The Business of Fashion Podcast

When Elliot Hill returned to Nike as chief executive in October 2024, he was tasked with reversing one of the most significant slumps in the company’s history.

The business had lost momentum with both investors and consumers and his strategy has focused on restoring wholesale relationships, rebuilding key categories like running and trying to stabilise the brand’s broader narrative.

But Nike’s latest earnings and weak outlook have intensified doubts about whether the recovery is moving quickly enough. In a fragmented marketplace where heat has moved toward niche competitors and rejuvenated legacy rivals, Nike is struggling to convince a skeptical public and an impatient Wall Street that its next chapter has truly begun.

On the episode, Sykes joins hosts Sheena Butler-Young and Brian Baskin to unpack why Nike’s comeback still feels unfinished, what the brand is getting right, and what it would take for the market to believe again.

Key Insights:

Sykes argues that the sharp reaction to Nike’s latest earnings was less about one bad quarter than a broader loss of patience. Hill has spent more than a year telling investors that the comeback is taking shape, but the numbers still do not show enough momentum to support that story. “Investors are just sort of running thin on patience with Elliott Hill,” Sykes says. That problem is compounded by Nike’s own guidance. As Sykes puts it, “you can’t really get ringing endorsements from people” when the company is already warning that the next quarter will still be down.

The sportswear landscape of 2026 is fundamentally different from the one Nike dominated a decade ago. Whilst Nike is still a big player in sportswear, its dominance does not necessarily mean the same thing it once did. With the market fragmented, heat is now distributed across brands like Hoka, New Balance and Adidas, and attention moves quickly between rivals. “Nike is still bigger than every other sportswear brand out there right now,” he says. “But when Nike is at its best, it is not participating in the conversation, it is controlling the conversation.” The issue is not that Nike has become irrelevant. It is that the market no longer seems to operate in a way that allows one brand to command the same singular hold it once did. Nike now requires a more versatile approach to global regions like China and sub-brands like Converse, which currently act as a drag on overall productivity.

Sykes is clear that Nike is not doing everything wrong. He points to genuine progress in North America, improved wholesale relationships and real traction in running. But those wins have not yet added up to the kind of breakthrough moment that changes the narrative. Nike is trying new products and categories, yet none of them has become the catalyst investors and consumers are looking for. “There are things there that I would say are definitely more positive than I thought they would be,” Sykes says. But he also notes that “there just seems to be still a bit of disconnect between what the brand thinks about its product and what consumers think about its products.”

Sykes argues that the company has to rebuild the basics before it can deliver the kind of defining cultural or product hit that resets perception. “You have to hit the singles before you can hit a grand slam,” he says. That may be true operationally, but the problem is that Nike is a company judged not just on steady execution, but on its ability to create category-shaping moments. Until one of those arrives, the sense of drift is likely to continue.

Additional Resources:
Can the World Cup Solve Nike’s Problems? | BoF
The Public Isn’t Buying What Nike Is Selling. Can That Change?

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In this second Ask Me Anything episode, Imran Amed responds to questions submitted by listeners around the world, offering a wide-ranging reflection on where fashion stands now — creatively, commercially and culturally.

The conversation moves from personal encounters with figures such as designer Yohji Yamamoto and Gentle Monster founder Hankook Kim to broader questions about whether the industry has lost its sense of excitement, what luxury means today and how emerging brands can still find a path to market.

“Sometimes big-brand fashion can feel a bit boring and corporatised and cookie-cutter. But there are so many independent, young, exciting brands out there doing really, really interesting things,” says Amed. “I’m starting to feel excited about fashion again.”

Later in the episode, the discussion turns to AI, fashion education and entrepreneurship. Amed makes the case for engaging early with new technologies rather than resisting them, calls on educators to stay connected to the realities of the industry, and reflects on the early failure that ultimately led him to build BoF.

Key Insights:

The creative energy in fashion is returning, driven by a wave of new creative director appointments. After a period where the industry felt productised and corporatised, recent moves — Mathieu Blazy at Chanel, Jonathan Anderson at Dior, Meryl Rogge at Marni, Duran Lantink at Jean-Paul Gaultier — have injected a sense of excitement Imran says he hasn’t felt in years. The lesson: pay attention to independent and emerging brands too, where some of the most thoughtful work is happening away from the spotlight.

The old gatekeeper model for launching a fashion brand is over. When Amed wrote his “Business of Fashion Basics” series in 2007, the only path to market for young designers ran through department store buyers, glossy magazine editors, publicists and showrooms. Today, brands can reach customers directly through social media and content — though some may still benefit from selective engagement with the traditional system.

BoF’s global editorial perspective has been present from day one, but global coverage requires active effort. Rather than seeing international storytelling as a matter of geographic inclusion, Amed frames it as a responsibility to understand how different markets connect through shared challenges. “The struggles a designer in Brazil is facing are often similar to the struggles, questions and challenges a designer in Dubai is facing,” he says. “You only really realise that when you start going around the world and people are asking you the same questions.”

On AI, the biggest risk is inaction. Drawing a parallel to his first experience with email and the internet in 1994, Amed argues that AI represents the same kind of transformational shift — and that professionals who reflexively reject it will fall behind, just as those who dismissed bloggers and influencers did a decade ago.

When the world feels uncertain, focus on what you can control. Amed’s advice to designers and business leaders navigating geopolitical instability: you can’t control tariffs, wars or macro uncertainty. You can control the quality of your work, the environment you create for your teams, and your cost base. Beauty and creativity, he argues, are a uniting force — and sometimes the best response to turbulence.

The failure that led to BoF: focus on the problem, not the solution. Before launching BoF, Amed tried to build a fashion incubator modelled on Silicon Valley. After eight months, he couldn’t sign a single designer. But because he’d identified the right problem — bridging the gap between creativity and business — the failure pointed him toward a different solution. “If your first solution doesn’t work, try another solution, keep iterating,” he says. “I did.”

Additional Resources:
The Emerging Designers Pushing Fashion Forward | BoF
The Great Fashion Reset | Is Fashion Failing Emerging Designers? | BoF
Why Revolve Can’t Stop Talking About AI | BoF
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

In March, H&M released financial results alongside its annual sustainability report, presenting two seemingly contrasting narratives. The company reported a 34.6 percent reduction in emissions from 2019 levels and also noted that 91 percent of its materials are now sustainably sourced. However, this environmental progress occurred alongside a 1 percent dip in sales, raising questions about the commercial viability of its green strategy.

While many industry peers are backing away from environmental messaging to focus on the bottom line, H&M is arguing that sustainability is not in tension with profit, but is rather a "core driver of future growth".

On The Debrief, we examine whether this decoupling of growth from environmental impact can truly resonate with consumers, or if it remains a purely internal metric.

Key Insights:


As a fast fashion brand, H&M understands that sustainability alone is not going to win back shoppers. Instead, Walid says the company is trying to translate its recent efforts into something more tangible at the point of purchase. The pitch is not that consumers care about emissions reporting in itself, but that sustainability can function as a marker of quality. As Leyla Ertur, H&M’s Head of Sustainability, told Walid during their conversation, “Our customers don’t care about our Scope 3 emissions going down. What they care about is what they’re buying.”

Walid suggests that one of H&M’s biggest challenges is the disconnect between how the company sees itself and how customers perceive it. “When we say H&M, I think people are thinking of H&M, the brand … But when H&M talks about itself, they’re talking [about] the whole conglomerate,” she says, pointing to brands like COS and Weekday, which occupy a more elevated position. While those labels may successfully compete with higher-end high street players, that distinction is largely invisible to consumers, who still associate H&M with “fast fashion … something cheap for an occasion.” As a result, while the group may understand how to build more premium propositions across its portfolio, Walid argues that the core H&M brand itself has not yet meaningfully shifted perception.

For all the company’s investments and emissions reductions, the core contradiction remains that H&M is still producing and selling huge volumes of clothing. Waleed is explicit about that limitation: “They’re not addressing the overconsumption and overproduction problem in fashion.” At the same time, she notes that H&M is one of the few large players still investing at scale in decarbonisation, water reduction and supply chain upgrades.

H&M is investing across sustainability, brand elevation and new channels like resale, but Waleed cautions that it is still too early to judge whether these efforts are working. “They use all these different levers that don’t come into one … There needs to be a way to bring that together,” she says. Initiatives like fashion week shows, collaborations and younger-facing campaigns are designed to re-engage consumers, but “I don’t think people have caught traction … just yet.” For now, the strategy remains a long-term bet rather than a proven turnaround.

Additional Resources:
Exclusive: H&M Says Sustainability Is Good for Business. Can It Get Shoppers to Care?
BoF Analysis: The Rise of Ultra-Fast Fashion Players
The Game of ‘Selling’ Sustainability

Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

Faye McLeod has built a body of work that sits at the intersection of retail, image-making and brand building. During her 16-year tenure at Louis Vuitton, she created some of the luxury industry’s most visible physical expressions – from windows and façades to fashion show sets. In that time, she helped define how the house translated its image from the runway and the archive into public-facing experiences around the world.

“I love the fact that the windows are a democratic space. You’re talking to the people on pavements – people can love it or not, and that’s okay,” she says. “You can’t retouch or hide anything. You’ve just got to be authentically you. And I think that’s what I’m really good at – being just me.”

Now in a new phase of her career, McLeod is building her studio, Closer, bringing her special mix of emotion, world-building and collaboration to other brands and clients.

On this week’s episode of BoF Podcast, McLeod joins BoF founder and CEO Imran Amed to discuss her path into window design, the emotional logic behind her creative process, and why she decided this was the right moment to strike out on her own.

Key Insights:

Windows are where luxury meets the street. McLeod describes window design not as a decorative retail function but as one of fashion’s most public-facing forms of communication — a place where a brand has to earn attention in real time. What draws her to the medium is precisely that lack of control. “I love the fact that the windows are a democratic space,” she says. “You’re talking to the people on pavements.”

Her instinct for contained spaces comes from somewhere deeper than design training. McLeod links her creative process to a traumatic childhood accident. At the age of five, she fell down a deep hole in the desert in Al Ain, United Arab Emirates and spent hours trapped in what she describes as a concrete box, using imagination and inner resolve to survive. She now sees that experience as formative. “I had to go inside myself to survive. I had to use my imagination,” she says. “I’m good at designing in a contained space.”

The audience feedback completes the work. McLeod returns to the idea that creative concepts only fully come alive when people respond in ways you could not have planned. “What I love about what we do is watching the crowd sing back,” she says. “It’s something you cannot control with creative. You just put it out into the universe and see what happens.” In Chengdu, people queued with scissors to cut off pieces of the tail and take them home as souvenirs.

Her work is built collectively, not individually. Despite the scale and visibility of the projects she discusses, McLeod is emphatic that none of them are authored alone. “It’s not just about one person, it’s about everybody,” she says. “It’s an orchestra and you just find your place.”

Her philosophy is simple: pour love into the work. Looking back on her career, she says what she wishes she had known earlier was not a strategic lesson but an emotional one: to trust herself more, let anxiety matter less and commit fully to what she was making. “I wish I knew you just had to pour love into everything you do,” she says. “I just get a big jar of love and I pour it right on top of everything.”

Additional Resources:
Faye McLeod | BoF 500 | The People Shaping the Global Fashion Industry
Role Call | Faye McLeod, Visual Image Director | BoF
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.

For years, Revolve was fashion retail’s byword for influencer marketing, particularly around its over-the-top Coachella event. But as the Instagram aesthetic matures and the cost of human-led marketing rises, the company is pivoting. The new mandate? To become as much an AI powerhouse as it is a party-hosting fashion giant.

In a recent conversation with Retail Editor Cathaleen Chen, Revolve founders Michael Mente and Mike Karanikolas argued that AI isn't just a buzzword for the board; it’s the engine that will sustain their multi-billion dollar dominance.

Chen joined The Debrief to talk about how Revolve is pushing the limits of how AI can be used in retail, and whether its strategy is working.

Key Insights:

Revolve was founded by software engineers who viewed fashion as an e-commerce "white space,” setting it apart from rivals that invested in new technologies only after establishing themselves in the marketplace. "While Revolve looks like a Shopbop or a Net-a-Porter... Revolve is actually built like a data science company." said retail editor Cathaleen Chen.
Revolve differentiates itself by building its own tools where possible, rather than buying off-the-shelf software, including the product search on its website. Using AI, Revolve has moved beyond literal keyword matching to a system that understands the vibe or occasion a customer is shopping for. By analyzing image attributes, the site can surface the perfect "party dress" even if that specific tag doesn't exist, explains Chen. "What their AI tool is able to do is pull up anything that is sequined... or textured... it is anticipating the desire."
Revolve fosters a "bottom-up" environment where every employee is encouraged to experiment with AI. They aren't just looking for "moonshots"; they value any application that moves the needle even slightly. "Eeven if something improves efficiency or output by just 1%, that's considered a success,” said Chen.

Additional Resources:
Why Revolve Can’t Stop Talking About AI | BoF
Why Fashion Doesn’t Talk About How It Uses AI | BoF
Why Revolve Is Embracing Brick-and-Mortar | BoF
Hosted on Acast. See acast.com/privacy for more information.