You Can See a Brand’s Positioning on the Rack
During an editing meeting, I found myself looking at a rack that could have belonged to dozens of different brands.
The company wanted to position itself in high-end streetwear. The categories were right, the materials appropriate, the silhouettes recognisable and the prices consistent with the target market. No one had made an obvious mistake. That was precisely what made the problem harder to address.
The collection looked like the work of a thousand other streetwear brands: reassuring garments, references already accepted by the market and products that buyers knew how to place. Everything worked, yet there was no compelling reason to choose us.
When discussing positioning, attention often goes to the logo, the campaign or the presentation prepared for the sales network. I prefer to look at the rack. Once the branding is removed, the decisions remain: the proportion of knitwear to outerwear, the materials that recur, how far the volumes are pushed, where the price is concentrated and which details appear across different categories.
In that collection, the logo was declaring an identity that the product could not yet support.
We decided to move away from the safety of predictable basics and worked through the garments one by one. A logo crewneck, for example, looked like many sweatshirts already on the market. We changed the construction of the neckline and the V-insert beneath it, making them as one continuous piece. At the hem, we rounded the ribbing at the sides and overlapped it. We then added an aged treatment that brought out the seams and topstitching.
The sweatshirt remained a basic. Once you looked at it closely and handled it, however, you could tell that someone had actually designed it.
The changes had a considerable impact on both cost and price. This required careful evaluation because the garment belonged to a category normally expected to provide commercial security within the collection. We had transformed an easy-to-buy item into a more considered piece, designed to attract attention and remain memorable. The decision paid off.
What Remains When You Cover the Logo
Recognisable positioning is built through the codes a brand chooses to repeat. These might be a shoulder line, a volume, a treatment, a construction technique or the way a material reappears across different categories. The balance between image pieces and commercial products also contributes to defining it.
TOTEME offers a clear example. Its Embroidered Scarf Jacket was not left as a successful one-season piece. It developed into a product family offered in different colours, weights and lengths. The permanent Garderob selection brings together garments intended to retain a lasting place in both the wardrobe and the brand’s offer. Coats, trousers and knitwear continue to explore relaxed volumes, compact materials and a controlled palette. The brand describes its approach through shape, materiality and the reworking of archetypes. The assortment makes that continuity visible.
COS applies similar principles at a different price level. Its focus on cut, volume and construction is not confined to the Atelier capsule. It returns in more commercial shirts, trousers and dresses. A T-shirt still performs its everyday function, but its weight and proportions prevent it from becoming anonymous. COS’s approach begins with draping, materiality and lasting design.
UNIQLO shows that a recognisable code can also be functional. HEATTECH and AIRism extend across categories, fits and price levels. Customers recognise the brand not only through its graphics, but through the repeated promise of comfort, simplicity and accessibility expressed by its LifeWear philosophy.
Brunello Cucinelli began with cashmere and expanded into ready-to-wear and lifestyle without abandoning its hierarchy of materials, natural colours, soft construction and signature monili embellishment. The brand’s development shows how extending into new categories can strengthen positioning when the founding product continues to guide the rest of the collection.
These are different examples, but they share one element: the most commercial garment does not speak a language unrelated to the image piece.
Merchandising Does Not Come at the End
In too many companies, merchandising is still treated as the stage at which a collection is corrected. Risky pieces are removed, easier products are added and prices are brought back into a reassuring range.
By then, many decisions have already been made. Fabrics, prototypes and workmanship have absorbed time and money. Intervening only when the final rack is ready may improve the numerical balance while leaving the identity problem untouched.
Categories, materials, proportions, look building and price bands need to be considered while the collection is being developed. Economic sustainability does not require choosing the simplest product every time. It requires deciding where to invest, which details can extend across several garments and how much intensity to assign to the pieces responsible for generating image compared with those expected to support volume.
Price also creates expectations. If a basic costs more, the customer must be able to see what justifies the difference. In the crewneck, the value did not depend on an explanation added afterwards. It was visible in the neckline and V-insert constructed as one piece, the rounded and overlapping ribbed hem, and the treatment that highlighted the topstitching. The price increased because the product had genuinely changed.
An image piece can push the language further, but the rest of the collection must be able to follow. Other garments can pick up its construction, treatment, proportions or material at different levels of intensity and cost. If the image piece remains isolated, it may work for the campaign while leaving the buyer without the products needed to build an order.
After the edit, the rack had gained rhythm and personality. Buyers no longer walked past the garments with a quick glance. They picked them up, examined the workmanship, tried them on and asked us for detailed explanations they could take back to their own customers.
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