or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What shoes fall between A-E & EG?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What shoes fall between A-E & EG? - Page 5

post #61 of 90
Thread Starter 
Frankly, as the initiator of this thread, it has gotten a bit off-topic. However, the thread has certainly answered my question. I think there is plenty of information here about my original question, which was basically, "If I want to step up from A-E and spend from $300-$500, or even $700, what should I look at?" Question answered.

The discussions that followed were equally valuable. It is really economics 101. JLibourel, with his 30 some pair of A-E is at one end of a demand line. The theoretical person with 7 pair of EG is at the other end of the same line. Neither is right, neither is wrong. In fact, both behaviors are expected, and it would be curious if neither veiwpoint was represented. It may seem more typical to own 6 A-E, 2 or 3 C&J, and an EG or 2, but that would represent just another data point on the identical demand curve.

The discussion was valuable, dignified, and professional.

As the thread originator, thank you to all for some very valuable input.

Matt
post #62 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203
Adding posts to a thread just to point out that the thread has too many "not much" posts is a little ironic, isn't it?

It might be if the sole purpose of the post was to point out that the thread has too many "not much" posts. However, in this case, the rest of the thread, if you cared to read it, was dedicated to the topic at hand. The post in its entirety read:

Quote:
Originally Posted by odoreater
Hmm, I just read 4 pages of stuff and didn't see much about what shoes fall in between AE and EG

With regard to the AE vs. EG debate, I think that there's room for both in my shoe wardrobe.

As for what shoes come between the two, I'll post the list of some of the shoes that I search for in this price range:

Alden, Berluti, Bruno Magli Platinum, C & J, Ferragamo Tramezza, Gravati, Grenson, Santoni, Sutor Mantellassi, Testoni, and JM Weston.

post #63 of 90
One more small thought. I own many pairs of shoes, the least expensive of which are AE, the most expensive - six pair of JL St. James. Below that, economically, seven pair of EGs. (How much or how little I paid for these is a matter best saved for another time as it is really quite magical.) My point is this: where an object BEGINS its life, how it has been made and by whom, what it is initially named, even how it looks - these factors recede as the object aquires a life in time, becoming nearly negligible after a while. I have "good" shoes I almost never wear - once a year perhaps - and other I can't imagine doing without. This has nothing to do with what they cost, whose name is stamped inside them, how rare they may or may not be. They have all taken on their own life. Some seem an extension of my body after several years. Others have never let me know them. And loving care can alter the appearance of a humble object slowly and surely. Push coming to shove, if my house starts to burn tonight I'll probably grab my much-loved, much-worn, decade-old AE shells and leave my "better" shoes to their fate.
post #64 of 90
Please call me after you dial 911. I will be going into the flames after your lesser-loved shoes.
post #65 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Yeah, the much-loved EG Dover split toe is better looking than the A-E Bradley, but the difference sure isn't worth even $300 to me! Ultimately, I suppose a lot of this boils down to a matter of taste..."De gustibus..." and all that!
I am beginning to wince when the Pollock scale is mentioned in discussions like this.

I think we can concede that, say, EGs are "only" 15% better than Allen Edmonds, yet are considerably more expensive, exhibiting diminishing returns on the extreme end of sartorial splendor.

However, you have to understand that for a lot of people, to use a tongue-in-cheek example, you could also say that Natalie Portman is "only" 15% hotter than that cheerleader next door. In other words, what a 15%, and since you can only have one pair of shoes on at a time, you can understand why some people would climb up the steeply diminishing curve to go from adequate to great.

Just commenting on my own decision to search for AEs in the US and come back with EGs, Jan.
post #66 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by aportnoy
I'm also a big believer in less is more in that I would much rather have one pair of killer shoe han 2-3 pair of also rans.
This aptly summarizes the conclusion I have come to with respect to my own needs.
post #67 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by josepidal
I am beginning to wince when the Pollock scale is mentioned in discussions like this.

I think we can concede that, say, EGs are "only" 15% better than Allen Edmonds, yet are considerably more expensive, exhibiting diminishing returns on the extreme end of sartorial splendor.

However, you have to understand that for a lot of people, to use a tongue-in-cheek example, you could also say that Natalie Portman is "only" 15% hotter than that cheerleader next door. In other words, what a 15%, and since you can only have one pair of shoes on at a time, you can understand why some people would climb up the steeply diminishing curve to go from adequate to great.

Just commenting on my own decision to search for AEs in the US and come back with EGs, Jan.

Well, as long we are using women as analogies, let's get down to commercial transactions. Let's say, Jose, we are visiting a whorehouse. One the one hand is a very good looking hooker with a pleasant personality who agrees to "do" you for $150. Would you turn her down in favor of one who is inarguably somewhat better looking but wants $500 or $850 for the same services? Not me!
post #68 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Well, as long we are using women as analogies, let's get down to commercial transactions. Let's say, Jose, we are visiting a whorehouse. One the one hand is a very good looking hooker with a pleasant personality who agrees to "do" you for $150. Would you turn her down in favor of one who is inarguably somewhat better looking but wants $500 or $850 for the same services? Not me!

I think your argument is flawed. EG's are not "somewhat" better looking than Allen Edmonds. They are much much hotter. I'd go for the more expensive girl if she was hotter than any girl I've touched before, if I felt she was probably the best looking girl I could afford - i.e. an experience that transcends the average/normal experiences I've had so far and will stay with me for a long time. IMO, that is is a better description of what it's like to get a pair of EG or JL...
post #69 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Well, as long we are using women as analogies, let's get down to commercial transactions. Let's say, Jose, we are visiting a whorehouse. One the one hand is a very good looking hooker with a pleasant personality who agrees to "do" you for $150. Would you turn her down in favor of one who is inarguably somewhat better looking but wants $500 or $850 for the same services? Not me!


Oh Jan, please tell me you did not write this.
!!!
post #70 of 90
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Well, as long we are using women as analogies, let's get down to commercial transactions. Let's say, Jose, we are visiting a whorehouse. One the one hand is a very good looking hooker with a pleasant personality who agrees to "do" you for $150. Would you turn her down in favor of one who is inarguably somewhat better looking but wants $500 or $850 for the same services? Not me!
Is fit an issue? Do we assume the fit would be equally comfortable without a break-in period?
post #71 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmatt
Is fit an issue? Do we assume the fit would be equally comfortable without a break-in period?

post #72 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmatt
Is fit an issue? Do we assume the fit would be equally comfortable without a break-in period?

Check please!
post #73 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by gdl203
I think your argument is flawed. EG's are not "somewhat" better looking than Allen Edmonds. They are much much hotter. I'd go for the more expensive girl if she was hotter than any girl I've touched before, if I felt she was probably the best looking girl I could afford - i.e. an experience that transcends the average/normal experiences I've had so far and will stay with me for a long time. IMO, that is is a better description of what it's like to get a pair of EG or JL...

Interesting the sexual language and imagery we have evoked here: "They are much hotter"..."an experience that transcends the average/normal experiences I've had so far and will stay with me for a long time"!

For heaven's sake, we're just talking about buying shoes! (For that matter, I doubt if "doing the do" with any whore is ever going to be "an experience that transcends the average/normal experiences I've had so far." Any man who makes such a statement has probably had little experience in hookerland!) Men's shoes--the kind we're talking about--are pretty much variations on relatively few themes--when all is said and done, they look very much alike. I will confess to having seen very few Edward Green and JLP shoes in the flesh. I just spent a little while perusing the websites of those firms. I see no reason to revise my opinions: I think they are marginally more elegant and handsome than the products of Allen-Edmonds, Alden or C&J Benchgrade, but the difference seems to me to be a modest difference in degree, not in kind, and certainly nothing that would induce me to pay a whacking premium over what I can get A-Es for.
post #74 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Any man who makes such a statement has probably had little experience in hookerland!

You got me there...
post #75 of 90
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLibourel
Well, as long we are using women as analogies, let's get down to commercial transactions. Let's say, Jose, we are visiting a whorehouse. One the one hand is a very good looking hooker with a pleasant personality who agrees to "do" you for $150. Would you turn her down in favor of one who is inarguably somewhat better looking but wants $500 or $850 for the same services? Not me!
I think that the problem with your analogy here (alluded to in later posts) lies in your characterization of the first hooker as a "very good looking hooker" and the second as "somewhat better looking." This is completely consistent with your prior characterizations of EG shoes, for example, as only "marginally better" (or words to that effect) in appearance than A-Es. But, as I tried to point out earlier in this thread, the difference to many of us is much greater than marginal so that, for us, the more appropriate analogy would be: "On the one hand is a somewhat mediocre-looking hooker--overweight and rather coarse--with a pleasant personality [which is probably irrelevant!]...in favor of one who is stunningly beautiful to the point of taking your breath away, but wants...." As you point out in your most recent post, the difference is one of degree, not of kind (I think that's obvious), but the number of degrees is phenomenal!

I don't think this issue can be settled definitively because it ultimately involves subjective esthetic judgments. To your eye, there is a small difference in appearance between EGs and A-Es, but certainly nothing that would justify paying the difference in price. To many of us, on the other hand, the esthetic difference is huge, and once having seen the better of the two, nothing in the A-E range looks acceptable any more--although I hasten to note again that, for me at least, this applies to serious business and dress shoes only. I'm quite content with my A-Es for casual wear. (I suppose though that it might just be a matter of time until I'm not content with them for even that level either.)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › What shoes fall between A-E & EG?