There are such intense emotions surrounding Gareth Southgate’s departure that the departure of another leader from a similarly troubled English institution this week has barely been noticed.
On Monday, Burberry’s board of directors announced that Jonathan Akeroyd, the company’s CEO of two years, is stepping down.
The similarities are almost too painful to contemplate. But we must consider them. England’s elite football team has brilliant components, but there is a problem with goals – they don’t score enough.
Burberry is also full of promises – a unique history, a royal charter, a reputation for the best trench coat ever. But its issue is sales. And there aren’t enough of those.
In the first quarter of this year, they fell by 21%. This was after a dismal 2020, 2021, 2022, etc. Both brands – Lions and Burberry Knights – may seem to fit their roles, but when it comes down to it, both suffer from a chronic lack of self-confidence with their fans.
Burberry’s announcement that Akeroyd will be replaced by Joshua Schulman, who most recently ran Michael Kors and Coach, is welcome news.
Normally, the swift appointment of a successor would be enough to calm a jittery stock market. But Burberry’s shares fell even further — more than 15 percent. Because, wow, Burberry was built to be world-class. Coach is … well, coach.
And Kors was mainly concerned with carrying mountains of £300 bags. Schulman did a good job with both. But this is the Championship rather than the Premier League.
This is worrying. Like M&S and Colin the Caterpillar, Burberry is one of the musics that set the mood of the economy. The music at Burberry right now is Götterdämmerung.
Granted, its current valuation of $4.07 billion sounds impressive, given all the slings and arrows it has been subjected to over the last few years. But in Italy, there is Prada ($17.7 billion), Armani (£5 billion), Moncler ($17 billion), Dolce & Gabbana ($6 billion) and Max Mara – all brands that are still proudly Italian-owned.
In France, there’s Chanel ($25.2 billion), Louis Vuitton ($36.4 billion), Hermes ($22.1 billion)… You get the idea. In a global context, Burberry is a small company.
But it’s our little fish and we need it to thrive because it’s hugely important to the British fashion industry. Burberry’s rise in the 1990s and 2000s changed the perception of Britain as a style hub.
From shabby tourist trinkets to flagships on Bond Street and Madison Avenue and Mario Testino campaigns starring Kate Moss, Stella Tennant, Eddie Redmayne and Rachel Weisz, it has changed the way international players see the UK as a place where luxury giants can thrive.
Under the creative direction of Christopher Bailey and CEO Angela Ahrendts, Burberry has rediscovered its British heritage and become a highly desirable brand around the world.
Yes, there were some hiccups; the hyper-visibility of the early 2000s led to the famous Burberry frames becoming synonymous with ugly celebrity culture.
But Bailey kept his cool, moving away from plaids for a while and focusing instead on creating the world’s number one trench coats. “Making Burberry” became shorthand for sexying up dusty old brands and making them culturally relevant and hugely profitable.
Part of this success was due to the Gucci Group, of which Tom Ford was a partner at the time, moving its headquarters to London rather than Paris or New York.
This meant that London Fashion Week, always unkindly related to Milan and Paris, suddenly had a hot property advertising in global markets, drawing major editors and celebrities to its shows. Other, much smaller designers basked in the glow, attracting attention they had never seen before.
Arguably, Burberry could do better in bringing more production home, but at least it has shown that we can think big and ambitiously at a luxury level, with numbers moving forward and rising.
But after Christopher Bailey and his relentless vision left the team in 2018, Burberry, like our national football team, appeared to have lost faith in its value as a truly elite player.
Bailey’s successor, Italian Riccardo Tisci, had neither the temperament nor a clear sense of what the brand should stand for (especially functional yet stylish outerwear).
Yorkshire-born Daniel Lee, who was appointed creative director in 2022, has not yet convinced his fans.
There is a frustrating pattern here. Despite his excellent craftsmanship and the support of the Princess of Wales and Anna Wintour, Alexander McQueen has yet to achieve the commercial potential his owner Kering (formerly the Gucci Group) hoped for when it bought a majority stake in 2000.
Another successful British brand, Mulberry, also faced trouble in 2012 when CEO Bruno Guillon decided to move from British luxury (unusual, practical bags around £1,000) to French luxury (more valuable bags around £2,000).
Perhaps part of the problem is that the British sense of luxury is out of sync with the rest of the world – it’s lower-profile, more pragmatically based on our love of the outdoors and military tailoring. In short, less flashy.
The brash logos that even a brand like Prada now feels compelled to splash across its accessories and clothing are still seen as vulgar by some Brits. As for the incredibly soft vicuna yarns and clotted cream leathers at Loro Piana and Brunello Cuccinelli – please give us some rain- and wind-proof Harris tweed and scratch-resistant duffel bags instead.
Another problem is that when we do spend money on something overly expensive and luxurious, we want it to be Chanel or Dior rather than a less ostentatious brand from the UK.
None of this means we don’t have some amazing designers using the finest fabrics, producing in small batches, and quietly providing custom and haute couture services to well-paying customers.
Anya Hindmarch, Erdem, Emilia Wickstead, Roksanda, Anna Valentine, Métier London, Suzannah London (who designed the Duchess of Edinburgh’s magnificent embroidered coronation dress) all do it.
Then there are the lesser-known designers who dress the royal family, like Claire Mischevani and Fiona Clare.
But with the exception of the genius Manolo Blahnik, most of these businesses generate between £3m and £20m a year, some much less. That is unlikely to change unless they launch perfumes, sunglasses and make-up – all of which would be very difficult to do without the infrastructure of an umbrella conglomerate such as Kering or LVMH.
Some industry experts say that making Burberry a more mid-level luxury brand, as Schulman would do, could be a logical way to get sales to recover.
But it also means Britain’s dream of becoming an incubator for luxury giants that could compete with the French or Italians is on indefinite hold.