Fast Fashion's winners and losers

According to a Cambridge University study people were buying a third more clothes than they were in 2002 . Brands began competing against each other for market share by introducing more lines per year at lower costs, culminating in a situation where ‘fashion houses now offer up to 18 collections a year’ and the low cost, so called ‘value end’ is ‘booming; doubling in size in just 5 years.‘ This naturally has led to pressure on the supply chain.

Fast Fashion gathered pace from the end of the 1990’s when brands began to look for new ways to increase profits. Globalisation had grown rapidly in the 80’s and 90’s and paved the way for value and mid price brands to shift the bulk of their production to the developing world where labour and overheads cost a fraction of those in Europe.

Traditionally, most fashion labels have produced two main collections a year, spring/summer and autumn/winter. However, in order to keep the customer focused on the high street, High Street brands needed to create some interest within their stores mid season.

Certain companies re-examined their supply chains and developed a system which several other brands then followed. They segmented their supply chain, keeping basic items manufactured in the far east but brought the production of the more high fashion items closer to home.

This had several benefits. Firstly it decreased their financial outlay on forward orders and also allowed them to make decisions about the fashion items much later in the season. This added flexibility and ensured they were able to react to the market quickly and deliver ‘on-trend’ items within their stores.

This model could then be developed through the use of new technological systems which linked all parts of the supply chain together. This new system allowed for the development of ‘just in time’ manufacturing and has now developed to a stage where they are able to turn a garment around from drawing to shop floor in just two weeks.

Consumers reacted positively to this trend which in turn has resulted in the widespread speeding up of fashion. The emphasis within the industry has moved from price and quality to a deeper focus on time. H&M and subsequently Zara have been the catalyst for this shift within the industry.

Zara’s success story begins by offering a product range capable of catering for men, women and children, providing affordable and stylish clothes whatever the season. Coupled with this, is their keen eye for discovering new fashion trends and translating these trends from the catwalk to the high street, both quickly and affordably. Zara boasts a marketing strategy of firstly product variety with a focal point of ensuring speed to market. At present, Zara launch 10,000 new articles per year across their portfolio of stores. Finally, store location, as any marketing is left to store location rather than advertising. Opting for a strategy of minimal advertising provokes the consumer into having to visit their stores.

The consequence of increased consumption is longer hours from factory workers. A Sri Lankan factory owner interviewed by Oxfam demonstrates the pressure they are now under;

“Last year the deadlines were about 90 days… [This year] the deadlines for delivery are about 60 days. Sometimes even 45… They have drastically come down. Instead of 40,000 garments being manufactured across four styles for 20 weeks at a rate of 500 per styles per week… all that is firm is the first five weeks across four styles at 500 per style per week. This is a commitment to 10,000 garments. The remaining 30,000 is unknown. Nor is there any promise of how many styles and at what manufacturing rate per week." 

Fashion is getting faster and faster, spinning not entirely out of control but certainly spinning at a rate that can makes you dizzy. If you want to be in fashion, you've got to stay in the race. But at what consequence?