Originally Posted by bananananana
Not saying you're right or wrong in your tastes, but I think a lot of people would choose 5-6 EGs over 42 AEs, which is the real comparison, and not the 1 to 1+$1000 you're describing.
I am a value and cheap shoe supporter, and I agree with this statement. however, my ideal shoe wardrobe is < 10 (probably more like 5-7) shoes I love, that are versatile, and will last. I would just assume spend $1k - $1,500 on my collection of AE, Grenson, et al than $3k - $4k on EG, JL, Vass et al. I've recently become a convert to less is more, and blissfully having less stuff. nice stuff, yes, but lots of stuff, no. I basically agree with the sentiment that only shoe geeks will really notice the difference between an AE Park Avenue and a JL equivalent model. I'll accept that Lobbs are built better and will last longer, but not by nearly enough to justify - alone - the upcharge. shoe geeks are kind of like women in this way - they dress more to impress each other than the opposite sex. in fact, I recently had in my possession some EG for RLPL shoes, some G&G for RLPL, and some C&J for RL. I showed them to 5 or 6 normal people (college/postgrad educated, white collar professionals, etc) and they all were like "ok, they are shoes I would wear to work". none of them could believe the price. these people are like most people here, before they discovered SF. that is the majority of people out there