From Prada's spring collection. Photo: Imaxtree

Underneath the gloss of Fashion Month there’s been a sort of international war raging over the dates of the spring 2013 shows (taking place next September, in 2012). Two years ago, the CFDA, the British Fashion Council, the Chambre Syndicale and the Milan Chamber of Fashion met to establish a list of guidelines regarding the international fashion calendar. It was decided that New York Fashion Week would always start on the second Thursday of September. Given the shifting calendar, sometimes that would mean right after Labor Day and some years nearly two weeks after. Next year, it’d set the shows later than ever, on September 13th, pushing London’s start date to the 21st, Milan’s to the 26th and Paris’ to October 2nd. But the Milan Chamber of Fashion is fighting the calendar, saying they were under the impression the agreement was only in place for three years, and that they were in fact entitled to earlier show dates. They wanted to set the Milan collections—including heavy hitters like Dolce & Gabbana, Versace and Prada—to September 19th to 25th, directly overlapping with both New York and London.

Last night, the CFDA finally responded to the controversy with a letter to the industry making it clear that the dates are not up for discussion. “All four fashion capitals have kept to this agreement, to date, and the U.S. will continue to do so for the foreseeable future,” said the letter. “As you may have read, the dates for showing the spring-summer 2013 collections are now being disputed. Milan is claiming that the agreement was for three years only. This is not the case; the agreed-to schedule was always meant to be a long-term/permanent one.” Another letter’s been sent to the Milan Chamber, this one from Condé Nast International chairman Jonathan Newhouse who says that his international editors from American, French and Italian magazines will skip the Milan shows if they refuse to cooperate with the established schedule. This morning, the head of the Milan Chamber answered the CFDA’s letter quite simply: “Let the best one win.” Good thing they have a year to reach a solution!