SKAGGS Blog

We all know that the world of fashion is extremely fickle and that exclusivity is pretty much key. I recently found an interesting article on HRH Posh Spice and her ability to kill a brand.

It brought me back to a long and heated discussion I once had regarding Burberry and their right to stop producing their infamous check because it was being “cheapened” by individuals they did not consider their target audience. My opposition on the matter felt that Burberry’s behavior was elitist, despicable and that if you could afford and want to buy Burberry, (in particluar the chequered items) you should. (BBC article on the matter)

I on the other hand felt that they had a right to do so, after all it was damaging their image. Unwanted individuals (Chavs) were buying the more affordable smaller items with the recognizable check and the wealthier consumers were buying pricier items (still with check).

Imagine Lady Muck with her “Burberried” handbag stepping out of her chauffer driven limousine to see Sharon and Pete head to toe in Burberry pushing a “Burberried” stroller on their way to the welfare office.

That doesn’t bode well for “luxury” or “exclusivity” at all, which I think is key to Burberry’s business. The Brand Killer article confirmed my thoughts on the matter. I know it’s snobby and in all fairness you should be able to wear what you want regardless of a brand’s disdain, but when it comes down to dollars, cents, pounds, euros and shareholders, I think a business has the right to protect it’s image…

Thoughts?