"Fast-fashion" clothing brands are popular among low-priced models
Even if it rains, London's busiest Oxford Street is not short of shoppers. A young woman walked out of Primark's clothing store known for its cheapness. She wore six or seven brown paper bags in her hands, stuffed with "cheap" trophies. An overwhelmed paper bag broke, and colorful clothes scattered across the floor. Surprisingly, this woman was too lazy to pick up her clothes on the sidewalk because her clothes were wet with rain.
That's right, this is the portrayal of today's fashion: the product is flooding, and the price is so low that it is almost garbage. Businesses claim that this is a “fast fashion†era where anyone can own a stylish product faster, more, and cheaper. However, the shortening of the epidemic cycle and cost reduction is a chronic plunder. The social problems caused by “fast fashion†cannot be ignored.
Clothing is not as popular as "fast fashion" in selling clothes, completely changing people's spending habits and the retail business model.
In the UK, people now have four times the amount of clothing they had 30 years ago. Everyone spends an average of 625 pounds (one pound about US$1.61) a year to buy clothes, buy 28 kilograms of clothes a year, and consume 1.72 million tons annually. Fashion products. It is worth noting that the same weight of clothing is thrown into the trash every year, although they are far from the old clothes.
The data proves that the relationship between people and clothing is changing. In the past, people bought clothes based on income, demand and season. It was common to wear a piece of clothing for one or two years. In the “fast fashion†era, people’s attention to clothing was far less important than before, and the focus of the fashion industry was also tilted from manufacturing to sales.
Because of this depth, Philip Green, founder of Topshop, a British clothing chain, has achieved great commercial success. In 2002, he bought Arcadia Group for 850 million pounds, making this clothing chain company a British "cheap fashion paradise."
Based on this, Greene established the Topshop chain, selling and designing fashions that are close to international brands. Three years after its establishment, Topshop had sales of more than one billion pounds in half a year. At the time, the entire UK clothing market had sales of only seven billion pounds.
For amateurs with limited income, Topshop stores on the streets are simply a shortcut to the fashion platform. They see "style" in fashion magazines and then walk into Topshop stores to buy similar styles of clothing at a low price.
For retailers eager to sell, Topshop's success model deserves to be advertised. Low prices are just one of the reasons for Topshop's success. Keeping abreast with market trends and rapidly adjusting supply varieties are another main reason why Topshop attracts consumers. Fast Fashion has become the industry standard.
Fashion "quick response"
"Fast fashion" not only changed the business model of the retail industry, but also completely changed the various aspects of fashion industry production, supply, and sales.
When stores adjust their supply as the trend changes, "quick response" becomes the key to winning the competition. The garment factory emphasizes not quantity but speed. Each retailer is eager to get the fastest supply chain, and the production cycle is continuously reduced from weeks to days or even hours.
While increasing production speed, the working hours of the garment processing factories have become more flexible. Because fashion trends are changing so quickly, retailers often do not place orders in the last minute. Regardless of the day and night, as long as the British design team finalizes the drawing, buyers who are specifically contacting the supplier will send a fax to contact the garment processing factories in developing countries.
A few years ago, a single retailer's single order usually agreed to produce a total of 40,000 items in 4 models in 20 weeks. Today, garment processing plants have had a hard time receiving large orders for long production cycles. If a retailer is willing to order 10,000 items in five weeks, any garment factory will feel lucky.
As the first “rapid reaction force†in the fashion industry, Topshop successfully reduced the production cycle from 9 weeks to 6 weeks. This record was quickly refreshed. Another British chain store, H&M, took just 3 weeks to complete the entire process, from design to merchandise.
Limited edition "teasing"
Shorten the delivery cycle At the same time, Zara, a clothing retailer from Spain, introduced the “limited edition†concept and completely rewritten the “fast fashion†game rules.
On the basis of the industry's reduction in production, Zara further downplays the quantity requirements and replaces them with a huge variety of options. The Zara design team designs 40,000 garments each year, of which 12,000 styles are put on the shelves and more than 5,000 varieties are offered than Topshop.
When the first Zara store in the UK opened in Regent Street in London, the store’s marketing strategy was confusing. Compared with stores such as Topshop, Zara's price is not cheap, but it is within an acceptable range. Indecisive consumers discovered that if they did not immediately buy the clothes they were looking for, they would be left empty-handed the next week.
This is Zara's success. By reducing the number of consumers psychological "hungry", the so-called "limited edition tease." This marketing strategy creates consumer panic, fears he has little hesitation, and will always miss out on buying opportunities.
Even Green, who created Topshop, praised Zara's strategy. “Genius is the essence of the fashion industry,†he commented in an interview with an industry magazine. Many clothing brands, including Esprit and Mongo, quickly copied Zara's success: the time between order and delivery was reduced to the shortest, the product range was no longer limited to the four seasons, and the number of each style was significantly reduced.
For fashion retailers, holding inventory on hand is the most backward performance. For consumers, traditional factors such as materials and brands that measure the quality of clothing are no longer important. We are busy buying the latest and most trendy designs and are willing to try different designs for more than 20 dress seasons each year. In the “Fast Fashion†era, if someone is still content to dress in the four seasons of spring, summer, autumn and winter, he is a “fashion dinosaurâ€.
"Luxury **"
Cheap clothing chain stores are not the only business beneficiaries of Fast Fashion. When bargains are rampant, high-priced first-line fashion brands are aggressively developing new markets and claiming to be “luxuryâ€.
In July 2001, sales of clothing and shoes in the UK increased by 12% year-on-year, the highest annual growth rate since the mid-1970s. At the same time, the retail price of clothing continued to decline. In 2001, the overall level of British clothing retail prices fell by 6%. In the four years from 2003 to 2007, the average retail price of clothing dropped another 10%.
Small profits but quick turnover is the "fast fashion" success. In addition to a number of clothing brands discounted 30% to 50% year-round, the United Kingdom has also emerged as a clothing chain that focuses on cheap products. Primark is an example of this, the brand's guide price for each piece of clothing is only 4 pounds. Low prices promote over-purchasing by consumers. Ordinary people can change their clothes 4 times a day.
When consumers scrambled to cut spending on clothes, the whirlwind rose quietly. The so-called "mashup", "Sunday Times Magazine" 2005 said, "the art of mixing luxury goods and cheap goods." This trend is the default, as long as wearing a luxury, even if the body is a bargain is no harm. Since then, cheap is no longer a fashion taboo.
The luxury products that aim at the high-end market all year round find the "new continent" and turn to explore the potential of middle-income consumers. Since the purchase of clothes has saved a lot of money, why not buy a luxury product to treat yourself and practice the tide of "mixed dreams"? The chief executives of the luxury goods group claim that this is "luxury *****", making luxury products "at your fingertips."
The “fast fashion†low price strategy on the dark side is the secret of retailers’ “gold and silverâ€, but it is low prices that expose the dark side of “fast fashionâ€.
It is physical labor that is full of sweat. According to incomplete statistics, there are at least 40 million workers in the world engaged in garment processing, cutting and sewing textile raw materials into garments. In addition, there are 30 million casual workers in the world working in a family workshop to embroider, trim or sew accessories for garments. These temporary workers are partially women.
The "quick fashion" depends on the low price and fast principle of survival, which challenges the limits of workers. In developing countries, the profit that a garment processing factory can earn for each order received is minimal. The downsizing of clothing retail prices may affect the income of garment factory workers. In Bangladesh, many workers are the sole source of income for the entire family, but their income of £1 a day is far from enough to keep the family’s daily expenses. Shortening the delivery cycle further stresses the pressure on garment factories. Workers were only told to work overtime before they got off work. In order to catch orders it was possible to work for more than a dozen hours.
Even luxury goods that are advertised as "artisan crafts" and expensive are hard to escape their responsibility. With the fanfare of “luxuryâ€, luxury brands have never relaxed their control of the supply chain. In order to reduce labor expenditures, the major production links of luxury brands in developed countries are all outsourced to developing countries such as Eastern Europe and Asia.
Even in developed countries, cheap labor is replacing traditional, expensive “studio†production methods. In Prato, the textile city of central Italy, about 25,000 garment workers from developing countries are manufacturing luxury goods locally. According to the Italian television documentary “The Slave of Luxuryâ€, the working conditions of these workers were extremely poor, and their wages were less than half the Italian minimum legal wage.
In 2007, the World Society for Nature and Nature released the report "Deeper Extravagance", which ranks luxury brands in terms of social and environmental sustainability. As a result, many well-known brands were rated low, LVMH was rated C, while Tod in the UK was F.
That's right, this is the portrayal of today's fashion: the product is flooding, and the price is so low that it is almost garbage. Businesses claim that this is a “fast fashion†era where anyone can own a stylish product faster, more, and cheaper. However, the shortening of the epidemic cycle and cost reduction is a chronic plunder. The social problems caused by “fast fashion†cannot be ignored.
Clothing is not as popular as "fast fashion" in selling clothes, completely changing people's spending habits and the retail business model.
In the UK, people now have four times the amount of clothing they had 30 years ago. Everyone spends an average of 625 pounds (one pound about US$1.61) a year to buy clothes, buy 28 kilograms of clothes a year, and consume 1.72 million tons annually. Fashion products. It is worth noting that the same weight of clothing is thrown into the trash every year, although they are far from the old clothes.
The data proves that the relationship between people and clothing is changing. In the past, people bought clothes based on income, demand and season. It was common to wear a piece of clothing for one or two years. In the “fast fashion†era, people’s attention to clothing was far less important than before, and the focus of the fashion industry was also tilted from manufacturing to sales.
Because of this depth, Philip Green, founder of Topshop, a British clothing chain, has achieved great commercial success. In 2002, he bought Arcadia Group for 850 million pounds, making this clothing chain company a British "cheap fashion paradise."
Based on this, Greene established the Topshop chain, selling and designing fashions that are close to international brands. Three years after its establishment, Topshop had sales of more than one billion pounds in half a year. At the time, the entire UK clothing market had sales of only seven billion pounds.
For amateurs with limited income, Topshop stores on the streets are simply a shortcut to the fashion platform. They see "style" in fashion magazines and then walk into Topshop stores to buy similar styles of clothing at a low price.
For retailers eager to sell, Topshop's success model deserves to be advertised. Low prices are just one of the reasons for Topshop's success. Keeping abreast with market trends and rapidly adjusting supply varieties are another main reason why Topshop attracts consumers. Fast Fashion has become the industry standard.
Fashion "quick response"
"Fast fashion" not only changed the business model of the retail industry, but also completely changed the various aspects of fashion industry production, supply, and sales.
When stores adjust their supply as the trend changes, "quick response" becomes the key to winning the competition. The garment factory emphasizes not quantity but speed. Each retailer is eager to get the fastest supply chain, and the production cycle is continuously reduced from weeks to days or even hours.
While increasing production speed, the working hours of the garment processing factories have become more flexible. Because fashion trends are changing so quickly, retailers often do not place orders in the last minute. Regardless of the day and night, as long as the British design team finalizes the drawing, buyers who are specifically contacting the supplier will send a fax to contact the garment processing factories in developing countries.
A few years ago, a single retailer's single order usually agreed to produce a total of 40,000 items in 4 models in 20 weeks. Today, garment processing plants have had a hard time receiving large orders for long production cycles. If a retailer is willing to order 10,000 items in five weeks, any garment factory will feel lucky.
As the first “rapid reaction force†in the fashion industry, Topshop successfully reduced the production cycle from 9 weeks to 6 weeks. This record was quickly refreshed. Another British chain store, H&M, took just 3 weeks to complete the entire process, from design to merchandise.
Limited edition "teasing"
Shorten the delivery cycle At the same time, Zara, a clothing retailer from Spain, introduced the “limited edition†concept and completely rewritten the “fast fashion†game rules.
On the basis of the industry's reduction in production, Zara further downplays the quantity requirements and replaces them with a huge variety of options. The Zara design team designs 40,000 garments each year, of which 12,000 styles are put on the shelves and more than 5,000 varieties are offered than Topshop.
When the first Zara store in the UK opened in Regent Street in London, the store’s marketing strategy was confusing. Compared with stores such as Topshop, Zara's price is not cheap, but it is within an acceptable range. Indecisive consumers discovered that if they did not immediately buy the clothes they were looking for, they would be left empty-handed the next week.
This is Zara's success. By reducing the number of consumers psychological "hungry", the so-called "limited edition tease." This marketing strategy creates consumer panic, fears he has little hesitation, and will always miss out on buying opportunities.
Even Green, who created Topshop, praised Zara's strategy. “Genius is the essence of the fashion industry,†he commented in an interview with an industry magazine. Many clothing brands, including Esprit and Mongo, quickly copied Zara's success: the time between order and delivery was reduced to the shortest, the product range was no longer limited to the four seasons, and the number of each style was significantly reduced.
For fashion retailers, holding inventory on hand is the most backward performance. For consumers, traditional factors such as materials and brands that measure the quality of clothing are no longer important. We are busy buying the latest and most trendy designs and are willing to try different designs for more than 20 dress seasons each year. In the “Fast Fashion†era, if someone is still content to dress in the four seasons of spring, summer, autumn and winter, he is a “fashion dinosaurâ€.
"Luxury **"
Cheap clothing chain stores are not the only business beneficiaries of Fast Fashion. When bargains are rampant, high-priced first-line fashion brands are aggressively developing new markets and claiming to be “luxuryâ€.
In July 2001, sales of clothing and shoes in the UK increased by 12% year-on-year, the highest annual growth rate since the mid-1970s. At the same time, the retail price of clothing continued to decline. In 2001, the overall level of British clothing retail prices fell by 6%. In the four years from 2003 to 2007, the average retail price of clothing dropped another 10%.
Small profits but quick turnover is the "fast fashion" success. In addition to a number of clothing brands discounted 30% to 50% year-round, the United Kingdom has also emerged as a clothing chain that focuses on cheap products. Primark is an example of this, the brand's guide price for each piece of clothing is only 4 pounds. Low prices promote over-purchasing by consumers. Ordinary people can change their clothes 4 times a day.
When consumers scrambled to cut spending on clothes, the whirlwind rose quietly. The so-called "mashup", "Sunday Times Magazine" 2005 said, "the art of mixing luxury goods and cheap goods." This trend is the default, as long as wearing a luxury, even if the body is a bargain is no harm. Since then, cheap is no longer a fashion taboo.
The luxury products that aim at the high-end market all year round find the "new continent" and turn to explore the potential of middle-income consumers. Since the purchase of clothes has saved a lot of money, why not buy a luxury product to treat yourself and practice the tide of "mixed dreams"? The chief executives of the luxury goods group claim that this is "luxury *****", making luxury products "at your fingertips."
The “fast fashion†low price strategy on the dark side is the secret of retailers’ “gold and silverâ€, but it is low prices that expose the dark side of “fast fashionâ€.
It is physical labor that is full of sweat. According to incomplete statistics, there are at least 40 million workers in the world engaged in garment processing, cutting and sewing textile raw materials into garments. In addition, there are 30 million casual workers in the world working in a family workshop to embroider, trim or sew accessories for garments. These temporary workers are partially women.
The "quick fashion" depends on the low price and fast principle of survival, which challenges the limits of workers. In developing countries, the profit that a garment processing factory can earn for each order received is minimal. The downsizing of clothing retail prices may affect the income of garment factory workers. In Bangladesh, many workers are the sole source of income for the entire family, but their income of £1 a day is far from enough to keep the family’s daily expenses. Shortening the delivery cycle further stresses the pressure on garment factories. Workers were only told to work overtime before they got off work. In order to catch orders it was possible to work for more than a dozen hours.
Even luxury goods that are advertised as "artisan crafts" and expensive are hard to escape their responsibility. With the fanfare of “luxuryâ€, luxury brands have never relaxed their control of the supply chain. In order to reduce labor expenditures, the major production links of luxury brands in developed countries are all outsourced to developing countries such as Eastern Europe and Asia.
Even in developed countries, cheap labor is replacing traditional, expensive “studio†production methods. In Prato, the textile city of central Italy, about 25,000 garment workers from developing countries are manufacturing luxury goods locally. According to the Italian television documentary “The Slave of Luxuryâ€, the working conditions of these workers were extremely poor, and their wages were less than half the Italian minimum legal wage.
In 2007, the World Society for Nature and Nature released the report "Deeper Extravagance", which ranks luxury brands in terms of social and environmental sustainability. As a result, many well-known brands were rated low, LVMH was rated C, while Tod in the UK was F.
Plastic Shoe Buckles,Plastic Shoe Decor,B Letter Shoe Buckles
Wanjun Crafts Manufacturer Co., Ltd. , http://www.zsbuckles.com