or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread 2016 - News, Pictures, Sizing, Accessories, Clothing, etc
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread 2016 - News, Pictures, Sizing, Accessories, Clothing, etc - Page 202

post #3016 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post

1. I was told at the retail store I could bring in one non-stocked style to try and it would be held for 7 days. Hey, better than nothing.

 

My local (non-outlet) store was very limited in sizes. Shocking actually.

 

I tried on a Sea Island and the new sneaker in 9D - and they had to pull the display model on both. No 9.5D in the sneaker and they don't make the Sea Island in a B width. Asked about what they had in 9.5C or 10B (since my last visit a few weeks ago, the manager said I was wearing the wrong size - though he didn't remember me or the conversation this time around) and was told very little. I went in with a plan to buy at least 1 pair of shoes, maybe 2. Left empty handed. Not the store's fault for AE not making the Sea Island in narrows, but hardly accommodating with their lack of sizes.

post #3017 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by danwatts2005 View Post

The Randolph looks like it has a pointier toe, but it's hard to tell how much. Also, which would you say is the most/least casual? I pretty much wear the same size in anything, so @slcrich's info was helpful in that regard. One review said the Lake Forest felt like his foot was in a vise, so that makes me a bit nervous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by danwatts2005 View Post

I'm starting to get an itch for an Ovblood loafer. I'm sorry if this has been discussed ad nauseum, but could someone offer some insight into the differences between the Cavanaugh, Lake Forest, and Randolph, and any benefits of one over the others? Which would be the most suitable for sockless with shorts? Would the Randolph be considered more or less formal since the strap goes all the way down? Thanks.

Dan, people on here will say the full strap on the Randolph makes it the most formal/least casual. I did not know this when I bought mine; I just fell in love with the bourbon color during the first fitting. Went back and bought the from the Shoebank later. The bourbon also has black piping, black sole edges, and is of course, burnished with black. Therefore, I cannot possibly imagine wearing it sockless with shorts. Oxblood may be a different animal.

To me, the Randolph looks a bit almond-shaped, looking down at it. It's definitely narrower all along its length than my 65 last shoes. I don't have any pics of it. I'll be pulling out the good camera this weekend, so I'll try to get some shots for you (and even try sockless with shorts!)

IMO, wearing any shoe with leather soles sockless with shorts seems a bit off to me. I even feel weird wearing my suede McGregors outside much. If I was in the market, I'd probably be looking at an Addison or Kirkwood. OTOH, I think @CMT1 wears his tan saddle Kenwoods everywhere, and that's a nice material on leather soles, too.

Regardless, check your fit with actual shoes. Loafers seems to be real tough to dial in.
post #3018 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

My local (non-outlet) store was very limited in sizes. Shocking actually.

I tried on a Sea Island and the new sneaker in 9D - and they had to pull the display model on both. No 9.5D in the sneaker and they don't make the Sea Island in a B width. Asked about what they had in 9.5C or 10B (since my last visit a few weeks ago, the manager said I was wearing the wrong size - though he didn't remember me or the conversation this time around) and was told very little. I went in with a plan to buy at least 1 pair of shoes, maybe 2. Left empty handed. Not the store's fault for AE not making the Sea Island in narrows, but hardly accommodating with their lack of sizes.

I think they're going to regret this limited stock idea.
post #3019 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP View Post


Dan, people on here will say the full strap on the Randolph makes it the most formal/least casual. I did not know this when I bought mine; I just fell in love with the bourbon color during the first fitting. Went back and bought the from the Shoebank later. The bourbon also has black piping, black sole edges, and is of course, burnished with black. Therefore, I cannot possibly imagine wearing it sockless with shorts. Oxblood may be a different animal.

To me, the Randolph looks a bit almond-shaped, looking down at it. It's definitely narrower all along its length than my 65 last shoes. I don't have any pics of it. I'll be pulling out the good camera this weekend, so I'll try to get some shots for you (and even try sockless with shorts!)

IMO, wearing any shoe with leather soles sockless with shorts seems a bit off to me. I even feel weird wearing my suede McGregors outside much. If I was in the market, I'd probably be looking at an Addison or Kirkwood. OTOH, I think @CMT1 wears his tan saddle Kenwoods everywhere, and that's a nice material on leather soles, too.

Regardless, check your fit with actual shoes. Loafers seems to be real tough to dial in.

Exactly the kind of advice I'm looking for. Thank you.

The leather sole + sockless doesn't really bother me. I probably would not do that too often, anyway. I have the Kirkwood and wore it all last Summer. I will probably go try each at the store since they seem to be a different animal.
post #3020 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post

My local (non-outlet) store was very limited in sizes. Shocking actually.

I tried on a Sea Island and the new sneaker in 9D - and they had to pull the display model on both. No 9.5D in the sneaker and they don't make the Sea Island in a B width. Asked about what they had in 9.5C or 10B (since my last visit a few weeks ago, the manager said I was wearing the wrong size - though he didn't remember me or the conversation this time around) and was told very little. I went in with a plan to buy at least 1 pair of shoes, maybe 2. Left empty handed. Not the store's fault for AE not making the Sea Island in narrows, but hardly accommodating with their lack of sizes.

I'm surprised that they don't make the Sea Island in a narrow size considering a lot of people (like myself) only buy AE shoes because they come in narrow sizes. Did you try shorter sizes in a D to see if they would fit??

I would ask them to get your brannock size into the store of the other shoes you are looking for.
post #3021 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP View Post

I think they're going to regret this limited stock idea.
I don't think that they will regret it. I don't think that they were smart enough to see what would happen in the first place. With limited stock of sizes and widths, people will walk away empty-handed. Sales of narrow and wide shoes will decline, and they'll offer fewer and fewer options, justifying that decision with the low sales numbers.
Personally, I'm not comfortable ordering an expensive shoe that may or may not fit. They've made it a lot more difficult with new lasts.
This is the beginning of the end for narrow and wider shoes at AE.
post #3022 of 17669


I agree. I wanted to take advantage of the sale and get a Cody in 10C. It's not in stock, so I'd have to wait 6 weeks to find out if they actually fit well. It's just not important enough to me to wait the six weeks for what may not work for me. I suppose I'll wind up trying a second if its still in stock whenever they go on sale. I'm not paying the restocking fee just to try them out, and I'm not going to pay more for seconds than firsts. Keeping so many sizes is what kept them afloat during the recession so many years ago. Seems like a dumb idea to me, but what do I know. I'm just a typical AE customer. 

post #3023 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP View Post

OTOH, I think @CMT1 wears his tan saddle Kenwoods everywhere, and that's a nice material on leather soles, too.

It's true, I'm a Kenwood kind of dude! Straight out of the box, it felt like I had worn them for years.

I wear them with and without socks, and through every kind of weather. They have seen a lot of rain and, despite some water stains that cannot be seen when worn, they still bounce back to look good enough for chinos.

New:







The last pic I took of them, after last November's yearly recon of Saphir Reno'Mat + Renovateur, and a coat of AE neutral polish:




I cannot fathom being happier with $127 seconds. If you can find a pair of Kenwood and they fit, enjoy yourself!
post #3024 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by MattRiv View Post

Did you try shorter sizes in a D to see if they would fit??

I would ask them to get your brannock size into the store of the other shoes you are looking for.

 

The majority of my AEs are 9D. The Sea Islands in 9D were too short, so dropping down in length wasn't an option. Funny, they make it in D and EEE.

 

Re: ordering in shoes - I agree with @redmusic1. With my current collection, my store visits are limited to seasonal purchases and checking out a new style. This would be the perfect time to close a sale. But its hardly worth waiting for shipping/store revisit, or worse the 6 week construction time. Plus the longer I wait, the more I will keep an eye out for sales, 2nds, ebay, etc.

post #3025 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by RichieP View Post


I think they're going to regret this limited stock idea.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by mreams99 View Post


I don't think that they will regret it. I don't think that they were smart enough to see what would happen in the first place. With limited stock of sizes and widths, people will walk away empty-handed. Sales of narrow and wide shoes will decline, and they'll offer fewer and fewer options, justifying that decision with the low sales numbers.
Personally, I'm not comfortable ordering an expensive shoe that may or may not fit. They've made it a lot more difficult with new lasts.
This is the beginning of the end for narrow and wider shoes at AE.

 

 

I sincerely hope you are wrong.  Sadly I fear you are 100% spot on.  I don't really understand the current obsession (in all industries) with super low inventory.  I understand you want to be nimble and not have a ton product in outdated styles languishing in stores all over the country.  But doesn't the online footprint lessen that impact?  Shouldn't the have a centralized account of evert shoe they have, and its location?  Sort of like a distributed warehouse.  If someone could please explain this to me, I really would like to try to understand.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by redmusic1 View Post
 


I agree. I wanted to take advantage of the sale and get a Cody in 10C. It's not in stock, so I'd have to wait 6 weeks to find out if they actually fit well. It's just not important enough to me to wait the six weeks for what may not work for me. I suppose I'll wind up trying a second if its still in stock whenever they go on sale. I'm not paying the restocking fee just to try them out, and I'm not going to pay more for seconds than firsts. Keeping so many sizes is what kept them afloat during the recession so many years ago. Seems like a dumb idea to me, but what do I know. I'm just a typical AE customer. 

 

 

 

Isn't it possible to return to a store for no restock fee?  I thought they still did that.  I know its true for seconds returned to an outlet.

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by middlepP View Post
 

 

The majority of my AEs are 9D. The Sea Islands in 9D were too short, so dropping down in length wasn't an option. Funny, they make it in D and EEE.

 

Re: ordering in shoes - I agree with @redmusic1. With my current collection, my store visits are limited to seasonal purchases and checking out a new style. This would be the perfect time to close a sale. But its hardly worth waiting for shipping/store revisit, or worse the 6 week construction time. Plus the longer I wait, the more I will keep an eye out for sales, 2nds, ebay, etc.

 

 

Though I can get a very reasonable fit in E, I suspect my best fit in a dress balmoral 65 is EE.  I wouldn't know, since I've never seen one in real life.

 

 

I'm thankful I know have an outlet within a reasonable distance (35-40 miles).  Kristen at the Paramus outlet has been a godsend.  I think if people take the time to develop a rapport with an SA it will pay off in spades.   If you get hold of a good SA, and not some... "buckaroo", then you may have a chance.

 

BTW, I'm told outlets can order in firsts, though retail cannot order in seconds.  I don't think there is a restock fee if they do, but I haven't had to do so yet.

post #3026 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by ace13x View Post
 

 

 

Isn't it possible to return to a store for no restock fee?  I thought they still did that.  I know its true for seconds returned to an outlet.

 

 

 

Sure it is. That would be a 4+ hour drive to Birmingham or New Orleans. Outlet would be even further. Ordering a second to check sizing costs the ten dollar restock fee plus the time I'm out the dollars in my extremely small bank account while I wait for whoever to get around to doing the refund, which all takes at least two and half weeks.

 

edit: two and a half weeks from the time I call to getting my refund. 

post #3027 of 17669
Pretty interesting comments here....ive been complaining about this inventory change thing for quite some time now. @RichieP I'm sure you've heard this one before - they bring in some bozo newly graduated mbas that think they can improve the business. It always has to take such a big failed attempt for them to decide things aren't working. I don't know why they can't just have retail stores do the following - just stock as many sizes as possible in a representative selection, floor models only, then have people order stuff? I have to imagine the number of people walking out empty handed and frustrated like redmusic (and like me) would outweigh the walk in sales of d widths, sizes 9-10 they carry. But then again, what do I know.
post #3028 of 17669
Another thing - I totally did not like hearing about that made for the outlet thing. I know this isn't a direct comparison, but ever compare retail vs outlet for BR, A&F, Armani, N vs NR? I go looking for the retail stores surplus and avoid the outlet only stuff as its consistently lower quality.
post #3029 of 17669
@ace13x I think Kristen is a real anomaly - I've dealt with MANY SAs since I'm not an online shopper and she is orders of magnitude better than anyone else. My drive to Freeport is about 2.5 hours while my drive to Paramus is closer to 4. I'm debating whether to start biting the bullet just to deal with her again.
post #3030 of 17669
Quote:
Originally Posted by Neo1 View Post

the walk in sales of d widths, sizes 9-10 they carry

Funny thing is, I'm a 9.5D on the 65, which of course they always have in stock. It's everything else that's the problem. Neo, you are absolutely right about stocking at least one size per last on the floor. Why not do this? That wouldn't help me much, since I'm still not driving four and half hours to try a shoe on. But, not having them in stock and on hand at all in Wisconsin, as in when I order online, is just ridiculous. They could try something like R&C if they are going to refuse to stock odd sizing and make them all to order –sending shoes to be worn on carpet, just for fitting purposes. I think R&C sends two or three different sizes at a time for this purpose if I'm remembering correctly. 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread 2016 - News, Pictures, Sizing, Accessories, Clothing, etc