Earlier this month, while fashion lovers were converging on the city for the start of NYFW, news broke in Milan that change was (once again) afoot at the House of Gucci. After just two years at the brand’s helm, Gucci announced that its creative director, Sabato De Sarno, would be leaving the brand.
The news came after a series of increasingly bleak financial reports, which have been further quantified by parent company Kering’s most recent report, which cites Gucci’s 2024 revenue as down 23%.
Furthermore, it was announced that collectively, we’d all already seen De Sarno’s last collection as the Fall 2025 collection set to show at Milan Fashion Week this month would be presented by Gucci’s in-house design studio.
A Farewell Too Soon?
There’s no denying that De Sarno had incredible shoes to fill after taking over Gucci’s helm from Alessandro Michele. Michele pioneered a renaissance at Gucci and catapulted the brand back to widespread popularity.
Still, his vision was distinct and undeniably eclectic, and it had been widely speculated that Kering’s higher-ups wised to lead Gucci in a different direction. It was De Sarno that they eventually chose to lead the next chapter in Gucci’s history, but that chapter was cut incredibly short.
While De Sarno’s Gucci was inarguably unsuccessful from a revenue perspective, from a fashion perspective, he did an incredible job at combining his own vision with a brand’s rich heritage. De Sarno quickly forged his own path at Gucci, settling in almost immediately and swiftly changing the brand’s aesthetic.
Quickly, Gucci Rosso Ancora became synonymous with the House, with the hue becoming a coveted shade at both Gucci and within the greater fashion world as a whole.
A Grand Farewell
De Sarno’s Gucci was classic, yet contemporary and wearable, yet statement-making, with a hint of sex appeal à la Tom Ford’s Gucci. His later collections, though were less commercial and sportswear-heavy, exploring the Gucci archives of the 60s and 70s with fun prints and classic tailoring.
De Sarno’s last collection for Gucci, Pre-Fall 2025, which debuted in December, was his strongest one yet, leaving fans excited for what was to come from De Sarno’s third year at the House. Yet Kering execs still opted to split from De Sarno ahead of the Fall 2025 collection, in a move that feels entirely untimely.
It’s arguable that the stark contrasts between Michele’s Gucci and De Sarno’s are ultimately what led to decreased revenues, not the work of De Sarno himself.
Fans of Michele’s loud luxury at Gucci began to look elsewhere for pieces that spoke to them, leaving De Sarno with the responsibility of curating a new generation of Gucci lovers.
This would have proven incredibly difficult for anyone, given the industry’s never-ending price increases and the luxury goods industry’s unstable climate. Gucci has yet to name a successor to De Sarno but one thing is certain: change is yet to come (again) at the House of Gucci.
It appears that I’m in the minority here, but I am sad that De Sarno is departing Gucci. I had abhorred Michele’s clamorous, in-your-face design so much that Gucci never interested me. (All my adulthood, AM was Gucci’s creative director until De Sarno.) So it was De Sarno who brought Gucci in a positive light, and he also made me love Gucci’s new direction. To me, his design hits the right balance between sensuality and structure.
Just as my finances became more stable, De Sarno departed from the brand.
So, I mourn this change. If Gucci reverts back to a Michele-like baroque period, I will find myself not in their boutiques but on resale platforms and vintage stores. I’m aware I’m just a single customer who won’t make a dent in their bottom line, but I’ll be shedding my tears in a corner, pinching my pennies to get one more De Sarno item before they disappear from the shelves.
I’m with you. I felt De Sarno was a breath of fresh air and loved the new direction which appealed to my more classic sensibilities. I think Gucci should have given him more time to establish his aesthetic after all it was so very different from Michele’s. Perhaps in time hindsight will be kinder to De Sarno but meantime I too will invest in a few more pieces before they disappear.
I agree with you on this one. I felt his last two collections were strong, particularly pre-fall, and I wish he had been given more time to see how these collections performed when they hit stores. I understand why his first collection felt underwhelming to some, but his later collections made me feel something strong was about to happen with De Sarno’s shift (particularly the RTW). He was just starting to really shine, IMO.
I agree like AM made good accessories but clothing wise it was to ghetto and unwearable like not everything needs logos and De Sarno was wearable and more subtle. My local boutique even said this as well. And when I was at a vip dinner with the CEO he said most of Guccis sales were from from black aspirational shoppers do to all the rap mentions. But money is money.
P.s I’m black so don’t take my use of ghetto as an insult.
I liked him and his style
I think the fundamental issue is to most people Gucci is a label-focused fashion brand. It’s not quiet… it’s gaudy and sexy and pop culture and a little in your face, worn by real house wives and rappers and people who like to show off!
I think that’s okay. De Sarno’s designs were pretty but there was no spark.
Explain Tom Fords gucci then
It was sexy and in your face. Remember the ad with the pubic hair “G”?
Even AM’s Gucci had pieces for every taste, yes, even quiet. The in your face items clearly got the attention, something for all, probably why he was so successful.
Well said, Gucci was never on my radar before Michele, he made that brand for exactly the look you describe. It added a little edge to my bag collection. I’m waiting for him to do this with Valentino. Personally De Sarno should have stayed at Valentino and Michele at Gucci, if it isn’t broke, why fix it…. I did enjoy De Sarno’s designs at Valentino, the brand suited him well, I definitely have a few of those too.
When things stay stagnant they go bad and don’t grow. They went wrong with allowing people to dictate what fashion is instead of telling people what fashion is. The designer sets the tone and mood regardless of sales. They finally made there image more classy and less ghetto.
his vision was zara… I’m glad he’s gone. I’m glad their corporate decision to abandon creativity did not work out.
People like you buy for logos not style.
Honestly I liked the bohemian style kinda Jackie Kennedy vibes. What I don’t get is people complain about logos so they tone it down to just get more complaints about not having logos. You just can’t win. They need to just do them and let the people who like it come to them instead of people pleasing
None of his bags had anything exciting about them. Sad.
Neither does Hermes that’s literally the point. Simple things are more wearable