Just a few blocks from Google’s New York offices, the company held an event today that marked the launch of a partnership with fashion icon Diane von Furstenberg. Partnership rumors have been floating around the still-young Glass brand since its inception, and there's a reason: Google considers this an important step in expanding the reach of the product, which has seen its fair share of detractors. Von Furstenberg herself is no stranger to the tech after using Glass at a runway event in 2012, and she was seen at today's event wearing many of the new designs throughout the afternoon while she maneuvered through the crowd. Google’s presence was split across three tables in the two open floors of the showroom, the frames resting on wooden tables that were surrounded by DVF's 2014/15 collection, original Andy Warhol paintings, and the fashion press elite.
A look at the DVF Made for Glass collection at one of the display tables.
Fashion matron Diane von Furstenberg sporting one of many different styles she wore throughout the day.
The partnership between DVF and Google also includes Marchon Eyewear, a manufacturer and distributor of optical and sunglass frames.
Isabelle Olsson, the Lead Designer for Glass, was taken aback when she began working with Glass. "I just remember how I reacted myself when I first found out what I was going to work on. I was like, 'What?' I was completely shocked. I saw the prototypes, they looked crazy."
"I think it works well on vacation in the South of France as well as on the ski slopes," Olsson said of the all-shade, no-frame design.
The new Glass styles were encased in chic packaging that felt like an appropriate fit for the $1,620 and $1,725 price tags.
The Glass displays were nestled in between original Andy Warhol paintings and the DVF 2013/14 fashion collection.
Olsson also spoke about how smoothly the relationship with Diane von Furstenberg has gone. "I could have never dreamt that Diane would be so passionate about this. I think there's this mutual love affair a little bit, and a lot of people are a bit surprised. There's a lot of love coming from this industry," she said.
For Olsson, the marriage of tech and fashion was a no-brainer. "It's all about change, it's all about the 'next thing' and not being afraid of expressing yourself, not being ashamed of wearing something new."
Google had specialists on hand to walk wearers through the basics of Glass.
"We definitely see a future where most glasses work with Glass," Olsson said, echoing the company's statements on its hope for eventual ubiquity.
Reporters and attendees were handed all different styles to wear around the event, and a few wound up so comfortable wearing them that they nearly walked out the door still wearing Glass.
Adding to the excitement in the room was a television crew filming for E! Network's The DVF Project.
Despite the event's focus, the iPhone was still the most popular camera in the room.
"We're excited about offering our female customers a more expressive, fun look. But I actually have seen a lot of guys wear the shades and they look really good in them, too," Olsson said.
Microsoft
Microsoft’s Xbox boss responds to Google Stadia, promises ‘we will go big’ for E3
Google
Google hit with €1.5 billion antitrust fine by EU
Google
Google will give Android users a choice of browser and search engine in Europe
View all stories in Tech
Comments
I wonder what the delay is in lowering the cost. What more do they need to do to call it a “consumer” version?
By razorflake on 06.03.14 7:19pm
Seems they’re going the opposite direction and actually raising the cost! LOL
By TheConductor on 06.03.14 7:29pm
Yeah, I feel like the general sale of Glass at the higher price and all this partnership stuff is starting to make a consumer launch look less and less likely.
Can’t help but feel that with Wear on the horizon (hellomoto), that they may well have put the consumer glass on the backburner.
By hammydbest on 06.03.14 8:10pm
Maybe they were hoping at some point they’d figure out how to make it cheaper, and unfortunately the ability to do it cheaper just hasn’t come together yet. Essentially it seems ‘done’, it’s just the price – they know it can’t be considered mass market at that price even if it had nothing else whatsoever against it.
By ualdayan on 06.03.14 10:45pm
The bill of materials (though according to a third party of course) is pretty low. Something like $300 for the initial version. I think it’s more desire on Google’s part to get everything how they want it and to be able to market it at the right time.
We don’t really know though, of course.
By Trent Archer on 06.04.14 4:25am
Seems to be all about marketing to me. Their only chance at success with this is if it’s cool, and exclusivity goes a long way towards that. So does waiting a while for it to sink into the public conciousness slowly, instead of just throwing it out there and having a thousand privacy activists up in arms.
By IneffablePigeon on 06.04.14 6:09am
I think this is it at the moment – The cool rich kids are saying it isn’t cool, and the only way to make the cool rich kids think something is cool is to make it so it’s only the cool rich kids that can get it.
By spudtheimpaler on 06.04.14 6:59am
it was the cool explanation :)
By twunk on 06.05.14 3:02am
I don’’t think they want to make it cheaper just yet. They are playing a game with perception. My theory:
Glass is currently ill-received out side the tech sector (even within) for a myriad of reasons. Google has finally decided to address this problem by changing public perception using the tools that (fortunately or unfortunately) majority of our population seem to respond to: Fashion and Celebrities.
By marketing Glass as a fashion accessory, they are slowly removing the “eww, geek” attitude associated with cool tech like this. Even further, by using famous fashion celebrities, they are telling people that their product is endorsed by those who matter in that industry. People listen to these fashion celebrities and many more are influenced by them.
Now, in the fashion world, price is often not an object. People will by a product if it is endorsed by their preferred celebrity/fashion idol. Of course, most of those who purchase this now will be perceived as having ‘good’ (relative, of course) fashion sense and being part of this wealthy group – much like people buying overly expensive clothes, makeup, perfumes, etc.). If this catches on (I’m still not 100% sure it will), they would have successfully created a market – be it ever so small – that people will begin to envy/desire.
One huge factor in marketing is affecting how people feel about a product; or more specifically: affecting how people believe they are perceived due to their product (Apple went for the ‘cool kid’ look, MS went for the ‘techie’ group, BB went for the ‘businessman/woman’ group, etc., Nike goes for the ’I’m a fit, sporty girl/guy’ group, etc.). People are going to start thinking twice about Glass as more and more celebrities endorse it. That endorsement will increase perceived value and will make paying any reduced cost seem like a steal (look how normal it is for a flagship phone to cost $700 now though it cost much less than that to produce).
Of course, I could be totally wrong, but the whole process of Glass’ growth has been very interesting to observe. Human behavior is amusing.
By Infinitesimus on 06.04.14 9:04am
You can market Glass as a fashion accessory, but until people see those celebs actually wearing them on the street, people won’t follow suit. And you aren’t going to see celebs wearing Glass on the street. Why? Because it doesn’t do anything.
By autonomousgerm on 06.04.14 11:31am
I just want to say, that I love you. Have a cookie.
By BenAnderson89 on 06.05.14 4:42pm
Glasses are, much like watches, first and foremost a fashion accessory. No one would wear a watch solely to know the time: you’ve got your phone, your computer, clocks, etc. to know that. And if your watch is ugly, you would get ugly. This becomes even worse with glasses.
Since Google seems to target masses and since most people have a social life in which they would use GGlasses, fashion and appearance are the main obstacle that could prevent GGlass to success. That’s why they have to collaborate with fashion designers.
Yet, they look like a secretary’s or a pimp’s glasses. But bad is what is and has ever been American fashion.
By dakuten on 06.03.14 7:54pm
Uh…No. First and foremost they are a tool. They’re only a fashion accessory if you don’t need them. Watches you have more of a point on, but they are a tool that has been well integrated into fashion. Glasses on the other hand, as noted, only become a fashion accessory if you don’t need them and are wearing them as sunglasses, otherwise, they are a requisite tool if your eyesight is poor and you don’t want contacts.
By ZahaianGhost on 06.03.14 8:20pm
I would agree with this argument if the person were younger than 10 years old or living some centuries ago. But then, when people grow up, do you know someone who willingly wears prescription glasses that are ugly ?
(But maybe I’m French: wearing sweatpants to go buy bread is here considered unacceptable, people whose eyesight is great wear glasses, people prefer glasses over contacts.)
By dakuten on 06.03.14 8:33pm
Wow. Is that sweatpants part for real? That’s.. sad? I guess. Don’t really know what to say about that.
Anyway, I can see how a watch would be more of a fashion item than glasses. A watch would be more like a hybrid bracelet that conveniently tells time.
Glasses however don’t start out as a fashion accessory. I literally only know of two people who don’t need to wear glasses but do, just to look fancier. It’s a necessity first and foremost to wear them. And at a later age, just like shoes, if you’re going to need them and the prices are more or less the same. Might as well be pretty right?
That being said, incorporating Gglass into more premium/mainstream looking items I can definitely can see my mother buying it. Unfortunately though, the pricetag just isn’t there yet.
By Yeah okay on 06.04.14 12:18am
Of course it’s real. And that’s probably true for most people. I’ve noticed that people who think glass is so great seem to be out of touch with fashion. This article would disprove what I say, but I doubt anyone I know would wear that.
By Forbius on 06.04.14 8:33am
And still no less sad. It’s idiotic to get dressed up to go to the grocery store or the home improvement store, period.
By cpuckett on 06.04.14 1:17pm
It’s idiotic to wear sweatpants when you aren’t exercising.
By domenico on 06.04.14 3:15pm
… you know they’re just called sweatpants, right? they’re not like … specialized exercise gear?
By ninnyjams on 06.04.14 11:19pm
My girlfriend spent 2 hours getting ready to pick up a prescription from Walgreens yesterday. That was literally all we had to do.
That sounds more idiotic than just wearing sweatpants for the 10 minutes it could have taken.
By Logics on 06.05.14 1:27am
Totally agree. People want to be fashionable. Glass isn’t, and is actually a pretty ugly contraption that you need to wear on your face. That’s what’s hindering it from being successful, along with the price of course.
By Forbius on 06.04.14 8:31am
If I didn’t need glasses, I wouldn’t wear them.. no matter how stylish they may be.
By mrkite on 06.04.14 5:56pm
No, regardless of the country of origin, its because you sound like a stuck-up elitist.
The reason why people why need glasses (like myself) choose to go for “fashionable” frames is because they are going to be on my face every waking minute. Of COURSE I’m going to want them to look good!
By BenAnderson89 on 06.05.14 4:46pm
glasses are as much accessories as tools. evidenced by how many ppl wear frames of all kinds with or without prescription. i have no real choice about it since i’m 500/500 but evrn then it has to wear comfortably and look nice. i certainlt do not want yet another doodad stuck on my face. neither, i reckon, do most ppl. it is a gadget accessory stuck onto another accessory. it would have to be completely blended in with the frame. every iteration we see has this block of extra glass and plastic sitting over the eyewear. making the eyewear nicer doesnt resolve this.
By ounkeo on 06.04.14 1:25am
And to everyone else, a fashion accessory. Good luck convincing people who don’t wear glasses to buy ugly or rarely worn glasses…with short battery life, the main ability of taking pictures, and all it’s functionality duplicated in their less ridiculous smart phones they have in their pockets.
By SoCoFoMo on 06.04.14 7:40am