Anonymous wrote:My father's Pierre Cardin jacket in really plush, good quality green corduroy.
My parents lived in Paris in their early 20s in the '70s. At the time, anyone who was slender enough could shop the sample sales of couture houses, and the prices were not the outrageous ones of today. They didn't earn a lot, but they bought some nice pieces. This is one of them.
My mother's pieces did not survive, because she wore them to death. She had an interesting job as a young adult; she presented well, so she was hired by a luxury watchmaker to shop at other jewelers' and watchmaker's places and bring back watches so they could reverse-engineer them. She walked about Place Vendôme looking like a million dollars - which she most decidedly did not have
Aww and flashback to the 80s when Pierre Cardin became really accessible and Mary Lou Retton became popular and everyone had Pierre Cardin track suits.
The rest below is o/t so feel free to ignore.
I just did a quick check on this
https://www.finnegan.com/en/insights/articles/more-valuable-than-patents-recognizing-and-leveraging-trademark.html#
Someone also did a fashion post recently about how brands we trust(ed) are licensing willy nilly. I was surprised at some of the names on there (Spyder, Brooks Brothers).
"Such licensing practices, if done carefully, can greatly expand a company’s sales.8In 2014, licensed products accounted for 57 percent of Calvin Klein’s global retail sales. However, licensing—if carried too far—can risk alienating core consumers. The Pierre Cardin brand serves as a cautionary tale: This once-venerable luxury brand initially saw its revenue soar as it agreed to various licenses for perfumes and cosmetics.9However, the brand arguably became overextended, into items like baseball caps and cigarettes.10Today, the brand has some 400 licensing partners.11"