You both returned to Milan and Salon Del Mobile this year after an absence – what was your take on the Australian output and reception?  
Nicholas Karlovasitis: Anecdotally there were less designers from Australia this year, but in saying that, the exhibiting designers or brands were probably investing more and where they were targeting was a little different – I feel like they’re definitely looking at the higher end of the market, more limited edition editions, galleries, high-end lighting and finishes; less trying to be discovered or trying to satisfy that mid-market of design, which is more volume. That was my impression.  
Sarah Gibson: I think Australian interiors and architecture is still being really well received overseas – there’s some Australian media platforms that are serving that in a good way too. But I did feel like the product design and industrial design industry has shrunk a bit – they’re maybe taking less risk in terms of stock, so it’s kind of steering people towards limited editions or made–to–order items. I saw that in Milan – people taking less risk and not producing a new chair or a whole new table system, but then out of that you’re actually seeing some beautiful, embellished materials because it’s more about the materiality at the moment.  
 
And what were some of those materials – in talking the higher end are we discussing marbles, certain ceramics, what else?  
NK: Definitely moving towards more expensive materials like marbles and stones – which touches on the point of exclusivity and positioning as a luxury brand or moving towards that luxury element. And the use of ceramic stone – there wasn’t anything really crazy new from that side of things, but it was definitely a move towards more gloss finishes and interesting and earthy materials. 
 
Before we move on from Milan – do you still view worth and importance in the fair?    
NK: From my perspective I think it’s still an incredibly important part of our industry, but I do think it’s evolving and there’s a lot of people who have a lot of negative things to say about that… Sure, there’s definitely parts of it that are wasteful and definitely parts of it that probably need to change, but I still think it’s important that, as an industry, we have something to aim for as a way of launching new product and as a platform for people to be discovered. I think it’s still relevant and I think it’s important for Australian brands to either aim to be there one day, maybe not go there too early, but I still think it helps if you go there and see where you are in the world because Australia is a really high performing market for design considering its size, and exposing yourself to wider audiences actually helps designers refine their tastes as well.  
SG: We had some really nice discussions with some designers over there and I think those discussions, in person, are always nice to have – it’s just a different interaction.  

To talk about international penetration is to talk about what you do here and what you’ve achieved with the studio – you’ve really forged a strong global presence.
NK: I think that’s our mission, really, to be a net exporter of Australian design. But it takes a longtime and we’re comparing ourselves to companies that have been around for 60, 70, 80, even one hundred years — so we know it’s a long, long road. But then we do have some advantages in that we have the benefit of new technologies and a supply chain that’s now global.  

To wander back a little bit, you set up the studio in 2007?
SG: Yes, but we didn’t do our first furniture piece until about 2010. We started off consulting for various businesses like Orton and across some medical products and things like that. And then we were doing a lot of accessories, smaller items, and then I think the ‘Butter Stool’ was our first furniture piece – that’s when I would say the furniture side of things began.  

Things have been forever evolving – as they should.
SG: Yes, and a lot of the products we’ve designed have been about how much room we had. We started in a garage in Newtown [Sydney], and then the ‘Butter Stool’ came after we moved into a larger second studio, but even then it was up two flights of stairs in an old industrial warehouse. And then we moved to a big space in Chippendale in about 2015 before here …
NK: We were basically moving every two or three years – so we could cope with designing bigger things … Initially, we started designing small accessories and were wholesaling to retail and looking back at it now, that was never going to work because there was no scale. And online wasn’t as mature as it is today. So we kind of then pivoted out of that into furniture. And then from there we had some things copied, and that’s when the decision was made, ‘okay, we need to design and consider where we’re making things, as well have an actual business strategy’. And the next was, okay, we’re going to start making overseas and then from there it became, ‘great, now we make overseas and we design here, how do we grow the business?’ And that’s where we expanded the product portfolio and brought on designers. So yes, for us every three to five years we’ve always had this kind of step change – the team’s grown and I think we’ve matured. And we’ve learned some lessons.
SG: So many lessons …  

What are some of the bigger learnings?
NK: We’re designers, you know, we didn’t come out of uni with business degrees, so we’re like, ‘hey, how does tax actually work?’ And we basically funded [DesignByThem] off a personal loan that we secured because we lied that we were going to throw a pool party …  

OK you need to elaborate on that – a pool party?
NK: We did a business proposal, we presented it and we got rejected – even though we had orders. The bank said that for a business loan we needed five years in trade and we had maybe two … But then the branch manager said, ‘look, you’ve got a good personal record, just call up, say you want a personal loan, just don’t say it’s for business’. I was pretty pissed, so I thought I’m going to say the most ridiculous thing to see what they do. And so I did: ‘Hi, I want to throw a party with a giant inflatable pool, single use, let’s do it.’ And they’re like, ‘you’ve been approved.’ 
SG: Apparently a large inflatable pool costs $30,000.  

That’s quite the party. To just jump on that concept of growth – what then is the next five years or what do you hope the next five years looks like? Is it about further growing the product suite?
NK: It’s an ongoing conversation. We’ve grown quite a bit over the last few years – we’re up to 26 staff now. And I think for us we’re definitely focusing on releasing more products to market. While we’ve always grown, we’ve always seen the opportunity when people start to pull back – we grew during the GFC and we grew during COVID. So we’re focusing on releasing more product and overseas is a big goal we’re going to continue to pursue.

What markets are you pursuing when you talk about global?
NK: Mainly growing the US – which has always been a good for us. I think Asia is also a real strong growth market. And Europe is Europe – it really embraces design, but it’s also very saturated with a lot of competition…
SG:  We’ve got a bit of traction in the Middle East and I think if we put more effort in there we could go a bit further. But the American market is one we love because there’s not as many brands competing there, also, there’s a bit of a similar identity to Australian design, particularly on the West Coast. There are a lot of indoor-outdoor scenarios in California in particular and they love the kind of casual approach of Australian design. So it’s not so much New York when we talk the about the US – that’s a different market in its higher end materials, less colour, more classic. But in California there’s a bit more of an appreciation for casual and fun, durable and high quality, it doesn’t necessarily have to be opulent — it’s a good market for us.  

How do you go about marketing or actively positioning the brand internationally – from here in this wonderful space in Sydney’s Alexandria?
SG:  We look at what’s out in market and where we sit in the mix, but a lot of the time it just comes down to Nick and my curation of the brand and staying true to what we believe in, rather than just trying to position ourselves for the sake of it. Because inherently, if you’re trying to push the brand in a direction that doesn’t feel right in your gut, then you’re probably not going to have the energy to take it through the next 20 years. It’s got to feel sincere and true to our design ethos. 

Tell us about that design ethos – how do you define or articulate your design?
NK: We’re a relatively young brand and the brand has evolved and I’m actually quite happy that the brand keeps evolving and our products and design language, even though consistent, are also evolving. We don’t want massive swings, but I do think it’s important that we don’t become too rigid. I look at a well-established brand that has a really strong longterm identity honed over 80 years is definitely able to really understand what it is.  

So you’re still finding it in that sense?
NK: To a degree I feel like we are, and I think that’s a good thing. I feel like we’re in our teenage years, we’re just going to pass that annoying teenager phase approaching the young adult side of things. But for us it’s that we’re tied to an outcome – and that is we want to make good design accessible, and that is based not on cost, but on value. We don’t want to be a brand where we necessarily have a design ‘tax’ where it’s like, ‘we did this product and we’re going to charge a lot more because we consider it ‘designed’. It has to be tied to materiality, investment costs, all these things. And it needs to be genuine… I also think what’s really interesting is as we bring in more designers, it’s what their interpretation of the brand is. And because we keep building a portfolio of products, they can refer to those products. And because those products keep changing, I expect that their interpretation will change over time as well. I’m really excited where the design language will go.  

It’s nice to have those tangible signposts along the way – allows reflection too.
NK: I love looking at the history of brands. I recently visited the Prada museum in Milan, and I was thinking, Prada was a brand that at one point in time no one knew about, it was this scrappy startup doing its own thing. And look where they are now – it didn’t just create itself [as it stands today]. I think that’s the thing that people forget about brands – they’re not just suddenly ‘Prada’ or ‘Herman Miller’, it takes time. And that evolution is really the exciting part in being involved in a brand.
SG: I think we’ve kind of got to a point where we’re curating the brand and guiding it overall as a brand and the products we release, but we like the individual designers to express themselves within the brand. I think there’s always going to be an eclecticism to this brand too – the ‘Weaver Cabinet’, a recent product, it’s different but it also still goes with the brand … We always weigh up this balance of form and function, which I know is tried and tested to the idea with design, but we want the products to be expressive and have personality and be endearing, but not at the compromise of function. So that’s always the seesaw that we play with in every design – there’s back and forth, more back and forth …  

And making it minimal too.
SG: Yes, we’re always trying to minimise it to the point where it hasn’t lost its personality. And that’s the tipping point for us that we always stick to. I would say as we get better at designing, we become a little bit more minimal each time – it’s just the fine line that we always tread.