or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb (St. James's Street, London) vs. John Lobb (Hermès, Paris)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

John Lobb (St. James's Street, London) vs. John Lobb (Hermès, Paris) - Page 2

post #16 of 22
Thread Starter 
I had the 1982 info from here:
http://finance-en.hermes.com/content/download/609/4510/version/2/file/Hermes_RA2011_GB.pdf

post #17 of 22
Interesting stuff. You learn something new every day.
post #18 of 22

I presume, 1982 refers to the initial decision to come up with a shoe range, but not a finished collection on offer to the customer. Alan Flusser (Style and the Man - 1996) has this to say:
Quote:
Hermès bought John Lobb Paris, a subsidiary of the British custom shoemaker in 1976 and moved it into its Faubourg-Saint-Honoré store, As the shop's custom offerings won an international reputation, Hermes began to consider the question of ready-to-wear. They wanted to produce and sell ready-to-wear shoes that would, in their own way, achieve the same hallowed status as their sur mesure footwear.

Such luxury can not be rushed. Management understood that it would have to invest time while possibly deferring profitsif it was to apply the Hermès standards to it's ready-to-wear footwear. As a result, the firm planned its entry into the men's shoe market in the manner of a corporation plotting a long-range takeover strategy. First, they dispatched Mr Dickinson, the éminence grise of their custom shoe-making, to England to oversee the development of the lasts. Dickinson instructed the craftsmen how he wanted the shoe patterns cut. He insisted the stitching threads be of a particular size and color, and made sure the punching and finishing was done to his specifications, They then test-marketed a limited collection of models out of the Hermès store in Paris.

In 1990, Hermès opened its first freestanding shoe store. Four years later the firm further ensured the superiority and longevity of their product's workmanship by purchasing the Edward Green factory in Northampton, England's finest shoemaking facility.
post #19 of 22

I thought this may be a good place to pose a question about the construction of John Lobb's RTW shoes.  I am pasting a video below showing the cork bottom filling process of a pair of Lobbs.  Watch the video and you will see that they seem to put an enormous amount of cork in the shoe, leaving a mound  that is nowhere near flush with the welting as you see with all other goodyear welted shoes.  Am I missing something, or do Lobbs somehow have a thicker cork layer? 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNqu1kQZ0Mc&feature=bf_prev&list=UUN1wOO2DFx9p_DC3VD2hviQ

post #20 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by MoneyWellSpent View Post

I thought this may be a good place to pose a question about the construction of John Lobb's RTW shoes.  I am pasting a video below showing the cork bottom filling process of a pair of Lobbs.  Watch the video and you will see that they seem to put an enormous amount of cork in the shoe, leaving a mound  that is nowhere near flush with the welting as you see with all other goodyear welted shoes.  Am I missing something, or do Lobbs somehow have a thicker cork layer? 

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tNqu1kQZ0Mc&feature=bf_prev&list=UUN1wOO2DFx9p_DC3VD2hviQ

 

No thoughts from anyone?

post #21 of 22

I don't own any John Lobbs (of either variety).  But I have noticed that some makers seem to use more cork than others.  I had some Church's a few months ago (I know, hardly venerated on SF these days, but I like this pair!), and one of the first things I noticed was that the sole seemed to be quite fully stuffed with cork - the insole seemed slightly convex to begin with.

 

The downside was that the shoes were tight to start with, especially across the forefoot.  The up side is that because there is more cork to mould to the shape of my foot, they have become some of the most comfortable and supporting shoes I own.  It's a small thing, but I'm all for a generous helping of cork: once you get it squashed into your shape, it makes the shoe feel a lot more luxurious, and a lot more "yours".

post #22 of 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by mimo View Post

I don't own any John Lobbs (of either variety).  But I have noticed that some makers seem to use more cork than others.  I had some Church's a few months ago (I know, hardly venerated on SF these days, but I like this pair!), and one of the first things I noticed was that the sole seemed to be quite fully stuffed with cork - the insole seemed slightly convex to begin with.

 

The downside was that the shoes were tight to start with, especially across the forefoot.  The up side is that because there is more cork to mould to the shape of my foot, they have become some of the most comfortable and supporting shoes I own.  It's a small thing, but I'm all for a generous helping of cork: once you get it squashed into your shape, it makes the shoe feel a lot more luxurious, and a lot more "yours".

 

I know what you are are talking about with the convex shape of the soles.  I may be mistaken, but I had attributed that to the rolling process that is used during manufactering (seen in most of the production videos for the different brands) where the shoes are turned upside down and the rolling press is used to flatten and curve the sole against the contours of the last.  You are definitely right that some makers use more cork than others, but I was under the impression that it was on the variance of a few millimeters at most.  Perhaps I am wrong, since the video we are referring to shows a serious amount of cork!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › John Lobb (St. James's Street, London) vs. John Lobb (Hermès, Paris)