The other day I nipped out to grab a coffee in London’s Hanover Square. As I was waiting, who should walk in but Alexandra Shulman, the Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue. There was no entourage or chauffeur or huge sunglasses. Rather, she very normally ordered her skinny cappuccino (without assistance and without attitude) and waited like the rest of us to be served.

It got me to thinking that (thankfully) some people in the fashion industry are completely normal (despite the caricatures that may be painted of them in the Press), and it also got me thinking about the business of magazines — fashion magazines in particular. It turns out Ms. Shulman has been quite the business woman during her respected editorship of the magazine.

The Guardian reported in February that circulation of British Vogue has increased from 170,000 to 220,000 since Shulman came on board in 1992 and that the magazine pulls in £32m in advertising revenues (much of which goes straight to the bottom line, with production costs largely covered by the cover price charged to readers).

While this doesn’t compare to the 1.1m copies and $150m in advertising of Anna Wintour’s US Vogue, it is well above the circulation figures for Vogue Italia and Vogue Paris. While these latter two may carry far more fashion prestige, as businesses, they are much less impressive.

But there’s another telling tidbit in the Guardian article which gets to the heart of the issue many people have with today’s big fashion magazines.  Having chosen a theme for one particular editorial, Shulman and Kate Phelan, Fashion Editor, realise that something is amiss:

The big problem with the painterly theme is that Chanel and Dior don’t have any clothes that fit the bill and both are big advertisers….so they go through the Dior lookbook in search of other clothes that could be called painterly and decide that a spotted dress will do.

You see, the challenge for the mega-titles is how to make money from advertisers while keeping an independent editorial voice.  Shulman responds to this directly in the article, saying:

Vogue makes most of its money out of advertising — and it does make an awful lot of money — so we’ve got to have a good relationship with our advertisers. They’re not going to place £100,000 a year and then say ‘Feel free not to use any of our goods’  — life’s not like that. So although there is this feeling sometimes that creatively it’s not pure, well magazines are a business, you’re not sitting there writing poetry.

The good news is that this leaves a huge space for smaller circulation independent magazines like Fantastic Man and fashion blogs, whose editors and writers can say exactly what they think and choose exactly what they like, without undue influence from the moneyed advertisers. At the end of the day, there is room for everyone – mega magazines, fashion bloggers, and independent magazines  — and the fashion media is all the better for it.

Two articles this week gave an inside look into two of the women who are changing the face of fashion. And unlike the mysterious, impenetrable images that helped to create previous fashion icons, these women seem to be comfortable just being themselves, even if it is politically incorrect. Is authenticity the new must-have?

The Anti-Anna (New York Magazine)
In an unabashedly honest look into one one most important women in fashion, the editor of Paris Vogue, Carine Roitfeld makes no apologies for who she is. Comparison to Anna Wintour aside, we were most intrigued by Ms. Roitfeld’s comments on the fashion business, saying

“Right now, I think that fashion in the world becomes a bit boring. There is so much money, and I feel a bit when you go to shows they want to sell so many handbags, and for me, well, I do not like handbags. I do not wear handbags. It is not a nice look, to carry a handbag…I’m not a business girl. I will never be a business girl.”

The Platinum Queen, Agyness Deyn (International Herald Tribune)
You know the star of Agyness Deyn is on the ascendant when the IHT calls her the new Kate Moss. She is also on the cover of the latest Time Style and Design supplement. This is the highest of praise in an industry which has not been able to move on from Moss, even after the scandals that have plagued her in the past.

So how does Deyn deal with all the newfound attention? In a heartwarmingly down-to-earth way, exceedingly authentic and very funny. How many models do you know that worked in a fish and chips shop and admit it openly?

Photo courtesy of the IHT and blogographic.com

Two Italian fashion moguls known for their fiery personalities have been making news this week.

Patrizio Bertelli, CEO of Prada announced his company’s intention to go public in 2008. The industry has heard a similar announcement from Prada at least three times in the last decade, only to see the IPOs get called off due to unfavourable market conditions.

Mr. Bertelli has become known for his astute product eye and his challenging personal style.  He is thought to have control over the leather goods businesses while Mrs. Prada focuses on the creative ready-to-wear businesses. Each has their own domain, as it were, and Bertelli’s success with leather goods speaks for itself. However, some have questioned how he will cope with answering to the public markets, when he has been answerable to noone up until now — not even his wife Miuccia, in some cases.

The announcement about the IPO emphasises the professional team and structures that have recently been put in place, addressing criticisms that have been placed on the company in the past. Bertelli said:

In the last few years, Prada has successfully completed a reorganization which led to an increase in profitability and to a strengthened leadership position. Now, we look at the financial markets with efficient industrial processes and a strong and experienced management team.

Perhaps Bertelli has wisened up to the ways of the market, seeing an opportunity to cash in on the controlling stake that he and Mrs. Prada have in the company, which was founded by her grandfather in in 1913. The company is in good shape, with a strong outlook for 2008 and 2009.

Things couldn’t be more different over at Cavalli. The Wall Street Journal published an article describing how Roberto Cavalli has turned down two offers valuing his company at more than 14x operating profit, higher than what normally might be paid in the fashion industry. He also fell out with the company’s first professional CEO, Roberto Jorio Fili, after only 13 months.

The Journal pulls no punches in painting Cavalli as a stubborn, irrational man. Despite his personal savvy and success at building a global fashion brand, they note that Cavalli has done so under the cloud of tax evasion charges. It also says he didn’t get a penny from the  sell-out H&M collection which launched this autumn, saying that the profile boost amongst young consumers from the advertising campaign warranted doing the collaboration on its own, without a design fee or royalty revenues.

Cavalli says he is still looking for an investor. Unless he takes a page or two out of Mr. Bertelli’s book, he may be looking for a long time. Then again, some change may already be afoot. Word has it that his wife had a major role in the subdued S/S 2008 collection shown in Milan in September to great acclaim.

Three different men, three different strategies for conquering the fashion business. They couldn’t be more different from each other (French "cult" fashion designer, legendary American couturier, and rapper entrepreneur), but they are each at the top of their game.

Oscar: Why Is This Man Still Fashionable? (Wall Street Journal)
75 year old Oscar de la Renta gives a candid interview on his longevity in the "family" business. CEO Alex Bolen, whom we met at the last Oscar show, chimes in towards the end with some business commentary.

JayZ: JayZ Expands Fashion Portfolio (BlackEnterprise)
JayZ continues to prove himself as a savvy businessman. The latest news is his acquisition of the Artful Dodger brand.

Roland: Moon Over Manhattan (New York Post)
Roland Mouret’s moon dress is out today at Bergdorf Goodman in NY and apparently half of the inventory was pre-sold before it hit the floor. A pop-up shopt at Selfridges was also stormed by Mouret-lovers.

P.S. We finally got around to securing a URL in sync with the Business of Fashion – welcome to www.businessoffashion.net. To all our friends, linkers and supporters, it would be great if you could update your links and bookmarks.

What drives me crazy about most fashion industry coverage is that it is often limited to soundbites, tainted with marketing spin, and driven by editorial objectives. This perpetuates the notion of the superficial designer and undervalues the contributions made by truly innovative creative geniuses like Karl Lagerfeld.

It is rare to have an unedited, in-depth conversation with anyone influential in this business– let alone Karl Lagerfeld. But, not only did PBS interviewer Charlie Rose have this rare opportunity, he seized it with gusto in this clip I recently found on YouTube.

Together with Harriet-Mays-Powell, Fashion Editor of New York Magazine, he deftly takes Mr. Lagerfeld through a wide ranging one hour conversation (no easy task!) which goes from his design process to the role of celebrity in fashion to the relevance of haute couture to how fashion reflects the modern zeitgeist. Lagerfeld also declares that second lines are “condescending,” “bridge lines are for the dentists,” and that fashion today is about mixing.

But, the most interesting insight for me was Lagerfeld’s appetite for technology and change and how this is what has kept his design and point-of-view relevant, even though he is decades older than many of his contemporaries. To boot, he was one of the first designers to use the Internet to show a runway collection. He has more than 100 iPods. And, he famously “lost all that weight to fit into a Dior Homme suit”, which is just one example of a bad soundbite that makes him sound shallow and stupid.

On the contrary, as he explains in this interview, through the weight loss he was aiming to destroy his past self and become someone new, citing French author Marguerite Duras and her book Détruire, dit-elle, or Destroy, she said. He says this is what enables him to stay modern. He is always looking forward.

As I heard him utter these words, it reminded me of an economic theory known as Creative Destruction, developed by Joseph Schumpeter in 1942, Wikipedia describes creative destruction as

The process of transformation that accompanies radical innovation. In Schumpeter’s vision of capitalism, innovative entry by entrepreneurs was the force that sustained long-term economic growth, even as it destroyed the value of established companies that enjoyed some degree of monopoly power.

Richard Foster and Sarah Kaplan, partners at McKinsey & Co, published a book expanding on this theory in their book with the same title, asserting that

rather than aiming for continuity, companies should embrace discontinuity, constructively destroying and re-creating themselves as needed (Publisher’s Weekly)

Lagerfeld seems to understand this intrinsically and has protected himself against it. The theory is particularly poignant in the fashion industry, which seems to move more and more quickly each day. Rather than become outmoded and irrelevant, he just changes himself and focuses only on the future. He doesn’t even keep any archives.

Be forewarned. It’s a one-hour long clip, but it makes for fascinating listening. Go grab a cup of tea and curl up in front of this one. It will provide much food for thought. I am looking forward to hearing what you think.

It’s been 10 months since The Business of Fashion was launched, and now it’s time to take stock. In sum, we would like to understand what and how we can improve so as to make the BoF more useful to you.

We have put together a 10 question survey that should take you less than 3 minutes to complete. We thought long and hard about how to motivate readers to complete the survey. Some people offer prizes for this kind of thing, but after much thought we decided that the most honest incentive would be to promise to deliver a better Business of Fashion in the future. Plus, we don’t have any clobber and swag to give away just yet!

We encourage feedback which is constructive, courteous and honest and in return commit to read everything and consider it as we take things forward.

Complete The Business of Fashion Reader Survey here. Or, if you find it easier, please feel free to leave comments below or email us using the "Email Me" link in the top right column under "About".

Thank you very much for taking the time — we hope you will see the impact of your collective feedback soon.

JC Report is one of the finest sources of global fashion content on the Internet, and thus the BoF was more than delighted to provide some of our thoughts on the fashion blogosphere and on the business of fashion to Jason Campbell for the most recent issue of JC Report. This topic seems to be quite hot at the moment, what with all the Web 2.0/Luxury conferences in London this Autumn and an interview we did for the South China Morning Post earlier this year, also on the fashion blogosphere.

But, the traditional fashion industry media are taking awhile to get on board. Women’s Wear Daily conducts "Yea or Nay" surveys, but doesn’t allow comments on its main stories. Style.com has a new roster of sharp bloggers over at StyleFile and the UK’s Drapers Record has a blog too — but this is only the first step.

Respected mainstream news outlets like the BBC have started moving even further. Not only have they set up their own blogs, they are also providing the option for readers to comment on their lead stories, creating a whole new set of content for readers to explore.

This would also be a natural next step for outlets like WWD and Drapers Record — but until then, it’s one of the things we like to think makes the Business of Fashion unique. Thanks to everyone who has been joining in on the debate by posting your comments. It’s something we like to encourage as it enriches the site with your experience, thoughts, and reflections.

JC Report has dedicated its most recent bi-weekly issue to men’s fashion where Angelo Flaccavento makes a compelling argument from the start.

Let’s be honest: over the last couple of years, most of the really interesting developments in fashion have happened in menswear. Maybe it’s because for women, everything (or almost everything) has been done and redone to death, while masculinity remains a vast, unexplored territory open to new sartorial definitions and formal experimentation. Maybe it’s because the apparent limitations of the genre are a stimulus rather than an obstacle for truly creative minds.

This was not something that had occurred to me before — but as I reflected upon it, it does seem one of the reasons behind men’s fashion new burst of energy is simply because so much has yet to be explored.

The start of this movement might have been Hedi Slimane’s much-trumpeted Dior Homme revival. Slimane not only reshaped Dior Homme but also questioned traditional notions of masculinity, and has opened up that avenue to countless other men’s designers who are now emboldened in pushing boundaries themselves.

Maybe Mr. Slimane has done for men what Yves Saint Laurent did for women, starting at his own reign at Dior in 1957. Over the next few decades, Saint Laurent constantly challenged what was considered appropriate attire for a woman, and in doing so, redefined the way women dress. It was YSL, after all, who first sent women down the runway in trousers and developed the notion of ready-to-wear. In 1996, he was the first couturier to show his collection on the Internet.

Upon his retirement in 2002, Saint-Laurent railed against the new commercial focus of fashion, saying

I have nothing in common with this new world of fashion, which has been reduced to mere window-dressing…elegance and beauty have been banished."

However, he must have known that by pushing boundaries on how women could dress, he had played his own strong role in the creation of  a multi-billion dollar industry. Could we be seeing the start of something similar for men?

Photoclip courtesy of JC Report from Impasse 13 A/W 07/08 collection.

Today, we are flattered to be Typepad’s featured blog of the day.

Thanks very much to Robin at Typepad for selecting us and welcome to new readers who are reading the blog for the first time. To regular readers who are visiting us from over 120 countries, thanks for coming back.

As the BoF continues to push forward, introduce new features and cover the intersection of business and fashion, we’d also like to encourage readers to join in the discussion. The best blogs aren’t a one way discussion — so pipe up and tell us what you think.

Do you have something to add to the discussion? Is there a topic you’d like to hear more about? Do you disagree with an assertion that has been made? Constructive comments and debate will make the BoF an even better place for exploring these issues.

boo.com was set up in London by 3 Swedes — Ernst Malmsten, Kasja Leander and Patrik Hedelin in 1998. Malmsten and Leander, the real visionaries behind the business, had previous experience and success with Internet businesses in Swedem. This was very impressive for 1998, before many people had even tried the Internet, let alone figure out the commercial potential it could harness.

boo was to be the world’s first online shop for fashion and sportswear. In a world with the hindsight of the successes of Net-a-Porter, eLuxury, ASOS and Yoox, this seems like an obvious idea. But, Leander and Malmsten faced substantial pessimism and doubt about boo’s potential from many of the people they contacted. Through sheer determination, optimism and hard work, they slowly won people over to their idea.

Even if you are not interested in Internet businesses or business planning, this book is chock-full with lessons about setting up new businesses. It would be an insightful read for any entrepreneur. Since I was living in London at the time of boo.com’s meteoric rise (and then dramatic fall) and knowing the ultimate conclusion of the business, I found myself rooting for Malmsten and Leander the whole way through, and wondering what I would have done in their shoes. What decisions would I have made differently? What decisions did they execute brilliantly? A few of the lessons that resonated most with me:

• Focus - be clear about what your company is about and what it is trying to achieve so as to understand what the core competencies of the business need to be. In the case of boo, not focusing meant they spent time an energy launching a new magazine and opening an international network of offices to support a business website that hadn’t yet been launched. This burned cash and detracted from the essential tasks at hand.
• Choose investors and strategic partners who believe in you and your idea – they will end up being the ones to support you when things don’t go as planned, not just because their money is at stake. That said, as an entrepreneur, to use a quip from the book, you might always want to think of your investors as “the enemy.” The worst kind of investors for a start-up are the ones looking for a quick buck, who’ll walk away without warning, when the going gets tough.
• It’s never too early to build a company culture – boo got as far as it did due to the commitment, excitement and buy in from its employees. This is an incredibly valuable resource and your employees can become great sources of guidance, energy and realism.
• Beware the publicity machine - The media is very powerful, and while boo built an amazing profile in such a short period, having extremely high expectations from the marketplace can add additional pressure while the foundation of the business is being set up. And, if you aren’t able to deliver what you promised, when you promised it, the media will be just as happy to tear you down afterwards
• Choose your partners carefully - Partnership is very tough. Having partners who don’t add value or whose objectives are different from yours will eventually lead to breakdown of the partnership. Being completely aligned and having tough conversations early on about roles, vision, strategy and exit strategy are crucial. Even then, it is inevitable that partnership issues will arise — these should be discussed openly and honestly so they can be resolved

I recommend this book highly. It is extremely readable, accessible and interesting, even to those who have no business training. It addresses all the nuts and bolts of building a business and as such, offers lessons to everybody in any business.

By the way, in case you’re wondering what happened to the company’s assets, brand and domain name, I went to the boo.com website and it says “A new boo.com is on the way” and then provides an opportunity to dress a guy in “slick” or “street” clothes. Also, rumour has it that Natalie Massenet of Net-a-Porter scooped up some of the expensive servers and hardware that was purchased to support boo’s complex website and all the traffic it was to receive.