10 Things Clothing Brands Need to Stop Doing

Image via Complex Original

Here's an idea: Instead of collaborating with a bunch of other brands, focus on creating a dope product on your own first. We understand that streetwear thrives on a sense of community, and it's important to support each other in that sense, but that doesn't mean you have to co-brand something with a buzz brand you just heard about two weeks ago. Producing dope shit on your own speaks louder than making a collaboration du jour that'll be popular for a day or two.

Tattoos were cool before everyone had them, now they're a de facto way to convey a sense of edginess. Sure, throw your product on a dude with full arm sleeves, that'll show people your stuff isn't for the faint of heart. The truth is that tattoos, for better or for worse, have become mainstream. That happened the moment Sailor Jerry had his own rum, Ed Hardy T-shirts blew up with douchebags, and tattoo parlors started getting their own reality shows. So while your tatted-up model may wear the clothes well, the only statement you're making is "we don't mind people with ink."

People that are popular on the Internet don't necessarily hold the same sway when it comes to moving units. Instagram likes and reblogs won't keep your brand afloat—sales wlll. If you're looking to build exposure, that's one thing, but hitting up so-called "influencers" to peddle your wares isn't as effective of a strategy as actually making good things people want to buy.

"Semantic satiation" is the phenomenon in which a word loses its meaning after it's constantly repeated. It applies to any word, really, but is especially true for profanity. When it's used well, it adds humor or proper shock value. But most times, people just use it for the sake of using it, which is absolutely pointless. What separates a subversive garment from a novelty sidewalk souvenir tee is some nuance.

It's good to want to expand your brand and get placement in stores around the world. However, it's best to grow at a pace you can maintain, unless you end up becoming ubiquitous too quickly, and therefore, mad corny. Limited distribution isn't the same as limiting distribution. Forge organic relationships with stores you could really see the brand doing well in, and respect those relationships. Nothing's worse than being able to buy the same brand at three or more shops within a five-block radius. That screams "sell-out."

Lookbooks have become a big part of the streetwear world. And while there's something to be said about a really well done video, it should be supplementary to a well-photographed lookbook, and not the main event. While brands like HUF have mastered a happy medium with a GIF lookbook, at the end of the day more people just want to stare at the clothes and contemplate a purchase rather than try to comprehend whatever visual story you're trying to tell. No one wants to sit through five minutes of a video and squint to see the clothes.

Designer parodies were cool when no one was doing them. Keep in mind in Shawn Stussy's day Chanel and surfing couldn't be further apart. Now, Chanel makes surfboards. By aping the linking C's with the letter S, he was making a statement saying he knew about those fashion brands, but wanted to create something that spoke to the stuff he was into. Now, simply copying a well-known designer logo is hardly transformative, it's just making a bootleg version of the real deal. There's no more cultural gap there.

Nostalgia is a powerful thing, but what separates hipster reappropriation and a knowing nod to the past is actively bringing a brand or piece of clothing into the now. For a brand like Kenzo, that means putting their iconic prints on New Era caps and Vans Sneakers. Stussy took their classic "World Tour" T-shirt and gave it a tie-dye treatment for this season. Both played up on existing things in their heritage and made them modern. Simply doing things like printing old rap record labels on a T-shirt or cutting up bedsheets from an '90s TV show and making it into somthing wearable doesn't do anything new, it just sells people on the strength of nostalgia alone.

Streetwear has always had a rebellious attitude, but that's because there's always been shit to complain about. Great examples include Supreme's "Fuck Bush" stickers and more recently, FUCT's "Raging Bull" collection which plays on U.S./Mexico immigration tensions. This type of stuff carries on that spirit perfectly: It has a message and uses the clothing to convey it across the collection. But rebelling just for the sake of it comes off as empty and shallow. No one cares if you have a middle finger to the world, but if you're trying to point out how fucked up something is, and want to use your brand to call attention to that, then people are more likely to listen.

Menswear is about fit. You want to see how a garment sits on the body, or how a graphic is placed on a T-shirt. Putting your clothes on girls in order to sell them says nothing about the quality or construction of a garment, but everything about your attitude towards women. Streetwear already has a reputation as a boys' club with a less-than-uplifting disposition towards the opposite sex (see: the Thirstiest Men of Instagram), and showing off your clothes in this manner only perpetuates that culture. It's 2013. Plenty of women are running the industry. We know by now that there are plenty of other things that sell more than sex.