I drafted something snarky, but I won't.
But I will say I disagree pretty strongly. To me, such exercises provide beginners, especially those who may not have the ability (without spending thousands of dollars), a benchmark to get a rough, qualitative sense of how various items compare, so they can make informed decisions on items they might purchase or pursue sight unseen. Science it isn't, and it must eventually be blended with personal tastes re: last, fit, etc. But knowing that one line uses better leather or construction than another is useful information have, without having to spend literally hundreds of hours sloshing through conflicting online statements, followed by several more hours researching the statement makers to see whether their opinions are reliable.
Having now handled many of the suit and sport coat brands myself, I a) have found the hierarchy roughly correct, and b) have my own sense of what fits me, what doesn't, what's good value and what isn't. But I was able to avoid a lot of stupid purchases with that hierarchy as a starting point. Similarly, a shoe hierarchy could help me benchmark whether, e.g., to spend the extra money on Edward Green vs Alfred Sargent, without having the benefit of touching, feeling and inspecting any of them. Some I've handled, some I haven't. My funds aren't unlimited. How best to spend them will depend, in part, on comparative quality, and that's where the hierarchy can be a useful starting point.
What exactly is the criteria for a shoe hierarchy? Too much personal preference is involved, and this is seen in the debate of Carmina vs Meermin. How much is gemming weighed? How much are plastic vs leather stiffeners weighed? Tight waists? Pegged waists? Fiddleback waists? French box calf vs German calf? These are just a few criteria that would have to be considered. Aniline vs crust leathers? Are we considering stuff like shape and fit which are entirely subjective?
I have no idea how you arrived at the conclusion that JL is better than G&G, and G&G better than EG. How you can say Alfred Sargent is better than C&J. You're also ignoring that shoemakers these day make a whole range of shoes. What are we comparing? JL or JLP to G&G main or G&G deco (I'm ignoring bespoke as I'm assuming it's a RTW hierarchy). AS exclusive or AS for Jcrew vs C&J bench or C&J hand? Meermin LM is so extremely better than Meermin main it'd be an overgeneralization to include them together. Same with Ferraggamo Tramezza to Studio or Sutor norvegese to Sutor cemented.
Not as extreme, but similar problems arise with the suit/jacket hierarchy. Canvassing is weighed so high that you've got Boglioli grouped with Charles Tyrwhitt. I mean really? A cashmere K jacket is close to quality to CT's stuff?