As the indie designer dominos fall, who’s going to step in to help fashion brands?

This article on independent brands is part of our Vogue Business Membership package. To enjoy unlimited access to Member-only reporting and insights, our NFT Tracker, Beauty Trend Tracker and TikTok Trend Tracker, weekly Technology, Beauty and Sustainability Edits and exclusive event invitations, sign up for Membership here. Yesterday, Dion Lee announced the brand’s Australian business has entered voluntary administration. The news was a blow on top of the three independent brands that announced this week they were shuttering. Lee, Mara Hoffman, Calvin Luo and The Vampire’s Wife are the latest in a steady stream of brand foldings (Christopher Kane last year), white knight acquisitions (Roksanda last week) and course-corrections (Puppets and Puppets, and Mia Vesper). Brands will always come and go, but the quick succession of this latest round of step downs is indicative of a larger problem: independent fashion brands are in dire need of support structures that are currently in short supply. “The closures show that despite existing efforts, independent brands still lack the necessary support to thrive in a highly competitive environment,” says Felita Harris, brand consultant and executive director of Raisefashion, which offers masterclasses on business fundamentals, marketing and financial literacy and operations, in addition to mentorship opportunities. Historically, mammoth events have spurred industry stakeholders to implement measures that uplift brands. In the US, Fashion’s Night Out began in 2009 (and ran for four years) in a bid to get shoppers back in store (and spending) at the height of the global financial crisis. The CFDA/Vogue Fashion Fund (CVFF) was established in 2003 to uplift emerging talent and New York’s broader fashion industry in the fallout after 9/11. Under the CVFF, fundraising initiative A Common Thread was launched as a response to the pandemic. This moment is different. There is no all-consuming global crisis. Sure, the collapse of Matches — and the struggling e-commerce system of which it is emblematic — was a major blow to many brands. (The wholesale market upheaval was the nail in the coffin for The Vampire’s Wife.) But Matches is a symptom, not the root cause. That the collapse of a single retailer could cripple so many businesses signals that there was not enough industry support to begin with. The risk of more brand closures is high, experts agree — which would have damaging ripple effects for the industry. “The loss of independent brands means a loss of diversity and innovation within the industry. These brands often bring fresh perspectives and unique designs that drive it forward,” Harris says. “Their closures can lead to job losses and economic downturns in the communities they operate in. It’s crucial for the industry to recognise these potential impacts and take proactive measures to support independent brands.” Burning out All the money, support schemes and awards in the world can’t fix one thing: fatigue. For Luo, the decision to halt his 10-year-old brand was a difficult one, and came down to burnout. “Those familiar with the fashion industry understand that it is akin to riding a bicycle — you must keep pedalling or stop altogether,” he said in a statement. “Each year follows a predictable rhythm and schedule, almost like a pre-set answer. Continuing as is would likely mean staying in this intense industry cycle indefinitely, which is not the life I envision for myself. Looking ahead, I see a path that becomes highly commercialised and commoditised, where dealing with numbers overshadows the creative process, and most of my energy is spent on non-design-related tasks. This is not what I desire.” Ahead of the Australian administration news, Lee skipped February’s New York Fashion Week in favour of an off-schedule Shanghai Fashion Week show in April. “The end of last year was so congested and busy that the reality of focusing on something like [a show] for February, right after Christmas, was unrealistic,” he told Vogue Runway. For Cozette McCreery, who co-founded menswear knitwear label Sibling in 2008 alongside Sid Bryan and Joe Bates, the gruelling calendar took a toll, especially as Bates was battling cancer for over six years during the brand’s existence. Sibling folded in 2017, two years after Bates died from cancer. Sibling had buy-out offers, but in the end, McCreery and Bryan needed the break. “A person can only keep momentum, enthusiasm and creativity going for so long,” McCreery says. “The hardest step is to close, especially when the brand has support and, speaking from personal experience, financial options. But running a fashion brand in the UK is tough and sometimes you have to know when to stop for your own sanity.” Fashion needs less stuff, says Sherri McMullen, founder of Oakland-based McMullen boutique. “Designers are expected to put out collections several times a year, when we really only need a few. How can we expect so much from them?” she asks. Consumer attitudes have changed, she says. A shift in this constant churn would benefit all: less markdowns on the retailer side and a more refined approach to modern dressing and buying. “The industry could adopt a model that prioritises fewer collections and longer selling times, or one-of-a-kind and bespoke pieces,” McMullen says. “That can lead to more profitable and sustainable businesses and allows for thoughtful designing and creativity. We are on a cycle of product overload and deep discounting to stay competitive. We are all racing to get to the next season instead of enjoying the season we are in and allowing our customers to enjoy their pieces.” Systemic, not reactionary CFDA CEO Steven Kolb agrees with the need for change. “We need to foster a stronger community that collaboratively supports creative independence,” he says. The CFDA is currently exploring ways to assist those affected by the current market economics, says Kolb. He declined to specify what these might look like. The BFC, meanwhile, is in ongoing talks with industry stakeholders about how best to support the designers impacted by the collapse of Matches. But at the end of the day, reactionary measures can only do so much, experts flag. They help in the short term, but oftentimes, as in McCreery’s experience, a cash injection or white knight acquisition is too little, too late for a designer that’s long been doing the hard yards. “Supporting independent designers isn’t just about giving them a boost; it’s about building a foundation for lasting success,” Harris says. This runs the gamut from advisory support to capital; education to market access. Money is a must, but it’s only the start. Ideally, this would come from the top. But historically, this hasn’t always been the case. “I don’t think manufacturers, brands or designers would approach governments if they were struggling because we just know that there’s nothing on offer,” McCreery says. “If there is, it isn’t quick enough or financially large enough to help.” Instead, it’s often organisations like Raisefashion and Tomorrow London that step in to help. Other times, it’s luxury houses and conglomerates. It’s Richemont that’s keeping AZ Factory afloat as a brand education initiative. Looking back, McCreery points to Chanel’s 2012 acquisition of Scottish Barrie Knitwear after its owner was placed under administration. McMullen is establishing her own incubator, Beyond M, for this purpose. When interviewing brands and designers to participate, access to funding, business and financial development, and mentorship were among the top needs, she says. “Through Beyond M, we will focus on providing mentorship and access to individuals in various business industries including finance, merchandising, marketing, e-commerce, sourcing and product development,” she says. The incubator will also connect its first three designers with one another. “We want them to share ideas to foster collaboration and innovation and learn from each other. It’s nice to connect with others who understand what you are going through.” Helping designers to diversify revenue streams is key, Harris says. “Revenue resourcing is vital. Designers need to explore avenues beyond traditional wholesale to maintain a steady cash flow. By diversifying their revenue streams, designers can ensure a more stable financial foundation, allowing them to innovate and grow sustainably.” This is particularly pressing in the UK post-Brexit. Ending tax-free shopping means that while tourists might sightsee in London, they take themselves (and their wallets) to other European locales to shop — with brands and department stores struggling, and buyers’ budgets beginning to shrink. “There are fewer and fewer openings to actually sell your designs,” McCreery says. And there are more brands than ever competing to sell their clothes. As fast fashion continues its race to the bottom, well-made — and accordingly priced — clothing is an even harder sell. Hoffman’s closure, alongside the others, is an example of why legislation like the New York Fashion Act need to be passed, says Erin Allweiss, co-founder of communications agency No. 29 (which handles Hoffman’s PR). The Fashion Act aims to shift the industry away from the race to the bottom, by implementing measures that require brands to do due diligence on sustainability and human rights fronts. This would result in less ultra-fast-fashion competition crowding the market. “[As it stands,] it’s an unfair system in which independent brands, who create things thoughtfully and with care for the planet and the environment, have to compete against the Sheins of the world,” Allweiss says. “Absolutely nobody will thrive unless there are parameters for what is acceptable treatment of nature and people.” This includes the designers themselves. Comments, questions or feedback? Email us at feedback@voguebusiness.com. More on this topic: Dion Lee appoints voluntary administrators as indie brands suffer blows The list of failed indie brands is growing: Why it matters Mara Hoffman is shuttering her namesake label

Make better business decisions

Make better business decisions