← The Glossy Podcast
The Glossy Podcast
Recapping Milan Fashion Week, and breaking down the competition between LVMH and Hermès
00:43:57
Loading summary
Transcript30 lines
- [00:03]
A
Your brand's growth shouldn't be a mystery. Don't let bad data or wasted ad spend block your success. Tenuity believes in one Love, growth, hate waste. Their brilliant humans use powerful tech to deliver clear strategies and results. They show you what's working and eliminate what's not. So nothing stands in the way of your growth. Love growth, hate waste. Visit love growth, hate hatewaste.com hello, and welcome back to the Glossy Podcast. I'm your host, senior fashion reporter Dani Parisi, and I'm here with our international reporter, Zofia Zviglinska. Hello, Zofia. How are you doing? Hi.
- [00:50]
B
Great to be on again.
- [00:51]
A
Great to have you on and it's great for me to be back. I was out for a few weeks on my honeymoon, so thank you to you and Jill for handling things while I was away. But I'm back now and we are in the middle of Paris Fashion Week. We're kind of splitting this episode into two. First, you and I are going to look back at Milan Fashion Week, which is over now. We're going to talk about some of the shows we saw and also a few related news stories from this week related to Brunello Cucinelli, which is dealing with some allegations about its business in Russia. We're also going to talk about Prada acquiring Versace. Versace had a really interesting show this week or this past week in Milan. And on top of that, the EU regulators cleared the path for Prada to acquire Versace. So great week for Prada. And then in the second half of the episode, we will be joined by Jill Manoff, our editor in chief, along with you and I, Zofia, to talk about Paris Fashion Week. And particularly we're going to be looking at LVMH and Hermes, two of the biggest luxury companies in the world, both French and both kind of frequently trading the the position of most valuable luxury company in the world. And we'll talk a little bit about the differences between those two companies and their strengths and weaknesses and so on and so forth. But first, let's start with our short recap of Milan Fashion Week. There were a lot of interesting shows. I was actually in Italy for part of Milan Fashion Week, although I was in a different part of the country, so I didn't get to go to any of the shows or anything. And also I was on vacation, so. But it was interesting because I feel like even where I was, which was like Rome and Florence, not near Milan, obviously, it's a very fashionable country. But also there was fashion Stuff kind of leaking out to the rest of the country. And the first thing I wanted to talk about was Armani, who, as you know, Giorgio Armani passed away recently. I think we talked about that very briefly on the podcast a few weeks ago. When it happened, when I was there, there was absolutely lots of public mourning for Giorgio Armani. Even outside of Milan. There were pictures of him hung up, and he was on the newspapers with memorials and testimonials about his life and work were all over the place. A major figure and a very influential figure in Italian fashion for like, half a century. And Armani had a show at Milan Fashion Week this season, which was kind of fortuitous because it was also tied to a retrospective of Giorgio Armani's work, which I believe was planned before he passed away. So it was not thrown together as a quick memorial that was already in the works. Did you see the Armani show and what did you think of what you saw?
- [03:34]
B
Yeah, I did see it. It looked obviously, a little bit kind of slower and more somber than maybe a traditional Armani show. But I'd say that most Armani shows are kind of more dignified and elegant. Any they don't tend to kind of go all out with emotions on the models. I think that the fashion was very kind of interesting because it did show a retrospective of Armani's work. In particular, a lot of the gowns and the jackets felt very kind of like 80s Armani. I think, in particular, obviously, this time there's a number of those kind of. I can't remember if it was sequined or beaded dresses. And one of them had this, I guess, like, relief of Armani's face on them, which I thought was a very nice kind of homage to the designer. And the dresses themselves were beautiful. It was like a sparkling indigo. So beautiful.
- [04:28]
A
Yeah, there was a lot of beautiful stuff. Like you said, it was kind of a black tie, almost funereal, but not quite that sad. But it was very. Just like, obviously everyone in attendance kind of was there to kind of remember Giorgio Armani himself. In addition to check out the new collection, which was also the last one designed by him. There were a lot of kind of a list celebrities, and a lot of them who have some particular connection to the brand. There was Richard Gere, Cate Blanchett, Spike Lee, like lots of people who have had a long association with either Giorgio Armani himself or with the brand. Another interesting factor in this whole thing, though, is which I don't think we've had a chance to talk about on the podcast was a little bit of a surprise in Giorgio Armani's will, in which he directed his heirs to try to sell the company. I think he particularly called out LVMH as an owner, that he would like to take the reins of Armani. I don't know if they're going to go for that, but I feel like this was surprising, at least to the public. I don't know if the Armani inner circle had any awareness that this was coming. I don't know. Do you have any thoughts on where Armani could or might end up or if they'll even kind of go through with that? I don't know if the will is legally binding or if it's just like his wishes.
- [05:51]
B
Yeah, actually, I think it is legally binding. It says that the will requires heirs to sell at least a 15% stake of the company within 18 months of the death of Mr. Armani, and after that, between 3 and 5% years later. The will permits, not necessarily instructs, a further sale of 30 to 54.9% to the same buyer or via an IPO. So essentially you'd be transferring ownership, because if you go obviously above 50%, that means total ownership and the will named preferred buyers, like you said. So lvmh, l', Oreal, Essil or Luxottica, who are obviously the eyewear giant or another group of equal standing, which I'm assuming just means, basically, if it's a big dog, you are one of the chosen ones. And the other kind of stipulation in the will was that the Fondazione, Giorgio Armani. So Armani's foundation must retain at least 30% of the capital to safeguard legacy and guiding principles. So that means that there's essentially a 60% stake, no 70% stake, sorry, floating around, which means that anyone could potentially get a bigger portion of the pie. Whether the brand is worth what it is now, what it was back in the 80s, I don't know. But it is still a very good kind of heritage house, one which has a great history, a great legacy. Kind of what you would have with Karl Lagerfeld, but less modernized, I'd say. So it makes for a good purchase and one that I think will be watched over the next couple of months, at least. Because obviously that 15% stake will be most likely an indicator of who that company will go to because of how the will is outlined. So that the rest of it would have to end up being sold to that same company.
- [07:41]
A
Yeah, it is an interesting and quite detailed set of Instructions for the Armani Airs. Like you said, there's preferred buyers. And it's funny that that stipulation of. Or another company of equivalent standing, it's like. Well, that's like five other companies. If, if it's LVMH and Lorian Slottica, it's like caring, I guess. Reshma, maybe there's not a ton of options out there, so it's sort of a limited pool. I'm sure there's tons and tons of holding companies and private equities and things that would love to be the one to acquire it, but it feels like there's. The instructions also kind of stipulate a certain values, like wanting it to be part of a group that's also luxury focused and not just some random conglomerate. Yeah, definitely will, will be watching that. And when there is news about who is picking up that stake, like you said, I think that will be a strong indicator of where the totality of Armani ultimately ends up in the future. There were a lot of notable shows, obviously Gucci, Bottega, Veneta, Jill Sander. We have an episode planned for after Fashion Month talking about the various debuts of creative directors. So I will try to refrain from giving too much thoughts on some of those debut shows because we will have a more focused discussion on that in the future. But one show I wanted to talk about was Versace, which had a show under the new creative direction of Daria Vitaly. I really liked the Versace show and I think a lot of other people did. It got really good reviews. It's also, I think, really interesting. I saw people comparing Vitaly's debut at Versace to Alessandro Michele's debut at Gucci 10 years ago or whenever that was as lrin. Really kind of like making a bold statement, sticking with the brand's ethos, not doing something totally crazy and out of the blue, but also feeling fresh. And I just thought that was really interesting. He's also the first designer for Versace who was not a member of the Versace family. So it's pretty notable in that regard. But yeah, it was cool. It was edgy, but without being, I don't know, while still feeling very relevant. What did you think of the Versace show?
- [10:02]
B
Yeah, I mean, I think it's kind of very 80s Versace inspired. I think there was a lot of denim, of bright tones, bigger jackets, like all of the stuff that you would think of. Kind of emblematic Versace ads back then really kind of stood out to me. Obviously the kind of styling and some of the silhouettes were slightly updated. So whether that's kind of the high waisted jeans or some of the kind of colour combinations, I think there was some lilac and yellow, a lot of blues. I think the genes in particular were very kind of emblematic of where Vitale is trying to take Versace. I think it is worthy to note that Vitale was previously at Miu Miu and kind of the main, I guess, creative person behind what Miu Miu is now because he joined it in 2010 and he left in early 2025. So he's been responsible for that whole kind of girlhood wonder that Miu Miu is now. And obviously it's still the bigger brand out of the Prada group kind of brand. So I'm wondering if he's trying to bring again a kind of a younger take to Versace as well. He said that he emphasized the spirit of Versace rather than just the archive. He said that he drew from letters, ephemera, some of the objects. So more about the kind of emotional vitality of Versace rather than maybe the literal archives, which I think is a bit of a different direction to take the brand in. Like last time, I remember Versace doing kind of big things was with that kind of high fashion relaunch. Like there was, you know, they did Gaga. I think there was some, some bigger kind of platforms. There was a lot of focus on suiting, a little bit more focus on like the, maybe not like the couture, but there was some gowns in there and like mini dresses. It felt like a very different direction. And this feels like a whole kind of 180 for. For Versace now.
- [12:02]
A
Yeah, I think you're right. I mean, people noted the lack of, you know, the Medusa head logos. There was not a lot of. I think it would be tempting if I took over as a creative director for a brand with like a really iconic imagery and legacy. I feel like it could be very tempting to just use all the like, you know, looks that they've done before and reference all these things. And it was kind of nice, like you said, to try to follow kind of the spirit of the brand rather than just copying like specific images and silhouettes and things like that. Yeah. And like you said, he was very integral at Miu Miu over the last decade. And Mew Mew, as we've mentioned many times on this podcast, has been explosively growing for Prada. It's been like, especially the last five years, I want to say, has driven a lot of new revenue for the Prada group. And on that note, we should also mention news this week is that the EU kind of cleared the path for the purchase of Versace by Prada. That's something that was announced, I think, earlier this year. I don't think there was any kind of expectation that there would be any attempt to like block it, but the EU regulator said this week that there's no concerns and they're basically clearing that acquisition to go through. And I think it's very good for Prada that just as they're about to acquire this brand, they have an exciting new creative director and his first collection was very well received. And then on top of that, it's like now they're cleared to buy it. I just think it's a good week for Prada. I'm sure they're feeling very happy about their decision.
- [13:36]
B
Yeah. And it kind of links it again to the kind of move towards a younger customer. I think Prada typically has always been the kind of older sister brand among those kind of companies, and Miu Miu has always been the younger one. If, if they end up changing Versace around so that it's more suited to younger customers, they could be looking at building up an audience the way that they have with Miu Miu, which again would make the Versace acquisition kind of a stronger one for them. And Dario's first show is a big indicator of that and where that kind of line is going. I think that there's more uncertainty around whether the Prada group generally can hold up this level of growth, considering how aspirational customers are typically more finickety and they switch brands around. They don't tend to kind of stay with just one brand. People love Miu Miu. Whether they will in three years time is a different matter. And I'm wondering with Versace, if, you know, if you're just positing towards younger customers, what will that look like? I am interested in seeing if maybe they will expand a more kind of high end line to maybe keep some of the high end customers the way that, you know, you have Ralph Lauren collection or the Michael Kors collection. Like those kind of things are the ones that kind of keep long standing luxury customers going rather than just the younger ones.
- [15:05]
A
Yeah, I think that's a good point. And Prada as a whole does not have a huge portfolio of brands. It has Prada and as Miu Miu, it has churches, I think. Is there one more? I think so, but it's not a huge portfolio. And so Versace is Joining a stable of only a handful of other brands. And I think within that portfolio, Prada is a pretty big portion of their revenue. But yeah, I think you're right that Prada as a whole is a much more high fashion group. And so I'd be interested to see how Versace kind of fits into that mold. Let's talk about our last topic. Brunello Cucinelli, one of my favorite luxury brands. If I won the lottery, one way you could tell is that I'd be wearing Cucinelli all the time. But it's there. I just think they have beautiful stuff. They had a show this week. The show was great. It wasn't like nothing from the show I particularly want to talk about. I think it was nice. Nothing super notable, but there was an interesting news story, kind of or drama unfolding around Cuccinelli in the last few days, which is basically they were accused by a short seller called Morpheus Research, alleging that they had been operating their business in Russia in a way that violates EU regulations, essentially saying they continue to operate stores in Moscow despite the EU as a whole having sanctions against Russia, which began with the war in Ukraine. They have responded to it and said it's not true. They're doing audits and all sorts of things. One thing notable I saw is that they, I think they said they do sell in Russia just in. They said in a way that is not in violation of any EU rules. But they said almost 10% of their sales are from Russia, which is quite significant. That's like more than I was expecting. Maybe that's typical, but I found that a little bit surprising. So, Sophia, from your European perspective, what do you make of this whole situation?
- [17:08]
B
Yeah, so obviously the EU has been very stringent around selling in Russia and especially around luxury brands, because so many of these brands were reliant on Russian clientele and to be honest, in the sense still are, whether that's through resale, through Russian customers still shopping in Europe, although there's a lot of limitations on how that's done or else luxury brands still being present in the country. I think that the official kind of way that luxury brands can sell in Russia right now is that it has to be under a €300. Let me just double check that. Yes, the EU prohibits sale, supply, transfer or export of listed luxury goods to Russia or for use in Russia if the statistical value exceeds €300 per item. And that luxury goods list includes garments, accessories, leather goods, watches and jewellery. So obviously this is based on descriptive value and if you're thinking about something like Brunello, where you're using cashmere, leather, all of these materials that have a very high kind of threshold. I would say, price wise, chances are that any of those items being under that €300 mark is small, which I am again wondering how that links up between that 10% that they're selling in Russia and that value, I guess, perception that is being used, outline how goods are being sold in Russia as a result. Obviously, Brunello had actually brought forward its earnings results to, I guess, like, make sure that its investors didn't get too skittish. So it had the earnings call Yesterday, so that's October 1st, and it reported a billion euros in revenue for the nine months in 2025 to date. And for Q3, 330 million euros, up 12% compared to the previous year. So I think that there's a lot of, I guess, support that is trying to drum up for the brand in spite of the Morpheus allegations. I think that there's been some comments that Brunello himself made on the call that it's focusing on exclusivity, that now, apparently that market is only 1.4% of the sales. A lot of the flagships in Russia have closed since March 2022. And that revenue in Russia he described as a melting candle, which I'm not quite sure what that means, but I think that he's trying to do other things. Obviously, the fact that the revenues are up to a billion euros is quite significant. And he pointed to a couple of the strategies that are working for the brand right now to kind of make that those customers are coming in and spending time in stores, including kind of increase in the amount of time they spend in stores. So 30 minutes in boutiques versus 15 minutes before. I think he said that cappuccino and kindness matters. He's always been described as a kind of more benevolent boss by his workers and by his staff. The kind of solomeo angle that I think the brand has been focusing on with the craftsmanship has been really important. It supports 400 artisans in Umbria. So I. I think that there's a lot of people relying on making sure that brand is doing well, especially in the luxury space where, you know, perception is everything.
- [20:40]
A
Yeah, no, I think you're completely right. And also I just looked it up and it says they have. Cucinelli has two spaces directly managed by its Russian subsidiary. They also have a small space dedicated solely to selling the children's collection in Russia. So it's small. And they described lots of, like you said, stores that they've closed in Russia and things like that. So I think that's all the time we have to talk about Milan Fashion Week and related stories. But this was a great conversation. Thank you, Zofia. We're going to take a short break and when we come back, you and I and our editor in chief, Joel Manoff will discuss Paris and focus on LVMH and Hermes. So stick around for that. Is your brand's potential being held back? Bad data? Wasted Ad spend, The wrong media mix? Lackluster creative? That's where tenuity comes in. As a full service media agency, they're powered by a single idea. Love growth, Hate waste. Their brilliant humans use powerful technology to deliver clear strategies and results. Their tech will show you exactly what's working and hunt down what's not so you have clarity on what to do next. Get ready for the big, bold growth your brand deserves. Love growth, hate waste. Find out if your media strategy is working for you@lovegrowthhatewaste.com.
- [22:11]
B
Foreign.
- [22:17]
A
Okay, welcome back. Paris Fashion Week is here and with it. I wanted to talk a bit about the competition between two of the biggest luxury companies in the world. That's LVMH and Hermes, who are often neck and neck at the top of the luxury food chain. LVMH was bigger and then until April when changes at both companies meant that Hermes had a higher market cap by $1 billion and that it was kind of a swap because LVMH was on top for a while. Since then they flipped a few more times and right now LVMH is back to being the most valuable luxury company in the world, over $300 billion valuation. But I wanted to talk about the difference between these two companies. Their different approaches, different strategies, different structures, what their strengths are in comparison to each other, what that means for the luxury market, all that good stuff. For that, I'm joined by Glossy's editor in chief, Jill Manoff and Glossy's international reporter, Zofia Zvyglinska. We also in the past few weeks have spoken to a few experts in the luxury industry to inform our Fashion Month podcast coverage. We spoke with Luka Solka, senior analyst at Bernstein covering luxury goods, and you will hear from him later in this episode as well. But I want to start by just laying out my quick take on why the big difference between these two companies, which is just that I think Hermes is a much more focused company. It has fewer brands within its portfolio. It has a smaller slice of the luxury consumer segment that it focuses on. LVMH is much more diversified. It has tons of brands within its portfolio. It covers leather goods, fashion, wine and spirits, newspapers. It has tons of stuff. I think there's lots of other things we can talk about, but for me, that's the big high level difference between the two. Jill, what do you make of these two companies?
- [24:02]
C
You know, Hermes always has like traded or that that's been their, their signature, their focus on, on heritage and craftsmanship. They haven't wavered. If you look at their most recent, even their most recent fashion show, which they're showing during Paris Fashion Week, again in, on Saturday of this week. But if you look at fall, you know, it still feels fresh. There are still things that appeal to a younger audience, but it's like material. The material, the fabric, the rich. Everything. I want to say everything feels luxurious. Everything feels rich. Like you can just see it, even if it's a plain black outfit, that the detail is there and everything is kind of of the highest quality. So I just feel like they haven't wavered even with this talking about the shuffling of the creative directors. Their womenswear designer has been there over 10 years now they're menswear designer since 1988. Correct me if I'm wrong, it was just wild. So, I mean, consistency, I would say, is a luxury. If somebody's investing that kind of money and they can count on the fact that maybe this is an heirloom that they can pass on to, like their children. Whereas I think I mentioned last week, sorry to keep bringing it up, that I bought a pair of Gucci heels and I'm like, are these cringe now? Like, do I want to wear them before? You know, Demna came back and like made it okay. But like, we're not going to have that question mark around Hermes and. And they haven't really played in this aspirational area that has made some items like the LVMH tote, never full tote. Like it's, it's everywhere and everyone has one. And I'm talking a lot, but I made a note because it really, really, I called to mind, like the fact that everyone has one. They just raised prices $100. So they're about 20 $200. They're not leather. They're like a canvas. Back in the day there was like, there were videos of people like cleaning them with Windex and crap. I'm sure that's not recommended, but like, it doesn't, you know, read. Why can't it be luxury Leather like it doesn't read as a luxury product. And there's a, there's a quote in an old, old episode, episode of Sex and the City when Samantha wants a Birkin bag and she calls the company and she says if they're so hard to get, why did I just see some effing nobody in a tracksuit carrying the exact one we want? But I mean there are a lot of nobodies in a tracksuit carrying an LVMH bag. Like it's just different extremes about accessibility and how the brands are marketing towards to the aspirational consumer is a big deal as I see it.
- [26:47]
A
Yeah. And I do think LVMH brands in general are absolutely high luxury and do cater to a wealthy clientele. But I think Hermes is even more laser focused on that subset. And we've talked a lot about how as the market gets sort of more unstable and there's fluctuations like a lot of luxury brands have shifted more toward, are catering to our highest value client and Hermes is like only has high value clients because that's all who can afford it. Zofia, what do you think?
- [27:19]
B
Yeah, I think that a lot of it also has to do with the ownership structure between LVMH and Hermes. So obviously Hermes has a total kind of run of the mill independence. It gives it a bit more purity in terms of brand strategy and storytelling. It can kind of focus on building out this whole brand world. Whereas Louis Vuitton is only kind of one of the horses in the stable for lvmh. There's so many brands that they're having to kind of think about. I think there's been a lot of issues, I guess around, you know, whether Nicolas Ghesquier has the best kind of idea for the creative direction behind Louis Vuitton. You know, the, the accessories have been a big, I guess sell for, for the brand for a long time and it's been pushing more into trunks over the last couple of years ever since, you know, the Olympics as well as all of the other kind of sports event that it's been involved with. But I'm wondering if, you know, if that kind of reliance on a very different creative direction is maybe losing them some customers. They've done so many different things, whether that's kind of collaborations with Murakami or trying some new things with kind of other designs in their ready to wear. Hermes seems more of like a, a stable but also quite legible brand. Like you know what you're getting. If you're doing Gomez, you have A connection to art. You, you have a connection to, you know, kind of horses and, and I guess the history of the brand. And you also have very reputable and kind of well known bags that haven't really changed much. And you know, you can kind of end up relying on that dependability, especially if you end up, you know, moving them into the resale market, which even though Hermes, you know, is staunchly def, doesn't love the fact that its bags are so popular on the resale market, it doesn't mean that they're not. And it is still a very covetable item there.
- [29:22]
A
Yeah, I think you both make a great point by focusing on the stability of Hermes. Like you said, Jill, their creative directors have been there a long time, but Nicolas Guessquier has also been at Louis Vuitton for I think a decade or so. So there's some stability there as well. I mentioned this up top, but, but I think LVMH is a much broader and more diverse business than Hermes. They have a whole division of wine and spirits and alcohol, which again, is like not really a glossy thing. So we don't talk about it that much. But I saw that sales in their spirits division dropped 17 or, sorry, 14% from last year to this year and then another 17% this quarter. So they have a lot more balls in the air and more, which is both kind of a good and bad thing because something might take off. They were diversified, but also it means they might have a drag on the business, whereas Hermes is kind of like more focused. That's, that's my take. Jill, do you have any other thoughts on what we're talking about? Because I have another kind of subtopic I want to introduce, but I don't want to cut you off if there's anything you wanted to add.
- [30:23]
C
Yeah, I don't know if it's even directly related, but like you said, lvmh, many, many divisions like watches and jewelry, we know, like they own Sephora as part of their selective retailing division and beauty's growth has slowed. So yeah, there are many factors here also. Like, coming into this, I looked at like marketing and social media and whereas everything is very clean and sleek and like luxury with a capital L on their Hermes side. Except, I mean, that's on Instagram. If you do go on, they do do some playful things that are kind of like, it's not all serious, I don't know. But if you look at, you know, lvmh, it's like celebrity, celebrity, celebrity. It's like night and day can in terms of the focus on celebrity. And I would also add that lvmh, the word is not like pick me. I feel like they just want, they want to borrow, they want a piece of Hermes. They want to borrow from their playbook. We know that Bernard Arnault up tried to up his stake to 17% back in the day back in 2010. Tried to and Hermes like anyway, the family now has control and they had some crazy, crazy quote in there about like the wolf and cashmere coming for us. I don't know what the word the quote was but yes, try to acquire the brand. And also, you know the neverfull toad I keep referring to on the LVMH side, they tried to put that on a waitlist. They did put that on a waitlist in 2023 to kind of borrow that scarcity model that was short lived. It's no longer on a wait list. So just interesting to see, to see the borrowing of ideas there.
- [32:01]
A
Yeah. Another thing I wanted to bring up is how both companies are affected by tariffs and they kind of have had different responses to this. I don't know if you guys saw this but basically Hermes, I mean they both do a ton of business in the us Both absolutely concerned about the effects of tariffs on their business. But Hermes said they're basically passing 100% of tariff costs onto their customer. They're like we are not absorbing any of it. That's all going straight into the prices. LVMH said that they can raise and they can and will raise prices like 2 to 3% to offset tariffs. But they have two categories that they cannot afford to raise prices in and that's cognac which we talked about the spirits business. And also lower priced beauty products which like you said, Jill, they own Sephora and they basically, I think it was LVMH's chief financial officer said that they don't really have room to raise prices there. They are such a diversified business and we think of them as high luxury. But they do have some more aspirational stuff. Probably Sephora carries a lot of the lower price things that are still technically part of an LVMH business and they just can't really absorb higher costs there to the same degree. Whereas again a strength of Hermes focus is they're like our customer can handle it and we're just 100% not taking any of this responsibility, which I'm sure a lot of brands would love to be able to say that and face no pushback at all.
- [33:20]
C
Agree.
- [33:21]
B
Thing is I don't know if that would be strictly true for all Hermes customers just because a lot of them nowadays do have exposure to the brand through their beauty line. And that is obviously something that will also be affected by those tariffs. So therefore those products will get significantly more expensive. Whereas Louis Vuitton, which also just launched beauty as a possible kind of entryway into the brand, I believe it's with Pat McGrath, isn't it? I feel like it was a big launch a couple of months ago. Those kind of categories. Categories. And you know, Hermes has mentioned on their earnings calls that those aspirational entry categories, so beauty, silk, perfume, all of those things are slowing for them. So again, like which, I guess which company, which conglomerate slash private company is focusing on those aspirational customers and those entry level, I guess like entry level into luxury price points, you know, for beauty especially, I think both of those brands are looking at a slowdown. But because of those tariff costs, maybe Louis Vuitton is slightly in a. Yeah.
- [34:23]
C
And I would say like Sephora is a different story than like Hermes, who sells like nail file emery boards for $60. Like that is a luxury product as opposed to like going to buy like the inky list for $18 at Sephora. So I don't know, I feel like there is like more of an aspirational customer within LVMH's umbrella.
- [34:46]
A
Last thing I want to talk about. Well, not, maybe not the last thing, if there's more we want to say. But I did want to talk about obviously competition between these two companies. But in and in our conversations with luxury experts, kind of over Fashion Month, multiple people have talked about how the big companies like LVMH have a huge portion of the market share of luxury. But they do face kind of like Nike with sneakers, where like Nike's still huge, but they can lose a little bit of market share here and there to a lot of different kind of smaller competitors. Multiple of the experts that we talked to talked about how now is kind of potentially an opportunity where big brands or big companies like LVMH could face some of that competition. I want to play a quote from Luca, who talked a little bit about this. I think Louis Vuitton is doing well. My impression is that in a market where you have fewer new consumers, mega brands in general struggle a bit more. Because it's the new consumers who go to the mega brands first as they have fresh money in their pockets, empty wardrobes, and they want to buy the first product from Vuitton, the first bag from Vuitton, the first watch from Rolex and maybe the first parachute was from Gucci or however, in this environment with China on the back foot and with fewer new middle class consumers being minted, finds it more difficult to power through. Yeah, I thought that this was a really interesting quote that I hadn't thought about. But if a new luxury consumer like Luca said is going to buy a watch from Rolex, but a seasoned collector might go to like Richard Mille or something more niche and more kind of for people who have already own all the Louis Vuitton bags, they're going to want that kind of thing. I hadn't really thought about that, but I don't know. Do you guys think that that's true, that there's some opportunity here for the more independent brands to take some market share?
- [36:55]
B
Yeah, definitely. I mean, I think that this is, I guess where the brand strength and the brand voice is really important. Because if, as Jill said, if Louis Vuitton is leaning into celebrity, but they're also doing all of these collaborations and they have multiple, multiple different bag launches and different styles and they've got the trunk business and now they've got museums. Like, is it going to be a little bit too much like, is that brand identity across the whole, I guess, like portfolio of brands as well? Is that something that is unified? Like, I'm not sure if it would be compared to again like a brand like Hermes, which I think is more, it's more understandable for a consumer. You know what they know what they're getting into. Even if they're going on the store, on the website, website, if they're thinking about buying an Hermes Kelly, for example, they know what kind of process they're going to be going through as well. I think that with Louis Vuitton, it's because of the wider range of their customers, they don't really know who they're aiming for. I think they've tried to section off so many different sides of their business. I don't think they've got quite as unified a strategy. And as a result, for customers who maybe just, just beginning to get into luxury, they're going to go for something which is either stronger, you know, on that kind of brand strategy side of things, or something that is more unified and more easy to understand, something that they'll be able to get into, you know, and, and kind of go through with, you know, especially if it's like a heritage item that they want to have for the rest of their lives. I think a lot of people still Think, as you know, their first luxury purchase might end up being their only luxury purchase because that's all they can afford it.
- [38:38]
A
So we have a couple more minutes left. There's a few other things we could talk about. I mean, LVMH is much more prone to acquisitions than Hermes is. And there are some brands on the market, like possibly Armani, with Giorgio Armani's will kind of asking them, the owners to sell the company. And I think he said in the will that he would love LVMH to buy it. I don't know if they will, but that's another kind of difference. I don't think Hermes is quite as willing to take more brands into the, the umbrella, but. Yeah. Is there anything else between these two companies you guys want to talk about?
- [39:12]
B
I think that like just on that kind of distribution side of things, as well as on the kind of supply chain side of things, Louis Vuitton is slightly better positioned, I would say, to weather the possible kind of storms ahead. I know how tough luxury has had it this past year, both in terms of how the tariffs have affected them, but also the various different issues with regulation, with Workmansh, you know, happening in Italy, the investigations that were held there, all of those have affected luxury brands. You know, Hermes has a very kind of tight supply chain. It focuses on building out these workshops which are only in France. So if there's any issues with any one of those workshops, that brand ends up being very severely affected. Now as a result, obviously Hermes is very particular about who it hires, how it trains, like it tries to be a very good employer. However, you know, it only takes one time for, for those kind of things to be affected. Louis Vuitton, because it has such a bigger spread, you know, it means that it could kind of move things around if need be. If there are issues, whether that's because of tariffs or because of workplace kind of issues, like they have been in Italy.
- [40:23]
C
Yeah, I was originally thinking no, like we're seeing Cody selling off brands and like, I feel like maybe a focused focus is, is ideal. However, you know, you see Prada buying Versace, we know there's been some shu and it's like kind of survival of the fittest. Like Capri had a sell off, Versace basically. And LVMH has the strength and if they want to again build out their umbrella, their portfolio. And yeah, almost in a way what Sophia was saying, it helps to safeguard the business when you have a greater variety, but at the same time it puts you at risk. We know Laura Piano was under fire, which is an LVMH brand recently. Yes. For their production. We know at the same time like they LVMH could stand to like have this amazing moment like today with the Dior show, like so. And is that going to like really boost the brand to, I don't know, next level status? Could be So I don't know. I think it's served them well thus far and they've had a few shitty quarters. But yeah, I think the bigger is is their, their M.O. right now.
- [41:34]
A
Yeah. And Jill, you took the words out of my mouth. I was going to sort of conclude with exactly that. I think LVMH's diversity compared to Hermes focus is sometimes a weakness and sometimes a strength. I think it just depends on the market conditions. So as, as you said, they too have kind of flip flop back and forth in terms of who's on top. I'm sure that will continue in the future as well. But this was a great discussion and thank you guys for joining and thank you for listening to the Glossy Podcast. Don't forget to give us a rating and a review on Apple Podcasts or Spotify, wherever you listen to this, because that helps us out so much. And don't forget to subscribe to the Glossy Podcast to hear interviews with industry insiders and weekend review segments where we break down the news. The new episodes come out every Friday. Until the next time, thanks for listening.