Signal History · Ari3lla Index
Net-a-Porter and SSENSE independently list obi-sash cocoon coat for pre-order
First recorded 2027-12-13 · 1 occurrence on file
Last appeared 2027-12-13 — 18 published reports since, with no further occurrence on file.
Recorded Occurrences
2027-12-13
net-a-porter.com and ssense.com each listed the obi-sash cocoon coat silhouette (first logged 2027-12-06 from Chanel's resort 2028 lookbook and Vogue's cross-house roundup) for pre-order this window, sourcing the item from resort 2028 delivery schedules. Neither retailer's listing cites the other or references Vogue's roundup specifically; both frame it as a resort-season buy decision made independently.
Index note: Logged as a new signal_id (resort-2028-obi-sash-cocoon-coat-retail-buy), distinct from resort-2028-obi-sash-cocoon-coat (the designer_origin/editorial parent signal from 2027-12-06): this is the market's own stocking decision, a different claim type than the designer lookbook or the editorial cross-house observation, mirroring how the Bogota/Sao Paulo thread kept its retail-buy signals distinct from the institutional and editorial signals that preceded them. Confidence is derived mechanically as 'medium': source_corroboration_count=2 but both sources map to the single 'retail' sector, which per derive_confidence()'s formula caps single-sector corroboration at medium regardless of count -- this is not a case warranting override, since the two retailers are genuinely independent (neither cites the other) and this is exactly what the mechanical single-sector-medium rule is designed to produce, not a case of citation-free rehash or unclear-sector corroboration.
Editorial Close-Out
derive_confidence() computes 'medium': source_corroboration_count=2, source_sectors = {'retail'} (single sector). Adopted as derived rather than upgraded, because both sources are genuinely independent retailers reporting the same specific stocking decision -- not a case of one sector's rehash of another's reporting -- and adopted rather than held down, because none of the three documented override conditions (unclear-sector corroboration, single-sector corroboration standing in for cross-sector, or a high-reliability-sector citation-free rehash) applies in the downgrading direction beyond what the mechanical formula already reflects: single-sector corroboration is exactly why this sits at medium rather than high, which is the formula working as intended, not a manual override.