PARIS – “It’s not up to the company to adapt to the family that controls it; it’s up to the family to adapt to the needs of the company. It’s the right time for Kering to have a new CEO, to have a new perspective, a new vision.”
So says François−Henri Pinault, who officially passes the chief executive officer torch to former Renault Group executive Luca de Meo this month after navigating the family-controlled conglomerate through multiple transformations, and making it a serious contender in the world of luxury goods.
Related Articles
The French business titan, who maintains the chairman role, sat down with WWD on Monday at Kering headquarters here to discuss his fruitful and eventful 20-year tenure as CEO, the day before shareholders are to ratify de Meo as Pinault’s successor, effective Sept. 15.
You May Also Like
Wearing a light blue shirt and gray pants, and sounding relaxed and sanguine, Pinault reflected on the key decisions and instincts that led him to shed the retail components of his family’s conglomerate — founded in 1962 by his father François — and charge headlong into the high-margin fashion business.
He also spoke excitedly about Kering’s future under de Meo, who was spotted in the corridors lugging a backpack and conversing rapidly in Italian with a colleague.
Viewed as a whole, Pinault’s tenure at Kering and previous iterations of the French group was a vibrant one, during which many of its marquee fashion houses grew rapidly.
According to Kering reference documents, between 2005 and 2024, revenues were multiplied by 18 at Saint Laurent and 11 at Bottega Veneta, fueled by daring designer appointments and rapid retail expansion. The group does not break out figures for Balenciaga, but market sources estimate that revenues at the French house grew more than 30 times over the same period.
What’s more, under Pinault’s leadership, overall luxury revenues were multiplied by six, and profit by a factor of seven, Kering reference documents also show.
To be sure, the last few years have been more challenging, with Gucci rapidly losing momentum — and Kering’s debt load swelling after an acquisition spree that included Creed, Maui Jim, a 30 percent stake in Valentino, and large chunks of prime real estate.
Taking Over
But when Pinault took over the CEO reins from Serge Weinberg at age 43 in 2005, he faced a similar financial scenario, his main goal then being to maximize cash generation and reduce the group’s then-debt load of 4.5 billion euros.
He also faced some skepticism in the market, given that what was then PPR was a relatively new player in European luxury.
The Pinault family came onto the international fashion radar in 1999 when it agreed to buy 40 percent of Gucci Group via its distribution conglomerate Pinault-Printemps-Redoute or PPR, which ran department stores, furniture and electronics chains, and a mail-order business.
PPR began edging out of retail in 2006 when it sold the Printemps retail chain, following up with a stock market listing for African trading company CFAO in 2009 and a sale of the Conforama furniture chain to Steinhoff International in 2010.
In 2013, it finally turned a page on its retail past and became Kering, initially a fashion and accessories specialist in the luxury and sport-lifestyle segments, and later exiting the latter segment.
Indeed, after shedding retail and sport-lifestyle holdings, Kering was whittled down to a luxury pure player with revenues just north of 3 billion euros.
Yet even then, Pinault had a fluid view of the sector: “Ferrari is a luxury car. Falcon is a luxury plane. It’s a very, very large universe,” he told WWD in a 2005 interview. “What we call luxury is not only fashion and accessories. For me, luxury is much wider than that.”
Under his leadership, Kering took many headline-making risks, notably taking a chance on Gucci studio talent Alessandro Michele in 2015, rapidly changing the fortunes of the Italian fashion house, and the same year tapping underground Georgian designer Demna from the nascent Vetements brand to take the creative helm of Balenciaga, unleashing fashion fireworks galore — and explosive growth.
An earnest and thoughtful executive with a warm, open demeanor, Pinault was seated at Monday’s interview under a large black-and-white painting of an owl, the mascot for Kering — and a metaphor for his watchful eyes on shifting consumer sentiment and economic fluctuations.
Over a wide-ranging, one-hour conversation, Pinault, 63, spoke frankly about his initial steep learning curve, his entrepreneurial streak, his pioneering sustainability initiatives, and his new priorities:
WWD: You’ve been piloting this group as CEO for 20 years, through important transformations, through boom times and lean times. How does it feel to give up the CEO reins?
François−Henri Pinault: I remain the reference shareholder, and I remain president (of the board of directors) so I don’t feel like I’m leaving. But still, it makes me realize what I’ve done for 20 years, and it was an extraordinary adventure. First, I was very lucky to have these responsibilities very early on. I was 43 years old, so I’m very, very grateful for that. At the time, my father was around my age, he was 65 or 66, and I’m 63. Above all, he let me do it, he trusted me from the beginning… and I realize it even more now that it’s my turn to pass the baton on the operational part.
I still have the feeling that we’re at the very beginning: What’s exciting is to see what Kering will become… and that’s why I’m very happy to have found Luca because we have someone who is there to build. He’s not there to take over something and manage it as best as possible. He’s here to bring something new, a new vision, a breath of fresh air, and a new idea. And I like that.
WWD: Even though the appointment of a new Kering CEO felt sudden to some, how far back can you trace the prospect of an eventual handover?
F-H.P.: I’ve been preparing for it for several years now. When my father gave me the responsibility for the group in 2005, first of all, I wasn’t succeeding my father, I was succeeding Serge Weinberg. But he told me two things: If I were your age, I would want to have full responsibility for the group. And for me, at 65 or 66, I don’t want to cling to power at all costs. It’s always very dangerous to hold on beyond a certain age. And so I told myself, “‘Wow, I hope that when the time comes, I’ll be able to do that, too.”
One special thing about me: I love numbers, and I told myself 20 years is a good symbol, and in 20 years means I’ll be 63. So I set that goal for myself. Not at the very beginning, but somewhere between 2010 and 2015, I told myself 20 years would be an important milestone. I’ll keep that in mind. And when the dates approached, I started the (succession) process quite naturally.
It’s not an easy decision, but it’s a very rewarding one to make it. That’s why you have to tell yourself what matters is not me. It’s the interest of the company. The group is moving into a new phase of its development. We need a new vision, new perspectives.
WWD: Before taking the helm of Kering, you had been running CFAO, Fnac and Artémis. Did having a bit of an outsider perspective then help you?
F-H.P.: The group was in good health in 2005. I could have chosen to manage it in the best possible way. But when he entrusted me with the reins, my father said. “What will your mark be? Think about what you want to do with the group later. That’s what’s important.” That had a big impact on me. And so that’s how I came to suggest this transformation.
Having had quite a bit of experience in distribution, even if it wasn’t luxury distribution, helped me a lot, especially the technology part. At Fnac, we launched e-commerce in 1997, so very, very early. Hence I had a real digital culture when I arrived and that served me well at Kering.
During the first phase, between 2005 and 2012 when I was transforming the group, I still managed the divisions, including Rexel, Fnac, etc. As a conglomerate, I had interactions with Robert Polet (then head of Gucci Group) and interactions from time to time with a few brands. During that phase I took the time to learn about luxury.
I understood that our (luxury) portfolio was very coherent, but that the houses had much more potential than what they had achieved up until then. I was convinced of that. There was really something to be done, but differently. When you’re a challenger in an industry, there’s no point in trying to copy-paste what those bigger than you have done. Of course, you have to understand what they do, what they do well, and what they don’t do so well. But above all, you need your own vision, your own way of doing things. I’ve always been obsessed with changing the rules of the game.
WWD: Also at the time of your appointment, PPR had faced skepticism in the industry for its being a newcomer in the luxury realm. How do you think Kering earned its recognition?
F-H.P.: In 2005, PPR was a conglomerate of eight divisions… and the luxury division was the smallest. So at the beginning, when you’re a conglomerate, you don’t directly manage the businesses because the businesses are too different… The organization of the group above the brands has changed enormously and we have brought luxury expertise into the group’s structures that we didn’t have before. And then we moved quite quickly to reposition the brands. It was in 2012 that I took over all the luxury brand CEOs directly. The question was, “How do we become an international player?”
The priority became the development of the brands and their positioning, and that’s where we changed the rules a bit… We took the gamble of differentiating ourselves through the creative component and less through the savoir-faire aspect. Heritage is also very important in luxury, but we said to ourselves, if we do that like everyone else; it’s going to take a very long time. So I thought, why not use this creative component to create a difference? And that’s when we changed artistic directors to ones with a stronger creative point of view, and a more global vision of the house. We harmonized the brand’s vision across all points of expression.
This very global 360-degree approach to the aesthetics of a house that we pushed quite far allowed us to create these differences, this visibility, this desirability. We know fashion is cyclical, and we increased the cyclical aspect of the group by doing that, but that’s what allowed us to change the dimension of the houses, and usher in a vision of a luxury that is a little more modern, a little more dynamic, but also consistent.
We developed a vision of creativity which is built over time. And we did that first with Hedi (Slimane at Saint Laurent), then with Alessandro (Michele at Gucci) and Demna (at Gucci), where we didn’t change our aesthetic every six months or every year. There was a very long continuity to establish a strong aesthetic. And that’s what we managed to do in our main brands. The figures speak for themselves.
Achievements
WWD: Putting modesty aside for moment, can you mention some proud achievements during your tenure as CEO of Kering?
F-H.P.: In a more entrepreneurial dimension, there is Kering Eyewear. I’m very proud of Kering Eyewear because, first of all, no one had done it before, to internalize what had been a licensed business. The licenses we bought were worth around 300 million… and we grew it to 1.6 billion. So that’s a real entrepreneurial success, and we’re still at the beginning. We changed the rules of the game for internalizing licenses. It’s something we anticipated, and everyone followed.
On a smaller scale, there is Qeelin. In the early 2010s, China was driving a lot of growth in the luxury sector and we asked ourselves very early on why there wouldn’t be a luxury brand in China? And we bought Qeelin in 2012 and it’s grown tenfold, if I’m not mistaken. So, in the jewelry sector, here’s a Chinese brand based on Chinese codes and Chinese culture that is developing essentially in China and is doing very well, and we’re continuing to do so. It’s not what will determine the size of the group tomorrow. But I remain very optimistic about this initiative.
WWD: Beyond business, you also brought your own convictions to the group about planet and people.
F-H.P.: It’s linked to my upbringing. That’s pretty clear on the environmental side. I was surrounded by women — my mother, my first wife — who were very, very sensitive to that. And my father always told me that a business can’t just be about constantly seeking profit. Businesses have responsibilities that go beyond the economic or financial objectives that we set for ourselves.
It became obvious in 2007-2008 that sustainable development was part of the definition of modern luxury. You cannot develop a true luxury brand that does not take into consideration respect for the planet, the preservation of its own resources, its know-how.
For example, we developed leather tanning processes that don’t use heavy metals, and we open-source them. It’s about inspiring others and convincing others to follow us. That’s the only way we can truly have an impact. So we have contributed to the creation of the Fashion Pact and its development. There’s also all the work we’ve done on regenerative agriculture and water protection. We’re going very far on that.
And then there’s social responsibility. Again, women have had a big impact on me, especially Salma (Hayek) who brought to my attention the reality of violence against women. Our collaborators are more than 60 percent women and our clientele is overwhelmingly female. And so women’s causes, including combating violence against women, became another important dimension and purpose for the group.
WWD: This is not the first time that succession at a family-controlled luxury group went to a non-family member. What would you say is the value of having a fresh perspective?
F-H.P.: It’s not up to the company to adapt to the family that controls it; it’s up to the family to adapt to the needs of the company. It’s the right time for Kering to have a new CEO, to have a new perspective, a new vision.
It’s not just about being family, it’s first about having the skills. But the question didn’t arise since it’s not on the agenda. For the third generation, they are still too young. On the other hand, it was the right time for the group. And so we had this very, very structured process with Serge (Weinberg) and the nomination committee, and Luca emerged quite naturally as the ideal candidate for the group.
What would be very dangerous is for the company to wait until someone in the family is ready to make the change. The company has its own life, its own needs. And it was the right time. And it just so happened that at that moment, a candidate from outside the family was needed.
WWD: Is there still room for taking risks in fashion? In your 20 years leading Kering, what were some of the risks you took that you’re most grateful for, and why?
F-H.P.: You can’t claim to be successful if you don’t take risks. Afterwards, there are different types of risk. And in the case of Kering, yes, we took a risk taking on artistic director profiles who have a very precise, very sharp creative vision, without trying to please everyone. We did that with Alessandro, with Demna, and Matthieu (Blazy at Bottega Veneta) too. We’ve taken entrepreneurial risks like Kering Eyewear.
The point is taking the right risks and knowing how to backtrack. It’s not easy, but you must have this ability to regularly question yourself, to not be afraid to change when you’ve made a mistake.
WWD: What do you think Kering has brought to the luxury sector over the past 20 years?
F-H.P.: In the luxury sector, we brought back brands that were either dormant or in difficulty in the 2000s, such as Saint Laurent, Balenciaga and Bottega Veneta, and built them into another dimension. And so we have enriched the competition in the luxury sector, which is always a very good thing.
Also, highlighting and pushing the creative dimension of luxury undoubtedly contributed greatly to introducing younger generations to luxury. We weren’t the only ones, but I think we contributed to that, too.
WWD: Can you describe what your role will be as president of the board of directors?
F-H.P.: I am responsible for leading the board of directors, and the role of the board itself is to make the strategic choices that will be proposed based on the options that will be proposed by the new CEO.
I know that there is a rumor in the market that I will remain very hands-on. Not at all. I know how important it was that I was given freedom of action on my first day in 2005. My father never wanted to intervene, which was critical for the transformation we managed to achieve. And so today, when I’m bringing in a very great new CEO to lead Kering, there’s no way I’m going to stop him and make decisions for him. I want to give him all the leeway possible to express himself with all the talent he has.
WWD: We hear Mr. de Meo has been quite active in getting acclimated to the group since his eventual appointment was announced in June. Can you share some of your first impressions?
F-H.P.: It’s true that Luca is a very active person, so he’s already met almost all of the CEOs, almost all of the artistic directors, and all of the group’s corporate directors. He’s eager to get started, and he saw all those people without me, obviously.
But the feedback I have from the collaborators is that he has a lot of charisma, along with humility and simplicity in his contacts. He fits the group’s culture well. He’s someone who has a real sense of urgency. He’s constantly thinking about the priorities, brand by brand, from the discussions he’s had. What’s really interesting is that even though he doesn’t know the luxury world, he has a real sensitivity to brands. Right away, he got into questions about brands, brand positioning. He loves the product. He visited all our stores in Paris.
He’s met a lot of people from outside, too, and he’s really, really keen to understand why things are done the way they are in the luxury sector before changing them. What’s certain is that he’s someone who’s going to bring new things. It’s about bringing a new vision, new ideas to help the group evolve in its new phase. It’s a young group, there’s plenty to do. He already has some very interesting ideas. It’s very exciting.
WWD: Relinquishing the CEO role at Kering will free you up for other projects and responsibilities. What will be some of the key subjects and priorities you will turn to?
F-H.P.: I’m the head of the board of directors, and I’ll be working on Artémis, where we still have a number of important assets. I’ll be looking after them full-time and the long-term diversification of this family holding. So, it’s a very interesting subject. I’m not about to go fishing.
WWD: What will you miss in the first months after having passed the baton of CEO of Kering?
F-H.P.: I’m really not like that. I think more about what’s to come more than the past. We have extraordinary teams here, and I entrust them to Luca. I know he will be able to do it perfectly well. I will find others at Artémis.
It’s true that I became attached to the artistic directors, to many collaborators of the group and I will see them less often, by definition. But it’s not a regret. It’s a natural evolution and it’s good for them, too. They will have the chance to have a new, different leader, who has different ideas. It’s very enriching for everyone.
WWD: You have new designers, and very accomplished ones, at three of Kering’s most prominent fashion houses. What does this say about the nature of your group and its place in the fashion firmament?
F-H.P.: First of all, that means we’re still very attractive. We’ve never had a problem recruiting talent. Even if we have difficulties — I don’t hide that — the quality of our houses, and the quality of the group’s culture remains very, very attractive. The proof is that these talents have joined us. Yes, I’m very proud to have convinced these artistic directors to join us and express themselves at Kering.
WWD: So should we expect you to attend the Milan and Paris shows later this month?
F-H.P.: Yes, but discreetly. It’s no longer my place to be in the front row. But you might find me backstage.