The case (paradoxical) of Crocs and Birkenstok: from the garden or from the beach to the catwalks thanks to the collaborations with the luxury brands. that are sold out.
"The more I make them the more ugly they like." It is famous the phrase of Picasso and we know well that there are no paintings Ugly of Picasso. We know well, however, that the Crocs and the Birkenstocks They're really ugly shoes. So far we've relegated them to the beach, to gardening, to puddles. We never sogneremmo to wear them at a party, let alone go to the office. So far... Because, on the other hand, it looks like "bad fashion" is great.
Did you introduce them? Are the Crocs of Balenciaga, colors and applications pop and with a very high wedge; The Reebok sneaker from the triple sole (always from Balenciaga), exhausted on Stylebop.com in a few hours; The sneakers of Reebok For Vetements (still he, the irresistible Demna Gvasalia); The Crocs of Christopher Kane, adorned with sparkling, pompom or fur-lined gems; The fashion-Birkenstock, with soles covered in shearling and fur uppers, or the Birkenstock designs (with black and white graphics) that grind successes one after the other, if it is true that the mark, last year, has tripled the revenues.
Not by chance, I would say, Birkenstock in January will be back to Pitti Uomo, and this time will be a special event: in the spaces of the archives, will be in fact protagonist the "Birkenstock Box", the new project of mobile retail. The "itinerant shop", with limited editions of product, has already made its appearance from Barneys in New York, which has seen many new customers coming attracted by the novelty.
Ugly but comfortable
So, bad fashion likes it. Not only that: it's trendy. But why?
The easiest answer, probably, is because it's comfortable. And in fact, they are mainly shoes to do as master and to meet the liking of consumers in bad fashion. What has allowed brands like Crocs and Birkenstock to go beyond the doors of the great fashion retailers. It is, perhaps, one of the trends destined to last: the combination of fashion/comfortable; i.e. aesthetic/function. In his sneaker for Vetements, Reebok has inserted a kind of inflation mechanism that makes it lighter, while the innovative soles reduce muscle fatigue.
Do not underestimate, then, the possibility of enlarging the target. From the point of view of the brand, take an object "from the periphery" of the system and elevate it to the rank of "fashion" pays perhaps more than usual perfume or the usual key chain: a Crocs of Kane certainly costs more than a normal Crocs, but certainly less than a normal Shoe Kane. Not to mention the media resonance and/or "Instagrammatica".
A matter of irony
But, in my opinion, there is another reason, far more important. Today's consumer, whether it's millennium, generation Z or something else, is tired of collecting items. His cupboards and drawers are overflowing with things.
The modern consumer does not look for things but experiences. For this reason it does not become attached to a single brand, but it changes, mixes a brand with the other, in search of its own style and constantly counting with the reality of one's daily life. The mainstream interests little, not only in newspapers, but also in fashion and social relations.
The nasty fashion likes it, therefore, just Because she's ugly and knowing she's ugly. It's a way to mock the rules and conventions. And the fashion itself, making itself ugly, makes fun of itself, you tease. So, once again, fashion proves to be clever, because, in my opinion, there is no better form of intelligence than self-mockery. As always, everything is about understanding the situations as well as knowing oneself: if someone falls into ridicule, it is not the fault of the pink fuchsia Crocs with a wedge of 10 centimeters made by Balenciaga.
In the future
The most Avveduti designers have understood and are pointing the way. Demna Gvasalia in Primis. And there will be a reason if "his" Balenciaga is now credited as the brand more "hot", having climbed the "Scuderia colleague" Gucci (for the record, OFF-White is in third place, Vetements to the fourth). Alessandro Michele is often accused of copying, not inventing anything new. In fact, he borrows and assembles, mixes, amalgams in a perennial movement that, in my judgement, more ironic than it can be. In the end, he is always right Picasso (still he): «The mediocre imitate, the geniuses copy».
And what do you think: You like the "ugly fashion"?
... and remember: Age does not matter