{"id":43217,"date":"2017-06-27T01:23:58","date_gmt":"2017-06-27T01:23:58","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.thefastfashion.com\/?p=43217"},"modified":"2017-06-27T01:23:58","modified_gmt":"2017-06-27T01:23:58","slug":"new-meaning-fast-fashion-need-know","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thefastfashion.com\/?p=43217","title":{"rendered":"The New Meaning Of Fast Fashion You Need To Know"},"content":{"rendered":"

How fast is fast enough when it comes to clothes and gratification? How much do you really need that dress or bag or platform sandal?<\/span><\/p>\n

I\u2019ve been wondering this since last week, when <\/span><\/span>Farfetch.com <\/span>announced that it would now be delivering Gucci in 90 minutes in 10 major cities around the world. A customer can \u201cplace an order and almost before they have hung up the phone, somebody is knocking on their door with a beautiful bag!\u201d the founder Jos\u00e9 Neves said with great fanfare when I called to ask about it.<\/span><\/p>\n

I don\u2019t often hear Simon & Garfunkel tunes playing in the back of my mind (unless I am in a Parisian subway and yet another busker is singing \u201cThe Boxer\u201d), but now I can\u2019t get the opening line of \u201cThe 59th Street Bridge Song\u201d out of my head. \u201cSlow down, you move too fast.\u201d Yadda yadda yadda.<\/span><\/p>\n

Farfetch, Net-a-Porter, <\/span><\/span>Matchesfashion.com <\/span>and other higher-end retail sites have been offering same-day service in world capitals and vacation destinations for a while now (and Matchesfashion offers 90-minute delivery in London), but the Gucci deal takes it to a whole new level. And while it is, for now, more of a niche offering than a rule, it\u2019s easy to imagine it snowballing to other brands and platforms, as the Great Race for Retail Domination (and Survival) heats up, online and off.<\/span><\/p>\n

\u201cFaster fulfillment\u201d is the mantra of the moment, a response by companies to what has been called the culture of impatience. But I can\u2019t help wondering if at least when it comes to designer fashion \u2014 the clothes that define a particular moment in time and often filter down to shape the styles of every day \u2014 it\u2019s solving a problem that doesn\u2019t exist. And maybe creating a new one.<\/span><\/p>\n

I understand that we live in a world where, as Mr. Neves pointed out, no one waits for cabs or groceries or tables in restaurants, where information is immediate and pictures go viral. I understand that the millennials and Gen Y-ers are (theoretically) the IWWIWWIWI generations \u2014 the \u201cI want what I want when I want it\u201d folks. Conventional wisdom goes that if retailers miss that moment of wanting, they miss the sale. I recognize that defying this seems like the classic behavior of a Luddite. But along the way we have lost some perspective.<\/span><\/p>\n

<\/div>\n\n

\u201cWhy should we lose face with Amazon?\u201d Mr. Neves said when we were talking. But another question might be: Why should we assume Amazon controls this particular playing field? It may be time to call, well, time on this game of one-upmanship.<\/span><\/p>\n

A handbag is not a bottle of milk for a baby. It\u2019s not a staple. And it\u2019s not necessarily a good idea to create a situation in which it is equated to one. It may not be sustainable, in any sense of the word.<\/span><\/p>\n

Saturday is <\/span><\/span>Earth Day, and in the run-up to the annual reminder of what climate change has wrought, fashion has been as active as always: <\/span><\/span>Kering <\/span>teamed up with <\/span><\/span>Plug and Play <\/span>and <\/span><\/span>Fashion for Good, and the <\/span><\/span>Council of Fashion Designers of America <\/span>has joined forces with Lexus, both to support new businesses focused on responsible supply-chain innovation. But while the industry often equates greenness with materials and manufacturing and also tends to attribute landfill problems to fast fashion of the cheap and disposable kind, it should think about high-end consumption, too.<\/span><\/p>\n

Because in treating investment fashion \u2014 which is to say fashion that takes time to create and consumers to understand (and often, desire) \u2014 as a commodity, you risk changing how people think about it, and value it, in an essential way. It is true that no one is forcing consumers to opt for the fastest delivery (you can have your jacket in two days if you want, or even a full week), but the sheer fact that the option exists makes the decision seem, somehow, less of a commitment.<\/span><\/p>\n

Besides, just because consumers say they want something \u2014 and according to Mr. Neves, timely delivery is the No. 1 criterion for online shopping in every consumer survey Farfetch has done \u2014 doesn\u2019t mean it\u2019s a crucial determinant of their behavior.<\/span><\/p>\n

Just consider the recent, somewhat abortive, move to change the fashion show schedule to the \u201csee now, buy now\u201d model. The rationale behind the change was almost exactly the same as the one behind super-speedy delivery: Everyone has a truncated attention span because of Instagram, and if you don\u2019t get a product to customers as soon as they feel desire for it, you miss your window.<\/span><\/p>\n

Yet after only a season, two out of the four main brands experimenting with the idea \u2014 Tom Ford and Thakoon \u2014 <\/span><\/span>gave it up <\/span>(Ralph Lauren and Burberry remain exponents). The reason given was that the market wasn\u2019t ready, but had there been a huge and extended spike in demand, the market would presumably have accommodated itself.<\/span><\/p>\n

Indeed, when it comes to investment fashion, as opposed to what we formerly called fast fashion (which perhaps now will have to be rechristened \u201cquick turnover fashion\u201d or some such), there is value in having to wait, which should not be dismissed.<\/span><\/p>\n

By conflating investment fashion with, effectively, groceries, you undermine its claims of specialness, effort and creative muscle \u2014 all the criteria on which it is built and which justify, in many ways, its price. You link it to the idea of disposability (which, let\u2019s face it, is the definition of what was normally called fast fashion, a sector in which it is often cheaper to buy a new shirt, say, than to clean the one you already own). If investment suggests value over time, reducing the time reduces the value. Put another way: There is a downside to rushing to fulfill the wants of today; it suggests they may not be the wants of tomorrow.<\/span><\/p>\n

Adv<\/em>.<\/strong><\/p>\r\n\r\n