Fashion extravaganza walks the talk

As the glamour of Fashion Week 2005 fades into the distance for another year, the verdict from designers is in.

The week was a success. The best yet, some say.

Founder Pieter Stewart says it was the first time Fashion Week - effectively a huge marketing exercise - has been profitable as a business in its five-year history. A $2.7 million budget was covered.

And with designer debriefings from last year's events now over, she's planning several changes to make the sixth Fashion Week more effective. Among them: holding the event earlier in the year and attracting good agents, not just buyers.

But pinning down what the exercise means to New Zealand's high fashion industry in cold hard cash is a far harder task. So hard, that Stewart has yet to finalise numbers from 2004. The best she can offer is an estimate that Fashion Week generated $27 million worth of media coverage in 2004.

It's still far too soon to get a similar figure for 2005, but there are upbeat anecdotes in abundance. Stewart says one designer won 27 new accounts. All the designers she has been in contact with have reported an increase in orders from existing accounts or new wins.

Adrian Hailwood, founder of the Hailwood label, said Fashion Week had been good for his finances, with about 11 new accounts signed up.

"That's huge for me. I'm a small brand: we only had six stockists previously."

There was also a definite pick-up in interest over previous years, when Hailwood had drawn one or two orders each season. This year, interest in his label finally ripened.

"A lot of buyers that come have been watching me for the last few years," he said.

Cybele Wiren, owner of the Cybele brand, did her first solo show in 2005 after participating in a new designers show in 2003.

She got an order from a Melbourne store, Blondies - her first major wholesale expansion into Australia.

Outside that, Wiren said it was difficult to identify the Fashion Week effect, with other orders she got likely to have come her way anyway.

"A lot of it is about branding," she said.

"The media response we've had has been amazing."

Wiren, whose show was sponsored, said she would like to participate again next year. "It was definitely worthwhile."

Another relative newcomer is Pearl, one of the 2004 new generation designers. But co-founder Cris Roberts said without a major sponsor it was expensive for a fledgling label to take part in Fashion Week.

Show fees can range from $8500 to $17,000. But it might cost more like $34,000 to put on the most minimal of full runway shows, once the cost of fabric, labour and things such as stylists are considered.

"It's just like planning a wedding," says Roberts, formerly Zambesi's general manager. While retail sales of her label rose sharply during the event - with enough press she believed fashion houses could have seen sales boosted by a third to a half - Roberts mainly took part as a branding exercise. But with Pearl paying its own way, she had yet to work out whether it had generated enough publicity to justify the cost, particularly when she might have got some of that coverage on her own.

"It's a great thing," she said. "But when you're little, it's a struggle."

But few that participate question Fashion Week's value to the industry. Trelise Cooper, founder of one of this country's most well-known fashion businesses with a brand that now encompasses lingerie and eyewear, said her business now generated "way over" $20 million in revenue annually. Fashion Week has played a vital part in that.

"It's hard to quantify, but without it [Fashion Week] I don't know whether I would have the success in the US market I have had," she said.

It has also provided invaluable sales tools through material for a DVD and look book - which would have cost far more to generate in the US.

This year, she also got a "fantastic" order from London retailer Koh Samui. But more significantly she has begun to think about the "big opportunity" of China, after interest from a Chinese retailer represented at her show. "I'm investigating China, not for now, but as a strategy thing," she said. More UK opportunities had also arisen.

"You might get orders on the day. But generally it's about the long-term view, the long-term strategy. I go into it for the opportunities it opens for me ... you never know where it is going to take you," said Cooper.

"I never think I need to get X, Y, Z in order to cover the costs."

Stewart said she did not set out to create a vehicle for an industry profile but that was what had happened. Nevertheless, she believed actual sales had also been pleasingly steady, despite the lack of hard data.

Six years ago, apparel exports were worth $220 million - that had increased to $317 million by June 2005. That's not just the fashion industry, though, but includes overseas sales from retailers like Pumpkin Patch and Glassons.

Estimates of export earnings from high fashion vary hugely, from $40 million (a figure Stewart doubts as she can think of several designers with exports in the tens of millions) to $200 million.

It may be hard to pinpoint Fashion Week's effect, but Stewart said it was now a vital part of the industry - too vital to stop. "It's very much cemented in the international calendar."

In the new year, Stewart's focus will be on the future. She's thinking about the Russian market. The Asian market is already important to the fashion industry and pushing hard into US boutiques will be a focus for 2006.

It's possible that the next Fashion Week will be in September, rather than late October. Letters have gone out to canvas designers' opinions. Many buyers, particularly those from the Australian market, have already put in most of their orders by the time they get to the New Zealand shows.

With five Fashion Weeks under her belt, has Stewart ever considered handing over the reins at some point?

"No, I'm probably less ready to finish than I was two years ago. It feels really good at the moment. People are approaching us. Now it is a matter of consolidating."