Alpaca Communications
46818179164_2a9f5f21fb_o.jpg

News

News

Missguided Influence

KIM K.jpg

Couple weekends ago Kim Kardashian shared an image of a well fitted golden dress on her Instagram that caused a pretty huge uproar. According to the influencer, the dress was designed by her husband Kanye West for a Miami trip last year. But this is not the end of the story. Her caption continued with a slightly shady jab at cheap retailers: “P.S. fast fashion brands, can you please wait until I wear this in real life?”

Fast fashion brand Missguided responded almost immediately with a one to one replicate of the dress and the cheeky caption: “The devil works hard, but Missguided works harder.” Now, this got many fashion publications and platforms such as Diet Prada wondering if this was a carefully planned publicity stunt. So was it?

Many have observed Missguided’s obsession with the Kardashians. The brand has dedicated an entire landing page to the reality tv stars. Could this explain the scepticism row? Well less than 24h after the post, Missguided removed their post. Whether it was due to the public outcry or an actual plagiarism problem we don’t know and Missguided hasn’t been available for comment.

The problem now is, whether a confidential partnership happened between these two parties. And if so, could this be an ethical complication for Missguided? As Kim Kardashian could care less. Missguided has previously been under fire for designing an obviously cheaper rip off collection of Kanye West’s Yeezy collection, which was notable exhibit by his muse Kim Kardashian. Obviously Missguided has recognised, that there is a market for copying designs worn by the Kardashians and brought this to the regular Julie, who always watches Keeping up with the Kardashians,” for a way cheaper retail price.

So what if Missguided thought: “Let’s pay Kim Kardashian to wear a Yeezy dress and post it on Instagram and ask fast fashion brands to wait for her to wear this fit in real life before copying it. Then we sneak into her comment section, that we’re onto her and create a perfect one to one replicate.” If this indeed happened, Missguided might have won marketing FOMO moment of this month.

But why delete it? Obviously, many saw through the lack of transparency in this alleged business transaction. This was a sponsored ad before we knew it was an ad. In the world of social media awareness, this deception could be considered a slap in the face. (Legally speaking too)

Essentially it doesn’t matter anymore as the post is down, but fast fashion brand Missguided made a win regardless, as the post obviously caused a generous amount of traffic to their site and social media platforms. Whether it was transparent or not!

Peter Elms