For the global luxury industry, Salone del Mobile in Milan has become a moment where brands look beyond the runway to expand into the broader "lifestyle" economy. At the centre of this intersection is Dimore Studio, co-founded by Britt Moran and Emiliano Salci — a studio that has defined the aesthetic language for luxury hospitality, retail and private residential projects worldwide.

Moran is originally from a small town in North Carolina. He moved to Italy over 30 years ago, initially intending to take a gap year before applying to medical school. He never went back. Together with Salci — his former romantic partner and now business partner of over 25 years — he has built Dimore into a multi-faceted brand spanning interior design, two furniture collections, a textile line, and a newly opened gallery in a former bank in central Milan.

As luxury conglomerates increasingly pursue the "home" and hospitality categories to drive long-term growth, Moran offers an insider's perspective on why credibility in this space can't be bought — it has to be built.

“I think you just have to completely trust your instinct, nurture the passion, do it only for the passion not thinking that you're going to become incredibly wealthy doing it,” says Moran.“Emiliano always tells me, we're not doing this for the money. We're only doing it because it's something that we love.”This week on The BoF Podcast, Britt Moran joins Imran Amed in Milan to discuss the business of building an "atmosphere," his unlikely path from the American South to the centre of Italian design, and why fashion's rush into the home category requires more than just marketing.

Key Insights:

• Atmosphere is the product, not furniture. Moran frames Dimore's core offering not as chairs or tables but as the complete sensory experience of a space — scent, music, lighting, feeling. This is what clients are paying for and what sets Dimore apart from conventional design studios. As he puts it, the studio began with the idea of "setting up atmospheres," and the furniture collections emerged later, almost as by-products of the environments they were creating for clients.

• Italy's manufacturing ecosystem remains a competitive advantage. Moran highlights the strategic importance of proximity to Brianza, the furniture manufacturing district outside Milan where major producers like Cassina and Poltrona Frau work alongside independent artisans. Having done projects in the US, France and the Middle East, Moran is categorical that the quality-to-price ratio in Italy has no equivalent elsewhere — a claim with real implications for any brand considering where to source its home and lifestyle products.

• Most fashion brands are getting the design crossover wrong. While fashion houses are flooding Salone del Mobile with installations and activations, Moran draws a sharp line between those using Design Week as a marketing platform and those — like Loro Piana — that are leveraging genuine material expertise to create credible home products. The distinction matters: consumers and the design community can tell the difference between a brand that understands three-dimensional design and one that's dressing up a booth.

• The Dimore partnership works because of creative tension. Moran describes himself as "much more classic, much more conventional, maybe much more traditional" while Salci is "very forward thinking" with an "urban edge." This creative polarity — not shared taste — is what gives Dimore its distinctive aesthetic. The fact that they began as romantic partners and successfully transitioned into a purely business relationship adds an unusual dimension to a studio that has now endured for over two decades.

Additional Resources:

• Britt Moran | BoF 500 Profile
• Why Salone Del Mobile is Irresistible for Luxury Brands | BoF

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Luxury entered 2026 with hopes that new creative directors and signs of stabilisation would finally help the sector turn a corner. Instead, the latest round of earnings has raised bigger questions about what growth now looks like for the industry. While brands including Dior, Gucci and Chanel are generating renewed interest, that excitement has not yet translated into a meaningful sales rebound.

From the slowing Chinese market to geopolitical tensions in the Middle East, luxury conglomerates are facing a complex web of challenges that creative hype alone cannot solve.

On the episode, BoF luxury editors Mimosa Spencer and Robert Williams explain why China remains such a critical missing piece, why Louis Vuitton is under closer scrutiny than usual, and why jewellery continues to outperform the rest of luxury.

Key Insights:

• One of the clearest messages from this earnings season is that new designers can lift mood and momentum internally, but that alone is not enough to restart the industry. Williams says the latest results confirmed that the impact of all these creative resets is “pretty limited, especially in isolation”. As he puts it, “the result of that is more like treading water or stabilising versus actually reigniting growth.” Spencer adds that the disappointment was sharper because there had been so much excitement around these debuts that “a lot of investors were expecting some earlier results.”

• Both Spencer and Williams point to China as the market hanging over the entire sector. Even where sentiment improved at the end of last year, investors were still looking for signs that Chinese demand might return in a meaningful way. Spencer says the bigger issue now is not just timing but structure: “The question is whether the kind of growth we saw in the past will actually come back.” She adds: “It seems like it takes a lot more work for a luxury brand to actually get good results in China.”

• LVMH still wants the market to see Dior as the manageable turnaround story, but Williams suggests the real anxiety now sits around Louis Vuitton. The brand has held up better than many peers, but investors are increasingly asking where its next phase of growth will come from. Williams points out that the bigger concern is not short-term performance, but what comes next. “No one can really see where the growth is going to come from,” he says. “Is this still a growth industry? What will the industry look like and how will it operate if it's not growing anymore?” If the industry’s strongest player cannot clearly define its next phase of growth, it raises deeper questions about the trajectory of luxury as a whole.

• Despite the broader slowdown across luxury, Spencer argues that jewellery’s outperformance is not just about demand for hard luxury, but about how consumers now judge value. Handbag prices have climbed so sharply that jewellery, by comparison, can feel like a more rational indulgence. “Jewellery prices haven’t gone up in the same way that handbag prices have gone up,” she says. At the same time, jewellery still carries a perception of durability and investment value, whether or not that always holds in practice.

• Luxury brands may be making more progress with their established high-spending clients than with the broader aspirational base they once relied on for volume. Williams notes that some houses are succeeding in pulling core customers back into stores, even if that is not yet translating into a wider recovery. At Chanel, for example, he points to renewed momentum among “well-to-do women with big executive jobs in their late 30s, 40s, and 50s,” while Louis Vuitton’s monogram anniversary campaign has helped refocus attention on its most iconic products.

Additional Resources:

• The Luxury Rebound Gets a Reality Check | BoF
• Kering’s Strategy Reveal, Examined | BoF

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

The global fashion industry is a $2.5 trillion economic engine, and yet in the corridors of Washington and high finance, it's often treated as a sideshow. This week I was in DC at Semafor World Economy, listening to conversations about AI and genomics and energy — and arguing that fashion is actually one of the best barometers we have for where the global consumer is heading.

Because the luxury landscape is being reshaped in real time. This week LVMH reported that its fashion and leather goods division contracted by 2 percent in the first quarter. Kering's group revenues were also flat, with Gucci down 8 percent. Meanwhile Ralph Lauren has raised its guidance three times in the past year, with revenue up 12 percent in the most recent quarter. And Zegna's flagship brand grew more than 7 percent in the fourth quarter.

So what are these winners doing differently? In this episode I sit down with three leaders who, from very different starting points, offer a remarkably consistent answer — one that has little to do with logos, scarcity or hype, and everything to do with substance, inclusion and a clear sense of what customers are willing to pay for.

First, Ermenegildo Zegna, group executive chairman of the Zegna Group, on why he chose this moment to step back as chief executive and hand the reins to his sons. We talk about vertical integration as a hedge against inflation and the formula he’s giving the next generation to run by.

Ermenegildo Zegna: "Think slow but act fast. These to me are the most important criteria for being successful."

Then, I’m joined by Patrice Louvet, president and chief executive of Ralph Lauren, and Noah Horowitz, chief executive of Art Basel — two leaders whose businesses keep growing while the rest of the market softens. We unpack why Patrice thinks the industry is working from a “lazy definition” of luxury, and ask why — in a world of frictionless, AI-powered shopping — the most valuable thing a brand can offer is a reason to show up in person.

Patrice Louvet: "We're not in the apparel business. We're in the dreams business."

Three leaders. Three businesses. One consistent answer about what luxury looks like now.

Key Insights:

• The Next-Gen Handover: Ermenegildo Zegna stepped back from the CEO role at age 70, appointing his sons to lead the Zegna Group. He emphasises that in times of change, leaders must "think slow but act fast" and remain true to core values.

• Vertical Integration as Resilience: A key differentiator for Zegna is its "sheep to shop" model. By owning 60 percent of its supply chain, the group maintains quality control and a compelling value perception that justifies its luxury pricing in an inflationary market.

• The Experience Economy: Both Ralph Lauren and Art Basel are leaning into "experientialisation". Patrice Louvet argues Ralph Lauren is in the "dreams business," comparing Ralph Lauren's creative process to a movie director rather than a traditional designer.

• Inclusive vs. Exclusive Luxury: Ralph Lauren differentiates itself through "inclusive luxury," welcoming customers into stores styled as "homes" and offering products ranging from $12 socks to $320,000 watches. This contrasts with retail peers who use security guards and create long queues.

• Art as a Human Market: Noah Horowitz notes a "flight to safety" in the art world, where collectors are moving away from speculative contemporary trends toward well-priced masterworks and global discovery. He defines the market as "confidence-driven," relying on community and connectivity.

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

When Elliot Hill returned to Nike as chief executive in October 2024, he was tasked with reversing one of the most significant slumps in the company’s history.

The business had lost momentum with both investors and consumers and his strategy has focused on restoring wholesale relationships, rebuilding key categories like running and trying to stabilise the brand’s broader narrative.

But Nike’s latest earnings and weak outlook have intensified doubts about whether the recovery is moving quickly enough. In a fragmented marketplace where heat has moved toward niche competitors and rejuvenated legacy rivals, Nike is struggling to convince a skeptical public and an impatient Wall Street that its next chapter has truly begun.

On the episode, Sykes joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack why Nike’s comeback still feels unfinished, what the brand is getting right, and what it would take for the market to believe again.

Key Insights:

• Sykes argues that the sharp reaction to Nike’s latest earnings was less about one bad quarter than a broader loss of patience. Hill has spent more than a year telling investors that the comeback is taking shape, but the numbers still do not show enough momentum to support that story. “Investors are just sort of running thin on patience with Elliott Hill,” Sykes says. That problem is compounded by Nike’s own guidance. As Sykes puts it, “you can’t really get ringing endorsements from people” when the company is already warning that the next quarter will still be down.

• The sportswear landscape of 2026 is fundamentally different from the one Nike dominated a decade ago. Whilst Nike is still a big player in sportswear, its dominance does not necessarily mean the same thing it once did. With the market fragmented, heat is now distributed across brands like Hoka, New Balance and Adidas, and attention moves quickly between rivals. “Nike is still bigger than every other sportswear brand out there right now,” he says. “But when Nike is at its best, it is not participating in the conversation, it is controlling the conversation.” The issue is not that Nike has become irrelevant. It is that the market no longer seems to operate in a way that allows one brand to command the same singular hold it once did. Nike now requires a more versatile approach to global regions like China and sub-brands like Converse, which currently act as a drag on overall productivity.

• Sykes is clear that Nike is not doing everything wrong. He points to genuine progress in North America, improved wholesale relationships and real traction in running. But those wins have not yet added up to the kind of breakthrough moment that changes the narrative. Nike is trying new products and categories, yet none of them has become the catalyst investors and consumers are looking for. “There are things there that I would say are definitely more positive than I thought they would be,” Sykes says. But he also notes that “there just seems to be still a bit of disconnect between what the brand thinks about its product and what consumers think about its products.”

• Sykes argues that the company has to rebuild the basics before it can deliver the kind of defining cultural or product hit that resets perception. “You have to hit the singles before you can hit a grand slam,” he says. That may be true operationally, but the problem is that Nike is a company judged not just on steady execution, but on its ability to create category-shaping moments. Until one of those arrives, the sense of drift is likely to continue.

Additional Resources:

• Can the World Cup Solve Nike’s Problems? | BoF
• The Public Isn’t Buying What Nike Is Selling. Can That Change?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In March, H&M released financial results alongside its annual sustainability report, presenting two seemingly contrasting narratives. The company reported a 34.6 percent reduction in emissions from 2019 levels and also noted that 91 percent of its materials are now sustainably sourced. However, this environmental progress occurred alongside a 1 percent dip in sales, raising questions about the commercial viability of its green strategy.

While many industry peers are backing away from environmental messaging to focus on the bottom line, H&M is arguing that sustainability is not in tension with profit, but is rather a "core driver of future growth".

On The Debrief, we examine whether this decoupling of growth from environmental impact can truly resonate with consumers, or if it remains a purely internal metric.

Key Insights:

• As a fast fashion brand, H&M understands that sustainability alone is not going to win back shoppers. Instead, Walid says the company is trying to translate its recent efforts into something more tangible at the point of purchase. The pitch is not that consumers care about emissions reporting in itself, but that sustainability can function as a marker of quality. As Leyla Ertur, H&M’s Head of Sustainability, told Walid during their conversation, “Our customers don’t care about our Scope 3 emissions going down. What they care about is what they’re buying.”

• Walid suggests that one of H&M’s biggest challenges is the disconnect between how the company sees itself and how customers perceive it. “When we say H&M, I think people are thinking of H&M, the brand … But when H&M talks about itself, they’re talking [about] the whole conglomerate,” she says, pointing to brands like COS and Weekday, which occupy a more elevated position. While those labels may successfully compete with higher-end high street players, that distinction is largely invisible to consumers, who still associate H&M with “fast fashion … something cheap for an occasion.” As a result, while the group may understand how to build more premium propositions across its portfolio, Walid argues that the core H&M brand itself has not yet meaningfully shifted perception.

• For all the company’s investments and emissions reductions, the core contradiction remains that H&M is still producing and selling huge volumes of clothing. Waleed is explicit about that limitation: “They’re not addressing the overconsumption and overproduction problem in fashion.” At the same time, she notes that H&M is one of the few large players still investing at scale in decarbonisation, water reduction and supply chain upgrades.

• H&M is investing across sustainability, brand elevation and new channels like resale, but Waleed cautions that it is still too early to judge whether these efforts are working. “They use all these different levers that don’t come into one … There needs to be a way to bring that together,” she says. Initiatives like fashion week shows, collaborations and younger-facing campaigns are designed to re-engage consumers, but “I don’t think people have caught traction … just yet.” For now, the strategy remains a long-term bet rather than a proven turnaround.

Additional Resources:

• Exclusive: H&M Says Sustainability Is Good for Business. Can It Get Shoppers to Care?
• BoF Analysis: The Rise of Ultra-Fast Fashion Players
• The Game of ‘Selling’ Sustainability

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Faye McLeod has built a body of work that sits at the intersection of retail, image-making and brand building. During her 16-year tenure at Louis Vuitton, she created some of the luxury industry’s most visible physical expressions – from windows and façades to fashion show sets. In that time, she helped define how the house translated its image from the runway and the archive into public-facing experiences around the world.

“I love the fact that the windows are a democratic space. You’re talking to the people on pavements – people can love it or not, and that’s okay,” she says. “You can’t retouch or hide anything. You’ve just got to be authentically you. And I think that’s what I’m really good at – being just me.”

Now in a new phase of her career, McLeod is building her studio, Closer, bringing her special mix of emotion, world-building and collaboration to other brands and clients.

On this week’s episode of BoF Podcast, McLeod joins BoF founder and CEO Imran Amed to discuss her path into window design, the emotional logic behind her creative process, and why she decided this was the right moment to strike out on her own.

Key Insights:

• Windows are where luxury meets the street. McLeod describes window design not as a decorative retail function but as one of fashion’s most public-facing forms of communication — a place where a brand has to earn attention in real time. What draws her to the medium is precisely that lack of control. “I love the fact that the windows are a democratic space,” she says. “You’re talking to the people on pavements.”

• Her instinct for contained spaces comes from somewhere deeper than design training. McLeod links her creative process to a traumatic childhood accident. At the age of five, she fell down a deep hole in the desert in Al Ain, United Arab Emirates and spent hours trapped in what she describes as a concrete box, using imagination and inner resolve to survive. She now sees that experience as formative. “I had to go inside myself to survive. I had to use my imagination,” she says. “I’m good at designing in a contained space.”

• The audience feedback completes the work. McLeod returns to the idea that creative concepts only fully come alive when people respond in ways you could not have planned. “What I love about what we do is watching the crowd sing back,” she says. “It’s something you cannot control with creative. You just put it out into the universe and see what happens.” In Chengdu, people queued with scissors to cut off pieces of the tail and take them home as souvenirs.

• Her work is built collectively, not individually. Despite the scale and visibility of the projects she discusses, McLeod is emphatic that none of them are authored alone. “It’s not just about one person, it’s about everybody,” she says. “It’s an orchestra and you just find your place.”

• Her philosophy is simple: pour love into the work. Looking back on her career, she says what she wishes she had known earlier was not a strategic lesson but an emotional one: to trust herself more, let anxiety matter less and commit fully to what she was making. “I wish I knew you just had to pour love into everything you do,” she says. “I just get a big jar of love and I pour it right on top of everything.”

Additional Resources:

Faye McLeod | BoF 500 | The People Shaping the Global Fashion Industry

Role Call | Faye McLeod, Visual Image Director | BoF

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For years, Revolve was fashion retail’s byword for influencer marketing, particularly around its over-the-top Coachella event. But as the Instagram aesthetic matures and the cost of human-led marketing rises, the company is pivoting. The new mandate? To become as much an AI powerhouse as it is a party-hosting fashion giant.

In a recent conversation with Retail Editor Cathaleen Chen, Revolve founders Michael Mente and Mike Karanikolas argued that AI isn't just a buzzword for the board; it’s the engine that will sustain their multi-billion dollar dominance.

Chen joined The Debrief to talk about how Revolve is pushing the limits of how AI can be used in retail, and whether its strategy is working.

Key Insights:

• Revolve was founded by software engineers who viewed fashion as an e-commerce "white space,” setting it apart from rivals that invested in new technologies only after establishing themselves in the marketplace. "While Revolve looks like a Shopbop or a Net-a-Porter... Revolve is actually built like a data science company." said retail editor Cathaleen Chen.
• Revolve differentiates itself by building its own tools where possible, rather than buying off-the-shelf software, including the product search on its website. Using AI, Revolve has moved beyond literal keyword matching to a system that understands the vibe or occasion a customer is shopping for. By analyzing image attributes, the site can surface the perfect "party dress" even if that specific tag doesn't exist, explains Chen. "What their AI tool is able to do is pull up anything that is sequined... or textured... it is anticipating the desire."
• Revolve fosters a "bottom-up" environment where every employee is encouraged to experiment with AI. They aren't just looking for "moonshots"; they value any application that moves the needle even slightly. "Eeven if something improves efficiency or output by just 1%, that's considered a success,” said Chen.

Additional Resources:

Why Revolve Can’t Stop Talking About AI | BoF

Why Fashion Doesn’t Talk About How It Uses AI | BoF

Why Revolve Is Embracing Brick-and-Mortar | BoF

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.