Marta Ortega makes her mark at the helm of Zara family dynasty

Dynasties are everywhere, from the Arnault family that runs luxury giant LVMH to the Murdoch-esque siblings seen on Succession.

Inditex – the largest fashion company in the world and owner of Bershka, Massimo Dutti, Pull&Bear and Stradivarius, as well as the most famous brand Zara – is home to another.

Founded in 1975 by Spain’s richest man, Amancio Ortega, his daughter Marta Ortega Perez officially took over as chairman just over a year ago.

She has been trying to prove her doubters wrong ever since.

Now 39, she’s long been tipped for the top job, despite being dismissed by some as little more than a bouncing socialite and billionaire heiress to the Zara fashion empire.

Taking the reins: Marta Ortega Perez officially took over as president of Inditex just over a year ago. She has been trying to prove her doubters wrong ever since

Her 2018 wedding to modeling agent Carlos Torretta β€” which included a blush couture dress hand-delivered by Valentino’s designer via private jet and a performance by Coldplay’s Chris Martin at the first dance β€” received significant coverage in newspapers all over the world. worldwide.

But while succession battles elsewhere have pitted siblings against each other as they battle for power β€” as with the fictional Roy media empire in the HBO TV show β€” for the Ortega family, it was seemingly painless.

Amancio Ortega, now 87, described in 2008 his “peace of mind” that the family had “managed to reach the second generation, almost without anyone noticing.”

“The problem of succession is solved because everything is delegated,” he revealed.

Just over a year ago, Marta Ortega took office as chairman of Inditex, 11 years after her father handed over the reins to company veteran Pablo Isla, along with a new CEO.

Fast-forward a year and she’s making her mark. A rare sit-down interview with the Financial Times sparked controversy in industry circles when Marta Ortega dismissed the idea that Inditex was a “fast-fashion” company.

But, as critics pointed out, the term β€” used to criticize retailers for poor environmental and labor practices β€” comes from a 1989 interview in The New York Times with a Zara boss.

β€œThe latest trend is what we are looking for. It takes 15 days from a new idea to hitting the shelves,” says Juan Lopez, who was tasked with breaking America for Zara at the time.

While Zara releases up to 24 collections a year, Marta Ortega has been quick to cancel her company’s association with the term.

She said: ‘We don’t recognize ourselves in what they call fast fashion. Because that is reminiscent of the amount of unsold items and poor quality clothing aimed at a very cheap price, and that can’t go beyond what we do.’

Father: Spain's richest man, Amancio Ortega Gaona, founded Inditex in 1975

Father: Spain’s richest man, Amancio Ortega Gaona, founded Inditex in 1975

But sustainability experts said her efforts to distance herself from the brand seem somewhat hollow. Professor Natascha Radclyffe-Thomas, an expert in corporate sustainability at the British School of Fashion, said Zara’s trend-following model “paved the way” for contemporary rivals such as Chinese e-commerce giant Shein to launch their own ultra-fast production lines.

While Inditex “definitely isn’t leading the pack” on sustainability, Radclyffe-Thomas said Zara “always associated herself with a more luxurious feel, even if it’s not a luxury prize,” rather than a tat that’s worn once and thrown away.

Still, while consumers may feel that the purchases are more of an investment, “we know that customers don’t readily associate fast fashion brands with longevity,” she said.

While rivals in the same price range as Inditex have built a reputation for cheap, unloved outfits, Inditex has always strived to be seen as an imitation of luxury. This seems to be the secret of success.

Online rivals are struggling to retain fashion fans in the cost-of-living crisis, many of whom turned to online shopping during the lockdown.

But in its latest results, for the three months to the end of February, Inditex posted positive sales and profits rose 20 per cent to Β£7.5 billion last year.

Its biggest rival H&M, the second largest fashion retailer after Inditex, posted less positive results in its own most recent market update.

In a recession, shoppers want to get more bang for their buck, while some looking to buy luxury brands trade for High Street alternatives.

So, a year later, analysts are bullish on Marta Ortega’s chartering of the retailer. A Royal Bank of Canada report praised the company for having “the strongest and most consistent track record of market share gains among specialists, independents and department stores.”

But analysts admit that “management transition and concerns about ESG have weighed on Inditex’s share price in recent years.”

Still, industry experts hope for a reassessment opportunity if the company “can deliver a consistent single-digit trend in sales and earnings growth.”

Wizz Selvey, retail analyst and former buyer for Selfridges, said Marta Ortega “steered the ship in the right direction.”

Many would love a chance to call her a “fake baby,” but Selvey believes her time on the shop floor in London’s Zara and Bershka stores during her college days “can only have deepened her understanding of the business and its audience.” .

If Marta Ortega makes one thing clear in her introduction to Inditex’s recently published annual report, it’s that the company is also committed to sustainability.

‘We don’t want to be fast; we want to be agile and flexible. We don’t want to be big, we want to be relevant,” she says, adding that the group wants to be “agents of change” in the industry.

On the face of it, it’s a noble ambition, but skeptics may need more convincing, regardless of Inditex’s bottom line.

Some links in this article may be affiliate links. If you click on it, we may earn a small commission. That helps us fund This Is Money and use it for free. We do not write articles to promote products. We do not allow any commercial relationship to compromise our editorial independence.