A brand is born when it decides what it will not be
At first, everything seemed possible: romanticism, streetwear, craftsmanship, colour, inclusivity, irony. The brand only began to exist when we stopped trying to be everything.
This often happens when creating a brand from scratch. Photographs, materials, words, periods and people accumulate on the moodboard. Every reference is interesting, some are even beautiful. The problem begins when you have to decide which one has the right to guide the others.
A moodboard without hierarchy describes a taste. A brand requires consequences.
In 2022, I worked on a line called “On the side of nature”. On the banner, I had set out four directions: feminine, organic, less but better, priorities. They had to enter the product, not remain in the presentation.
The category that could not be included
The first selection concerned materials and treatments. T-shirts, sweatshirts, dresses, skirts, trousers, jumpsuits and bags could only become part of the collection if they met the environmental criteria established for the project.
Accessories were left out.
In 2022, sustainability had not yet gained the central role it would later assume, and the range of suitable materials was more limited. I could not find solutions for the accessories that would allow me to guarantee what “On the side of nature” promised. I could have included them to broaden the offer and make it more commercially complete. I would also have been asking communication to conceal a contradiction in the product.
That decision clarified the project more effectively than another page of images. If a category could not support the promise, the fact that it was commercially viable was not enough.
The same scrutiny continued beyond the garments. The sales booklet presented organic textiles and processes compliant with GOTS requirements. The palette came from coffee, cumin, mosses and lichens, madder, rhubarb and blueberry. The labels were made from apple-processing waste, while the hangtags and packaging used FSC-certified paper and the polybags were compostable.
Natural dyeing raised the most difficult issue. It could not guarantee the colour consistency from one batch to the next that the market had come to expect. Shades and nuances could vary. We stated this openly in the booklet: colours borrowed from nature continued to change on the garments.
That characteristic narrowed the field again. Customers who expected an identical, repeatable colour according to conventional industrial standards were not our customers. We were looking for informed people who were prepared to accept variation and capable of attributing value to the origin of the colour, the materials, the supply chain and everything that normally remains invisible behind a price.
It was not a project for everyone. The difference between our product and a T-shirt from a high-end brand could not be explained through image or the name on the label alone. The process had to be understood. This already narrowed the customer base before distribution even began.
After those decisions, the research became more precise. Every proposal could be accepted or rejected according to a recognisable criterion. The ideal customer also stopped being a generic figure defined by age, income and purchasing habits. They had a reason to choose and a limitation to accept.
The boundary must reach the market
A brand takes shape when its name, product, palette, materials, styling, tone, price and channel respond to the same position. Coherence allows for different languages, but prevents every department from developing its own version of the project.
Some brands have built their recognition by maintaining a refusal over time. Stone Island has placed material research ahead of generic luxury. Garment dyeing, membranes and treatments determine the product before becoming part of the narrative. Nudie Jeans has taken its choice into service and distribution: denim is repaired, resold or recycled, and free repairs are part of the store experience. Two different positions, both capable of changing what a company produces and sells.
For “On the side of nature”, the name already carried a responsibility. It could not become an atmosphere applied to a conventional collection. The cotton, dyes, admitted categories, labels and every part of the packaging had to confirm the same choice. Price and distribution would also have to explain why a variation in colour did not mean that the garment had been poorly made.
Creative direction protects this boundary when commercial requests, new categories or markets with different habits arrive. Many proposals can be valid on their own. Once introduced into the brand, they may force it to promise one thing and sell another.
Accessories were left out because I had not found the right materials. The customer who would have considered any change in colour unacceptable was left out as well. Both decisions reduced the commercial possibilities. They also prevented us from selling a promise that the product could not keep.
Romina Tosi
Disclaimer
The views expressed above represent my personal interpretation of publicly available information and, like any interpretation, may be shared, debated, or challenged.
The information referenced comes from public sources available at the time of publication, including official documents, union communications, press articles, and materials accessible to anyone. I do not disclose confidential information or facts learned through privileged access. I do not reveal protected information, nor do I attribute unlawful conduct to individuals or companies.
Any reference to specific cases is intended solely to provide context and analyze dynamics affecting the broader industry. It is not intended to target individuals or particular businesses.
Observations regarding industrial strategies, financial decisions, and production models fall within the right to express opinions and commentary on matters of public interest. They remain personal assessments, not definitive judgments.
Not all companies operate in the same way. Alongside businesses that may deserve criticism, there are many others that work with seriousness, consistency, and long-term vision.
If you notice any errors or inaccuracies, please let me know. I will be happy to review and correct them where necessary.
The purpose of this reflection is to encourage discussion and debate, not to cause harm to individuals, companies, or organizations.
Comments