Personal Era Has Been Eliminated By Football And Fashion.

Zuhair Mural embroidered with SWAROVSKI crystal

The age of the individual, the era of playing the role of a star in football, is expressed in the fashion as an age of designer's personal charisma and ability.

In this era of OUT in the world cup in South Africa, football has finally been confirmed by the progress of the war: from

In the fashion world,

The net interest rate is also rising in the volume of numbers.

Economists use the "business model innovation" to describe the earth shaking changes in the fashion industry.

Once again, we freeze the picture in tears in England, Brazil's helplessness, Argentina's confusion, and Italy's dejected moments. We find that the charm of these "individuals" is, after all, no match for the strength of "integrity".

It is not only because "dribbling past three people" seems to have become a legend.

And for such a clear "attack", the defending side can use cruel defense to relieve itself.

What's more, those stars who enjoy gold lettered signboards are too expensive to take care of their feet and lose their lethality and initiative even if they suffer heavy losses.

To see how Messi and Kaka face each other's Quartet's chase and three people to intercept, they know how weak the personal charisma is in team sports.

Just as gorgeous luxury brands encounter rapid copying of fast selling brands, they are equally helpless at parity.

Those mature and fast selling brands, sophisticated product lines, like the passing lines of mature teams, are not stereotyped but full of changes. They are full of changes while they are clear and orderly.

For the changes in the camp, from the 2002 World Cup 4-4-2 formation, to the 2006 World Cup's usual 4-2-3-1 formation, and then to the South Africa World Cup, the highly praised 4-2-1-2-1 formation, although the 4-2-1-2-1 formation is also interpreted as a certain form of formation of the 4-4-2 formation, and the four strong matches also use the 4-2-3-1 formation, but there are more pursuits in passing changes. The winners are often those who attack and defend together, and can quickly change to defend the attacking team.

It's like those fast selling brands that are full of style, series, and mix and match. They defend their brand principles and attack the product style characteristics of competing brands. They rely on the precise brand series, the brilliant product development plan, the calm and quick preparation, and all the attacks and defends are all mixed up.

It's hard to match those old brand tactics with simple and classic style.

{page_break}

Think of those who have relied on the bursting of the money, asking for a strong monophyletic line, the style of the style, the success of the marketing, the dominant position of the fashion brand, the complex brand competition environment, should be changed or not?

Resentment usually has three: why should the product line be so poorly changed, why is it confused by competitors in operation? Why is the hope of brand rising on one person?