dELiA*s has filed for bankruptcy. Abercrombie & Fitch/Hollister is in trouble.

[randomness]

A comment thread about Zara in rednikki's LJ reminded me that I'd been putting together a post about fast fashion chains like H&M and Forever 21 pushing specialty teen clothing retailers out of business.

From The New York Times' Dealbook blog:

Unable to find a buyer or arrange a financial lifeline, Delia’s said on Friday that it would file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection and seek to close all its stores and distribution centers. The company said it would aim to run going-out-of-business sales.

...

On Friday, Delia’s warned its shareholders that it “does not anticipate any value will remain from the bankruptcy estate.”

From The Wall Street Journal:

Delia’s news followed the bankruptcy filing Thursday by Deb Shops, whose 300 stores also were booming in the 1990s.

“When there’s one of these guys that’s kind of sick, it tends to infect all these guys,” Paul Lejuez, a Wells Fargo Securities analyst, said of the hypercompetitive environment teen retail environment.

From MarketWatch:

Teen retailers like Delia’s have struggled to compete with fast fashion players like H&M and pure online retailers that cater to millennial shoppers who increasingly do all their buying on the Web.

And from Business Insider:

But Eric Beder, specialty apparel analyst at Wunderlich Securities, said he believes Abercrombie is running out of options.

"What is going to turn the tide?" Beder asked in a note to clients. "Frankly, we have no idea."

Beder notes that Abercrombie has already exhausted numerous turnaround strategies, to no avail.

"Abercrombie has already aggressively closed domestic locations, cut back on inventories, shifted away from logo products, and cut costs," Beder writes.

The once-leading teen retailer has struggled to stay relevant since the surge in demand for fast-fashion brands like Forever 21 and H&M.

One of my fraternity siblings in Manhattan has a roommate who's in the industry and claims that "everything is fast fashion now". My friend and I agree this is hyperbole but there is clearly a sense in which fast fashion is setting the pace.

It's just a thought, but an overdose of fast fashion may be one driver behind the rise of vintage.

Comments

[rednikki.livejournal.com]

There's a missing piece here.

H & M and Forever 21 sell plus size clothing. Delia's didn't and Abercrombie doesn't. In fact, up until they hit the financial rocks Abercrombie quite famously only wanted thin people (http://www.businessinsider.com/abercrombie-wants-thin-customers-2013-5) to shop at their stores, which is why they didn't offer anything above a size 10 for women. 67% of women are plus size (although I'd argue that's because "plus size" is now anything over a size 10, whereas when I was a teenager it started at size 18). I think this is the result of excluding so much of the buying public.

Did I mention that, when I was in Australia and New Zealand, I was not plus size? I could - and did - buy designer clothes while I was there. That is something I cannot do in the US, full stop - designers don't even come close to my size.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Interesting!

That missing bit may include Brandy Melville grabbing a big chunk of the non-plus-size market as well. (I have another piece on them--about the takedown BuzzFeed did on their idea of "one size fits all"--that I'm working on.)

Did I mention that, when I was in Australia and New Zealand, I was not plus size?

You didn't! Fascinating. Same vendors as in the States, or different ones?

If they are the same vendors, I really would like to know who's making inventory decisions.

[digitalemur.livejournal.com]

Wow. I want to hear more about this, and I really want to see a discussion of that takedown of "one size fits all" because I glanced at it and didn't get the chance to dig in. And I just now had to look up Brandy Melville; I didn't know that name and I'm not sure why I didn't. Are they at my local mall and would I like them, I wonder?

I wonder if Forever 21 and H&M have also done a better job of figuring out the right look and feel for those little everyday pieces that underpin the flashier items in anyone's wardrobe. I pretty much live in a combination of H&M and Old Navy Men's v-neck basic t-shirts even if many days that t-shirt isn't a visible part of my wardrobe because I'm wearing it under another layer. The Old Navy ones are cheaper and I love their essential black v-neck t-shirts best but their other colors tend to be too bright and too "American" in color palette so I love my heathered, muddy t-shirt colors at H&M that I buy in piles.

Doesn't H&M have unisex changing rooms, too? I've noticed my local H&M employees were totally cool with a butch and possibly genderqueer chick digging in the men's t-shirts and could talk about fashion and gender-nonconformity with me while I was shopping (r_ness I believe you were there for that, remember? He was totally cool.) That one might be a pioneer valley thing, but I feel like I've seen articles recently about how millenial youth are pretty fed up with strong gender stereotyping in products, fashion and beauty anyway. (Which is delightful, because they're making life easier for me.)

Uh sorry for wordspamming you with questions and ideas here, it's just that my gender identity and body image stuff is REALLY kind of yelling for my attention lately and I wonder if these are ways in which youth culture is shifting to put its collective foot down about some of the same things that chafes me about some of these retailers? A&F is _exactly_ that retailer who only sells to dudebros and very feminine chicks and I think there may be a rise of backlash against that.

I bet the CEO of A&F is a Gamergater, too.... (I'm kidding but it's a funny idea.)

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

I believe you were there for that, remember? He was totally cool.

Wait, was that H&M? I could swear that was a different store.

And I just now had to look up Brandy Melville; I didn't know that name and I'm not sure why I didn't. Are they at my local mall and would I like them, I wonder?

Quick answer: Be warned, I think you'd hate them.

More detail on that when I get around to posting.

[digitalemur.livejournal.com]

One more thought: I'm also thinking about how maybe if fast fashion actually figures out the rapid prototyping sort of semi-bespoke garment sales that a couple of companies are experimenting with (and they're still crazy expensive, but, that may change), that may _really_ take down these companies who refuse to sell to people who don't look a really specific way, especially if it's a combined pushback about clothing size range diversity and gender presentation diversity.

Because I think that one of the things that may be driving my move to masculine-of-center clothing is that in an attempt to provide some cute clothing for fat women, they tend to go flowers and bright colors, or dark colors and bold prints, and I'm like it fuck it i'm moving to menswear. I'm doing that ANYWAY, but it also suits me better color and patternwise.

[rednikki.livejournal.com]

Different vendors. These were all Aus-local vendors - although I was told that several brands that exist in the US went up to size 16 in Aus where they do not in the US.

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

The Australian-local vendors keeping larger sizes in stock makes sense. They know their market.

I just hope that the global brands which do carry larger sizes in Australia figure out that they should carry them in other countries, too.

[rednikki.livejournal.com]

Honestly? There are probably a higher percentage of size 16s in the US. But companies give a million excuses for not wanting to sell to them. Designers are pretty firm with the people they partner with, too - the Isabel Marant collaboration at H&M (http://www.thegloss.com/2013/10/07/fashion/hm-collaborations-are-only-for-skinny-people/) only goes to a size 12, and Lagerfeld famously threw a fit when H&M produced his collaboration up to size 16, saying they were meant only for skinny people (http://www.vogue.co.uk/news/2004/11/18/lagerfelds-high-street-split).

[r-ness.livejournal.com]

Sure, no disagreement on that.

I'm thinking that Australian vendors may be able to resist/fly under the radar of designers because they're a relatively small and out of the way market, so the vendors can do what they want. And they may not have the same prejudices that European and North American companies and designers do.

This may also explain Zara's curious decision to stick Australia under their Asian division. It makes no sense from a product point of view, but looking from a boardroom in Galicia, Australia may just be "over by Asia somewhere", so logistics might take precedence over style and size.

[achinhibitor.livejournal.com]

Interesting! I know that some brands worry a lot about the sort of people that use their stuff because some people buy on that basis. The only specific instance I'd heard about previously was that Tommy Hilfinger works hard to keep its stuff out of Wal-Marts ... and there's a thriving grey market of diverting TH stuff to Wal-Marts. But this sort of strategy is vulnerable to shifting demographics and shifting tastes. Not to mention that the teen and early-20s markets are subject to serious ups and downs in population, because the age groups are so narrow. Lena Dunham alone might undermine the business of Abercrombie if she manages to cut the obsession of teen girls with being thin.