New Game: Date the Advertisement

I would guess in the "aughts" Say 1908? I say that because looking at the dress of the time, ties don't seem to be as much a part of the uniform as they are now. From reading the ad, ties are a new thing that are catching on.

Well, I'd agree with Stu. It's either in the aughts or even in the 90s. And I'm basing it on the cheap cost of the ties.

It's interesting to note that the terminology for colors was not as well developed as it is today. No periwinkle, alice blue, azure, raspberry; just "red-black-and-white".

The cost of the tie makes me want to date it later, like the 20s, when detachable collars were still a valid, if growingly antique, option.

I'm guessing 1930.

I'd go with the 30s as well. Note that the text says that WOOLEN neckties are catching on in the US, not that neckties are a new thing. The detachable collar language is also telling, though I'll bet that it hung on longer at Brooks than most places.

Well let's see, today a basic Brooks tie costs about $50, right? $1.50 is 3% of $50, so that means we need a consumer price index of .03 in 2005 dollars. However, the CPI in 2005 dollars has never been below .04. Conclusion: the ad is a fake.

Maybe BB and other clothing retailers have simply been jacking up the price ahead of other consumer products in the index. It makes sense that luxury goods such as clothing will rise in value faster vis-a-vis other consumer products as a society becomes more prosperous and has more disposable income.

Perhaps the Necktie Price Index (NPI) is different.

my guess is 1940. print quality looks to good to be turn of the century.

It was actually a joke. mack - I'd like to see some numbers if you've got them.

Also -- another clue besides the very useful things others have brought up, such as price and collar, is the distinction between England and the Continent. Obviously it still exists in many ways, but you probably wouldn't see the distinction written in print as you do in the advert. after a certain date. I'd say before WWII and maybe before -- though it's interesting to note that Brooks in another publication circa the 10's or 20's mentions "Europe" rather than the Continent. The Continent seems an antiquated phrase, at least to this American ear. I'm sure it survived in England much longer.