Black Friday Is Almost Here!
The Inventory team is rounding up deals you don’t want to miss, now through Cyber Monday. Click here to browse!

What the Hell Is Going on at Lucky Magazine?

Illustration for article titled What the Hell Is Going on at iLucky /iMagazinei?/i

After reports leaked this weekend that Lucky and their new Lucky Group would be shut down completely, now it seems like just the magazine will cease printing, but that the digital arm of the brand will continue. Or something.


The writing has been on the wall for Lucky for some time: a year ago, Condé Nast announced they were letting go of Lucky, and that the brand would spin-off into its own shopping/magazine website with some sort of print presence. But in April, highly-touted editor Eva Chen left the company, and since then, its future has looked even more uncertain.


On Sunday, The Daily Front Row reported that The Lucky Group was “closing and firing its entire staff” because a possible investor pulled out, after months of assorted and sporadic layoffs. But on Monday, Women’s Wear Daily wrote that contrary to that report, just the print part of the publication (which had gone quarterly last month) will be shuttered, as Lucky is reportedly still talking to three other investors.

But what kind of digital part of the company will continue remains to be seen; the website URL now redirects to, and it includes some editorial content with a lot of options to buy what you’re reading about. More than one staffer told The Cut that “they were fired and given no severance whatsoever, despite being longtime employees,” while others were reportedly given two weeks.

WWD says there will be a meeting today informing staff what’s going on in more detail—were you there? Did you hear anything? Do you know anything about Lucky, in any of its many iterations? Email us.


Contact the author at

Image via Lucky mag of their May 2015 issue

Share This Story

Get our newsletter



When it debuted, I read Lucky religiously, bought the books, etc., until the team that founded the mag left and so did I. A couple of years ago, I picked up a copy and found it strange that a mag that skewed younger in style featured pretty much only ridiculously, prohibitively expensive products. Back it the day, it was a better mix of high and low, which makes more sense for a younger audience that is less likely to have piles of money to spend on fashion/beauty. Perhaps they tried to take it too editorial without attracting an audience that aligned with their vision.