming bigger names.
In this episode, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young talks to BoF US Editor Diana Pearl about how brands and creators are rethinking the value of an audience, and where creator value is headed next.
Key Insights:
A huge following no longer guarantees cultural weight. Pearl points to the gap between raw numbers and actual impact: "You look at someone like Dixie D'Amelio, who has almost 54 million followers on TikTok... but I would not say [she is] as culturally relevant as someone like Alex Earle, who has not even 9 million followers on TikTok."
New platforms have made it possible to see exactly who is driving sales, not just who has the biggest audience. As Pearl explains, "ShopMy really changed that — they offer brands a lot more insight into which creators are actually driving sales, even if they're not running a paid partnership."
TikTok's For You page and Instagram's suggested posts have done more than any other shift to break the link between followers and visibility. "Those are the two primary factors that have really diminished the importance of follower count," she says, "because you can have someone with 300 followers who goes viral."
The single most important quality a creator can build today resists easy measurement. "Trust is the number one most important thing that an influencer or creator can curate today," Pearl says, "and that trust is not something that can necessarily be measured by metrics on a spreadsheet."
Chasing every viral trend is a losing strategy — consistency is what builds a durable audience. "Playing the long game is really the best strategy," she says. "Staying true to who you are — that's how you build that community. That is how you built that trust in that community."
For much of the last decade, fashion brands and retailers were fixated on making shopping as seamless as possible — endless product online, algorithmic recommendations, next-day delivery. But after years of digital sameness, something more analogue is starting to feel exciting again. That shift sits at the heart of BoF's new retail package, The Best Fashion Stores in the World — an insider's guide to 65 independent retailers spanning from Brooklyn's Ven. Space to Dongliang in Shanghai, Alara in Lagos and Dover Street Market.
BoF retail editor Cathaleen Chen joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young to discuss why independent retailers are becoming more important to shoppers, brands and the wider fashion ecosystem, as well as why the ritual of engaging with fashion IRL is more important than ever.
Key Insights:
Chen says the list's three pillars — curation, experience and partnership — were designed to reflect more than consumer taste. Partnership, she explains, addresses "the support and the responsibilities that all retailers have to the fashion ecosystem," at a moment when department stores have earned a track record for not paying vendors and multi-brand retail has been reshaped by the collapse of players like Matches and the struggles of Net-a-Porter.
With e-commerce solving for intent-driven shopping, Chen argues stores now win on discovery. As she puts it: "If you know exactly what you want, you shop online. If you don't know what you want, you shop in stores." She adds that the best shopkeepers add value "not just discovery for new brands" but new ways of styling — an eye that "allows designers to sort of view their collection in new eyes" in a way social feeds may fall short,
Per wholesale data from the platform Joor, independent retailers' share of transactions rose from 49 percent in 2020 to 62 percent in 2025 — meaning independents "now make up the majority of transactions in wholesale" on the platform, a significant insight even when accounting for the caveat that it reflects one marketplace.
The list includes retailers in Ibiza, Hangzhou, Cairo, Cartagena and Kuwait City — a deliberate move beyond fashion's traditional capitals. Citing a conversation with Kallmeyer founder and chief executive Daniella Kallmeyer, Chen notes that regional boutiques may be " even more important than the larger international stores because they're able to penetrate these outer-tier markets," which represent white space for fashion, rather than lesser opportunity.
The appeal of independent retail is fundamentally about a different mindset: casual discovery and "bopping around the neighbourhood," which Chen calls "the opposite of online shopping, where I know exactly what I want.”
Asked to name the one quality that will define the best stores for the next decade, Chen didn't hesitate: "I think conviction is what makes these doors so special, and ultimately what makes them so successful today" — pointing to Ikram Goldman's boutique, Ikram, in Chicago, and her famously intimate client relationships as the clearest example.
The Fashion and Beauty Companies Everyone Wants to Work For
05 Aug 2026
00:34:11
What makes a fashion or beauty company a truly desirable place to work? BoF’s second annual ranking of the industry’s most sought-after employers looks beyond brand recognition to examine what workers value — and where companies’ reputations do not always sync up with employee experience.
In this episode of The Debriefsenior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young speaks with junior commercial writer Eoghan O’Donnell and commercial features editor Dan Hastings about the companies that topped the list, the factors shaping employees’ choices and the challenges facing employers today. They also discuss career development, leadership, workplace stability and how artificial intelligence is changing fashion jobs.
Key Insights:
The conglomerate stability draw: Amid market volatility, candidates are gravitating toward European luxury conglomerates and beauty giants. Chanel, Hermès and Dior topped the fashion list, while L'Oréal Paris led beauty, ahead of Dior Beauty and Charlotte Tilbury. Their appeal lies partly in perceived stability and career longevity. Founder-led brands including Charlotte Tilbury, Rhode, Victoria Beckham Beauty, Fenty Beauty and Rare Beauty also made the beauty top 20, driven more by product and creative vision than corporate scale.
Prestige recruits, it doesn't retain: Iconic brand names remain powerful recruitment tools, but employees consistently rank pay, career progression and company culture as their top three priorities — even as prestige tops their stated reason for choosing a dream employer. The disconnect is measurable: only 28 percent of current workers say their employer's external reputation strongly aligns with their day-to-day experience, and among those who perceive a gap, 80 percent plan to leave within 12 months. "Prestige attracts talent, but it's not necessarily what retains it," says O'Donnell.
The ivory tower effect: Of all cohorts surveyed, C-suite and HR respondents were the least likely to say their employer's external image differed from internal reality — the group best placed to close that gap is often the most disconnected from it. A Glassdoor and Indeed review analysis (December 2024 onward) of the top 10 companies in both rankings surfaced consistent complaints about workload, benefits, and disconnects between store-level management and headquarters. "There is a [difference] between having a prestigious brand name and working for a brand that doesn't necessarily deliver a healthy workplace," says O'Donnell. "
The generational AI divide: Sentiment on AI splits sharply by seniority, not by digital fluency. Workers over 40 are the most AI-optimistic cohort — not Gen Z, as employers might assume — while 39 percent of fashion workers and 35 percent of beauty workers say they want AI training they haven't received. A small but notable share admitted using AI at work without disclosing it to their employer.
The "job lock" threat: Many employees are staying in roles for economic security, not satisfaction. "We know that some employees are staying in roles because of economic uncertainty rather than that sense of genuine satisfaction," says O'Donnell. Hastings sees the same pressure building from the other direction: "I don't think [Gen Z] are willing to sacrifice their [salary], paying the rent, and eating on the altar of working for a prestigious fashion or beauty company — and that will create a lot of friction within the industry."
Women's health is the next battleground: In survey responses skewing majority-female, respondents voiced urgent, largely unmet demand for egg freezing, menstrual leave, and support through perimenopause and menopause — benefits nearly absent from current employer offerings in two female-dominated industries.
Fabric content used to be a niche sustainability conversation. Now it's a mainstream health one, driven by the same scrutiny shoppers already apply to what they eat and put on their skin — searches for "natural fibre" are up over 100 percent in five years, and searches for "what is viscose?" have climbed roughly 5,000 percent in the US over the same period. Gap found out just how fast that shift can turn into backlash when its nostalgic Zac Posen knit drop — 80 percent polyester, 20 percent elastane — drew comparisons to fast fashion within days of launch, despite carrying a premium, above-$100 price tag.
In this episode of The Debrief, Sheena Butler-Young and Shayeza Walid unpack why natural fibres have become a health obsession rather than a values debate, why "natural" doesn't automatically mean sustainable, and whether polyester can ever really be dethroned.
Key Insights:
Health Is the New Driver: The conversation used to centre on durability and value; now it's about wellness. Walid explains that shoppers are "instead of just talking about durability and value... starting [to go] more into this health conversation," adding that clothing has become "this final frontier" for the same scrutiny people already apply to food and skincare.
Gap's Zac Posen Knit Became a Cautionary Tale: The backlash wasn't really about one sweater — it was about price and expectation. Walid notes the item retailed above $100, so "the disappointment was... doubled down on by the fact that this is supposed to be like a premium level of Gap." As she puts it, "people are [now] associating price with natural fiber."
Natural Doesn't Automatically Mean Sustainable: Walid is blunt that the "natural equals good" framing oversimplifies things: "natural does mean that it might have a higher carbon footprint," she says, pointing to methane from grazing cattle for wool and the water intensity of cotton. Her summary: "anything that's derived from nature... naturally has a higher environmental footprint because it's from the earth."
Different Generations, Same Shift: Motivations diverge by age, but the direction is the same. Gen Z shoppers are driven by "value signaling" around climate, Walid says, while older shoppers are asking "how can I live a healthier, better life?" Her takeaway: "you're seeing it across different age brackets, but the end result is this shift."
Polyester Isn't Going Anywhere Soon: Despite the backlash, Walid says synthetics remain entrenched, especially in performance wear. "It's cheap... it is subsidized by... the oil lobby," she says, and its "malleable qualities are so unique to itself that it's very difficult to replace." Bio-based elastane is emerging, but only at pilot scale.
For decades, institutions like Central Saint Martins, Parsons and Institut Français de la Mode have launched some of fashion's most successful careers. But, today's graduates are entering a more competitive industry grappling with slower growth across the board, where AI is changing how work gets done and employers are reassessing the skills they need.
This week, BoF Careers features editor Dan Hastings joins Senior Correspondent Sheena Butler–Young to examine how fashion education is evolving alongside a rapidly changing industry — and whether those changes are enough to prepare students for today's job market.
Key Insights:
Fashion graduates are entering a far more competitive industry. With thousands of graduates competing for a limited number of entry-level roles, breaking into fashion is arguably becoming even more difficult than it was just a decade ago. According to UCAS data, the UK alone now offers over 200 bachelor's-level fashion courses, with cohorts running from single figures up to roughly 50 at institutions such as Central Saint Martins and the London College of Fashion. That points to close to 5,000 new fashion design graduates a year, entering a job market that, in Hastings's words, “is not ready for that number of young graduates” — and competing not only with each other but with the backlog of graduates from previous years who haven't yet found work.
Financial barriers persist. Despite some progress, Hastings describes many fashion students continuing to work unpaid internships to gain much-needed experience while struggling to afford tuition, housing and other college expenses. It’s structure that, he says, often “excludes people from working-class backgrounds, even if now they have access to fashion degrees.” UK student loans widen access to the degree itself, but not to the unpaid work experience that increasingly follows it.
Prestige still opens doors. Hastings says some of fashion's most prestigious schools continue to offer a route into the industry's most sought-after roles—but not because of the name on the diploma alone. Their value lies in the combination of rigorous creative training, selective programmes and sustained access to industry professionals. As examples, Hastings points to schools like La Cambre in Brussels, whose highly selective programmes and graduate shows, he says, continue to attract attention from leading luxury brands and recruiters. He also highlights institutions like IFM in Paris, where close industry ties and scholarship support help connect students with the wider fashion ecosystem. As Hastings puts it, "when you have a foot inside the door, you can really connect with really amazing people."
The Anti-Unicorn Playbook That Beat Fashion's DTC Boom
15 Jul 2026
00:26:47
In 2016, the global retail landscape was dominated by successful direct-to-consumer (DTC) disruptors like Everlane, Glossier, Allbirds and Outdoor Voices. Backed by hundreds of millions of dollars in venture capital, they prioritised rapid sales growth and hyper-aggressive social media customer acquisition over immediate profitability.
In this episode, senior news and features editor Diana Pearl joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young to explore why the once-dominant DTC formula ultimately unravelled — and how a quieter, lesser-scrutinised class of brands, such as Doên, Hill House and Staud, built more durable businesses by taking a different path.
Key Insights:
A faltering DTC playbook faltered : IIn 2016, fashion's direct-to-consumer boom was fuelled by venture capital. Well-funded startups spent heavily on creative agencies, polished brand identities and social media advertising in pursuit of rapid growth, while largely rejecting wholesale. But as customer acquisition costs climbed and digital marketing became less effective, many brands discovered that bypassing traditional retail wasn't the sustainable advantage it once seemed.
Brand before scale: Having a strong aesthetic is key to the equation. . “Being very defined with your aesthetic and your point of view, you can then take that and apply it to a bunch of different categories,” says Pearl Direct consumer selling can be a good way to control brand identity but wholesale remains a critical avenue for brand awareness and discovery. 'It’s not that direct- to-consumers can't work, you just need to build up that brand identity,” says Pearl. “I think a lot of these big 2016 names went wrong by raising so much money without [the brand identity].”
The value of being small and growing slow Limited capital forced many of these brands to stay disciplined with inventory, giving them time to understand what customers actually wanted before making bigger bets. While frequent sell-outs weren't ideal, they were often less damaging than excess inventory that required markdowns and eroded profitability. The result was a stronger feedback loop between brands and their customers and quicker pivots.“When products sell out, you get to see what your customers are really resonating with versus if you're just advertising on social media in order to grow sales,” says Pearl.
Community over customer acquisition : Rather than relying on expensive paid marketing, many of these brands built loyal followings through authentic relationships with creators and customers. Early influencer partnerships grew alongside the brands themselves, creating trust and awareness that proved more durable than simply buying reach through social media advertising. “
Luxury's post-pandemic boom is over. Growth has slowed, shoppers are pushing back on years of price increases and many brands are struggling to convince customers they're still worth the premium. Drawing on BoF's 2026 State of Luxury report — which includes a survey of more than 2,000 affluent consumers in the US and China, alongside interviews with industry leaders — BoF editors Mimosa Spencer and Robert Williams explore what's driving luxury's reset and what it means for brands.
They unpack why heritage, craftsmanship and logo power are no longer enough to justify premium prices on their own, and why emotional connection, creativity and exceptional retail experiences have become increasingly important to today's luxury shopper. They also discuss what brands need to do to rebuild excitement, restore value and win customers back.
Key Insights:
Emotional Matters More Than Heritage: Craftsmanship, heritage, and logo power are still important, but they are increasingly seen as table stakes rather than the ultimate selling point. After years of price increases, luxury shoppers are looking for brands that spark excitement, feel culturally relevant, or offer a more meaningful emotional connection. As Spencer explains, this shift is deeply tied to a broader consumer weariness: "Luxury fatigue has been a real problem. Shoppers are tired of price hikes. They're tired of things costing more when... the product hasn't actually changed."
Luxury Shouldn’t Feel Like a Chore: Luxury brands once built exclusivity through long queues, appointment-only access, and other barriers to entry. Today, shoppers expect premium service to feel effortless, requiring brands to balance accessibility for aspirational consumers with absolute privacy for Very Important Clients (VICs). The traditional mechanics of high-end retail are fast becoming liabilities; as Spencer observes, "Once you've peaked somebody's interest, you've gotten your audience, you want to be able to serve them right away. Don't make them go through hoops. Don't let them wait in line. None of that is appealing anymore."
Different Meanings in Different Markets: While emotional connection remains key across both major economic engines, how that plays out is heavily influenced by geography. In China, luxury consumption is closely tied to external self-expression and social recognition—even through understated "quiet luxury". In the US, shoppers are more likely to prioritise personal taste, self-reward, and alignment with a brand's values. Explaining this cultural divergence, Williams notes that "historically there is a stereotype that conspicuous consumption and very obvious signifiers of luxury are what are gonna perform much better in a country like China, [but] you have a really strong success for certain brands there that have a much more discreet or understated approach."
Navigating the Spectator Divide: Luxury brands are increasingly catering to two distinct groups: transactional store clients who buy products, and digital audiences who engage with brands strictly through fashion content. The challenge is turning online attention into meaningful retail engagement without losing either audience. This structural shift requires brands to balance commercial conversions against the growing weight of pure spectatorship. As Williams notes, "There is a real issue in fashion right now with spectatorship and the idea that lots of people are just as happy to consume images of fashion than to actually go buy it. We're compulsive consumers of imagery in our culture today."
How Nike Built the Biggest World Cup Campaign Ever
01 Jul 2026
00:48:46
The 2026 World Cup marked an unprecedented milestone for global football, expanding to 48 teams playing over 100 matches across the US, Canada and Mexico. In this special episode of The Debrief, Nike’s vice president of global brand management Helena Thornton joins BoFsenior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young and sports and fashion correspondent Mike Syke to discuss the strategy behind the brand's World Cup campaign, the expansive relationship between football, culture and commerce and what the tournament means at a pivotal moment for Nike.
The episode examines how Nike approached the sport's biggest stage, from the creative thinking behind its 'Rip the Script' campaign — which brought together elite athletes, pop culture figures and cinematic storytelling — to the challenge of building campaigns that resonate in an increasingly fragmented media landscape. Thornton also reflects on how the World Cup fits into Nike's broader brand strategy as the company works to regain brand heat.
Key Insights:
Breaking beyond football fans requires becoming part of the broader cultural conversation. As brands compete for attention with creators, entertainment and other cultural forces, Nike designed its World Cup campaign to extend beyond the sport itself, bringing together elite footballers, athletes and cultural figures to appeal to both dedicated supporters and more casual fans. “Including the sort of that celebrity class alongside the elite footballers and the athletes, because I think that speaks to the more casual fan,” Thornton says.
Long-term community building matters more than tournament marketing alone. Thornton says major sporting events should serve as a catalyst for brand storytelling and momentum rather than the entirety of the brand’s strategy. You don't ever just want to be the shiny object that drops in for the weeks of the tournament and then you leave,” she says. “We really want to make sure that people have unbelievable access to the game... that moment actually really ignites this huge love of the game.” Grassroots investments, like Nike's ‘Toma’ platform, the street football movement, help build deeper consumer relationships than short-lived tournament campaigns.
Nike built its campaign around athlete instinct rather than a traditional sports marketing playbook. Rather than relying on rigid creative formulas, the brand grounded 'Rip the Script' in conversations with professional footballers, embracing emotion, authenticity and intuition as the foundation for the campaign. “We spoke to hundreds of footballers who kept telling us the same thing,” Thornton explains. “They were … just a bit sick of people telling [them] what to do... ‘we just wanna trust our gut.’”
Football creates moments of connection that few cultural platforms can match. The World Cup's global reach made it more than just a sporting event, creating a shared cultural moment at a time when people were looking for connection and optimism. “There's just a passion about the sport…there is just this larger unity right now that I'm seeing from people,” Thornton says. “I think the world just needed this thing to bring us all together and there is no other sport other than football really that truly, truly is the global game.”
Innovation remains central to Nike's broader turnaround strategy. While campaigns like 'Rip the Script' are among the brand's most visible expressions, Thornton says major sporting moments bring together teams across the company to think beyond marketing. “We sit down across all of the different departments at Nike and we talk about these big sports moments, ‘what do we wanna do to totally change the industry again? What is the athlete problem that we're solving for? What innovation can we push to allow an athlete to do something they never even believed that was possible?’”
Why Activewear Consumers Are Looking Beyond Lululemon
24 Jun 2026
00:24:59
For more than a decade, activewear shoppers largely looked to Lululemon and Nike. But as the post-pandemic boom cools and growth becomes harder to find, a new crop of brands is gaining traction.
Smaller labels like SetActive, 437 and Oner Active aren’t reinventing activewear. They’re winning customers through social media, creator-led marketing and a deep understanding of today’s fitness culture where consumers move fluidly through workouts like pilates, Hyrox and tennis on any given week.
In this episode of The Debrief Podcast, retail editor Cathaleen Chen joins senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young to discuss why these newer brands are resonating, whether their momentum is sustainable, and what their success reveals about the challenges facing industry leaders Nike and Lululemon.
Key Insights:
The era of Lululemon as a status symbol may be ending. "Lululemon in the past two decades effectively cornered the market on activewear as a status symbol," Chen says. "I do think the era of Lululemon as a status symbol is ending ... if you're not going to be a status symbol, what will you be?"
Consumers are craving something new. The rise of brands like Set Active, 437 and Oner Active is being driven less by breakthrough product innovation than by a broader desire for novelty. "The answer that I got overwhelmingly from my reporting is that, honestly, we are just in this moment of desire for newness," Chen says. "People were like, ‘okay, I have Lululemon in my closet, what's next?’"
Founder-led social media is helping challengers compete. Rather than relying on big marketing budgets, many emerging brands are building audiences through creator-style content — from behind-the-scenes glimpses into product development to founders who function as influencers in their own right. "What they have done incredibly well is build organic followings on social media and be able to capitalise on certain TikTok trends," Chen says. “They have the benefits of … the founder coming in every day, trying on the products herself... it makes a big difference in being visible to the customer”.
Activewear is entering its own version of the indie beauty era. As consumers build wardrobes around multiple activities rather than a single sport, the category is becoming more fragmented and open to new players. "What's happening in activewear is very similar to what happened in beauty a few years ago," Chen says. "Where the category was dominated by a handful of brands … but we reached this inflection point where people want something that feels new."
Fashion’s book obsession is no longer subtle. What started as the occasional literary reference has become a broader wave of book clubs, salon-style events, campaign imagery and products designed to signal that a brand — and its customer — has cultural depth. It’s all happening as reading rates are declining, but the image of the reader has never looked more fashionable.
This week on The Debrief, BoF reporters Haley Crawford and Shayeza Walid explain how books became fashion’s latest flex, and when the trend starts to look less like culture and more like marketing.
Key Insights:
Books have become fashion’s new status symbol: Literature has always inspired fashion, but both reporters argue the relationship has become far more explicit. “We felt like books were being productised by fashion itself,” says Walid. In a world saturated by digital content, books now function as markers of cultural literacy and intellectual identity. As Crawford puts it: “You actually have to take the time to read a book from cover to cover. Fewer people are doing that today, so it is more of a flex to have read the book and actually understand the reference.”
TikTok is fueling an analogue revival: Ironically, fashion’s literary turn is being accelerated by social media. Online subcommunities like BookTok have transformed reading into a visible identity and community marker for younger consumers. “Social media, the stores, the products you’re buying and this analogue signalling, are all coming together,” says Walid. “ I don’t think this is happening in a silo. I think it’s very interconnected to other forms of analogue connection that people are finding nowadays.”
Not every literary collaboration resonates equally: Both reporters argue that the strongest examples are those rooted in genuine engagement with literature rather than surface-level branding. Crawford points to Prada’s collaborations with authors and literary scholars as examples of brands building deeper cultural worlds. Walid highlights Chanel’s funding of a library at a Shanghai art museum. “It was actually creating or funding something which allowed people to engage with books and literature,” she says.
The trend risks losing its cultural power: Fashion using books as a cultural signal is likely to lose some potency if every brand adopts the same strategy. “The ones that have been doing it for quite some time will continue to do so. But those that have maybe slapped a book name on a T-shirt or created a book tote might see less success,” says Crawford. “The second consumers start noticing the corporatisation of this trend, it is going to start to become stale,” adds Walid.
The rise of GLP–1 drugs, such as Ozempic and Wegovy, is forcing fashion and beauty companies to rethink everything from sizing and fit to product development. With one in eight Americans having tried a GLP–1 medication, brands are grappling with how to serve consumers whose bodies may be changing more rapidly than traditional product cycles were designed to accommodate.
In this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young sits down with BoF senior news and features editor Diana Pearl and The Business of Beauty news and features editor Brennan Kilbane to discuss how fashion and beauty brands are responding to the GLP-1 boom — and why the industry's apparent willingness to adapt to these consumers is raising difficult questions about its long history with size inclusivity.
Key Insights:
GLP-1s have turned into a fashion infrastructure problem: GLP-1 drugs are creating a new kind of consumer need — not just smaller sizes, but clothes and products that can accommodate rapid physical change. For fashion, this exposes the limits of systems built around relatively stable bodies, from fit models to inventory planning to alterations. As Pearl puts it, the industry may be talking more openly about fit, but real change will be slow because the underlying systems are deeply entrenched. “I don’t think it’s going to be a change that happens overnight or even in the next few months,” she says. “This is something that’s going to take years to fully address.”
The best brand responses meet customers where they are: Brands such as Soma offer one model for how to respond: create products for bodies in transition without framing that change as something to fix. Pearl says that approach works because it centres practical need rather than aspiration or shame. “It’s really just making it about: ‘okay, your life has changed, your body has changed, let’s meet you where you are,’” she says. Kilbane adds, “It's possible that we’re going to continue to see more people fluctuating in their weight and it’s quite forward-thinking for a fashion brand to accommodate that changing body.”
Beauty is already speaking more directly to the GLP-1 consumer: Beauty and wellness brands are moving faster than fashion in addressing the physical effects of rapid weight loss, from skin laxity to changes in facial volume. According to Kilbane, the category has to have a clearer product rationale for entering the conversation and respond to specific consumer concerns with products and treatments that feel practical. As Kilbane says, “I’ve talked to a lot of plastic surgeons and dermatologists and even some skincare executives. There are things that happen to your skin when you take these medicines,” he says. “I think especially beauty and wellness brands do need to talk to this customer differently, because they are going through a different transformation.”
Fashion’s unresolved relationship with thinness: The GLP-1 conversation has provoked scepticism as plus-size consumers have long argued that fashion sizing is broken, yet the industry appears more willing to change when bodies are getting smaller. For Kilbane, this criticism is fair: “It’s hard to not see any of this as the fashion industry’s excuse to champion thinness once again,” he says. Pearl adds that the debate cannot be separated from fashion’s deeper history of exclusion. “On the surface, it’s about sizing, but you can’t talk about what’s going on and not talk about fashion’s history of championing thinness,” she says.
In May, sleeping bags lined pavements and police barriers went up outside Swatch stores from Times Square to Dubai. The object of this global hysteria was not a piece of high-end mechanical art, but the "Royal Pop" – a $400 pocket watch collaboration between mass-market giant Swatch and watchmaker Audemars Piguet. Based on AP’s iconic Royal Oak, which typically starts at $20,000, the launch divided the insular watch enthusiast community while captivating Gen Z consumers and equity analysts alike.
In this episode of The Debrief, senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young is joined by retail editor Cathaleen Chen and luxury editor Mimosa Spencer to evaluate the highs and lows of the fallout of the viral launch, the operational chaos across retail and whether a plastic pendant can truly serve as a long-term customer recruitment tool.
Key Insights:
The Strategy of Alternative Formats: By designing the collection as pocket and pendant watches rather than traditional wristwatches, Audemars Piguet aimed to protect the brand equity of its foundational core product while still opening the brand to a younger, accessory-loving Gen Z demographic.
An Unequal Value Exchange: While Audemars Piguet is treating the collaboration as an insulated, almost philanthropic “special project,” Swatch Group stands to gain significantly more commercial momentum. Despite some short-term negative sentiment driven by watch purists, the partnership represents a major cultural breakthrough for Swatch as it attempts to reverse recent financial stagnation.
The Accessibility Offense: The intense backlash from traditional watch collectors exposes a deeper tension within the luxury value proposition. For an industry built on status signaling and rigid gatekeeping, the mass participation of everyday consumers is often viewed by insiders not as democratization, but as a dilution of exclusivity in luxury watchmaking.
The PR Stunt Demerit: While market traffic and mainstream cultural buzz reached unprecedented stratospheres, the operational execution – which resulted in store closures and aggressive crowds – inflicted real in-person emotional damage. For legacy luxury institutions, headlines detailing retail chaos and police barricades run directly counter to the controlled, pristine environment that high-net-worth clients expect.
Entering the Cultural Conversation: The collaboration underscores a broader challenge facing the luxury sector: building cultural relevance and household-name recognition among younger consumers who may currently be priced out of $25,000 mechanical timepieces, while planting the seed for future customer loyalty.
The beauty industry is currently contending with marketing saturation, compounded by an overcrowded content ecosystem in which traditional metrics like follower counts and comments are often distorted by bots. To combat this, brands are turning to "rage bait"— content designed to trigger shock, anger or confusion and meant to drive shares and saves, which are now seen as more authentic indicators of engagement. From Lancôme’s "misdirected" PR mailers to ColourPop’s fake apology squares, the strategy bets that a negative or confused reaction is more valuable than no reaction at all in a world where attention is the ultimate currency.
In this episode, BoF’s Sheena Butler-Young talks to Business of Beauty Executive Editor Priya Rao, and Senior Editorial Associate Rachael Griffiths about whether these high-risk stunts build genuine brand equity or simply erode long-term consumer trust.
Key Insights:
The Engagement-Sales Gap: While rage bait excels at awareness and can grab people’s attention, there is no direct, proven line to immediate sales. Success is currently measured through the "halo effect" on other posts and metrics like shares and saves rather than conversion.
The "Boy Who Cried Wolf" Risk: Brands face a significant limitation in that this strategy is often a one-time lever. If a brand issues a fake apology for marketing, it risks losing all credibility when a genuine corporate blunder occurs.
Suitability by Segment: Chaotic creator" style may work best for indie or playful brands like ColourPop and Dieux. Heritage or luxury brands — particularly those focused on medical-grade efficacy or high price points — risk alienating customers who expect a serious relationship with the brand.
The Confusion Trap: Stunts that cross the line from cheeky to genuine misinformation, such as Schick’s ambiguous partnership with Nick Jonas, can leave consumers feeling annoyed and disappointed rather than entertained.
Since the earliest days of tools like ChatGPT and Claude, industry conversations have been marked by a tension between excitement around speed and efficiency alongside deep-seated fears of job loss, creative dilution and concerns about its environmental footprint. What once played out in theory is now unfolding in practice – as a broader rejection of what AI represents — particularly as more consumers view AI-generated content as a cost-cutting measure that erodes fashion’s human touch,
In this episode, The Debrief host Sheena Butler-Young discusses with BoF correspondents Marc Bain and Haley Crawford why the backlash is intensifying and how consumer sentiment against brands using AI-generated imagery is forcing a reckoning. They explore whether fashion can actually embrace these tools without losing the care and time that confers luxury status.
Key Insights:
Consumers are moving past passive skepticism around AI and increasingly displaying a more visceral negative reaction to AI visuals.
In an industry built on originality and attribution, AI is often perceived as shortcutting the creative process — or worse, borrowing from artists without credit. For many, it raises uncomfortable questions about what constitutes real creative ownership.
At the same time, there is growing concern that AI could erode both the craft and the pipeline behind fashion creativity, threatening entry-level roles and the time, care and human touch that underpin luxury’s value.
For years, the fashion industry operated under the assumption that digital scale was the right path. However, the "growth-at-all-costs" model is currently fracturing as luxury giants grapple with soaring customer acquisition costs and a logistical crisis fueled by high return rates. In response, a quiet counter-culture is emerging, with stores like Ven. Space and Dot Reeder thriving by intentionally limiting their digital footprints.
In this episode, executive editor Brian Baskin and senior correspondent Sheena Butler-Young discuss with BoF correspondent Austin Kim how these analogue retailers are using hyper-local intimacy and intelligent curation to build a more resilient business model that values brand equity over infinite reach.
Key Insights:
The Rejection of Digital Friction: Store owners like Chris Green of Ven. Space are intentionally limiting their digital footprints to avoid the "grind" of high customer acquisition costs. Austin Kim notes that for these owners, "these small businesses are people doing what they love and what they don't love is e-commerce and they have no interest in it".
The "Sit and Fit" Financial Advantage: Analyst Simeon Siegel posits that the in-store customer is the superior economic unit because they absorb the costs of fulfillment. As Kim explains, "In the store, the customer takes the pair of jeans off the rack, walks it over to the cash register, and then takes it home to themselves," whereas online, a brand must pay for picking, packaging, and the high probability of returns.
Product Curation as a Moat: Success for these boutiques relies on a "mythic" assortment of brands that creates a level of trust an algorithm cannot replicate. Kim highlights that the draw is the owner's perspective: "Chris Green is almost like a Mr. Rogers if he wore Dries van Noten ... that perspective is exactly what I think customers connect with".
Analogue Marketing and the "Third Space": To cut through digital exhaustion, retailers like Outline are pivoting to high-quality print catalogs. Co-founder Margaret Austin describes e-commerce as "unsexy," preferring a strategy where receiving something at your door acts as "an amazing strategy" to cut through the noise of social media.
The Scalability Paradox: The "secret sauce" of these stores is often the owner-operator’s deep local roots, which is difficult for corporate entities to mimic. Kim warns that "you lose the soul of a business really quickly as you scale, especially on e-commerce," because you begin buying for an international audience rather than maintaining a specific, connected perspective.
Why Luxury Still Can’t Find Its Way Out of the Slump
22 Apr 2026
00:36:51
Luxury entered 2026 with hopes that new creative directors and signs of stabilisation would finally help the sector turn a corner. Instead, the latest round of earnings has raised bigger questions about what growth now looks like for the industry. While brands including Dior, Gucci and Chanel are generating renewed interest, that excitement has not yet translated into a meaningful sales rebound.
From the slowing Chinese market to geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, luxury conglomerates are facing a complex web of challenges that creative hype alone cannot solve.
On the episode, BoF luxury editors Mimosa Spencer and Robert Williams explain why China remains such a critical missing piece, why Louis Vuitton is under closer scrutiny than usual, and why jewellery continues to outperform the rest of luxury.
Key Insights:
One of the clearest messages from this earnings season is that new designers can lift mood and momentum internally, but that alone is not enough to restart the industry. Williams says the latest results confirmed that the impact of all these creative resets is “pretty limited, especially in isolation”. As he puts it, “the result of that is more like treading water or stabilising versus actually reigniting growth.” Spencer adds that the disappointment was sharper because there had been so much excitement around these debuts that “a lot of investors were expecting some earlier results.”
Both Spencer and Williams point to China as the market hanging over the entire sector. Even where sentiment improved at the end of last year, investors were still looking for signs that Chinese demand might return in a meaningful way. Spencer says the bigger issue now is not just timing but structure: “The question is whether the kind of growth we saw in the past will actually come back.” She adds: “It seems like it takes a lot more work for a luxury brand to actually get good results in China.”
LVMH still wants the market to see Dior as the manageable turnaround story, but Williams suggests the real anxiety now sits around Louis Vuitton. The brand has held up better than many peers, but investors are increasingly asking where its next phase of growth will come from. Williams points out that the bigger concern is not short-term performance, but what comes next. “No one can really see where the growth is going to come from,” he says. “Is this still a growth industry? What will the industry look like and how will it operate if it's not growing anymore?” If the industry’s strongest player cannot clearly define its next phase of growth, it raises deeper questions about the trajectory of luxury as a whole.
Despite the broader slowdown across luxury, Spencer argues that jewellery’s outperformance is not just about demand for hard luxury, but about how consumers now judge value. Handbag prices have climbed so sharply that jewellery, by comparison, can feel like a more rational indulgence. “Jewellery prices haven’t gone up in the same way that handbag prices have gone up,” she says. At the same time, jewellery still carries a perception of durability and investment value, whether or not that always holds in practice.
Luxury brands may be making more progress with their established high-spending clients than with the broader aspirational base they once relied on for volume. Williams notes that some houses are succeeding in pulling core customers back into stores, even if that is not yet translating into a wider recovery. At Chanel, for example, he points to renewed momentum among “well-to-do women with big executive jobs in their late 30s, 40s, and 50s,” while Louis Vuitton’s monogram anniversary campaign has helped refocus attention on its most iconic products.
When Elliot Hill returned to Nike as chief executive in October 2024, he was tasked with reversing one of the most significant slumps in the company’s history.
The business had lost momentum with both investors and consumers and his strategy has focused on restoring wholesale relationships, rebuilding key categories like running and trying to stabilise the brand’s broader narrative.
But Nike’s latest earnings and weak outlook have intensified doubts about whether the recovery is moving quickly enough. In a fragmented marketplace where heat has moved toward niche competitors and rejuvenated legacy rivals, Nike is struggling to convince a skeptical public and an impatient Wall Street that its next chapter has truly begun.
On the episode, Sykes joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack why Nike’s comeback still feels unfinished, what the brand is getting right, and what it would take for the market to believe again.
Key Insights:
Sykes argues that the sharp reaction to Nike’s latest earnings was less about one bad quarter than a broader loss of patience. Hill has spent more than a year telling investors that the comeback is taking shape, but the numbers still do not show enough momentum to support that story. “Investors are just sort of running thin on patience with Elliott Hill,” Sykes says. That problem is compounded by Nike’s own guidance. As Sykes puts it, “you can’t really get ringing endorsements from people” when the company is already warning that the next quarter will still be down.
The sportswear landscape of 2026 is fundamentally different from the one Nike dominated a decade ago. Whilst Nike is still a big player in sportswear, its dominance does not necessarily mean the same thing it once did. With the market fragmented, heat is now distributed across brands like Hoka, New Balance and Adidas, and attention moves quickly between rivals. “Nike is still bigger than every other sportswear brand out there right now,” he says. “But when Nike is at its best, it is not participating in the conversation, it is controlling the conversation.” The issue is not that Nike has become irrelevant. It is that the market no longer seems to operate in a way that allows one brand to command the same singular hold it once did. Nike now requires a more versatile approach to global regions like China and sub-brands like Converse, which currently act as a drag on overall productivity.
Sykes is clear that Nike is not doing everything wrong. He points to genuine progress in North America, improved wholesale relationships and real traction in running. But those wins have not yet added up to the kind of breakthrough moment that changes the narrative. Nike is trying new products and categories, yet none of them has become the catalyst investors and consumers are looking for. “There are things there that I would say are definitely more positive than I thought they would be,” Sykes says. But he also notes that “there just seems to be still a bit of disconnect between what the brand thinks about its product and what consumers think about its products.”
Sykes argues that the company has to rebuild the basics before it can deliver the kind of defining cultural or product hit that resets perception. “You have to hit the singles before you can hit a grand slam,” he says. That may be true operationally, but the problem is that Nike is a company judged not just on steady execution, but on its ability to create category-shaping moments. Until one of those arrives, the sense of drift is likely to continue.
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.
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.
What European Luxury Can Learn From American Fashion
25 Mar 2026
00:24:42
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.
Why Fragrance Is Fashion’s Newest Digital Frontier
18 Mar 2026
00:23:40
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.
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.
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.
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.
How Dior and Chanel Are Winning Back Aspirational Shoppers
18 Feb 2026
00:19:44
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.
How Fashion Brands Are Winning the Winter Olympics
11 Feb 2026
00:23:50
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.
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.”
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.
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.”
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.
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.”
The Themes That Will Define the 2026 Fashion Agenda
07 Jan 2026
00:25:23
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.”