Retailers and Designers Continue to Ignore Real Women

Real women are not size zero and everyone knows it! The Mail online reports that "Nearly half of UK women are a dress size 16 or above" but researchers Mintel report that "larger" women tell them much more still needs to be done to provide clothes that look good on a more rounded frame.

According to the Mail online "The average size for a British woman is a curvy 16". As this equates to about 11m women it is no surprise that providing clothing for them is proving the fastest growing market for the fashion chains worth £3.8 billion a year.

The 45% growth in the value of sales of larger clothes over the last 5 years compares to a rise of just 15% across women's fashions so it is clear that demand is strong.

With this in mind I visited some designer stores in London and found the following: Miu Miu, Louis Vuitton, Moschino, Prada and Versace - maximum dress size is 12. Alexander McQueen stock 14 in some styles but the sales assistant says they come up so small that she advised buying a size larger. They don't stock 16 so no luck there.

Donna Karen and Gucci make an effort by going to 14 but "Hurrah" for Chanel who do stock size 16 and on some occasions 18.

So what is the real reason that designers don't go above a size 12? According to Robin Lewis, co-author of "The New Rules of Retail" commenting on the sizing policy of Abercrombie and Fitch (who don't sell trousers above a US size 10, UK 12) to Ellen DeGeneres "they just don't want larger women shopping in the store". The appalled host exclaimed "Since when was something over a size 10 plus-size?"

Recently Lululemon said that clothes above size 12 were not part of their business strategy and there is an almost sinister move here to equate a woman's dress size to her financial and social status. In an ironic reversal of history "thin" and "rich" go together so in their prejudiced minds only thin people can afford their clothes. They need to get out more!

This is also true of some well known retailers. In 2009 Selfridges stopped selling anything above a size 16 and got rid of those brands that do cater for those sizes. So if "larger" women want good quality clothing where do they go? Until recently Jaeger was a good bet but they have lost their way and although they stock larger sizes I defy you to find anything you would want to buy. My advice would be to go online to Scandinavian stores (and occasionally the US).

So what do you think? Are these brand designers right to protect their prestigious images in this way or should they wake up and manufacture for the real world?

Written by Erica Vilkauls: Director Jem Retail Consultants.

The "Spinning" Of Results

Jaeger has more than halved its group loss after tax from £35.5m to £13.1m in its full year results to February 23rd.

The fashion retailer Jaeger revealed that losses shrank by 63% in the year to February 23rd. However sales fell 17% to £70.7m while gross profit also dropped 17% to £40.9m from £49.3m the year before.

It interests me that certain parts of the media seem to just regurgitate retailer's results. There is no journalistic content or analysis and the real story is not revealed to the reader in these publications.

Take the above headline regarding Jaeger: "Yes" the facts are there but this does not reflect the true state of Jaeger, which is that Better Capital have got to grip with costs. The fact that SALES FELL under their year in charge is shocking, but very typical of Private Equity ownership of fashion businesses.

As with every blog I write about retailing I highlight the need for product that the customer desires and actually wants to buy. Cost cutting, of course, strengthens the cash position of a business and enables the management team to feel secure. This is a false sense of security if the product is not desirable or relevant.

Congratulations to the team at Jaeger for getting the business on a sounder financial footing. However.... I tried yet again to find something, anything, to buy from Jaeger, even after the coat I bought in the summer started to fall apart after just one wear! The coat only had one button and that had gone by the time I got home after wearing it for the first time. But "No!". Nothing to tempt me.

Jaeger's heritage (as outlined on their website) is the key to its future. Beautiful fabrics made with quality should be the top priority for its garments. Jaeger used to revolutionise. Now what a sorry state its product ranges are in.

No amount of cost control will actually build this business up again and even loyal customers like me have reached the conclusion that "we must move on".

My message to the new CEO: PLEASE focus on product and look back to what you used to do so well. That gap in the market is still there but I'd guess for not much longer.

As for the media: more analysis and less taking well-spun results at face value.

Written by Erica Vilkauls: Director at JEM Retail Consultants