Hi, and welcome back to Line Sheet. What a terrible weekend! There I was on Friday, feet on the ground, contemplating Lauren Sánchez’s subtle makeunder—she wore Alaïa to dinner in Sun Valley, I hear—and then, suddenly, everything mattered less than it already mattered.

Today, in non-world-stopping news, I’ve got something for everyone. If you like luxury, there’s a tidbit from Milan. If you like nepotism, details on the Jack Schlossberg–Vogue deal, with a few Condé Nast updates as a bonus. If you like normie fashion, a bit of backstory on the dress that’s taking over Washington as the world falls apart. And finally, Josh Schulman is back!!! Let’s try to make sense of this Burberry news.

🚨🚨 Programming note: Tomorrow on Fashion People, Becky Malinsky and I get into the fun stuff, including Wimbledon’s weekend fashion upgrade (thanks mostly to Ralph Lauren and Zendaya), the new Loewe campaign (!), designer musical chairs, and more. Subscribe here.

And remember, if this newsletter helps you do your job better (I’m looking at you, Burberry), your company probably needs a group subscription to Puck. Feel free to reach out to Alexandra@puck.news to learn more about our downright luxurious suite of offerings.

Mentioned in this issue: Burberry, Joshua Schulman, Daniel Lee, Jack Schlossberg, Vogue, Capri, Alastair McKimm, Moschino, Adrian Appiolaza, D.C.’s Tuckernuck dress fixation, Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, Tory Burch, Rocco Liu, GQ, Blake Abbie, Roger Lynch, Kering, LVMH, Lina Khan, Sarah Burton, the Kardashians, and many more.

• More movement in Milan: Big, fancy stylist guy (and former i-D editor-in-chief) Alastair McKimm is slated to begin working with Moschino and its still-new (and very fun) creative director, Adrian Appiolaza, in September, I’m told. McKimm will style the show and the campaign. Usually, stylists of McKimm’s stature (and rate) refrain from working with more than one brand in each city, but McKimm has done two at once in the past. Will he stay at Gucci or go? No comment from McKimm or Moschino.
• A D.C. fashion trend befitting these apocalyptic times…: Victoria Knight, a healthcare reporter at Axios, somehow ended up in my Twitter feed last Thursday just as Joe Biden was fielding questions from reporters instead of announcing his exit from the presidential race. (I guess the algorithm works after all.) Anyway, Victoria thinks that “someone needs to do an exposé on the absolute chokehold the Tuckernuck shift dress has on the Capitol Hill girlies rn.”

  I have a lot of important things to do (like find out how much money Jack Schlossberg is making at Vogue; see below), so someone else will have to truly investigate the apparent phenomenon surrounding the $268 wool-tweed “Jackie” dress created by a decade-old brand called Tuckernuck, available in a range of colors including baby blue and tomato red. But I was curious, so I did a teeny bit of reporting.

  First off, what in the actual Puck is Tuckernuck, you might ask? It’s the house brand of a Georgetown boutique, founded by three ladies—​​Jocelyn Moore Gailliot, Madeline Grayson, September Rinnier Votta—in 2012 after they spent six months in Mountain View, California, “to learn the ins and outs of launching a digital company.” (That, to me, is a real way to flex the privileges of inherited wealth.) Anyway, the boutique sells brands like Ganni, Veronica Beard, and Isabel Marant—you get it—but what they’re really shilling is their in-house line, consisting of too many SKUs to count, covering far too much ground aesthetics-wise. My gut reaction is, “This brand blows,” but that is probably too cruel. A more constructive response would be that Tuckernuck is attempting to offer trend-forward, sophisticated items for trad wives, but that there’s just a bit too much going on. If you’re into the East Coast look, why not hit up Ann Mashburn, or Plain Goods, Old Stone Trade (okay, I’ve probably gone too far), or, you know, Tory freakin’ Burch.

  All that aside, Tuckernuck is a growing digital business (I checked, it’s true) that has clearly made an impression on its target audience. Which brings us back to the Jackie dress, a copy of something Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis would have worn when she was just a Kennedy. This article of clothing is bipartisan (both Dems and Republicans are wearing it, although it’s leaning more to the right), and proliferating. Through an intermediary, I messaged one former Hill staffer who now works at an N.G.O. and owns the dress. She is a Democrat but is often mistaken for a Republican. She dislikes the “double-fake pocket,” and the fact that “it’s kind of cheaply made and it feels very starchy.” However, “it’s an easy throw-on that looks professional and has no shape if you’re bloated.” Another D.C. insider suggested that the dress is “giving public affairs.”

  I like that people in D.C. still dress up, and on tomorrow’s episode of Fashion People, my friend, the stylist and writer Becky Malinsky, heartily endorses Tuckernuck. My advice, however, would be to buy a dress like this or this from St. John instead, or this one from Tory. Same idea, not much more expensive, and less costumey. Also, if you want the “Jackie” dress anyway, but are fretting over the fact that it’s $300, as Victoria seems to be, please do not buy the Amazon dupe. Not because I’m all ethical or anything, but because it’s not going to look good. You will find the O.G. on Poshmark sooner rather than later, I promise.

• Jack Schlossberg’s deal: I refuse to engage in the Kennedy-heir-taking-a-media-job-away-from-a-real-journalist discourse because it’s straight-up dumb, but I was curious enough about Schlossberg’s contributor deal at Vogue to do a little digging. Unsurprisingly, Schlossberg is slated to be paid just as poorly as every other Vogue contributor. Schlossberg’s contract, as of this writing, requires him to create up to four monthly Instagram videos of his reactions to “key news” moments in the election cycle (coming in hot as a competitor to Puck’s very own Tara Palmeri, follow her here), and as many written articles as he wants to accompany them. He will also be asked to contribute to a Vogue app that’s launching in September—micro-scoop!—and create additional social content. He’ll be paid the typical freelancer rate, I’m told: $250 per article.

  If that sounds ludicrously low, it is, but it’s also… fair? Perhaps Schlossberg can negotiate upward, given all the press this thing has already gotten everyone involved. Also, what a vintage Condé Nast idea to hire this Camelot nepo baby. During the company’s heyday, the place was littered with pedigreed heirs: John Edwards’ daughter, a Springsteen, Tom Hanks’ kid, etcetera. None as funny, or (inarguably?) attractive, or nepo-y as Schlossberg. I love it, and so do all of you. (Reps for Condé Nast did not respond to a request for comment. Schlossberg’s rep told me that “Jack is being compensated in accordance with Vogue’s standard contributor rate.”)

• Tell it to the board: The reactions to the appointment of Rocco Liu as editorial director of Vogue China late last week were mixed. To many, it made business sense. Liu has climbed steadily up the ranks at GQ (where he started as a copywriter 15 years ago) and certainly knows how to play the game in China, where the game is pay to play. Others considered the appointment wholly uninspired. Blake Abbie, the editor of the indie A Magazine Curated By, was also rumored to be in the running, but clearly the group needed to hire a native Chinese person who understands how the market works. This could be a nonfinancial highlight for C.E.O. Roger Lynch to share later this week at the company’s quarterly board meeting. As for the GQ China debacle that I reported last week, it sounds like they’ve signed a new licensing deal and will announce it soon.

You’d think that Akeroyd’s replacement, American retail exec Joshua Schulman—whose C.V. includes stints at Jimmy Choo, Coach, and, most recently, Michael Kors—would have sparked something. He is probably the most obvious choice in the industry for a turnaround of this type. And he has much to prove. At Kors, after all, Schulman had been considered the successor to take over Capri—the parentco that owns Kors, Versace, and yes, Jimmy Choo. But then about two years ago, roughly a year into the transition, Capri C.E.O John Idol decided he wanted to stick around to steward the company’s $8.5 billion merger with Tapestry in a career-culminating, if F.T.C.-challenged, deal. Schulman received an eye-watering exit package for his troubles. Ever since, Schulman, a department store savant who ran Bergdorf Goodman in a previous life, has been a free agent—and it’s hardly a surprise he landed at Burberry. He is one of a handful of fashion executives who understand this slice of the market—luxury, but not mega luxury; fashion, but not mega fashion.

When Ahrendts left for Apple in 2014, however, Burberry made the fatal mistake of appointing Bailey—the nicest man in fashion?—as C.E.O. Alas, the past 10 years have not been kind. Marco Gobbetti, the longtime Céline exec who replaced Bailey in 2017, was popular with analysts and investors alike, and brought designer Riccardo Tisci over from Givenchy in 2018 to finally take Burberry upmarket—to make it a designer brand to compete with those in the Kering and LVMH stables, perhaps in the hopes that, one day, a larger company might want to buy it. But Tisci wasn’t the right fit, and Burberry has since struggled to establish its position in the fashion ecosystem. While Kering and LVMH have looked at Burberry in the past (Kering looked closely), Burberry has never managed to sell enough luxury products to make sense.

It’s not entirely Akeroyd’s fault, but things have gotten even worse since he joined in April 2022 from Capri-owned Versace (yes…) and Daniel Lee, a former Céline and Bottega Veneta designer, was appointed creative director. Lee’s collections have been ridiculed both online and by the press, a notable contrast to his white-hot but incredibly brief Bottega run. In a note to investors, analyst Luca Solca called the move further upmarket under the Akeroyd-Lee regime “abrupt,” adding that, “Brand power is already damaged by the fact that following the failure of moving up, Burberry has been discounting very heavily.”

I’m sure Schulman will cut costs where he can, but the key to Burberry succeeding is going to be getting outerwear—its definitive hero product—right. (In his statement, Schulman mentioned that the company’s “original purpose” was to “protect people from the weather.”) This is a coat brand, not a handbag brand, and while he’ll need to sell plenty of bags, too, he needs to sell more coats first.

As for Lee, the board has made it clear that he is staying, for now, although the decision will ultimately be Schulman’s to make. (I’ve heard that they’ll meet on Wednesday, Schulman’s official start date.) There is already change afoot, however. C.M.O. Rod Manley is on his way out, with former Gucci exec Jonathan Kiman—also very nice—said to be a leading choice to replace him.

If Lee does end up leaving, who could be right? A connected friend of mine wished for Sarah Burton, but I suspect she is closer to Givenchy than ever, and I’m not sure she would solve the problem. There’s also the strong argument that Schulman doesn’t need a designer, but rather a merchandiser. (He needs both, of course, but probably a merchandiser more.) Regardless, Schulman understands the category better than anyone, and there are swift changes he can make to get things moving again. My hope is that Schulman will indeed home in on Burberry’s Englishness, and its heritage in outerwear, instead of trying to sell an empty dream. The consumers who are still buying things (and yes, they do exist) are not looking for the most expensive or the most exclusive product, but the most worthy. I’ve been yammering on about luxury fatigue for years now, and it has finally set in. The remaining customers are fashion enthusiasts. And you know what they’d be happy to buy? The best trench coat in the world.

It’s not a nowhere-to-go-but-up situation—the company has a lot of exposure in China—but Schulman has an opportunity to take some risks. After all, if sales continue to dive, he can always blame the macro issues. And if that happens, I suspect it’ll be taken private by an unsavory acquirer. It really will be no one’s fault. However, I actually think that the best long-term outcome here isn’t a sale to Kering or LVMH so much as an acquisition by Moncler or Ralph Lauren. The most fascinating option, of course, would be a sale to Tapestry, shortly after it swallows Capri, reuniting Schulman with his old colleagues. Given the American political situation, after all, the regulatory environment may be transformed overnight.

The cross-section of Sun Valley people and fashion people is actually quite high, and Dylan’s reporting from inside the lodge is unmatched. [In the Room]

I’m pretty anti-tie on most women (although it works here on Glenn Close and Willa, always), but the Ralph Lauren blazer, shirt, and casual L.V. bag are it. [Teen Vogue]

The Nordstrom anniversary sale is a huge opportunity for fashion-focused outlets to make a lot of money on affiliate links. Sarah Shapiro does a good job explaining its history and evolution. [Sarah’s Retail Diary]

Faran asks: Why buy the new version when the original is more affordable? [WSJ]

Shannen Doherty is not someone whose style I admired when I was younger. (I stopped watching Beverly Hills 90210 in earnest after the shoplifting episode. I was 8 years old and scandalized.) Looking back, though, she had some really good looks. Also: Heathers. [Vogue]

This campaign… what do the kids say?… slaps. [Jonathan Anderson’s Instagram]

You might ask why John Carreyrou is spending his time on something like this, but I’m fine with it. [New York Times]

This is funny. [Twitter]

No concessions?! [Twitter]

I gotta go. [Airmail]

It’s extremely hard for me to believe that Violet Affleck likes LoveShackFancy. [WWD]

Brunello Cucinelli had a really good quarter, and yet the market didn’t react favorably given all the turmoil in European luxury. [BoF]

Until Wednesday,
Lauren