Discussion
  • Read More
    GigiKate Dries
    2/25/15 2:58pm

    "The ladies also have to commit 50 days a year or more to VS, which prohibits them from participating in bigger, better fashion and fragrance campaigns."

    Honest question here...there are 315 other days in the year. How can they not participate in other campaigns?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Nihongo Hanashimasen.Gigi
      2/25/15 3:00pm

      I think it's because most 'Fashion Week's and stuff happen seasonally and at the same time. So a Spring Fashion week in Milan is an amazing opportunity. And being hampered by the 50 days when you HAVE to be on a VS stage/catalogue/shoot is disruptive.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dalilaGigi
      2/25/15 3:07pm

      Not entirely sure, but a lot of these women are very recognizable for being VS models. Maybe VS doesn't want to lend what essentially is their brand to other companies?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    HelpMeTomCruise!!!!!!!!Kate Dries
    2/25/15 3:07pm

    while $100k sounds like a lot of money, when you're restricted to one major fashion brand that's practically peanuts

    source: I work for a globally well known fashion brand.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      NaturalLimeFlavorHelpMeTomCruise!!!!!!!!
      2/25/15 3:23pm

      Can you explain what you mean? How is it peanuts?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      GinAndTonic Got Stuck in the BarneyHelpMeTomCruise!!!!!!!!
      2/25/15 3:24pm

      I weep for the women only earning in the low six-figures.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GinAndTonic Got Stuck in the BarneyKate Dries
    2/25/15 2:54pm

    Those models all have the same face.

    Also, how do you pronounce "Doutzen Kroes"? Doot-zen Crows? Cress? Crease?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      GreenNoteGinAndTonic Got Stuck in the Barney
      2/25/15 2:57pm

      *whispers* I kind of think the face is boring.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      olivianewtonjohnGinAndTonic Got Stuck in the Barney
      2/25/15 2:59pm

      Crows.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Bear BrianKate Dries
    2/25/15 3:06pm

    Don't know that I'm believing this 100 percent. I believe the money is lower, and also know VS profits aren't what they used to be. But models aren't able to book other jobs? An entire shoot will be moved around the available dates of the most important person there, and that's usually the talent. Sounds mainly like VS just doesn't have the power that it used to, a result of their own making, and this is a saving-face move.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      olivianewtonjohnBear Brian
      2/26/15 12:42pm

      L Brands (the parent company) announced record-breaking sales for 2014 this morning—and you're right, profits aren't what they used to be...they are bigger than ever. I don't think they really need to "save face" at the moment. I think it was a slow news day yesterday and the Post needed an excuse to print pics of lingerie-clad women.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Bear Brianolivianewtonjohn
      2/26/15 2:32pm

      So, record-breaking sales, but the faces (and bodies) needed to ring up those sales make less than in the past? Nice way to do business. No wonder the profits are bigger than ever.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    olivianewtonjohnKate Dries
    2/25/15 3:17pm

    This sounds like BS to me. They've always had about 5-6 at a time (see below, 1998 and 2004). Now they have to spread the wealth among a few more because:
    1) Supermodels are no longer truly "super" now that celebs are on all the mag covers and snagging major campaigns.

    2) Even when you have a bunch of Angels, only a fraction of them are qualified to do public appearances (because of accents and comfort level on video and speaking in interviews).

    But no, the contracts might not be as lucrative as they used to be. I imagine because models these days don't have as much individual star power.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      lovelyniftyolivianewtonjohn
      2/25/15 4:36pm

      I'm not sure if I'm alone in this, but I hate that shirt in the second pic with a passion! (unrelated: yes. had to be said: not really)

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      olivianewtonjohnlovelynifty
      2/25/15 4:53pm

      Oh yes. Very of that moment, no?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    BrightEyesKate Dries
    2/25/15 3:29pm

    I know she was never affiliated with Victoria's Secret but I will take any model related article to post her photo. I remember when she reigned supreme:

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      herbadmotherBrightEyes
      2/25/15 7:25pm

      I met her once, at a private party a few years ago. She was still drop-dead gorgeous and just super, super nice. (also: SO TALL. Holy shit.)

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      BrightEyesherbadmother
      2/25/15 7:54pm

      It's awesome to hear she is a nice person. That makes me love her more.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ChocoslovakianKate Dries
    2/25/15 4:31pm

    50 days a year? No way. 13 days, ok. But 50 days @ $100 K is only $2000/day (yes, my math skills are stellar,) and no way any of those girls would do non-editorial work for $2,000 a day.

    Still, I wonder how much they are making. Anyone?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      PhDon'tChocoslovakian
      2/25/15 11:29pm

      Don't forget to subtract agent fees (20%), accountant/ money manager fees (5 -10%) and taxes (30%).

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      SweetBeatsChocoslovakian
      2/26/15 2:48pm

      No way their agents would agree to these rates and for 6 years? I'm half suspicious and would loooove to see this contract. Maybe for a relatively new face but not a Karlie or Doutzen. This cannot include print, web, promotional, video, tv ads...can it??? It may be possible that $100k is solely public appearances and events that could total up to 50 days - still a LOT of days to commit to for one girl. I still doubt this rate would include shoppable ecomm imagery + catalogue. This rate is about as comparable to a 5-day campaign shoot rate.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    pollyannacowgirl 2.0Kate Dries
    2/25/15 3:13pm

    And here is the rub. We are always told NOT to take less than we think we're worth. Hold out for more money (the way men do)! Be willing to walk away! Don't settle for less!

    When there are thousands of women jockeying for your position, and you say "I want more than what you're offering", THEY say "Okay, see ya. NEXT!" because the next woman won't be so uppity and will be happy to take what you refused.

    I don't know what the answer is. Just wanted to complain about it. Something like this, there is a huge pool of women who can do the job.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BabyGotFrontpollyannacowgirl 2.0
      2/25/15 3:59pm

      It's called a "market." Basic supply and demand.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    JujyMonkey: Clever tagline goes hereKate Dries
    2/25/15 3:31pm

    The photo looks like they did a "Ghostbusters"-style all female reboot of "Boys From Brazil".

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      PessimippopotamusJujyMonkey: Clever tagline goes here
      2/25/15 5:20pm

      Needs more Gisele Bündchen.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    anniegawker2-electricboogalooKate Dries
    2/25/15 2:58pm

    "The money isn't what it used to be," a source told Page Six. "Older contracts like Alessandra Ambrosio were in the millions, now they're like $100,000."

    I was wondering because I always heard that VS contracts were among the biggest.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Waidonutanniegawker2-electricboogaloo
      2/25/15 3:07pm

      I'll work 50 days a year for 100k$. I walk around in my underwear all the time at home, I'm qualified!

      Reply
      <