or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Australian Members - Page 2845

post #42661 of 57846

Is anyone interested in a pair of Meermin suede tassel loafers in snuff, size 8.5:

 

http://www.meermin.es/ficha_articulo.php?id=4061

 

Turns out I'm a size 8 for loafers and it's going to cost $80 to ship them back out :(

 

They were $260 shipped, I'd be willing to part with them for less to cut my losses. Unworn and in mint condition naturally, PM me if you're interested.

post #42662 of 57846

http://www.styleforum.net/t/365214/foster-son-henry-maxwell-official-affiliate-thread/470_10#post_6770225

 

Some amazing boots for bargain prices. 380 pounds for amazing boots? Bargain.

 

I bought my Edward Green oxford cap toe from F&S and they truly are a remarkable shoe. A brand you can trust.

post #42663 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post

I think PoP means he'll buy some Doc Martins, 12 up laces.

Well Tricker's was the factory where they shot Kinky Boots...
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post

I'd agree monkstraps are forgiving, perhaps singles more than doubles, perhaps the most forgiving after chukkas.

Quote:
Originally Posted by The False Prophet View Post

I would say that they're more forgiving: you can add an extra hole on the straps, if need be!

Hmm, no I still disagree. Laced shoes can be adjusted infinitely more than monks, which usually only have 3 holes on the strap (of course you can possibly add another on the tighter side but what a lot of bother). I agree re chukkas, they have laces - open laces at that.

In terms of forgiveness of fit I would say open laced > closed lace > monk straps > loafers.

Of course there are variations - some monks with the extra stitch across the vamp (see pic) won't stretch at all there, so if your instep is too high you are literally in a world of pain.

post #42664 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHoffa View Post

http://www.styleforum.net/t/365214/foster-son-henry-maxwell-official-affiliate-thread/470_10#post_6770225

Some amazing boots for bargain prices. 380 pounds for amazing boots? Bargain.

I bought my Edward Green oxford cap toe from F&S and they truly are a remarkable shoe. A brand you can trust.
50 quid postage... ptth.
post #42665 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post


50 quid postage... ptth.

Most places that ship from the U.K are at least 20 pounds.

 

The way I see it, it's all built into the total price of the goods.

post #42666 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by JimmyHoffa View Post

Most places that ship from the U.K are at least 20 pounds.

The way I see it, it's all built into the total price of the goods.
Well actually many are 10 pounds or free over a certain value of goods... but I agree with you, the total price should be the consideration. But 50 pounds on top of the sale prices does make some of the 'bargains' less attractive.
post #42667 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stiva View Post

Why the feck is he tucked up in bed wearing a tie?

Why the feck has she got clothes on?

FTFY.
post #42668 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post

Hmm, no I still disagree. Laced shoes can be adjusted infinitely more than monks, which usually only have 3 holes on the strap (of course you can possibly add another on the tighter side but what a lot of bother). I agree re chukkas, they have laces - open laces at that.
In terms of forgiveness of fit I would say open laced > closed lace > monk straps > loafers.
Of course there are variations - some monks with the extra stitch across the vamp (see pic) won't stretch at all there, so if your instep is too high you are literally in a world of pain. Warning: Spoiler! (Click to show)
mmh yes - I now realise not all monks are like mine or the ones I was thinking of. It seems some monks are made as if a closed laced shoe, then a monk flap across, others like a open laced shoe, with flap across. An interesting point. Also it depends how low down on the side the flap starts or is stitched to. Lower and more open and flexible or higher up and less flexible. Its the same with chukkas - some start at different points on the flaps.

As usual we are both right.
Naturally I'm righter than you but the two of us together are so right its godlike.
post #42669 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

Sigh...

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/executive-style/style/the-best-dressed-men-in-australia-20131202-2yksq.html

I don't know why I bother clicking on these things, I really don't.

 

It's for the d-marge readers. Had to be balanced for their readers. If you categorise each candidate into their genre of dressing, they do pretty well in their respective genres, I reckon.

 

- classic menswear

- wannabe classic menswear / clueless about fit / let me just put on a DB and some patterns

- streetwear / runway (those were done really well, IMHO).

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli2012 View Post
 

 

Nick Tobias does okay. Tudehope's just over the top. 

 

The rest are just a bad smell from the 00s...

 

Anyone with more than 3 ties, or three shoes seems over the top for you mate haahaha

post #42670 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by fxh View Post


As usual we are both right.
Naturally I'm righter than you but the two of us together are so right its godlike.
I thought I was wrong once, but I was mistaken.
post #42671 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stiva View Post

Why the feck is he tucked up in bed wearing a tie?

Why the feck is she kneeling like a supplicant to deliver a tray?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Foxhound View Post



Let me deconstruct the image for you.

Its 1950's USA a woman's place is in the home and the man is lord of his domain. The image shows him as boss with the little wife being the good submissive type bringing him breakfast in bed. He is dressed that way and posing in a manner that shows that he is satisfied with his lot in life, he is the boss and he is probably in post coital bliss. She kneeling shows subservience to his authority and she is dressed in PJ's and not dressed like Betty Page so their is the air of Doris Day innocence of the just married, the missionary position is probably all they know. Noticed the absence of children. Their working on it but sex is not something you can't discuss openly in advertising in the 1950's which why the food tray and its inference, its all Freudian stand in's representing something else. The ad works by essentially reinforcing 1950's notions of American masculinity. Its confirming and promoting a particular agenda namely if you wear one of our ties this could happen to you, doesn't matter how low on the corporate food chain you are at home your lord and master and she knows it.

Mind you after the feminist revolution of the 1970's and you tired that crap on today you would end up sleeping with the dog. biggrin.gif
post #42672 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Journeyman View Post

Sigh...

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/executive-style/style/the-best-dressed-men-in-australia-20131202-2yksq.html

I don't know why I bother clicking on these things, I really don't.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oli2012 View Post
 

 

Nick Tobias does okay. Tudehope's just over the top. 

 

The rest are just a bad smell from the 00s...

Quote:
Originally Posted by nabilmust View Post
 

 

It's for the d-marge readers. Had to be balanced for their readers. If you categorise each candidate into their genre of dressing, they do pretty well in their respective genres, I reckon.

 

- classic menswear

- wannabe classic menswear / clueless about fit / let me just put on a DB and some patterns

- streetwear / runway (those were done really well, IMHO).

 

Actually for my money, the best-dressed from that bunch of images was Grant Pearce. Beautiful fit, classic style, and a touch of dandyism imparted by the polka-dot tie. Runner-up was Nick Tobias.

 

The most interesting thing about that photoessay is the thumbs. It seems that Exec Style's readers approve of black and white, approve even more of black and no white, and disapprove of unstructured shoulders, sneakers, and tassel loafers worn without socks.

 

So I'm guessing the voters were mainly Melbourne-based.

post #42673 of 57846
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stiva View Post

Why the feck is he tucked up in bed wearing a tie?

Why the feck has she got clothes on?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Prince of Paisley View Post

FTFY.

Because they're probably married.

post #42674 of 57846
Extremely inappropriate.







post #42675 of 57846
I think the ADF are still using this one.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › Australian Members