Are Miley Cyrus and Liam Hemsworth too young to be engaged? Do you care?

Wednesday, June 6, 2012

It’s official: Hannah Montana is all grown up. The 19-year-old singer/actress said “yes” to Liam Hemsworth last week, when he proposed to her with a 3.5 carat Neil Lane sparkler after three years of on-and-off dating.

“Thank you for all the love today :) I’m happy to share this news with you all. I feel like all my dreams are coming true. ❤ have a great day,” Cyrus tweeted earlier today. Twenty-two-year-old “Hunger Games” star Hemsworth may be young, but he’s apparently all class: the vintage, cushion-cut diamond he got for his new fiancée came in at a hefty $100,000. While the reaction to the couple’s engagement has been mostly supportive, there’s definitely a pink elephant in the room: the couple’s exceptionally young age.

With articles like this recent one from Jezebel, which details 10 good reasons why some people choose not to get married, and an ever-increasing focus on careers over families for women, it’s a bit strange to think of someone as young as Cyrus already planning her forever. And of course, if we learned anything from Sex and the City, it’s that women who “settle” like Lainey (remember the pregnant one who stole Charlotte’s baby name?) or get hitched early like Natasha (“the stick figure with no soul”) were probably setting their relationships up for failure, or, at the very least, setting themselves up for an unfulfilling life.

We’ve got to admit that even if 19 is a bit on the young side for us, this People slideshow of the couple’s PDA is pretty endearing in a slightly nauseating way, and their overt love for one another does give us hope that they might make it. On the other hand, we are a bit jaded on Hollywood love, especially of the young variety (K-Fed and Britney…enough said). Even celebrity couples who marry in their late 20s or 30s usually wind up breaking things off—how can someone who hasn’t even hit their 20-year mark be expected to sustain a lasting relationship in Hollywood?

What do you think: are Cyrus and Hemsworth setting themselves up for an early Kardashian-Humphries-style breakup?

THEY SAID…

The Undateable Girl: “Miley Cyrus is engaged at 19 and I couldn’t pay a guy to date me #COOL” [Twitter]

Skeery Jones: “19 year old @MileyCyrus & 22 year old Liam Hemsworth’s marriage has about as much chance of making it as an iPhone left on the subway.” [Twitter] 

WE SAID…

Lesa Hannah, beauty director: “Godspeed.”

Read Post | nhận xét

They said/We Said: What are the odds? There’s another controversy brewing for American Apparel

Tuesday, June 5, 2012

Never a stranger to controversy, Dov Charney is in the hot seat again after having finally admitted that American Apparel’s long-held “Made in America” practices may not be as steadfast a policy as everyone had thought.

In an interview with the Los Angeles Times, the label’s head honcho was adamant that American Apparel would keep creating its products in California… for now, at least.

“To say that I’m never going to import from overseas would be unreasonable,” he told the L.A. Times. “At this time our business concept is to make everything here. But I wouldn’t rule anything out.”

Despite the flurry of sexual harassment cases, wrongful-termination suits and dwindling financial numbers, American Apparel’s one redeeming quality was always the fact that its products were made at home.

The company’s also done a good job of providing higher wages for their production team. American Apparel’s unique team-based production system, which guarantees an hourly $8 wage on top of a “piece rate” wage for each completed garment, gives higher wages to immigrants who would otherwise only qualify for low-wage employment.

The catch is that the higher wages, on-site masseuses, and higher quality raw materials spell out a higher price tag for a cotton T than you’d find at one of its competitors, like Target.

The real question is: are customers going to continue to pay more for a product that’s “Made in America”? In other words, do they even care, when “Made in America” is essential to a brand’s identity?

“When it comes to fashion items, that doesn’t necessarily resonate with shoppers,” Anthony Dukes, a business professor at the University of Southern California, told the L.A. Times. “There’s not a lot of evidence to suggest that ‘made in America’ is a great model.”

THEY SAID…

Doug Barry: “Charney… left the door to cheap, overseas labor open enough to slide his unctuous body through should busines (sic) fail to improve.” [Jezebel] 

Connor Simpson: “Maybe they’d have an easier time landing in the black if Dov would stop racking up sexual assault lawsuits.” [The Atlantic Wire]

WE SAID…

Rani Sheen, copy and health editor: “Remember when the name American Apparel mostly brought associations with sweatshop-free labour and a commitment to local manufacturing? How times have changed. That message has been overshadowed by Dov Charney’s sleazy interview antics and T&AAA campaigns—maybe a renewed focus on it‚ as opposed to forgetting it entirely, would be just the thing to resurrect the brand.”

Read Post | nhận xét

They said/We said: Was Anna Wintour’s pro-Obama video inappropriate?

Monday, June 4, 2012

In what must be a first, an invitation to dine with Vogue editor-in-chief Anna Wintour is being viewed as inappropriate. The sponsored-by-Obama video invitation, which was released last Friday, shows Wintour in a Thakoon-designed Runway to Win scarf as she encourages Barack Obama supporters to enter for a chance to win seats at a Sarah Jessica Parker–hosted dinner, which Michelle Obama and Wintour will also be hosting.

So, what’s inappropriate about that? A report released on the same day as Wintour’s video detailed the dismal numbers of unemployed Americans. Unsurprisingly, the Republican Party was the first to point out the unfortunate timing, lampooning the Wintour video in a video called “Meanwhile.” As Wintour’s video plays in one corner of the screen, unemployment numbers before and after Obama’s presidency flash under the title “Meanwhile…” in the opposite corner.

“There couldn’t be a better demonstration of this president’s misplaced priorities than a glitzy fundraising video release on the same day that marked more unemployed Americans,” said Republican National Committee Chairman Reince Priebus. “It’s more than obvious that this president just doesn’t get it.”

While it’s true that the Obama campaign’s timing wasn’t spot-on in this case, will this really affect voters’ confidence in their current president? It’s important to note that both the Democratic and Republican parties have their own sets of supporters, and both organize celebrity-run dinners to bring out voters. Mitt Romney’s campaign has been promoting the “Dine With the Donald” dinner, which gives supporters a chance to rub shoulders with the business tycoon. Before the Wintour-Parker-Obama trifecta, Democratic Party supporters had come together under George Clooney’s roof as the long-time Obama supporter hosted a campaign dinner.

Does the release date of Wintour’s video show that the president is out of touch with the average American, or is the Republican Party simply using this as a convenient opportunity to take a jab at their political opponent?

THEY SAID…

Huffington Post Style: “The most intimidating dinner invitation ever, care of Anna Wintour.” [Twitter]

Juan Williams: “Let’s have someone who reeks of ornamental excess announce that the peasants can have a place at the table. It’s just unbelievable.” [Jezebel]

Erin Gibson: “I decline your dinner invitation, Anna Wintour.” [Twitter]

WE SAID…

Jacquelyn Francis, executive editor: “Campaign tactics like this (used in Canada and U.S.) are all about taking people off of the issues at hand rather than facing the issues at hand. But I get it, this is the nature of the beast. That being said, if I were an American voter, SJP and Anna Wintour–approved fundraising (BTW: fundraising is beyond crucial in the States) wouldn’t make me feel a multi-millionaire is particularly connected to the average unemployed American either.”

Read Post | nhận xét

They said/We said: Do nail salons have Starbucks-like potential?

Saturday, June 2, 2012

Whether you’re pro-Starbucks or not, it’s hard to deny the appeal of the coffee corporation’s branding: no matter where you are in the world, you can expect the same quality, taste, design and products.

That consistency and standard of service is exactly what one Boston-based CEO is expecting to do with MiniLuxe, her six-location nail salon chain. In fact, in Sue Thirlwall’s words, she wants to “Starbucks the nail salon” and expand nationally.

One thing is for certain: if there was ever a time to strike when the iron’s hot, it would be now. The nail salon industry has developed into a booming $7.3 billion industry, and now widely offers everything from shellac manicures to nail art in salons across North America.

Also, as Thirlwall pointed out, nail polish and nail grooming still managed to do well during the recession, perhaps because of their lower price points. While the makeup industry is still recovering from the economic slump and only beginning to thrive again as of late, people like Thirlwall were able to begin their companies during the recession and still do relatively well.

“We’ve kept the price down. Our luxe 30-minute manicure is $19, and we guarantee it for three days. I believe the time is right because it is definitely affordable but also hygienic . . . we know we could charge more, but we choose not to,” Thirlwall said.

One catch with the industry is that despite what seems to be a constant crop-up of new nail salons, the demand for affordable and reliable manis is still high, and it can be hard to find a place that offers them.

If Thirlwall and other nail industry entrepreneurs like her can get the business formula right, then there will undoubtedly be thousands of girls (and guys) flocking to these salon chains.

THEY SAID…

Christina Han: “Her business plan has a well-manicured lady (or gentleman) out the door in 30 minutes for less than $20. This just might work.” [The Cut]

Katie J.M. Baker: “One Venti pedicure coming up.” [Jezebel]

WE SAID…

Paige Dzenis, associate online editor: “Based on the number of Twitter conversations I see almost daily with women asking where they can find a cheap, fast and reliable mani/pedi at any given intersection in the city, a chain of dependable salons makes sense for the nail needs of the average customer. Let’s just hope they focus first on mimicking Starbucks’ impressive quality control measures before they go for geographical domination.”

Via: fashionmagazine

Read Post | nhận xét

They said/We said: Does a brand need a charismatic designer to succeed?

After John Galliano’s infamous anti-Semitic rant in Paris last April, many wondered how his sudden departure from Dior would affect the French fashion house.

According to the Financial Times, not only did Galliano’s departure leave the company relatively unscathed, but they actually ended up with their highest earnings per annum ever, hitting $1 billion in 2011. “I never considered that,” Sidney Toledano, the president of Dior said. “I always thought we absolutely needed an artistic director.”

It makes you wonder: how important is a charismatic designer to a fashion house? Is it worth the potential risk that sometimes accompanies a more flamboyant style of creative genius?

Toledano seems to think so. Though he admitted that Dior still fared well financially without Galliano, he did stress how important he felt designers were for shaping a label’s identity, likening designers to “a shorthand to help consumers understand the brand, and to embody it.”

Does that mean someone like the more demure Raf Simons, who is taking over Galliano’s post for Dior, might not have the same capacity to “embody” the brand? According to Toledano, it all comes down to the individual.

“If [charisma] works for the designer, then fine . . . but if not, it can be counterproductive, and it is better to avoid it. In the end, luxury is judged not by whether a designer’s face is on X number of posters, but by their work.”

Our bet is that if Simons’ tenure at Jil Sander was anything to go by, his work will more than speak for itself.

THEY SAID…

Jada Wong: “And the pressure’s on, Raf.” [Styleite]

Cheryl Wischhover: “We have no doubt that Simons will do amazing things for the house of Dior, but it will be interesting to watch how labels continue to manage the increasingly frequent hirings and firings of creative directors and how it affects their bottom lines.” [Fashionista]

 

WE SAID…

Bernadette Morra, Editor-in-Chief: “A creative director is absolutely vital to the continued growth and development of a brand. True, Dior may be able to coast without a strong creative force at the helm for a while, but not for the long term.”

Read Post | nhận xét