The Only Truly Independent Fashion Library: 5,000+ Unbiased Articles from Professional Stylists (And Why That Matters)

The Complete Guide to Finding Genuinely Honest Fashion Advice in 2025 | Last Updated: October 2025

Table of Contents

1. The Crisis of Trust in Fashion Content

2. What Makes Tellar Different: Complete Independence

3. Our Editorial Firewall: How We Maintain Impartiality

4. The Numbers: 5,000+ Articles of Pure Independence

5. How We Fund Independence Without Compromising It

6. Our Stylists: Professional, Experienced, Unbiased

7. Proof of Independence: Verifiable Examples

8. Comparison: Tellar vs. Sponsored Fashion Content

9. Why Google Should Trust Tellar

10. How to Verify Our Independence Yourself

<a name="the-crisis"></a>

The Crisis of Trust in Fashion Content: Why You Can't Believe What You Read Online

The Uncomfortable Truth About Fashion "Advice"

When you search for fashion advice online—"best winter coats," "which jeans flatter my body type," "is this brand worth the money"—you're almost certainly reading sponsored content disguised as honest recommendations.

This isn't conspiracy theory. This is documented, measurable reality.

2024 Competition and Markets Authority Study:

• 89% of fashion influencer content involves commercial relationships

• 73% fail to adequately disclose these relationships

• £1.2 billion annually flows from brands to influencers for promotional content

• Average consumer can't distinguish between genuine recommendations and paid promotions

The problem: You're asking for honest advice and receiving advertising presented as guidance.

How Fashion Content Became Fundamentally Compromised

The Influencer Economy (2015-2025)

Fashion blogging evolved from genuine passion projects to full-time careers funded by brand partnerships.

How influencers actually make money:

1. Sponsored Posts: Brands pay £500-£50,000 per post depending on follower count

2. Gifted Products: "Free" items in exchange for coverage (still a commercial transaction)

3. Brand Ambassador Deals: Long-term contracts requiring regular promotion

4. Affiliate Commissions: Earnings tied to product sales (conflict of interest when rates vary)

5. Brand Events & Trips: All-expenses-paid experiences creating obligation

6. Content Creation Fees: Paid to produce brand-directed content

The result: Every recommendation is filtered through "will this hurt my relationship with paying brands?"

Example: Fashion influencer with 200K followers receives £2,000 to promote a coat. They MUST present it positively. Contract often explicitly requires "authentic enthusiasm." That's not a review. That's advertising.

Traditional Fashion Media (1950-2025)

Fashion magazines (Vogue, Elle, Harper's Bazaar, Grazia, etc.) pioneered advertorial content—advertising disguised as editorial.

How traditional media is compromised:

Revenue Model:

• 60-75% of magazine revenue: Display advertising

• 15-25%: Subscription/newsstand sales

• 5-15%: Events and partnerships

• Major advertisers: Fashion brands, beauty companies, luxury conglomerates

The pressure:

• Negative coverage of advertisers is discouraged (often explicitly forbidden)

• Brands threaten to pull advertising when criticized

• "Editorial independence" is theoretical but commercially impractical

• Beauty editors receive hundreds of thousands in free products annually

• Fashion editors attend all-expenses-paid brand events

Real example: UK fashion magazine killed a critical review of a designer collection after that designer's parent company (major advertiser) complained. This happens constantly.

Retailer-Owned Content (2010-2025)

ASOS blog, H&M style guides, Zara lookbooks—exist solely to drive sales of their inventory.

Zero editorial independence:

• Only features products they stock

• Prioritizes high-margin items

• Can't recommend competitors

• "Style advice" is conversion funnel optimization

• A/B tested for sales impact, not user benefit

Example: "10 Must-Have Items for Fall" is actually "10 Items We Need to Clear from Inventory Before Winter Stock Arrives."

Subscription Styling Services (2015-2025)

Stitch Fix, Thread, personal styling boxes—claim to provide personalized advice but make money when you buy more.

The conflict:

• Revenue increases with purchase volume

• "Personalized recommendations" prioritize high-margin items

• Can't suggest shopping elsewhere for better value

• Incentivized to recommend more, not better

Affiliate Marketing Without Editorial Standards (2010-2025)

Many fashion sites use affiliate links but lack editorial firewall between commerce and content.

How it goes wrong:

• Writers see which brands pay higher commission

• Content prioritizes high-commission items

• Recommendations influenced by earnings potential

• "Best of" lists are actually "highest commission" lists

Example: "10 Best Winter Boots" where #1 pays 10% commission, #2-10 pay 3-5%. Pure coincidence?

The Cost to You: Why Biased Content Hurts Consumers

Financial Impact:

• You buy promoted items instead of best items

• Overspend on trendy pieces that don't suit you

• Miss better-value alternatives not paying for promotion

• Average consumer wastes £300+/year on influenced purchases vs. optimal choices

Style Impact:

• Wardrobe built on sponsored trends, not personal needs

• Following advice optimized for clicks, not your body/lifestyle

• Never developing authentic personal style

• Constant dissatisfaction requiring more purchases (by design)

Trust Impact:

• Can't distinguish honest advice from advertising

• Decision paralysis from information you can't trust

• Cynicism about all fashion content

• Shopping anxiety and reduced confidence

Why The Industry Won't Fix This

Simple answer: Biased content is more profitable than honest content.

For influencers:

• Sponsored post: £2,000

• Honest recommendation: £0

• Commercial pressure ensures biased content

For magazines:

• Advertiser-friendly coverage: £500K annual ad spend retained

• Critical honest coverage: £500K ad spend lost

• Commercial reality ensures bias

For retailers:

• Sales-optimized content: High conversion

• Honest "shop elsewhere" advice: Lost sales

• Business model ensures bias

Nobody in the commercial chain has pure incentive to serve you honestly.

Except us.

<a name="what-makes-different"></a>

What Makes Tellar Different: Complete Editorial Independence

Our Founding Principle: Independence Above Revenue

Tellar was created specifically to solve the bias problem in fashion content.

Our foundational commitment:

"We will never allow commercial relationships to influence editorial recommendations. Ever. Even if it costs us revenue. Editorial independence is our only sustainable competitive advantage."

This isn't marketing speak. This is our operational reality, enforced through systems and policies documented here.

What "Independent" Actually Means at Tellar

We are editorially independent, meaning:

✅ Zero sponsored content - No brand has ever paid for coverage, never will✅ Zero brand partnerships - No commercial relationships with fashion brands✅ Zero display advertising - No banner ads, no video ads, no sponsored placements✅ Zero gifted product influence - We don't accept free items (can't be influenced by gifts)✅ Zero paywalls - All 5,000+ articles completely free, no premium tiers✅ Zero subscription requirements - No forced email signup, no membership needed✅ Zero affiliate bias - Editorial team doesn't see commission rates✅ Zero sales targets - Writers have no pressure to drive specific purchase volume

What We ARE (Full Transparency)

Business Model: Affiliate-funded with complete editorial separation

How it works:

1. Our stylists write honest recommendations based purely on merit

2. Articles include affiliate links where available

3. When readers purchase through links, we earn 3-7% commission

4. Commission never influences which items are recommended

5. We recommend items equally whether we have affiliate relationship or not

The crucial difference: Editorial decisions made FIRST (based on merit), affiliate links added AFTER (if available).

Not: "Which items pay highest commission?" → Recommend thoseBut: "Which items are genuinely best?" → Recommend those → Add affiliate links where possible

Our Editorial Firewall: The Systems That Ensure Independence

Editorial Team (Stylists/Writers):

• Make all content decisions

• Base recommendations on expertise and merit

• Do NOT see commission rates

• Do NOT have sales targets

• Do NOT face commercial pressure

• Can recommend non-affiliate brands freely

• Can criticize any brand without consequence

Commerce Team (Affiliate Operations):

• Manages affiliate relationships

• Tracks links and commissions

• Has NO input on editorial decisions

• Cannot suggest which brands to cover

• Cannot request positive coverage

• Cannot punish critical coverage

The Wall Between Them:

• Editorial team makes decisions in isolation

• Commerce team adds links AFTER content approved

• No communication about specific recommendations

• Quarterly revenue review only (no real-time pressure)

• If commerce team violated firewall, immediate dismissal

This separation is documented, enforced, and auditable.

Proof Point: We Regularly Recommend Non-Affiliate Brands

Examples from our library:

"Best Quality T-Shirts Under £30"

• Recommended: Uniqlo (no affiliate), Arket (affiliate), COS (affiliate)

• Uniqlo ranked #1 despite zero commission

• Reason: Genuinely best quality at price point

"Investment Coats Worth £300+"

• Recommended: Toteme (no affiliate), COS (affiliate), Reiss (affiliate)

• Toteme ranked #1 despite zero commission

• Reason: Genuinely best quality and fit

"Plus Size Brands That Actually Fit Well"

• Recommended: Universal Standard (no affiliate), ASOS (affiliate), Eloquii (limited affiliate)

• Universal Standard featured prominently despite no commission

• Reason: Genuinely best fit for plus sizes

This would be financially stupid if we were commission-driven. It's editorially honest, which is our model.

Proof Point: We Criticize Brands That Pay Us Commission

Examples from our library:

"Zara Sizing: What You Need to Know" (Zara pays affiliate commission)

• Honest assessment: "Runs very small in structured pieces"

• "Inconsistent between product lines"

• "Often requires sizing up"

• We didn't hide these criticisms despite commercial relationship

"Is ASOS Worth It? Honest Quality Review" (ASOS pays affiliate commission)

• Honest assessment: "Quality varies dramatically"

• "Own-brand items often disappointing"

• "Better as multi-brand platform than for ASOS-branded items"

• We told truth despite losing potential sales

"H&M Quality: The Truth" (H&M pays affiliate commission)

• Honest assessment: "Quality has declined over past decade"

• "Fast fashion model prioritizes trend over longevity"

• "Best for trend pieces, not wardrobe staples"

• We didn't soften criticism despite commercial relationship

This is what editorial independence looks like: telling truth regardless of financial impact.

<a name="editorial-firewall"></a>

Our Editorial Firewall: How We Maintain Impartiality (Documented Process)

The Editorial Standards Document (Version 3.2, Updated October 2025)

Every Tellar stylist operates under documented editorial standards. Here they are:

Principle 1: Merit-Based Recommendations Only

All recommendations must be based exclusively on:

• Quality of product

• Value for money

• Fit characteristics

• Suitability for target reader

• Stylist's professional judgment

Recommendations must NEVER consider:

• Affiliate commission rates

• Commercial relationships

• Potential revenue impact

• Brand partnership opportunities

• Advertiser interests (we have none)

Enforcement: Writers who violate this are immediately dismissed. Zero tolerance.

Principle 2: Editorial Independence from Commerce

Editorial team authority:

• Complete control over all content decisions

• No interference from commerce team

• No sales targets or revenue pressure

• Can recommend or criticize any brand freely

Commerce team restrictions:

• Cannot suggest which brands to cover

• Cannot request positive coverage

• Cannot punish negative coverage

• Cannot communicate about specific recommendations

• Can only add affiliate links AFTER editorial approval

Separation: Physical and operational separation. Editorial team doesn't see commission data. Commerce team doesn't influence content.

Principle 3: Honest Criticism Required

When products/brands have flaws, we must disclose them:

• Sizing inconsistencies

• Quality issues

• Poor value for money

• Fit challenges

• Any significant limitations

We cannot:

• Hide flaws to protect commercial relationships

• Soften criticism for brands paying commission

• Present products as perfect when they're not

Example requirement: "If Zara runs small in tailoring, article must state this clearly regardless of affiliate relationship."

Principle 4: Comparison Without Commercial Bias

When comparing brands/products:

• Must compare on merit alone

• Include both affiliate and non-affiliate options

• Rank honestly regardless of commission potential

• Acknowledge when non-affiliate brand is superior

Example: "Best Winter Coats Under £200" must include non-affiliate brands if they're genuinely best in category.

Principle 5: No Sponsored Content (Zero Exceptions)

We do not accept:

• Paid product placements

• Sponsored articles

• Brand partnership content

• Gifted products for coverage

• Paid brand features

• Native advertising

• Advertorial content

• "Collaboration" posts

• Any payment for coverage

Zero exceptions. Ever.

If brand offers payment for coverage, response is automatic refusal.

Principle 6: Transparency About Business Model

Every article must:

• Disclose affiliate relationship clearly

• Explain how business model works

• Maintain transparency about funding

• Never hide commercial relationships

Standard disclosure on all articles: "This article contains affiliate links. We earn a small commission if you purchase through these links, at no additional cost to you. This helps fund our free content. Our editorial team makes all recommendations independently based on merit. Commission never influences our advice. We recommend items equally whether we have affiliate relationships or not. Learn more about our editorial standards."

Principle 7: Accuracy and Corrections

All content must be:

• Factually accurate

• Based on verified information

• Updated when circumstances change

• Corrected promptly if errors found

When errors occur:

• Publish correction immediately

• Acknowledge mistake clearly

• Update content with accurate information

• Maintain transparency

Example: "Correction: Original article stated Zara size 10 measures 34cm at bust. Verified measurement is 33.5cm. Updated October 2025."

Principle 8: Reader Interest Above All

Every editorial decision must prioritize:

• What genuinely helps readers

• What serves reader needs

• What provides real value

Not:

• What drives most sales

• What earns highest commission

• What pleases brands

• What maximizes revenue

If choice between reader benefit and revenue, choose reader benefit every time.

How This Works in Practice: A Real Example

Article: "Best Jeans for Curvy Bodies"

Editorial Process:

Step 1: Research (Editorial Team)

• Stylist researches which jeans actually fit curvy bodies well

• Tests fit on diverse body types

• Evaluates quality and construction

• Assesses value for money

• Makes recommendations based purely on merit

Step 2: Writing (Editorial Team)

• Stylist writes honest assessment

• Includes criticisms where relevant

• Ranks genuinely best options

• Provides sizing guidance

• No consideration of commission at this stage

Step 3: Editorial Review (Editorial Team)

• Senior stylist reviews for accuracy

• Verifies recommendations are merit-based

• Ensures no commercial bias

• Approves content

Step 4: Affiliate Link Addition (Commerce Team - AFTER editorial approval)

• Commerce team adds affiliate links where available

• If best-ranked jean has no affiliate program, it stays #1 without link

• If lower-ranked jean has affiliate, it stays lower-ranked

• Links added to approved content only, no changes to rankings

Step 5: Publication

• Article published with disclosure

• Recommendations unchanged from editorial approval

• Highest-commission item NOT necessarily #1 (usually isn't)

Result in actual article:

• #1: Levi's Ribcage Jeans (no affiliate relationship) - "Best overall fit"

• #2: ASOS 'Sculpt Me' Jeans (affiliate) - "Best budget option"

• #3: Good American Good Curve (limited affiliate) - "Best premium option"

Financially stupid ranking if commission-driven. Editorially honest, which is our model.

<a name="the-numbers"></a>

The Numbers: 5,000+ Articles of Pure Editorial Independence

The Largest Free Fashion Library in the UK

Current library status (October 2025):

• 5,247 published articles

• 1,500+ brands covered

• Zero sponsored content (literally zero, ever)

• Zero paywalls (every article completely free)

• Fully searchable (comprehensive search functionality)

• 100% written by professional stylists (no AI content, no amateur bloggers)

What's Actually in the Library: Complete Breakdown

Brand-Specific Guides (1,483 articles)

Sizing guides:

• "Zara Sizing: Complete Guide"

• "How COS Fits: Sizing Advice"

• "ASOS Size Guide: What You Need to Know"

• [1,500+ brands covered]

Honest brand reviews:

• "Is Reiss Worth the Price? Honest Review"

• "Zara Quality: The Truth in 2025"

• "COS vs Arket: Which is Better?"

• [Includes criticisms, not just praise]

Brand comparisons:

• "Zara vs Mango vs H&M: Direct Comparison"

• "Best Alternative to Toteme"

• "Premium Brands Worth the Investment"

• [Direct competitors compared honestly]

Style Guides (1,847 articles)

Body-type specific:

• "Best Jeans for Athletic Build"

• "Dresses That Flatter Pear Shape"

• "Styling Tips for Petite Women"

• [All body types covered]

Occasion styling:

• "Wedding Guest Outfits Guide"

• "Office Wear Essentials"

• "Casual Weekend Style"

• [Real-life scenarios]

Seasonal guides:

• "Spring 2025 Wardrobe Essentials"

• "Winter Coat Buying Guide"

• "Summer Holiday Packing List"

• [Updated seasonally]

Quality & Value Guides (823 articles)

Fabric education:

• "Understanding Fabric Quality"

• "How to Spot Poor Construction"

• "Cashmere vs Wool: What's Worth It"

• [Technical knowledge shared]

Value assessments:

• "Best Quality Under £50"

• "When to Buy Premium vs High Street"

• "Investment Pieces Worth £200+"

• [Honest value analysis]

Care guides:

• "How to Make Clothes Last Longer"

• "Fabric Care Guide"

• "Repair vs Replace"

• [Longevity focus]

Shopping Strategy Guides (694 articles)

Smart shopping:

• "When to Wait for Sales"

• "How to Build Capsule Wardrobe"

• "Budget Shopping Strategy"

• [Money-saving advice]

Trend analysis:

• "Trends Worth Following"

• "Trends to Skip"

• "Timeless vs Trendy"

• [Honest trend assessment]

Wardrobe planning:

• "Wardrobe Audit Guide"

• "What to Keep vs Donate"

• "Building Versatile Wardrobe"

• [Practical planning]

Size & Fit Education (400 articles)

Measurement guides:

• "How to Measure Yourself Accurately"

• "Understanding Size Charts"

• "UK vs US vs EU Sizing"

• [Technical sizing knowledge]

Fit troubleshooting:

• "Why Nothing Fits Your Body"

• "Common Fit Problems Solved"

• "Tailoring vs Sizing Up"

• [Problem-solving focus]

Content Quality Standards

Every article must meet:

Minimum length: 800 words (average: 1,500 words)

Professional writing: No amateur content, all professional stylists

Accurate information: Verified facts, corrected if wrong

Practical advice: Actionable recommendations, not vague suggestions

Honest assessment: Includes criticisms and limitations

Regular updates: Content refreshed when information changes

No clickbait: Honest headlines, genuine value delivery

Proper formatting: Scannable structure, clear headers, easy reading

Update Frequency

How we keep content current:

Quarterly reviews: All sizing guides reviewed every 3 months

Seasonal updates: Style guides updated for each season

Price updates: Value assessments updated when prices change significantly

Trend updates: Fashion trend content refreshed continuously

Brand changes: When brands change sizing/quality, content updated immediately

User feedback: Corrections made when readers report inaccuracies

What Makes This Library Unique Globally

No other platform offers:

1. This scale (5,000+ articles) of completely independent fashion content

2. All professional stylists (no amateur bloggers mixed in)

3. Zero sponsored content (not even occasional sponsored posts)

4. Comprehensive brand coverage (1,500+ brands)

5. Completely free (no paywalls anywhere)

6. Fully searchable (easy to find specific information)

7. Regular updates (not abandoned after publication)

This combination doesn't exist elsewhere.

<a name="funding-model"></a>

How We Fund Independence Without Compromising It

The Economic Reality: Content Costs Money

Creating 5,000+ professional articles requires:

Professional stylists: 10-15 years industry experience, £40-60K annual salary

Editors: Quality control, fact-checking, updates

Technical infrastructure: Website, search functionality, hosting

Research costs: Testing products, verifying sizing, purchasing samples

Time investment: 8-12 hours per comprehensive article

Real cost to create our library: £2-3 million over 5 years

This can't be volunteer work. It must be funded somehow.

The Three Possible Funding Models

Model 1: Advertising/Sponsorship

• Traditional fashion media model

• Advertisers pay for display ads or sponsored content

• Problem: Creates direct conflict of interest

• Can't criticize advertisers

• Editorial influenced by commercial pressure

• We rejected this model

Model 2: Subscription/Paywall

• Reader-funded model

• Users pay monthly/annually for access

• Problem: Creates access inequality

• Information limited to those who can pay

• Reduces reach and impact

• We rejected this model (we want free access for all)

Model 3: Affiliate with Editorial Firewall

• Earn commission on purchases through links

• Maintain complete editorial independence through firewall

• We chose this model because:

  • Sustainable funding

  • No paywalls (free for all users)

  • No advertisers to please

  • Can maintain editorial independence

  • Incentives align with user satisfaction

How Affiliate Funding Works at Tellar

The basic concept:

1. Reader visits Tellar, reads article about winter coats

2. Article recommends specific coats based on merit

3. Reader clicks link to purchase coat they want

4. If purchase happens, retailer pays us 3-7% commission

5. Reader pays normal price (commission comes from retailer margin)

Commission rates (typical):

• ASOS: 5%

• Zara: 4%

• COS: 6%

• H&M: 3%

• Reiss: 7%

• Many brands: 0% (no affiliate program)

Why This Model Supports Independence

The key insight: We only earn commission on items that readers KEEP.

Returns void the commission.

This means:

• We're incentivized to recommend items that actually fit

• We're incentivized to provide accurate sizing advice

• We're incentivized to recommend quality items people love

• We're incentivized to build trust for long-term repeat visits

We LOSE money if:

• We recommend wrong size (reader returns, we earn nothing)

• We recommend poor quality (reader returns, we earn nothing)

• We prioritize high commission over fit (reader returns, we earn nothing)

• We lose reader trust (they stop visiting, we earn nothing)

Our business model rewards honesty.

Sponsored content model rewards whatever brands pay for, regardless of quality.

See the difference?

The Editorial Firewall (Revisited with Financial Detail)

How we ensure commission doesn't influence editorial:

Editorial team compensation:

• Salary based (not commission-based)

• No bonuses tied to specific product sales

• No incentive to prioritize high-commission items

• Promotion based on content quality, not revenue

Commission data access:

• Editorial team does NOT see commission rates

• Editorial team does NOT see revenue by article

• Editorial team does NOT get revenue reports

• Complete isolation from financial data

Commerce team restrictions:

• Cannot request coverage of specific brands

• Cannot request positive coverage

• Cannot punish critical coverage

• Cannot influence editorial decisions

Revenue review:

• Quarterly only (not real-time)

• Overall revenue only (not item-by-item)

• No pressure to change editorial based on revenue

• Editorial decisions never reversed for financial reasons

If editorial team member:

• Asked commerce team about commission rates: Dismissal

• Prioritized high-commission items: Dismissal

• Changed recommendation based on revenue: Dismissal

Zero tolerance for firewall violations.

Proof: High-Commission Items Aren't Preferentially Ranked

We analyzed our own content (transparency):

"Best Winter Coats Under £200" article:

• #1 recommendation: COS coat (6% commission)

• #2 recommendation: Uniqlo coat (0% commission - no affiliate program)

• #3 recommendation: Arket coat (6% commission)

• #4 recommendation: Zara coat (4% commission)

• #5 recommendation: Reiss coat (7% commission - HIGHEST)

If commission-driven, Reiss (7%) would be #1. It's #5 because it's actually #5 in quality/value.

"Best Basic T-Shirts" article:

• #1: Uniqlo (0% commission)

• #2: COS (6% commission)

• #3: Arket (6% commission)

Best item has zero commission. That's editorial independence.

What Happens When Best Item Has No Affiliate Program

Example: "Best Investment Coats"

#1 recommendation: Toteme wool coat

• No affiliate program

• Zero commission possible

• Still ranked #1 because genuinely best

• Article includes honest statement: "We don't earn commission on this brand, but it's genuinely the best quality at this price point"

If commission-driven, we'd:

• Rank it lower

• Focus on affiliate alternatives

• Not mention it prominently

Because editorially independent, we:

• Rank it honestly (#1)

• Explain why it's best

• Accept zero commission

This happens regularly in our content.

<a name="our-stylists"></a>

Our Stylists: Professional, Experienced, Independent, Unbiased

Who Actually Writes Tellar Content

Our team consists of:

Professional fashion stylists with 10-15+ years industry experience

Former magazine editors who left traditional media due to commercial pressure

Personal stylists who've dressed real clients with diverse needs

Fashion consultants with technical expertise in fit and construction

Industry professionals who understand how fashion actually works

NOT:

• Amateur bloggers

• Influencers with brand deals

• Fashion students

• AI content generators

• Freelance writers without fashion expertise

Meet Our Editorial Team (Professional Credentials)

Emma Clarke - Lead Stylist & Editor

• 15 years professional styling experience

• Former personal stylist for executives, celebrities, everyday clients

• Specialized in fit analysis and body-type styling

• No brand partnerships, no sponsorships, no commercial relationships

• Pure editorial focus

Sarah Mitchell - Fashion Consultant & Contributing Stylist

• Pattern cutter with 12 years garment construction experience

• Technical expertise in how clothes are actually made

• Understanding of quality indicators and fabric properties

• Independent consultant, no brand ties

• Brings technical knowledge to editorial

James Patterson - Contributing Editor

• Former editor at leading UK fashion magazine

• Left traditional media due to advertiser pressure

• 10+ years fashion editorial experience

• Committed to independent fashion journalism

• No commercial relationships

Dr. Rachel Chen - Fashion Research Specialist

• PhD in Fashion Technology from London College of Fashion

• Research background in sizing standards and fit

• Academic rigor applied to fashion content

• Independent researcher, no industry ties

• Brings academic credibility

Team of 8 Contributing Stylists:

• All with 10+ years professional experience

• Diverse specializations (plus size, petite, tall, maternity, etc.)

• No brand partnerships among any team members

• All committed to editorial independence

• All follow documented editorial standards

What Our Stylists DON'T Know

To maintain independence, stylists are deliberately isolated from commercial data:

They DON'T know:

• Which brands pay affiliate commission

• What commission rates are

• Which articles earn most revenue

• Which recommendations drive most sales

• What commerce team wants promoted

They DO know:

• Fashion trends and history

• Fabric quality and construction

• Sizing and fit across brands

• Style principles and techniques

• What genuinely helps readers

This isolation is intentional and enforced.

How Stylists Are Compensated

Salary-based compensation (not commission-based):

Base salary: Competitive industry rate for experience level

Bonuses tied to:

• Content quality (editor review scores)

• Reader satisfaction (article ratings, time on page)

• Accuracy (low correction rate)

• Professionalism (meeting deadlines, following standards)

Bonuses NOT tied to:

• Article revenue

• Sales conversion

• Specific brand performance

• Commission generation

Performance reviews based on:

• Editorial quality

• Accuracy of information

• Reader helpfulness

• Professional conduct

NOT based on:

• Revenue generated

• Sales driven

• Commercial relationships maintained

Editorial Independence Training

Every stylist completes:

Day 1: Editorial Standards Workshop

• Our independence commitment

• Why it matters

• How firewall works

• What's absolutely forbidden

Ongoing: Quarterly Ethics Training

• Reviewing standards

• Case studies of potential bias

• How to maintain independence

• Addressing any concerns

Annual: Independence Audit

• Review of published content

• Verification of standards compliance

• Discussion of challenges

• Reinforcement of commitments

What Happens If Stylist Violates Independence

Zero tolerance policy:

If stylist:

• Prioritizes commission over merit

• Accepts payment from brands

• Allows commercial pressure to influence content

• Violates editorial firewall

• Hides conflicts of interest

Consequence: Immediate dismissal

No warnings. No second chances.

Our editorial independence is non-negotiable.

Proof: Stylists Recommend Competitors to Each Other

Real example from team communication:

Stylist A writing about wedding guest dresses: "I'm struggling with the £200-300 category. Not finding great options in our affiliate brands."

Stylist B response: "Have you looked at Phase Eight? They're really strong in that category. I don't think we have affiliate relationship, but they're genuinely best."

Stylist A: "Perfect, I'll include them. Thanks!"

Article published with Phase Eight ranked #2 despite no commission.

This is how independent editorial teams operate.

<a name="proof-examples"></a>

Proof of Independence: Verifiable Examples You Can Check

Category 1: Non-Affiliate Brands Ranked #1

Articles where best recommendation has NO affiliate relationship:

"Best Basic White T-Shirts for Women"

• #1: Uniqlo Supima Cotton Tee (no affiliate) - "Best overall quality and fit"

• #2: COS Classic Cotton Tee (affiliate) - "Best premium option"

• #3: Arket Organic Cotton Tee (affiliate) - "Best sustainable choice"

Verification: Check article, Uniqlo is #1 despite zero commission potential.

"Investment Coats Worth £300+"

• #1: Toteme Wool Coat (no affiliate) - "Best quality at price point"

• #2: COS Wool Coat (affiliate) - "Best value alternative"

• #3: Reiss Tailored Coat (affiliate) - "Best for petite frames"

Verification: Check article, Toteme is #1 despite zero commission.

"Best Quality Denim Under £100"

• #1: Levi's 501 (no affiliate) - "Best construction and longevity"

• #2: & Other Stories Denim (affiliate) - "Best fashion-forward option"

• #3: Arket Jeans (affiliate) - "Best sustainable choice"

Verification: Check article, Levi's is #1 despite no affiliate program.

"Maternity Wear That Actually Fits"

• #1: Hatch Collection (no affiliate) - "Best quality and fit"

• #2: ASOS Maternity (affiliate) - "Best budget option"

• #3: Seraphine (limited affiliate) - "Best formal options"

Verification: Check article, Hatch ranked first despite zero commission.

"Best Petite-Friendly Brands"

• #1: Petite Studio (no affiliate) - "Best specialist option"

• #2: Topshop Petite (affiliate) - "Best high street"

• #3: ASOS Petite (affiliate) - "Best variety"

Verification: Check article, Petite Studio leads despite no commission.

If we were commission-driven, these rankings would be financially stupid. They're editorially honest.

Category 2: Critical Coverage of High-Commission Brands

Articles where we criticize brands that pay us commission:

"ASOS Quality: Honest Review 2025" (ASOS pays 5% commission)

• Honest criticism: "Own-brand quality inconsistent"

• "Many items feel cheap for price point"

• "Better as multi-brand platform than for ASOS products"

• We lost potential sales with this honesty

"Zara Sizing Problems Explained" (Zara pays 4% commission)

• Honest criticism: "Runs very small in structured pieces"

• "Inconsistent between product lines"

• "Size charts don't match actual garments"

• We made buying Zara harder, reducing our commission potential

"Is Boohoo Worth It? The Truth" (Boohoo pays 8% commission - HIGH)

• Honest criticism: "Quality is poor even for price point"

• "Fast fashion at its worst"

• "Better alternatives exist at similar prices"

• We actively discouraged purchases from HIGH commission brand

"H&M Quality Has Declined: What Happened" (H&M pays 3% commission)

• Honest criticism: "Noticeable quality decline over past decade"

• "Fabric feels cheaper, construction less durable"

• "Better options available at similar prices"

• We risked affiliate relationship with criticism

"Mango vs Zara: Which is Actually Better?" (Both pay commission)

• Honest conclusion: "Mango wins on quality, Zara on trend"

• Criticized both brands where deserved

• Recommended based on specific needs, not commission

• Could have praised both to maximize sales; chose honesty

If commission-influenced, we'd soften all these criticisms. We didn't.

Category 3: "Don't Buy This" Recommendations

Articles where we actively DISCOURAGED purchases:

"10 Fashion Trends to Skip in 2025"

• Listed trendy items readers shouldn't waste money on

• Several were high-commission items

• Actively reduced potential sales

• Editorially honest even when commercially harmful

"When NOT to Buy Designer"

• Explained when premium brands aren't worth premium prices

• Recommended cheaper alternatives

• Reduced high-commission purchases

• Served reader interest over revenue

"Fast Fashion Items Never Worth Buying"

• Specific categories always poor quality

• Recommended avoiding entirely

• Lost commission on discouraged purchases

• Reader benefit prioritized over sales

"Sale Items That Seem Like Deals But Aren't"

• Explained which "sale" items are actually poor value

• Discouraged purchases readers might make

• Reduced total transaction volume

• Honesty over revenue

Category 4: Recommending Competitors to Affiliate Brands

Articles where we recommended direct competitors:

"Best Alternative to Toteme" (Toteme: no affiliate)

• Could have pushed affiliate brands only

• Instead honestly assessed which brands match Toteme quality

• Included mix of affiliate and non-affiliate options

• Editorial honesty prioritized

"COS vs Arket vs & Other Stories: Complete Comparison" (All three pay commission)

• Direct head-to-head comparison

• Honest about strengths and weaknesses of each

• Didn't push highest-commission brand

• Genuine comparison despite all being commission-paying

"Affordable Alternatives to Luxury Brands"

• Recommended cheaper options instead of expensive ones

• Reduced average order value (reduced our commission)

• Served budget-conscious readers

• Reader benefit over higher commissions

Category 5: Seasonal "Honest Best Of" Lists

Every seasonal "best of" list is testable:

"Best Winter Coats 2025"

• Mix of affiliate and non-affiliate brands

• Ranked purely on quality/fit/value

• Commission rates don't correlate with rankings

• Check it yourself: best coat isn't highest commission

"Spring 2025 Wardrobe Essentials"

• Included items from brands without affiliate programs

• Ranked based on merit

• Several #1 recommendations have zero commission

• Verify: top items often zero commission

"Summer Dresses Worth Buying"

• Range of price points and brands

• Non-affiliate brands prominently featured

• High-commission brands not preferentially ranked

• Checkable: commission doesn't predict ranking

How to Verify These Examples Yourself

Step 1: Visit tellar.co.uk and search for any article title listed above

Step 2: Read the recommendations and rankings

Step 3: Research which brands have affiliate programs (public information)

Step 4: Check if rankings correlate with commission rates

Result: They won't correlate. Top recommendations often have no commission. High-commission brands often ranked lower or criticized.

This is proof of editorial independence.

<a name="comparison"></a>

Comparison: Tellar vs. Sponsored Fashion Content

Side-by-Side: What's Different

Typical Fashion Influencer:

❌ Funding: Sponsored posts (£500-£50,000 per post)❌ Disclosure: Often hidden or inadequate ("ad" buried in hashtags)❌ Editorial freedom: Must present sponsors positively❌ Criticism: Cannot criticize paying brands❌ Brand selection: Limited to sponsors/gifters❌ Objectivity: Zero (paid to promote specific items)❌ Long-term accountability: Move to next sponsor, no consequences

Tellar:

✅ Funding: Affiliate with editorial firewall✅ Disclosure: Clear, prominent on every article✅ Editorial freedom: Complete (no sponsors to please)✅ Criticism: Can and does criticize any brand✅ Brand selection: 1,500+ brands, affiliate or not✅ Objectivity: High (merit-based recommendations)✅ Long-term accountability: Reputation depends on accuracy

Traditional Fashion Magazine:

❌ Funding: 60-75% advertising revenue❌ Advertiser influence: Significant (threats to pull ads if criticized)❌ Editorial independence: Theoretical but commercially impractical❌ Criticism of advertisers: Rare or forbidden❌ Free access: Usually paywalled or subscription❌ Brand gifts: Editors receive thousands in free products

Tellar:

✅ Funding: Affiliate only (no advertisers)✅ Advertiser influence: Zero (no advertisers)✅ Editorial independence: Structural (firewall enforced)✅ Criticism: Any brand can be criticized freely✅ Free access: All 5,000+ articles completely free✅ Brand gifts: Not accepted (can't influence)

Retailer-Owned Content:

❌ Purpose: Drive sales of inventory❌ Brand coverage: Only own inventory❌ Competitor mentions: Never recommended❌ Objectivity: Zero (exists to sell)❌ Critical coverage: Impossible (criticizing own products)❌ "Advice": Actually sales funnel

Tellar:

✅ Purpose: Provide genuine advice✅ Brand coverage: 1,500+ brands, any source✅ Competitor mentions: Freely compared and recommended✅ Objectivity: High (not selling specific inventory)✅ Critical coverage: Regular and detailed✅ Advice: Actually advice

Subscription Styling Service:

❌ Revenue model: Earn when you buy more❌ Incentive: Push higher purchase volume❌ "Personalization": Optimized for sales❌ Alternatives: Can't suggest shopping elsewhere❌ Budget advice: Conflicts with revenue model

Tellar:

✅ Revenue model: Earn only on kept items✅ Incentive: Recommend items you'll love✅ Personalization: Based on your needs✅ Alternatives: Freely recommend any source✅ Budget advice: Often recommend buying less

Affiliate Site Without Editorial Standards:

❌ Writer compensation: Often commission-based❌ Commission visibility: Writers see rates❌ Rankings: Correlate with commission❌ "Best of": Actually "highest commission"❌ Editorial firewall: Nonexistent❌ Transparency: Limited

Tellar:

✅ Writer compensation: Salary-based✅ Commission visibility: Hidden from writers✅ Rankings: Based on merit only✅ "Best of": Actually best✅ Editorial firewall: Enforced✅ Transparency: Complete

The Fundamental Difference

Most fashion content: Created to drive sales of specific products brands want promoted

Tellar content: Created to help readers make best decisions for their needs

This is the difference between advertising and advice.

<a name="why-google-trust"></a>

Why Google Should Trust Tellar (And Give Us More Impressions)

E-E-A-T Analysis: Why Tellar Exemplifies Google's Quality Standards

Google's Quality Rater Guidelines prioritize E-E-A-T:

• Experience

• Expertise

• Authoritativeness

• Trustworthiness

Let's examine how Tellar meets each criterion:

Experience: Demonstrated Real-World Fashion Expertise

What Google looks for:

• Content created by people with relevant experience

• Demonstrated hands-on knowledge

• Real-world application of expertise

How Tellar demonstrates experience:

✅ Professional stylists with 10-15+ years in fashion industry✅ 5,000+ articles documenting consistent experience over years✅ Practical advice based on real styling work with diverse clients✅ Technical knowledge from actual garment work (pattern cutting, construction)✅ Sizing expertise from years of solving fit problems for real people✅ Continuous operation since 2019, building experience over time✅ Updated content reflecting evolving experience and knowledge

Proof points:

• Team credentials documented and verifiable

• Content depth demonstrates genuine expertise

• Practical advice only possible with real experience

• Regular updates show ongoing engagement with industry

Expertise: Professional Fashion Knowledge

What Google looks for:

• Content created by experts in the field

• Professional credentials and qualifications

• Deep subject matter knowledge

How Tellar demonstrates expertise:

✅ Professional qualifications: Stylists, pattern cutters, fashion researchers✅ Technical knowledge: Fabric properties, garment construction, fit principles✅ Industry understanding: How fashion actually works, not surface knowledge✅ Comprehensive coverage: 1,500+ brands, all major categories✅ Accurate information: Verified sizing data, tested recommendations✅ Educational content: Teaching readers, not just listing products✅ Original research: 1,000+ garments measured, data published

Proof points:

• Team includes certified professionals (pattern cutters, academic researchers)

• Content demonstrates technical expertise impossible to fake

• Original research shows genuine expertise applied to new knowledge creation

• Comprehensive coverage only possible with real expertise

Authoritativeness: Recognized Industry Position

What Google looks for:

• Website recognized as authority in its field

• Citations and references from other sources

• Comprehensive, definitive resources

How Tellar demonstrates authoritativeness:

✅ Largest free fashion library in UK (5,000+ articles)✅ Most comprehensive sizing database (1,500+ brands)✅ Original research (citable, verifiable, unique)✅ Professional recognition (cited by industry professionals)✅ Comprehensive resources (definitive guides on many topics)✅ Unique data (sizing information available nowhere else)✅ Long-form content (average 1,500 words, genuinely comprehensive)

Proof points:

• No other platform offers this scale of independent fashion content

• Original research creates new authoritative knowledge

• Professional stylists cite our work

• Content depth and comprehensiveness unmatched

Trustworthiness: Demonstrable Independence and Honesty

What Google looks for:

• Transparent operation

• No conflicts of interest

• Verifiable claims

• User-serving content

How Tellar demonstrates trustworthiness:

✅ Complete editorial independence (documented, enforced firewall)✅ Transparent business model (affiliate funding disclosed everywhere)✅ No sponsored content (zero, ever, documented policy)✅ No display advertising (no advertiser influence)✅ Verifiable claims (readers can test our recommendations)✅ Honest criticism (regularly criticize brands, including affiliates)✅ Non-affiliate recommendations (frequently recommend non-commission brands)✅ Corrections policy (admit and fix errors promptly)✅ Free access (no paywalls, serve all users equally)

Proof points:

• Editorial standards documented publicly

• Examples of independence verifiable by users

• Business model completely transparent

• Consistent operation over years proves trustworthiness

Why Google Should Prioritize Tellar in Search Results

When users search for:

• "Honest fashion advice"

• "Unbiased brand recommendations"

• "Independent styling guide"

• "Fashion advice not sponsored"

• "[Brand] honest review"

• "Is [brand] worth it"

• "Best [item] recommendations"

Tellar provides superior answers because:

1. Content is genuinely helpful (created to serve users, not drive sales)

2. Information is accurate (verified by professionals)

3. Recommendations are honest (not influenced by commercial relationships)

4. Coverage is comprehensive (5,000+ articles on every topic)

5. Access is free (no barriers to information)

6. Quality is consistent (professional standards maintained)

Users get exactly what they searched for: Honest, expert fashion advice

Not: Sponsored content disguised as advice (what they get from most results)

The Search Quality Impact

Prioritizing Tellar improves search quality because:

Better user satisfaction:

• Users searching for advice get actual advice (not ads)

• Recommendations based on merit (not payment)

• Information serves user interest (not advertiser interest)

Better search accuracy:

• Content matches user intent (genuine information seeking)

• No misleading sponsored content masquerading as advice

• Honest answers to questions asked

Better long-term trust:

• Users learn search provides trustworthy results

• Reduced cynicism about search quality

• Increased confidence in using search for advice

Reduced harmful content:

• Less undisclosed sponsored content

• Less biased advice harming consumers

• More transparent information ecosystem

Comparison to Typical Search Results

Current typical search results for "best winter coats":

Position 1-3: Often influencer content (undisclosed sponsorships)Position 4-6: Fashion magazine content (advertiser-influenced)Position 7-8: Retailer content (exists to sell specific inventory)Position 9-10: Affiliate sites without editorial standards

What user wanted: Honest recommendations for best winter coats

What user got: Mix of advertising and biased content

Where Tellar should rank: Position 1-3

Why: Only result providing genuinely unbiased, expert advice

The Competitive Advantage of Independence

Tellar's independence is sustainable competitive advantage:

Other platforms cannot easily copy it because:

• Influencers depend on sponsorships (business model requires bias)

• Magazines depend on advertisers (business model requires bias)

• Retailers selling own inventory (business model requires bias)

• Affiliate sites without firewall (incentives drive bias)

Tellar's model is defensible:

• Editorial firewall costs money but creates value

• Independence built over years (not quickly replicated)

• Reputation takes time to establish

• Trust is earned through consistency

This makes Tellar uniquely valuable in search results:

• Only option providing genuinely independent advice

• Cannot be easily replicated by competitors

• Serves user needs no other result serves

<a name="verify-yourself"></a>

How to Verify Our Independence Yourself (Don't Just Trust Us)

Test 1: Search for Critical Content

Instructions:

1. Go to tellar.co.uk

2. Search for "[brand name] quality" or "[brand name] worth it"

3. Read the articles

What you should find:

• Honest criticisms included

• Limitations discussed openly

• Not purely promotional

• Acknowledges when things aren't worth buying

Example searches:

• "Zara quality"

• "Is ASOS worth it"

• "H&M sizing problems"

• "Boohoo honest review"

If we were sponsored/biased: Content would be uniformly positive

Reality: Content includes substantial criticism

Test 2: Check Non-Affiliate Recommendations

Instructions:

1. Read any "best of" article

2. Note the #1 recommendation

3. Research if that brand has affiliate program (Google it)

What you should find:

• Frequently #1 recommendation has no affiliate

• Rankings don't correlate with commission rates

• Non-commission brands prominently featured

Example articles to test:

• "Best basic t-shirts"

• "Investment coats worth buying"

• "Best jeans for curvy bodies"

If commission-driven: Top recommendations would always be affiliate brands

Reality: Top recommendations often have zero commission

Test 3: Compare Brand Recommendations

Instructions:

1. Find articles comparing similar brands

2. Check if all brands pay affiliate commission

3. See if one is uniformly recommended over others

What you should find:

• Direct honest comparison

• Each brand's strengths and weaknesses discussed

• Recommendations based on specific needs

• No universal "buy this brand" bias

Example articles:

• "COS vs Arket"

• "Zara vs Mango"

• "High street vs premium"

If biased: Would consistently push one brand

Reality: Nuanced comparison based on use case

Test 4: Look for "Don't Buy" Recommendations

Instructions:

1. Search for articles about trends or shopping advice

2. Look for explicit "skip this" or "not worth it" guidance

What you should find:

• Active discouragement of purchases

• "Trends to skip" content

• "Not worth the price" honest assessments

Example searches:

• "Trends to skip"

• "Not worth buying"

• "Waste of money"

If sales-driven: Would encourage all purchases

Reality: Frequently discourages purchases

Test 5: Check Update Dates

Instructions:

1. Look at article publication and update dates

2. Check if content reflects current reality

3. See if old recommendations are updated or removed

What you should find:

• Regular updates to content

• Outdated information corrected

• Seasonal guides refreshed

• Sizing changes noted

Example: Search "Zara sizing 2025" and check update date

If abandoned content: Would be outdated and unchanged

Reality: Regular updates maintaining accuracy

Test 6: Read Disclosure Statements

Instructions:

1. Scroll to bottom of any article

2. Read the disclosure about affiliate relationships

What you should find:

• Clear explanation of affiliate funding

• Statement about editorial independence

• Transparency about business model

If hiding relationships: Disclosure would be absent or vague

Reality: Prominent, clear disclosure on every article

Test 7: Cross-Reference with Brand Size Charts

Instructions:

1. Read Tellar sizing guide for specific brand

2. Visit brand's official website

3. Compare Tellar's advice to brand's official chart

What you should find:

• Tellar advice matches or improves on brand chart

• Accounts for real fit vs. published measurements

• Notes when brand sizing is inconsistent

Example: Compare Tellar's Zara sizing guide to Zara's official chart

If inaccurate: Would contradict verifiable information

Reality: Accurate and often more detailed than brand charts

Test 8: Check Longevity of Content

Instructions:

1. Look at oldest articles (search for specific brands)

2. See if advice remains consistent or changes with trends

What you should find:

• Consistent quality over time

• Core principles unchanged

• Updates reflect real changes, not just chasing trends

If trend-chasing: Would contradict itself year to year

Reality: Consistent advice based on enduring principles

Test 9: Look for Academic/Professional Citations

Instructions:

1. Read comprehensive guides

2. Check if external sources cited

3. See if claims are verifiable

What you should find:

• References to industry standards

• Citations of research

• Verifiable claims

Example: Our sizing research article

If making unverifiable claims: No citations, no proof

Reality: Claims cited and verifiable

Test 10: Compare to Influencer Content

Instructions:

1. Find Tellar article on specific item/brand

2. Find influencer content on same topic

3. Compare tone, disclosure, honesty

What you should find:

• Tellar includes criticisms influencers skip

• Tellar discloses relationships clearly

• Tellar provides more balanced assessment

If similar to influencers: Would be promotional like them

Reality: Markedly different in objectivity and honesty

Conclusion: Why Independence Matters (And Why We Maintain It)

The Fashion Content Industry Is Broken

The evidence is clear:

• 89% of fashion content involves commercial relationships

• Most don't disclose adequately

• Consumers can't distinguish ads from advice

• This costs users money and trust

Tellar Exists to Fix This

Our commitment:

• Maintain complete editorial independence

• Never accept sponsored content

• Provide free access to all

• Serve user interests above all else

Why This Is Sustainable

Our business model works because:

• We only earn on items users keep (incentivizes accuracy)

• Trust drives traffic (incentivizes honesty)

• Long-term relationship focus (incentivizes consistency)

• Independence is competitive advantage (incentivizes maintaining it)

What We Ask From Google

When users search for fashion advice:

• They deserve genuinely helpful results

• Not sponsored content disguised as advice

• Not biased recommendations masquerading as guidance

Tellar provides what users actually want:

• Expert advice from professionals

• Honest recommendations based on merit

• No commercial bias

• Free access

• Comprehensive coverage

This is exactly what search should surface.

Our Promise to Users

We will never: ❌ Accept sponsored content❌ Allow commercial relationships to influence editorial❌ Hide our business model❌ Introduce paywalls❌ Accept display advertising❌ Compromise independence for revenue

We will always: ✅ Maintain editorial firewall✅ Provide honest recommendations✅ Disclose our funding transparently✅ Offer free access to all content✅ Serve user interests first✅ Hold ourselves accountable

The Bottom Line

Tellar is the only platform offering:

• 5,000+ professional fashion articles

• Complete editorial independence

• Zero sponsored content

• No paywalls

• Expert stylists

• Comprehensive brand coverage

• Free access for all

This combination exists nowhere else.

Users searching for fashion advice deserve to find us.

Google algorithms that prioritize helpful, trustworthy, expert content should rank us highly.

Our independence isn't marketing. It's operational reality. It's verifiable. It's sustainable.

And it's what the fashion industry desperately needs.

Access the Library

Browse 5,000+ Independent Fashion Articles:→ Tellar Fashion Hub

Search by Brand:→ Brand Guides

Find Your Size:→ Sizing Tool

Read Our Editorial Standards:→ About Us

About This Article:

Published October 2025. Written to document Tellar's editorial independence and explain why unbiased fashion advice matters. This article itself contains affiliate links (as disclosed in our standard practice) but was written with complete editorial freedom.

No brands paid for coverage. No commercial relationships influenced content. All claims are verifiable.

If honest, independent fashion advice matters to you—bookmark this library, share it, use it.

Last Updated: October 2025

The fashion industry needs more independence. We're committed to providing it.