Hi, and welcome back to Line Sheet. It’s been so nice catching up with all you good people in Los Angeles these past few weeks, even if many of those encounters were with out-of-towners. Attersee’s Isabel Wilkinson Schor, Maria McManus (both in from New York), and Anya Hindmarch (here all the way from London) even hosted invitation-only shopping events, which I’d argue are the best way to get people to convert these days.

On Monday, I’m headed to New York for some Puck stuff (subscribe here or I’ll steal your Mounjaro coupons), Met Gala shenanigans, and other requisite schmoozing. I have, for the first time in my life perhaps, kept my schedule loose, so if you want to meet up, there’s a smidgen of availability. Just hit reply to this email and we’ll sort it.

🚨🚨 Programming note: The second episode of Fashion People drops tomorrow. My guest is Elizabeth von der Goltz, the buying whiz late of Browns, Farfetch, Matches, Net-a-Porter, Bergdorf Goodman, Barneys… and pretty much every store you’ve ever shopped. We’re talking pricing architecture: Why are luxury goods so expensive these days? The idea with the Friday show is to dive a little deeper into one topic, and yes, I’m taking requests. Subscribe to Fashion People here, here, and here.

Let’s get started, because I know all you want to talk about is Hedi Slimane. We have to love this man, not only for his brilliance as a designer and merchandiser, but for his ability to get everyone so riled up. Hedi, come on the pod!

Mentioned in this issue: Hedi Slimane, Michael Rider, Celine, Paris Hilton, Condé Nast, Roger Lynch, Anna Wintour, Miu Miu, Miuccia Prada, Moncler, Phoebe Philo, Sidney Toledano, Ralph Lauren, Valérie Hermann, Dior, Chanel, Bernard Arnault, LVMH, Jonathan Anderson, Trevor Ballin, Anthony Vaccarello, Michael Burke, Delphine Arnault, Toni Belloni, Simon Porte Jacquemus, and many more…

• Rachel on the art of the celebrity brand: Earlier this week, I got an email boasting that Paris Hilton’s self-tanner collaboration with Tan Luxe—the perfect pairing of face and product, and a collaboration unlike in an era when celebrities insist on building out full brands—had sold out in eight hours. To be clear, eight hours is hardly unprecedented these days. But The Future Airbrush 360 Self-Tan Mist got me thinking about Hilton’s stellar track record in beauty. In the 20 years since she launched Paris Hilton for Women, her first scent with longtime licensee Parlux, Hilton’s many fragrances (some of which come in bottles shaped like fitted strapless gowns) have generated billions of dollars in sales.

  To her credit, Hilton doesn’t shift with trend cycles; she was herself when that was in fashion, remained herself when it went out of fashion, and is now getting some overdue credit for persevering through it all. Indeed, Hilton is a caricature of herself at this point—the beacon of a human party girl and tabloid survivor turned business lady—and that’s just one of her many charms. —Rachel Strugatz

• They’re coming for you, Anna: During the negotiations between Condé Nast management and the equally long-suffering union, the vitriol has been aimed primarily at C.E.O. Roger Lynch (can he make a decision?) and human resources boss Stan Duncan (why you gotta go to fashion shows, Stan?). Meanwhile, Anna Wintour, Condé Nast’s chief creative officer and the person who does so much of the work, has mostly avoided attacks from the union. She played a major role in the breakdown of Pitchfork—wearing her (prescription?) sunglasses while discussing the situation with staff—but other than that, she has been largely given somewhat of a pass.

  Perhaps it’s because employees fear her; perhaps it’s because they genuinely admire her and know that, in some ways, her hands are tied. Even at the walkout last December, quoted union staffers were pretty nice about Wintour to the press. Perhaps they, too, secretly fear what the company would become without her imprimatur.

  Well, that’s going to change as of tonight, when union members visit Wintour’s Greenwich Village neighborhood to post flyers that say, “Anna wears Prada; workers get nada,” with an emphasis on her celebrity connections and the upcoming Met Gala. (Apparently, union members were open to posting flyers around Lynch’s home—but they don’t know where he lives.) The union will start at 6 p.m. and it is expected to last an hour. I’m pretty sure there will be speeches.

  I’m told that this rally is a precursor to a potential strike, which union organizers would like to start the day of the Met Gala and maybe extend for the entire week. However, not everyone is on board with the plan, especially those who work at Vogue. The advisory released by the union says that staffers from brands “such as Vanity Fair, GQ, Bon Appétit and more” will participate. It doesn’t mention Voguettes, many of whom worship Wintour and probably don’t want to look so tacky, even if this is a common labor tactic.

  Also, I suspect that they don’t think Wintour is to blame in this situation. Most importantly, they probably recognize that the Met Gala is a command performance and the brand’s most significant moment on the calendar. They not only want to be there, but they also probably feel they are needed. (And, I suspect, they would fear that a freelancer replacement might even be able to do their job just as well.) Fewer people may want to work at Condé Nast compared to yesteryear, but Vogue is still Vogue.

  ​​Anyway, this all brings up something that I’ve been thinking about a lot these past couple of weeks: Wintour is probably the only one on the management team who could make any headway with the union, because she’s the only one they respect. And she might very well have to do Lynch’s dirty work in order for this union mess to finally be resolved.

• I like my Prada backpack, but I love my Miu Miu bikini briefs: Just kidding… I don’t own either. And honestly, I’m more of a Prada woman myself. But the story of the Prada Group earnings was Miu Miu’s eye-popping 89 percent bump in year-over-year sales in the first quarter. Miu Miu is still just over a quarter of the size of Prada in terms of sales, but after 30 years of little sister-ing (it was founded in 1992), it’s unexpectedly catching up. Here’s what we need to talk about:
• Yes, Miuccia Prada—who designs Miu Miu alone, without her Prada partner, Raf Simons—is the designer’s designer. She pays attention, and has thoughts and feelings about real events happening outside of fashion. (Many designers don’t.) She does not design a fantasy, and that makes her fashion more emotional—and irresistible. The company is doing an incredible job of packaging (through styling and campaigns) and merchandising (through commercial products) those emotions.
• All that said, the Prada brand—which missed analyst estimates slightly but was still up 7 percent year over year—remains the most important piece of the group’s puzzle. That increase is still fairly remarkable given the state of the luxury market, and especially at a giant brand like Prada, which relies more on sales of handbags than Miu Miu.
• The brands doing well right now—including Moncler, which beat the street this quarter, Brunello Cucinelli, and Hermès—are not wholly reliant on handbags as the profit center. (And in particular, generic handbags.) And the brands where price doesn’t necessarily match up with the perception are struggling. While the prices for Prada clothing are astronomical by some measures, the bags remain priced just under the point of inconceivable.
• What makes me nervous about these results is the pontification, not only in the press but also on social media. Yes, if I were the Prada Group, which has been the subject of speculative acquisition rumors—related to the Wertheimers and also a (potentially) stalled European I.P.O.—I’d worry about logo reliance. Everything at Prada has a triangle. Everything at Miu Miu says Miu Miu. They are such good, clever designers that people who don’t wear logos are wearing them. But at some point, some consumers will start begging for logo-free gear, and they need to be one step ahead of that.

My spies at Ralph Lauren ignored my queries, but it would be a shame for Ralph Lauren to lose Rider, who was originally hired by the great executive Valérie Hermann (she now runs a consumer private equity firm back in France). Rider has, by all accounts, done quite well at Ralph Lauren, and while that isn’t a company that talks about creative succession—ever—he must be in the back of somebody’s mind. Look, who knows what the future holds? Things change. Anything can happen. Insert your favorite hedging cliche here.

And what of Hedi Slimane leaving Celine? As I reported a few weeks back, my understanding is that his contract is up in June. Afterward, I received two bits of feedback. One was that Slimane loves stirring the pot, and that the Dior and Chanel rumors may have come straight from his camp. The other was that Bernard Arnault, C.E.O. and chairman of LVMH, has a “soft spot” for Slimane, given that he’s one of the group’s remaining superstar designers.

I’m sure Arnault does have a soft spot for Slimane, who has made him a lot of money over their on-again, off-again, 20-plus year relationship. First at Dior Homme, where he ushered in the era of the skinny jean, and then at Celine, which now generates more than $2 billion a year in sales. I’m sure LVMH will do what they can to keep him, and I would be thrilled if that meant he was headed to Dior. But as we all know, Dior is a machine that may be too big for one person’s vision. He would also be right for Chanel—he was a speculated successor to Hedi-megafan Karl Lagerfeld—but he requires complete control over the brand image. That may not be something that the Wertheimers—the incredibly private, careful family that owns Chanel—want to offer.

There is also a chance that Slimane, who is 55, will just relax for a while. He took a long break in the late aughts between Dior Homme and Saint Laurent, moved to Los Angeles, hung out at Speranza, and pursued photography. Slimane would be leaving Celine in a prime position for a person like Rider—a commercial designer with the right European pedigree and connected circle of friends (he is socially linked with Loewe’s Jonathan Anderson, Studio Tricot’s Trevor Ballin, and the actor Dan Levy)—to take it to the next level. Look what Anthony Vaccarello did with Slimane’s Saint Laurent.

One more thing to consider: Slimane-ophiles might be whispering sweet nothings about Chanel to connected friends in an effort to make LVMH think he is serious about leaving, but LVMH could be doing the very same to him by getting the word out about Rider.

Delphine is the most accomplished, and competent, of her siblings, and the clear frontrunner in the race, literal or not, to replace Arnault pere as group C.E.O. when the time comes. Last week, there was a lot of succession talk around the Arnaults, thanks to the recent appointment of two more kids to the board of directors. Tiffany’s Alexandre Arnault, 31, and watch group C.E.O. Frédéric Arnault, 29, now both have a vote. Jean Arnault, 26, head of Louis Vuitton watches, is the only one left out.

“This isn’t going to be like the Murdochs,” one person close to the company told me, meaning that it isn’t going to be chaotic, and that every child will play nice. We’ll see, especially as the younger kids gain experience and confidence. I reckon that the company’s performance will also color their behavior: If everything continues to go as well as it has, maybe they will each find their place and remain dedicated to keeping things moving.

The question, as always, is when the changeover will happen. My estimate is five to seven years, barring an unforeseen circumstance. As one person put it, Arnault wouldn’t have released retirement-age Toni Belloni—his closest deputy—and Sidney Toledano if he was planning on leaving soon.

Regardless of when Arnault transfers power, this reorganization may be the harbinger of some significant changes to the way LVMH and its individual business are run. The Olympics are a demonstration that LVMH is not in the business of fashion, but the business of culture—growing as big as McDonald’s or Nike in the mind’s eye—and the group is going to increasingly reflect that change. Pietro Beccari’s hiring of Wieden+Kennedy president Blake Harrop as the head of image and communications at Louis Vuitton, LVMH’s biggest brand, is another manifestation of the philosophy. (Wieden+Kennedy, an advertising agency, is best known for its decades of work with Nike.)

Now, I hear that Megan Grant, L’Oreal’s current U.S. president, is also headed to Louis Vuitton on June 1 to run its Americas division, replacing the well-regarded Lanessa Elrod. Grant is more of a traditional choice: Plenty of LVMH’s fashion C.E.O.s used to work in consumer packaged goods or beauty. However, it’s still indicative of the direction that the company is moving. As a C.E.O. of a family-run fashion business posited to me a couple of weeks ago: For the first generation, there are no rules. The second generation is the one responsible for writing them.

Jacob on the “snoafers.” [Wall Street Journal]

Congrats to The Atlantic’s Amanda Mull, who got poached by Businessweek. Amanda is not only a fantastic writer everyone should be reading, she’s also a pretty great human. [Twitter]

Congrats to Simon Porte Jacquemus, who is now a father! Babies are nice. [Instagram]

Los Angeles brand The Great launched an “outdoors” collection, which is a smart way to do activewear for people who aren’t that active. [Their Website]

Witch or not, I am very entertained by Andrew Garfield’s girlfriend’s witchy style. (It’s very Taylor Swift, mid-2000s-coded.) [Just Jared]

The LVMH Prize finalists were announced. My girl Marie Adam-Leenaerdt is in there. [Vogue]

Until Monday,
Lauren