Trans-seasonal, quality-driven, and rich—emphasis on rich. The Row is the only celebrity-owned brand currently leading a significant portion of the fashion market, positioned in 9th place among the hottest brands after bigger names like Loewe and Miu Miu, according to Lyst. But what makes this brand different from Phoebe Philo’s old Celine or other inspirations, such as Martin Margiela’s Hermès archives? The answer lies in ignoring trends and pop culture. By removing the faces of the two founders from The Row’s image, the brand has characterized itself as logo-free, celebrity-image-free, and, most recently, social media-free for the past two seasons.

To be honest, while the rest of the fashion players are busy trying to keep up with TikTok trends—like Bottega Veneta inviting “very mindful, very demure” girls to their SS25 show, or brands collaborating with sportswear labels for years—The Row doesn’t care about views because life is calmer than that. Their audience definition should be: “We produce clothes for the filthy rich, elegant Upper East Side women who only watch TikTok when their daughters or some social-obsessed friend shows them a video.” AND IT FREAKING WORKS! At least, it has been working really well so far.

The idea that The Row has about fashion is quite admirable. You can argue, “Yes, but The Row is a mix of many people’s ideas, including Martin Margiela, Phoebe Philo, and they’re directly competing with Loro Piana.” However, that doesn’t take away from the fact that they saw a market, studied it, and produced the demand. Simple economics: there was a lot of demand for Phoebe’s old Celine and Margiela’s Hermès archives, and they said, “You know what? Let’s do it.” The Olsen twins themselves were searching for those archives and dressing in them before they founded the brand!

Probably the only ugly monster The Row created without any intention was the “quiet luxury” trend. This trend is likely the most boring to ever happen in fashion, as it trivialized a way of dressing that had existed for years. It massified it for the sake of fake inclusion—emphasis on “fake”—because even fast-fashion brands jumped on it. This was just the start of the decline in the creative fashion business, as everything you’ve seen over the past two seasons has become all very similar. This is not a way to blame The Row for the quiet luxury trend; as mentioned, they had no intention of creating it, which is likely why they decided to keep their shows off social media. The Olsen twins may dislike social media, but they must be very glad their brand became the representation of powerful, rich women. That’s one of the best ways to summarize the brand.

This brand should be a case study for young people studying fashion business, as it clearly demonstrates how fashion is divided into so many niches, and that, in reality, there are no winners—and there should be no winners. It’s very unlikely that The Row cares about being in 9th place rather than 1st or 2nd on the list of “hottest brands.” Brands like this aim for one thing only: increasing the loyalty of their current consumers and passing it down to the heirs of those consumers, creating sustainable linear growth. This seems like a sustainable plan for a brand of the future. The massification of fashion and “luxury” is something that definitely needs to be reduced. Fashion is now positioned as the 3rd most polluting industry in 2024, according to studies by the United Nations Environment Programme and the World Health Organization. So, making at least wealthy consumers pay €3k for an ethically sourced and produced cashmere basic sweater seems like a small effort to slow the wheel from spinning so fast, and a real reaction to how the world is currently facing an economic crisis.

Is The Row a brand of the future?

The reason why these three events should be considered a cultural shock to our generation: Erykah Badu, CHROMAKOPIA and Lady Gaga’s New Music Video