I have no reason to doubt BB's claim and that they introduced the name Peal to the American audience in 1953. I was told (although I don't know for certain) that the bespoke shoemakers Peal & Co closed down somewhere in the early sixties. It is quite possible (again, I don't know) that Peal in London also sold ready-to-wear shoes (many bespoke firms did: Wildsmith, Alan McAfee, Maxwell.) Had BB not gone for Peal, they might have settled for one of the other names mentioned. Maybe they even negotiated with John Lobb first, but did not come to an arrangement. So in 1953 Peal gave BB the permission to sell a ready-to-wear range in the States. Obviously an arrangement beneficial to both parties: Peal got money and BB some old-world cachet. This might have simply been a licence of the name or, at this point, the firm had control of designs and the use of manufacturers; i.e. sold the range wholesale to BB. When Peal went under, I believe it was Foster in Jermyn Street who bought the lasts and also has use of the Peal logo, just as BB has. Whether the shoes produced under the Peal name today have any resemblance to the real McCoy, I have no idea. Designs for clothing or shoes change with fashion and Peal shoes, were the firm still in existence, would be different today than from the 1950s. I presume that over the years BB has changed manufacturers quite a few times. As there are considerable costs involved in making a new set of lasts, they might have been made on whatever lasts the different manufacturers hade in stock already. Alfred Sargeant, EG or C&J will make shoes to the specifications of the firm that places the order. Maybe the buyer in charge of the Peal collection at BB today, has a sense of history and is very particular in his specifications, or maybe he does not care about that. Bottom line in any commercial environment is the question whether or not it sells.