100 likes | 243 Views
FASHION. Caroline, Emily, Lauren, Sarah. Feminine vs. masculine Living in luxury Achievement/icons or celebrities . Gender stereotypes Elegant vs. Playful Playful parties and technology / beauty. “live colorfully” . “Unwrap Wonder” . Minimalist individual
E N D
FASHION Caroline, Emily, Lauren, Sarah
Feminine vs. masculine • Living in luxury • Achievement/icons or celebrities
Gender • stereotypes • Elegant vs. Playful • Playful parties and technology / beauty “live colorfully” “Unwrap Wonder”
Minimalist individual • Music and artistic growth • Separation of professional/personal • International presence • Adventurous, urban groups • Emphasis on music and sports • Personal/ professional overlap • Primarily domestic focus
Individual woman vs. Community • Domestic vs. Internationality • YouTube channel
Rolex/Michael Kors & Kate Spade/C. Wonder Luxury Playful fashion Elegance Classic
Converse/Vans & FEW/FFP Empowering Bold Making your own choices and creativity Modern
Gender Stereotypes • Rolex: masculine/athletic, dark colors • Michael Kors: celebrities, feminine colors • Kate Spade: feminine colors, foods, language • C. Wonder: trendy, bold patterns • Fashion Empowering Women: couture, style, trends
Socioeconomic Targets Kate Spade: upper middle class, retail doors & department stores, price points: $50-1,500 C Wonder: middle class, price points: $10-400 Converse: lower/middle class Vans: lower/middle class FEW: upper/middle class, donations start at $50+, high fashion sponsors/designers FFP: upper/middle class, high fashion sponsors/designers Michael Kors: Middle to Upper class Rolex: Upper middle and Upper class
Implications Brand consistency and cohesiveness. Consistent brand image, while reaching demographics. Social media mediums: distinguishable brand identity. Consistency to maintain brand identity and drive action.