Gobbetti’s blueprint for brand resuscitation first took tangible form at Givenchy, where he served as CEO from 2004 to 2008. The house, caught in a purgatory between a storied haute couture past and a commercially uninspiring present, desperately needed direction. Gobbetti’s decisive move was to bring in Riccardo Tisci in 2005, then a relatively unknown designer. Together, they orchestrated a pivotal shift, steering the brand towards a dark, romantic aesthetic infused with streetwear influences—a bold move long before such styles became luxury’s mainstream.

Tisci’s edgy creativity, paired with Gobbetti’s disciplined management, sparked a cult-like revival. Sales surged, the brand reclaimed its coveted red-carpet relevance, and Givenchy finally shed its legacy inertia, embracing genuine growth. It was the first resounding proof that Gobbetti’s willingness to make unconventional bets could translate into significant market share.

Céline: Crafting Minimalist Mania

Before his high-profile tenure at Burberry, Gobbetti arguably enjoyed his most impactful stint at Céline. Partnering with Phoebe Philo, he transformed the once-sleepy French label into a global minimalist icon. Under his leadership, Philo’s precise vision wasn’t merely protected—it was amplified, honed into a weapon. Clean tailoring, whisper-soft campaigns, and that cult logo tote became the gospel for a new generation of women who coveted status without needing to shout.

Between 2008 and 2016, Céline’s revenues reportedly quadrupled, boasting some of the best margins within LVMH’s vast portfolio. Sleekly designed stores and a burgeoning digital presence elevated the brand, which notably thrived even without a fragrance line or a robust e-commerce platform.

Yet, when both Gobbetti and Philo departed in close succession, so too did the momentum. Hedi Slimane’s arrival ushered in a new aesthetic, but also a sharp cultural pivot. While the house undeniably continues to sell, the quiet confidence and distinct identity of the Philo era have not returned. Once again, Gobbetti’s exit coincided with the fading of a very specific kind of magic.

The Burberry Blueprint: From Heritage to Hype

Fast forward to 2017, when Gobbetti arrived at Burberry, a brand once globally iconic but then heavily reliant on its trench coats and a pervasive sense of nostalgia. Revenues were flat, relevance was slipping, and the famous check pattern, once a symbol of prestige, risked becoming a punchline.

Gobbetti’s response was swift and uncompromising. He drastically slashed wholesale distribution by 50%, aggressively accelerated the brand’s digital push, and meticulously shifted Burberry’s image from a quiet heritage stalwart to a fierce luxury contender with undeniable street credibility. Once a bastion of British tradition, Burberry under Gobbetti, and with the return of Riccardo Tisci as creative director, boldly embraced global streetwear culture.

The results, initially, were compelling: by 2020, revenues had rebounded to £2.63 billion, operating profits rose to £438.1 million, and the share price climbed approximately 60% over a two-year period. Financially, the brand was not only back but unequivocally bankable.

However, a shift was underway. The Covid-19 pandemic introduced unprecedented challenges, Riccardo Tisci’s designs began to reach a creative stalemate, and the initial shock factor that had driven intrigue started to fade. Momentum gave way to a creeping brand stagnation. As Marco Gobbetti’s contract neared its end, Daniel Lee was brought on board, signaling another pivot. With Burberry’s sales and shares showing signs of slipping once again, Gobbetti quietly exited, leaving just as the tide began to turn.

Culturally, questions about Burberry’s long-term identity lingered. After Gobbetti’s departure, the brand pivoted yet again under Jonathan Akeroyd, seeking a balance between modern polish and its British roots. While Burberry struggles to regain profitability, some argue it is still searching for the distinctive soul that Gobbetti, in his pursuit of streamlining and profitability, may have inadvertently pushed aside.

Ferragamo: A Swift, Strategic Exit

In 2022, Marco Gobbetti stepped into Salvatore Ferragamo—a brand often described as Italy’s best-dressed ghost. Storied, undoubtedly. Still selling with gusto? Not quite. Gobbetti moved with characteristic speed. Within months, he brought on 27-year-old Maximilian Davis, a decisive hire that unmistakably signaled the end of Ferragamo’s polite minimalism and the beginning of something bolder. Davis’s debut collection was sleek, graphic, and unmistakably Gen Z-facing, a radical departure from the brand’s legacy of silk ties and conservative polish.

The gamble initially paid off. By the end of 2022, revenues climbed 10.2% to €1.26 billion, and net profit rose to €81 million. For a fleeting moment, Ferragamo was back in the industry conversation, appearing on red carpets, runways, and TikTok feeds.

Yet, the buzz proved difficult to sustain. In 2023, revenues slipped 7.6% to €1.16 billion, and profits cratered, plummeting by nearly 70% to €26 million. The start of FY24 brought an even sharper drop: Q1 revenues fell by more than 18%, with China and wholesale dragging performance significantly. While direct-to-consumer sales showed some lift in Europe, the U.S., and Japan, it was insufficient to reverse the overall narrative.

Amidst these challenges, it was confirmed that Gobbetti would step down as CEO of Salvatore Ferragamo on March 6, 2025, less than a year after his tenure had been extended to 2026. This mutual decision came as the company continued to grapple with an 8.2% decline in revenues for 2024, highlighting that Gobbetti’s turnaround strategy, while delivering initial impact, ultimately proved unsustainable for enduring success.

The Gobbetti Pattern: Impact, Not Endurance.

What’s clear from Gobbetti’s trajectory is a consistent modus operandi: enter, reposition, optimize for profit, and then exit. While he delivered undeniable initial impact and often significant financial gains, particularly in his earlier roles, the endurance of these transformations, as evidenced by Ferragamo’s recent performance, is less certain. He rarely outlasts a second creative director.

Gobbetti isn’t the CEO who dreams in poetry and permanence. He’s the one approving new logos, trimming inefficient wholesale channels, and meticulously orchestrating the P&L to sing. In today’s hyper-competitive luxury landscape, marked by relentless margin pressures, creative fatigue, and unforgiving consumer impatience, this pragmatic, results-driven approach might be exactly what struggling brands need in the short term.

Final Call: Strategist or Opportunist?

The answer depends entirely on perspective.

To luxury purists, Gobbetti might appear as a capitalist in couture—more CFO than true visionary, prioritizing financial engineering over enduring artistic integrity. To savvy investors and impatient boards, however, he is the definitive blueprint for modern luxury leadership: cut through the noise, relentlessly chase margins, and never get sentimental about silk and symbolism.

Whatever the final verdict, brands under his watch emerge undeniably leaner, louder, and often significantly more profitable, at least initially. Whether they can sustain that hard-won momentum after his departure, however, remains a separate and often challenging story.

Speculation will inevitably turn to Gobbetti’s next move. The real question is not if he will strike again, but which brand will be next to receive the intensive “Gobbetti treatment”.