Join Puck to listen to this article
Line Sheet, the ultimate fashion industry bible, offers daily intel from Lauren Sherman, Rachel Strugatz, Sarah Shapiro, and Malique Morris on every aspect of the business and its biggest players. (Sign up here to get it in your inbox.) Here’s the latest you need to know:
VS Pink Collabs
As I noted yesterday, one of Victoria’s Secret C.E.O. Hillary Super’s greatest successes has been repitching Pink, the company’s youth-focused line, to social media–obsessed teens. Naturally, TikTok is central to the strategy. Last March, the brand partnered with Isabel Clancy, who creates Y2K skits for her 4 million TikTok followers, to promote a collection of its classic high-waisted flared pants after she went viral talking about the style, according to a person with direct knowledge of the deal. In the final quarter of 2025, the sub-brand’s sales grew at the highest rate in a decade.
Now Super is doubling down on the nostalgia factor with some of Pink’s newest collaborations. I’m told the brand is partnering with Reese Witherspoon’s Hello Sunshine on a collection for Elle, the upcoming Legally Blonde prequel series that follows Elle Woods in high school. The linkup underscores Super’s talent for trendspotting—recent collaborations with the ultra-girly LoveShackFancy and Frankies Bikinis have also been hits.
But Super is taking an even bigger swing with a forthcoming swim collection with… Cheetos. I’m told the rationale was that “it would be fun because it’s so surprising.” It’s a head-scratcher, but great collaborations balance the duh with the W.T.F., so we’ll reserve judgment. (“While we cannot speculate on any future plans, we’re excited for what’s ahead,” a Victoria’s Secret spokesperson said.) Perhaps the strategy will help Super avoid the stagnancy that contributed to Victoria’s Secret’s previous downturn (minus all the sexual harassment allegations, of course). —Malique Morris
Everlane-Shein Aftershocks
Everlane’s shocking sale to Shein, which Lauren broke over the weekend, still left plenty of unresolved questions for everyone’s favorite 2010s basics brand. One loose end is the nearly $200,000 in unpaid rent for Everlane’s San Francisco headquarters, which occupied two buildings, with two separate landlords—both of whom sued the company in April. At the time, Everlane said it was relocating offices to Los Angeles and negotiations with its S.F. building owners were underway.
I’m told that last Friday, Everlane’s finance chief, Vince Adams,notified one of the landlords that the company had vacated the property—the brand has apparently moved into one of its new L.A. spaces—and that payments would follow in the coming weeks. Days earlier, Adams had asked the landlord for an extension, but Everlane’s lawyer never followed up to finalize anything, according to a person with direct knowledge of the situation. (Everlane declined to comment.)
The sale’s aftermath was always going to be messy. Everlane had at least $90 million in loans and revolving credit, and I’m told that company leadership has not formally notified the landlords of the sale to Shein. “They’ve completely blown up their brand by who they sold it to. It shows that they’re in deep, deep trouble,” the person said. “They got out of it… but they still have to pay their bills.” —Malique Morris
Estée’s Markups
The Ordinary—Estée Lauder’s mass-priced skincare line, and one of its successful recentish acquisitions—may be getting its parent company in trouble by doubling down on its “accessible-for-all ethos.” Shortly after Business of Fashion reported that the brand will be focusing even more on its low-cost, transparent pricing, the industry watchdog Instagram account Estée Laundry stirred things up by posting an anonymous D.M. from a former Lauder employee: “Makes me laugh that they do these markup campaigns for The Ordinary but they own La Mer and their 60 ml. CDLM [Crème de la Mer] costs £4.50 to make.” Take that exact figure with a grain of salt, but a 2-ounce jar of Crème de la Mer retails for $390.
Sure, insane beauty markups are a well-known and common practice within the industry. But regular consumers still don’t understand exactly how much (or how little) it actually costs to make some of the products they’re buying—and with this campaign, Lauder is veering into tricky territory. It’s throwing significant marketing dollars behind its value-driven messaging for The Ordinary while continuing to charge close to $400 for a sister product that costs a fraction of that amount to produce. Of course, Lauder might be banking on the hope that La Mer’s customers don’t know The Ordinary exists or that the two share a parent company. But everything comes out in the wash. —Rachel Strugatz
