-
sponsorship
At the early end of the current economic downturn, the New York Times published an article about how lipstick is a potential economic indicator. The theory is that in times of fiscal woe, women won't be able to afford that $200 frock, but they'll splurge on a $10 lipstick, a cheapo manicure, or some other kind of small luxury. And lately we've heard reporting not on just the lipstick effect," but also on how the credit crunch is killing boob-job loans, how Nordstrom's profits have tanked since the ladies who lunch are brown-bagging it, and how moms are cutting back on their kids' birthday parties, causing a seismic blow to the clown community.
It seems that every day now there's a trend piece on the way women are spending—or not spending—our increasingly meager earnings. That's why we're introducing the Lipstick Level, an occasional Recession-o-Meter in the mold of Slate's Change-o-Meter rating how the economic downturn is shaping the way women make purchases. A low Lipstick Level score indicates spending as if you still believed those returns from Uncle Bernie were for real, like the article on Bloomberg.com today about how Shiseido is still profiting from a face cream costing $1,350 for a 1.4-ounce jar. “High-priced cosmetics are resisting the economic downturn,” says Shiseido president Shinzo Maeda.
A high Lipstick Level score says we're fast approaching diets of ramen and Target-brand pants held together with twine. An article in Women's Wear Daily by Rosemary Feitelberg on the notoriously spendthrift fashion crowd cutting back is an example of this. According to Feitelberg, "Constance White, eBay’s style director, said she has been trying to explain to her husband what Wal-Mart is." Even those who are aware of Wal-Mart are finding new ways to save: Tailors are doing better business as people try to revive old clothes rather than buying new ones.
So what's today's LL? I'm going to give it a 40 on a scale of 1 to 100. If people are still blowing rent money on cold cream, it could get much, much worse.
Addendum: The Big Money's Hans Eisenbeis wrote brilliantly on the lipstick index theory late last year. His take? "For this recession, lipstick has been upscaled right out of its own economic index. Hello, Hosiery Index!" Sigh. TBM also wrote on Uggs as an economic indicator here.
-
sponsorship
There's good news all around in today's lipstick level, both at the high and low ends. Predictably, Wal-Mart is doing incredibly well, but according to the IHT, it's actually exceeding expectations. Also doing well: niche teen stores like Hot Topic. Apparently the desire for zebra-print leggings remains high even during times of struggle.
Also in the black? YSL. According to Miles Socha at Women's Wear Daily, YSL has become profitable by emphasizing store sell-through rather than loading up boutiques with merchandise. The company is led by Valerie Hermann, a "driven but fun-loving" CEO. Part of the reason that YSL is doing well seems to be their increased brand visibility. Socha notes, "YSL is ranked number-one within Gucci Group in terms of editorial credits, prorated versus advertising investments."
Keeping your brand solid is something that Nespresso, the "upmarket coffee capsule" from Nestle has done quite well. They've built their entire marketing campaign around George Clooney. But that's not all! Advertising analyst Jim Boulton tells the BBC:
The marketing material [for Nespresso] at every touch point is polished and has data capture at its heart. ... Consumers are automatically enrolled in a loyalty programme, and receive a regular glossy magazine that re-enforces the notion that consumers are members of an exclusive club.
I guess everyone wants to join a club that involves fantasizing about waking up next to George Clooney. Thanks to the Cloon and his upscale caffeinated beverages, today's lipstick level is a 70.
Earlier: Introducing the Lipstick Level: A Recessionometer
-
sponsorship
With none other than Michelle Obama! After nine years of stubbornly holding off on appearances with well, anything that is not a saleable accessory (not even so much as a cabana boy), Oprah caves on the cover of her magazine, O. The dish:
Winfrey also has an interview with the new First Lady that addresses everything from the joys of White House pie to Obama's decorating philosophy, which seems to have a lot to do with sofas. "I want comfortable sofas," said Obama in the interview. "You've got to be able to make a fort with the sofa pillows! Everything must be fort-worthy."
As a child who constructed obstacle courses and secret islands from couch cushions, that's kind of an awesome sentiment (will the cushions, like the new White House playset, be engraved with former presidents' names?). More remarkable, however, is that Oprah may have actually realized that someone is more bankable than her. Barack Obama certainly holds his own as a magazine cover sales god, but Michelle is giving both her husband and the megastar who campaigned for him a run for their money--appearing on sellout covers from Vogue to People (the O photo boasts a rare sleeved Michael Kors look). Oprah acknowledged as much in the magazine: "people do judge a magazine by its cover, which is why it's important to me keep the cover of this one looking fresh," said Winfrey.
Snap! Lipstick Level: 95. Both Madame Os probably still buy their own gloss—but watching richer-than-sin Winfrey trying to hustle a little extra cash on the side is surely a sign of the apocalypse.
Earlier: Introducing the Lipstick Level: A Recessionometer
-
sponsorship
You know, there's something about the whole lipstick level concept that doesn't make any sense to me. The theory is that lipstick is an economic indicator; supposedly during economic downturns, women will purchase comparatively cheap lipsticks rather than buy high-end frocks. But the whole thing seems like fuzzy logic to me. Either that, or from years of freelancing, every trend piece of this sort reads more blatantly as evidence of a reporter's ability to sell a so-called story that may or may not exist than evidence of an actual, real-world trend. What is more than evident if one surveys the latest fashion "trend" stories is that 21st century women are completely schizophrenic. Flats are in. Actually, high-heels are the new black. They're bringing sexy back. Wait, no, in fact it's really all about the return of masculinity by way of the '80s power-shoulder. Tie me up; tie me down. What's the word for what comes after postfeminist? Schizofeminism? The real trend piece is about whatever internal conflict is raging within women, not what's going on economically.
-
sponsorship
In today's New York Times Sunday Styles section, there are two articles devoted to the educated downwardly mobile. First is a profile of Caitlin Macy, author of the forthcoming book Spoiled, which chronicles “These people on the edge of where they’d like to be: almost rich, slightly rich, very conscious of their place in the world.” It’s no surprise that Daniel Menaker, who is quoted in the Times article, is the person who originally purchased Ms. Macy’s work. He published his own tale of the urbane striver, the under-rated The Treatment, 10 years ago. Menaker’s novel took place in another era of want—the early '70s—and is about an overeducated NYC prep school English teacher and his romance with an old-money widow.
There’s a second article, about how the upper middle classes can no longer afford private school. Add to that the article about living on $500,000 a year from a few weeks ago, and three makes a trend. And when compared to the Styles articles from last year at this time, the contrast is stark. On Feb. 28, 2008, styles had an article about 7-year-olds getting pedicures and other salon services regularly. A month later, on March 27, there was another article about Bottega Veneta handbags, and how, even with the recession looming, women were still willing to shell out $6,000 for a “signature piece.”
For the past five years, the narrative of the Styles section has been a classier version of the Real Housewives franchise: (mostly) women spending outrageous sums on fairly useless goods and services. These articles tended to focus merely on the money spent, not the class implications. Now, the Times is choosing to cover the class anxieties that were always there but that will only become more pronounced as the recession lengthens. I can’t wait for someone to produce something like Whit Stillman's Metropolitan for the late aughts. It’s the logical next step.
Since it’s only the middle middle class relegated to mopping floors, and the genteel impoverished are still thinking of private schools, today’s lipstick level is a 20.
-
sponsorship
The Washington Post's Ylan Mui writes on the new American trend of "insourcing." This means, basically, do for yourself what others used to do for you. Apparently, people are pulling up their own weeds, dyeing their own hair, grooming their own Portugese water dogs, changing their own car headlights, baking their own birthday cakes, asking the manicurist to cut nails extra short to increase time between visits. One woman Mui quotes even tried dyeing a dress, to make it seem new! Stores, meanwhile, are reporting increased sales of sewing kits, car filters, and herb garden starters. I keep the XX lipstick level at 40. Until we are actually, you know, growing potatoes, or biting our own nails off, we're not yet desperate.
In the meantime, readers who are attempting their own creative insourcing, please send me ideas: hannawrosin@gmail.com.
-
sponsorship
Is the recession causing gendered consumer patterns to shift? That's what a marketer from ESPN thinks. While household goods have traditionally been advertised to women, according to MediaDailyNews, "Men are becoming more involved in making household spending choices—perhaps because of the economy—and that could increasingly open doors for ESPN with its male audience." Johnson & Johnson, Kraft, and other major advertisers are shifting funds to reach those new purchasers. For "Ad Report Card" enthusiasts, it will be interesting to see how advertisers attempt to sell these products to men. I predict a Swiffer commercial starring a Victoria's Secret model seductively sweeping in our future. For the married "XX Factor" ladies—who makes decisions about household products in your union?
-
sponsorship
Jessica, your "lipstick level" post this morning about the recession-proof success of Nespresso coffee machines strikes a guilty chord in me. I hate the Nespresso company as an addict hates her dealer. After receiving one of their machines as a (very generous) housewarming gift, my partner and I have gotten strung out on Nespresso, which is environmentally wasteful (the little one-per-cup aluminum capsules are unrecyclable), unsustainably farmed (like most coffee on the market), wildly overpriced, and reprehensibly delicious. Their "upscale" marketing campaign is a mailbox-clogging annoyance, transparently designed to flatter the consumer for her "exclusive" taste. (I chuck their glossy magazine in the recycling bin so fast that I never even noticed George Clooney was the spokesman.) And I don't know what "customer loyalty programme" that BBC article is talking about—maybe it's only for Brits?—but after two years of ordering boxes of those little foil capsules (like a software giant, Nespresso works to insure there's no cross-platform use of its product), we have yet to be offered a discount of any kind. No matter the quantity you order, each capsule costs the same (a price that now tops 50 cents per cup). I periodically resolve to go back to my old stovetop coffeemaking method, but ... the stuff is just so damn good. Maybe the knowledge that this smug company is prospering even in the recession will be enough to wean me off their coffee at last, if only out of pure consumer schadenfreude.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?