Trending ›
Gap Inc. has been circling the toilet lately with miserable sales pushing the company into a downward spiral. Two Gap stores in my area are already closing their doors only leaving one string of Gap stores open. The brother and sister stores Old Navy and Banana Republic remain open, but for how long?
In reality, the chain catering to the seekers of cargo pants and fleece will probably just be sold. With several options for the chain to be sold or chopped up, it seems unlikely the Gap’s wares will simply vanish. Recently some executives such as Ivy Ross (an executive vice president of product design and development at Old Navy) and Christopher Hufnagel (VP of Gap brand store experience) both found an exit and “departed” from the brand. Most likely as the result of being shit canned the leaders who once came to the rescue of the chain are rumored to be going separate ways with Hufnagel seeking solace with “Under Amour.”
So what’s the real problem? Here is a theory.
Find Out What the Answer Might Be After the Jump.
The things that worked in 80′s and 90′s are falling short of giants like “H&M” and “Forever 21″ that are taking the reigns and using celeb power, haute looks versus gobs of fleece and khaki, not to mention young fresh ideas versus constant reinvention of ideas that used to work. The contemporary stores offer something fresh and different. Even the store looks are at ends. Old Navy and Gap’s wooden floors, bare unpolished metal, and track lighting mixed with kitschy signs are beyond dunzo. Forever 21 and H&M appeal with white bright open concepts and there is a welcomed absence of the rustic feel that is engulfed in the Gap Inc signature. The stores and looks are desperate for a breath of fresh air.
However, I am sure that as long as Mariah Carey is alive and squeezing herself into Baby Gap, the brand will trudge on.
jlg | January 11, 2007 at 9:27 am
Since GAP launched cropped pants about 6-7 years ago, the quality of their product has declined. In the late 90s, you could find a lot of business casual clothes there. Now it’s all t-shirts and cargo pants, which don’t appeal to anyone over 25 or anyone with a job that makes more than $5.15 an hour. Their clothes are shitty and overpriced. I say, good riddance.
bunni | January 11, 2007 at 9:30 am
you can’t beat old navy for work out clothes though! their yoga pants are so cheap! and i like their pjs. but i wouldn’t be caught dead in anythinng else there. although they’re good for kids too i think.
kat | January 11, 2007 at 9:37 am
Or it could be that their clothes are just ugly. Hello, double-pleats?
Small Fry | January 11, 2007 at 10:07 am
The kids clothes are cute, but beyond that it’s just overpriced junk that falls apart after 1 washing. If I want crap that is going to fall apart I’ll head down to Forever 21 and pay 1/3 what Gap and Old Navy charge.
Christopher Peterson | January 11, 2007 at 11:18 am
There’s a simple solution to fixing Gap, the brand. Get rid of the celebrities and start investing in the emotional meaning of the word Gap itself. The brand name’s identity has gotten lost in the celebrity shuffle.
The feelings that rub off on the word Gap need to come from a genuine place, not from an never ending parade of celebrities. The core values of the brand need to be defined in a personal way that plays off the word itself.
Example: A teenage boy and a girl are sitting on a bench with a “gap” between them. Neither one has the courage to start a conversation, but clearly they are enamored with each other. Suddenly a no name street musician sits down between them and starts belting out a soulful ballad. Then he walks away. The two kids immediately start talking to each other. Gap logo…then tagline: Get Together
It’s this feeling that needs to drive the inner core of the brand. Without it, the brand is lost in the emotional retail space. By developing a series of “Gap” stories, there’s a way to reinvigorate the brand from inside out, rather than outside in. Gap’s inner brand identity is dead and needs to be carefully re-constructed starting with the brand name’s meaning.
It’s the Disney approach. Get the story right so the feelings rub off on the merchandise.
I’m available to implement this strategy, Mr. Pressler.
Rick | January 11, 2007 at 12:19 pm
I miss the button fly jeans that were faded and had the buttons exposed when done up. These only appeared one season in one year. A TON of gay men bought those and still lament the fact that GAP does not make them anymore. I miss the solid colour shirts that were made of 100% cotton and were form fitting. And the colours were varying and non-conventional. I go to American Apparel to get those. For some reason, a medium size shirt made in East Asia is not the same medium size as made in North America. IT IS Different!
lala37 | January 11, 2007 at 12:42 pm
I think the opposite: they’re failing because they tried to hard to be trendy. They used to be the best (and ONLY) place for simple, classic clothes: jeans, khakis, t-shirts, plain sweaters. Then they decided to go all trendy, but other companies do that cheaper and better. They try to have celebrities, but it’s the friggin Gap: who cares? Maybe if they brought back the classic stuff and lost the fake attitude they’d do better.
former gap fan | January 11, 2007 at 6:38 pm
I used to get a lot of staples there, jeans, work pants. Then all of a sudden most of the staples were gone and there was all this crap that only appeals to tacky teenagers. Go back to nicer quality and fit staples and save yourself!
LiliAna | January 12, 2007 at 12:20 am
Ever since Mickey Drexler left the GAP and ended up head of J. Crew it has NOT been the same. A couple years ago, I started noticing that J. Crew stuff was exciting again. There was new life injected into the pieces–everything from the materials to the fact that water was being handed out was more appealing. (See: the most perfect dress in the world.
http://www.jcrew.com/home.jhtml;jsessionid=ENFNSWAO03DW2CTFEELBX1QKMUQRKGUG?_requestid=191271)
On the other hand, it seemed like GAP was losing it’s way. I agree with all of you about it not having an identity. I think they used to be better at branding it as the “anti-identity,” as the store where you went to just “be yourself.” But I think now, it’s just the store where you go to…to do what? To be boring? The retro campaign they did with that fantastic brunette and her winged eyeliner–a start. I want to start seeing more of that from the GAP. You can’t endlessly be a purveyor of “basics,” especially when your conception of “basics” does not morph with each year or adapt fresh materials (read: patterns that don’t resemble seventh grade doodles).
Aside from the crappy “basics” offered, I agree that there is too much emphasis on having a bunch of trendy trash pieces in every line. And who, might I add, is at the helm of discerning what these trends even are!! What the FUG is this: http://www.gap.com/browse/product.do?cid=12663&pid=444755&scid=444755032
I’m sorry, peasant tops!?!
http://www.gap.com/browse/product.do?cid=12651&pid=471683&vid=1
BRAIDED BELTS. Did they just fall asleep and use designs from 2001?
These people need to REGROUP. I don’t know why, but I’m always annoyed by GAP’s downfall when I pass it in the mall. I love the idea of Americana and a “fresh, pared down” brand. The problem is these people don’t deliver. So I end up shopping in…you guessed it…J. Crew (I understand the price points are different here, but I’m talking broad strokes).
If GAP wants to even THINK about being “basic” or “trendy” or WHATEVER, they need to conceptualize to a tee what that means, and work it. They need to SET the trends, not follow them. God, I feel like a friggin’ high school counselor. But, really, how hard is it to employ designers with a fresh perspective, who don’t give a damn about adapting crappy fly-by-night trends into a brand, and instead INVENT cool themselves. No guts, no profits.
A random aside: GAP Body is the most wonderful thing that happened to me. Witty patterns, great prices, absolutely LOVELY stuff. Are they employing different designers here? ‘Cuz the lingerie and sleepwear seems much more organized in its conception than any rag I pick up in the clothes section.
And just ONE thing about Old Navy. Stop BRANDING your damn clothes. I don’t want my fugging buttons to advertise that the jacket they’re attached to is a $20 piece of crap. I might buy ten or twenty of said jacket (or jeans…surprisingly, Old Navy skinny jeans were not so bad, and I bought a bunch of pairs back in September) if you would only take that tacky tacky tacky lettering the hell of my brass buttons. I don’t even care what argument they’ll come up with for branding buttons (Intellectual property rights, people ripping off our clothes, yadayadayada and ahem don’t you do the same?) but I can GUARANTEE that the prices of everything in that store would rise if they were more discreet.