6 hours ago, GlitterAndWings said:

Even though I'm not a fan of some of those Angels, I don't think they're at fault for VS' issues. The biggest issue is the direction they're taking with their shoots. If they went back to the sexy, more mature vibes, it would be better all around, but going for a more laid back look is what's damaging. The girls can deliver, it's just a matter of using them in the right setting. More shoots like the ones for Valentine's Day last year would be better instead of the cutesy shoots they're pushing right now. 

 

 

 

100% agree on this but apparently last year VDay shoot was pulled out of stores because it was judged too sexy...

I don’t think they should necessarily hire “plus-size” models but certainly go back to a more classic curvy lingerie model type. I don’t buy that all their customers want to see only stick thin models:

DAY 16: Stella Maxwell #LOVEADVENT2017

 

DAY 23: Romee Strijd by Phil Poynter #LOVEADVENT2017

 

DAY 28: Elsa Hosk by Phil Poynter #LOVEADVENT2017

 

Whenever people talk about who has the best body, they always mention the likes of Tyra Banks, Heidi Klum, Daniela Pestova etc.

VS used to hire supermodels who didn’t fit high fashion measurements any longer but had ideal bodies for commercial appeal. Now VS chases the high fashion prestige by trying to turn their less-known starter Angels into big hf stars, so they get models who don’t have much in the boobs/butt area.

 

There is too little variety in the body types that the Angels represent. VS also needs to get with the times. Being as thin as possible, having no boobs/butt is not currently in. Go at least with the classic voluptuous underwear model look, can’t go wrong with that.

Lol turning the  angels into hf stars no way the only person who is doing  well is Taylor. How has vs not filed for bankruptcy like seriously they keep making the brand look silly and most of the models look alike

The V.S. brand was born out of creating a catalog that made it less awkward and uncomfortable for men to buy sexy things for their wives and girlfriends.  That's a fact.  I've spent a lot of money in the store and online for that very reason.  That's what took the business from one guy's garage to the global powerhouse it became.  There's powerful psychology to this strategy: men fantasize about Candice Swanepoel wearing a particular lingerie set, they want to see their girlfriend wearing it, they buy it, and when their girlfriend is modeling it some of that "Candice Swanepoel fantasy" unconsciously bleeds over into the real-life experience.  Who wouldn't want to go back for more of that?  I bought a lot of V.S. stuff for exactly that reason.  That's how the best marketing psychology works: you create a fantasy in your marketing AND in real life for your customers.

 

For years the catalog appealed to both men and women in different ways, and there's no question that men's purchases were a large part of the balance sheet.  It's obvious to me why the brand is failing now, and it has nothing to do with who their current models are, or what their body type is (IMO their models are still the best of the best):

 

- Dropped swimwear line: instant revenue drop by cutting an entire product line, loss of men's interest in the brand because, quite frankly, the V.S. swim catalogs in past years were often photographed better than the classic S.I. Swimsuit issue, with better and more recognizable models (because the S.I. models often came from V.S. discoveries to begin with)

 

- Dropped the clothing line: maybe they were losing money on clothing, but dropping clothing means fewer people interested in visiting the store and the website, both men and women included

 

- Killed the catalog: they could have kept the catalog online.  Don't tell me they can't afford the 2-3 full-time salaries it would require to do the graphic design and layouts, and retain their existing photographers/locations.  Yeah, I'm a guy, but I've also been a paying customer.  Now I just don't care about the brand anymore, and there's nothing to look forward to. Perfect example was the Christmas Catalog, the highlight of their branding every year.

 

- Photography style went from "fantasy" to boring af:  I would bet anything that whoever has been in charge of the brand's creative direction since revenues started plunging decided it would be a good idea to kill the appeal to men and focus on women only.  Whoever that is either does not understand the male contingent of their customers and how men can affect women's buying decisions, or worse, is a closet man-hater.  No swimwear, no catalog, less reason for men and a large section of women to ever set foot in the store or buy online, then the final nail in the coffin: photograph all of the styles against a white or solid background with zero creativity.  Now the site looks like every boring, mediocre, department store's website with nothing standing out.  Buying V.S.'s product now carries all of the excitement of buying groceries.

 

- V.S. Fashion Show is irrelevant and a waste of money: want to save some money to pay for creative photo shoots, video specials, commercials, and branding again? Stop spending millions on all of the press, video, celebrities, and foreign locations for the dead end runway special.  Once they went "Las Vegas Showgirl" with it there was nowhere else to go.   Spreading out the interest over the course of the whole year is a lot better than wasting a ton of money building up to a one-night, totally lame T.V. special. No one even watches T.V. anymore!

 

R.I.P. Victoria's Secret

(I hope someone from their corporate office ends up reading this)

I agree VS has built on a sexy image. I think they have lost a bit of sexy side especially when we see half of the angels with teenage bodies under nutrition.

 

Although I agree with most of your complains, it's just tiring to read the same sh*t about the models, specially in a freaking forum dedicated to VS. If it frustrates you so much and you think it is that bad, why do you even spend your time here? 

VS needs to drop some angels, Stella, Romee, Martha and Jo can go. They’re all boring... 

Lol @ them putting out a commercial with both Stella and Martha now.

Don't love the fake bangs on Martha in that commercial. 

14 minutes ago, Warhol said:

VS needs to drop some angels, Stella, Romee, Martha and Jo can go. They’re all boring... 

Yeah they should be dropped ASAP vs can keep pretending that those girls are really saving that brand hmm and the sales continue to drop 

12 minutes ago, Siemgi said:

Lol @ them putting out a commercial with both Stella and Martha now.

there is really too much diversity

That commercial was a snoozefest. 

Everything @slacker said is true.

Let's all form a pact and buy a bunch of useless crap from VS to help them with sales!!!  

37 minutes ago, Diorsfashion said:

Yeah they should be dropped ASAP vs can keep pretending that those girls are really saving that brand hmm and the sales continue to drop 

I don’t understand why they keep them lol

1 minute ago, Warhol said:

I don’t understand why they keep them lol

To keep this forum alive.

28 minutes ago, PinkCouture said:

Let's all form a pact and buy a bunch of useless crap from VS to help them with sales!!!  

 

I'm still dealing with the VS brightening gel cream and the Rocking Body Shimmer 

11 minutes ago, Scarlet said:

 

I'm still dealing with the VS brightening gel cream and the Rocking Body Shimmer 

 

OMG, I sometimes use the Rockin' Body Shimmer too!!!  It is ok. Works slightly better if you combine it with lotion  

 

I have used the brightening gel too. I prefer the original one that came in a jar. It was a better shimmer and had a better texture  

 

 

Why is VS acting like the t-shirt bra is only just now coming out in wireless? That thing's been wireless since the line was launched, or at least the relaunch.