No Crocs, no party

Fashionista was surprised by the news that one of her favourite Hollywood actors, the one and only George Clooney, has decided to come to rescue of the not so fashionable and virtually indestructible footwear, Crocs.

John Duerden, President and CEO of Crocs Inc., stated in an interview with the Washington Post that the brand that although the company was in financial difficulties, it is not the end of the road for Crocs. His good friend, George Clooney, has, he claims, offered to help the company by starting to wear Crocs. In return Mr. Clooney wishes to see children in Africa provided with Crocs. So far, it appears to be a win-win situation for both parties.

As part of a marketing strategy, more and more companies turn to a celebrity to help them promote their brand .

The key question is: "If the brand were a person, what type of person would it be …?"

That's why choices such as Lily Allen for the new Chanel's budget-friendly bags and accessories line "Coco Cocoon" and Scarlett Johansson as the new face of Mango seem good choices from a brand personality perspective.

Fashionista questions whether the same applies for George Clooney and Crocs. For sure, George is not a rookie when it comes to the promotion of new or forgotten brands. After all, thanks to his irresistible charms, class and good looks, Mr. Clooney definitely contributed to the recent success of the "Nespresso" and "Martini" brands. So, what will be the impact of his endorsement for Crocs? Fashionista waits with interest for the verdict . . . . and for the first sighting of George Clooney wearing a pair of Crocs.

Fashionista's Belgian colleague Christine

It's a Twittering frenzy!

We know Demi and Ashton do it. We know Susan Boyle of Britain's Got Talent became an overnight sensation because of it. We all know David Cameron's dismissive views of it. Like it or not, Twitter seems to be taking the online world by storm. The need to be constantly up to speed with everything drives the website where people write about everything they are doing. All the time.

Something that started out for friends to keep in touch has morphed into an inexpensive, hugely accessible, mass marketing/advertising tool and fan club for brands. YSL is paving the way for luxury brands having signed up to both Twitter and social networking giant Facebook, and promises to update followers on the YSL fashion shows, products and celebrity fans of the brand.
Although the constant need to update information can seem like a bit of a chore, Fashionista can see why brands are buying into this. Having a Facebook group is nothing short of having a fan club. It gives rise to a sense of solidarity for a fashion brand's fans. People like to feel popular or that they are part of a "club" of like minded people. The bigger the Facebook group, the better things are going to look for the brand: everyone wants to be on its team.

Ditto for Twitter. The constant "stream of consciousness" posts will create an affinity between brand and fan. Before the advent of online social networking sites, luxury brands were somewhat more etheral - like the Monarchy - a presence that you know is there but you only have access to what they want you to know or see, in the case of luxury brands through advertising in glossy magazines or from the products displayed in their exclusive boutiques. It was a one-way relationship.

YSL's move to Twitter means that we can know what YSL are up to on a daily basis. For the first time, brands are actively interracting with consumers. And this draws us in. It makes us feel part of an exclusive circle. It makes us understand them better. The result: it may make us prepared to part with our cash more readily than we would otherwise have done - and for a relatively low cost for the brand.

Although she hasn't yet succumbed to Twitter herself, Fashionista can certainly see why YSL has done, and why other brands are likely to follow...

Donna Karan and Luxottica: renewed eye deal is ideal

Cementing its reputation as the world's leader for the design, manufacture and distribution of glasses (both specs and sun), Italian luxury optical company Luxottica Group SpA has just renewed its global eyewear licence agreement with Donna Karan to produce prescription glasses and sunglasses under the DKNY and Donna Karan brands for a further 5 years. Luxottica - designing for own brands and licensed brands - has a portfolio which reads like a who's-who of the leading luxury brands and includes Bulgari, Burberry, Chanel, D&G, Oakley, Prada, Ray Ban and Versace amongst others.

For brand owners, there are clear competitive advantages to entering into a licence with a company which has a cost effective worldwide network of factory direct distrbution, an extensive retail business and established "tried and tested" reputation and expertise. For Luxottica, the renewal of the Donna Karan licence endorses the company's reputation and position as world leader in its field.

Reading the press release in her Bulgari frames, Fashionista muses on the power of branding and the trend for fashion brands extending to eyewear. Luxottica seems to have the market covered: a single company designing for a multitude of brands. How does Luxottica keep its competing licensees happy? By creating designs which perfectly reflect each brand's individual look.

How does the consumer choose? This is the power of branding. Ultimately, frames are large or small; round, square, or rectangular; rimmed or not. The colour will differ. There may be embellishments. The differences aren't that many. So the consumer is drawn to the brand: its ethos; what it represents; the message it conveys.

And why are brands extending to eyewear? To tap into a broader market, attract new customers and forge new loyalties. For the "spectacled" fashionista who likes to add a touch of glamour to her everyday look, branded eyewear achieves this. For the "recessionista" fashionista, it is a way of buying into a brand without imparting too much cash. For the "young" fashionista, it can be an introduction to a brand. The bonus? Eyewear branding is at eye-level, so it is the "eye deal" (sorry) advertising tactic by the brand owner: minimal expenditure; maximum exposure.