or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › How do others rate Allen Edmond Shoes
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How do others rate Allen Edmond Shoes - Page 3

post #31 of 49
Quote:
A plain cap toe bal C&J handgrade will no doubt be more carefully made than an A-E Park Avenue. Maybe it will be more elegantly lasted, but really won't only the most discerning and educated eye be able to descry the nice differences?
Yes, but I'll know. I don't really buy shoes for the impact that they'll have on others. I'm more concerned with their impact on me, and that impact is much greater for, say, a Vass shoe than it is for an Allen-Edmonds shoe. (I'm not at all trying to disparage your shoe collection, your buying methodology, or your value judgments. I'm just pointing out that everyone's value judgments are different.)
post #32 of 49
Quote:
(I'm not at all trying to disparage your shoe collection, your buying methodology, or your value judgments. I'm just pointing out that everyone's value judgments are different.)
Dont listen to him... He did it to me too... Now I have some nice shoes that I am enjoying and feel great and its all HIS FAULT... JJF
post #33 of 49
Quote:
Dont listen to him... He did it to me too... Now I have some nice shoes that I am enjoying and feel great and its all HIS FAULT...
Give a man a fish, and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish, and he'll die from hunger because he's too busy complaining about something or other.
post #34 of 49
Quote:
Quote:
(JLibourel @ April 05 2005,22:30) A plain cap toe bal C&J handgrade will no doubt be more carefully made than an A-E Park Avenue. Maybe it will be more elegantly lasted, but really won't only the most discerning and educated eye be able to descry the nice differences?
Yes, but I'll know. I don't really buy shoes for the impact that they'll have on others. I'm more concerned with their impact on me, and that impact is much greater for, say, a Vass shoe than it is for an Allen-Edmonds shoe. (I'm not at all trying to disparage your shoe collection, your buying methodology, or your value judgments. I'm just pointing out that everyone's value judgments are different.)
Perhaps for you, Mr. Cusey, (and I do respect you for being one of the most knowledgeable and tasteful of all the forum regulars--if Manton is our Achilles, then you are our Ajax ). However, as I previously stated, in my world in slovenly California the difference between A-E, on the one hand, and Vass, C&J Handgrade or EG, on the other, would be simply a matter of gilding the lily. If I were driving up a dusty road among starving villagers in Bourkina Fassou, it would probably matter little to them or me whether I was driving a Cadillac or a Rolls. If I lived in the more upscale parts of Beverly Hills, it would probably be of great significance. I think the analogy is pretty close. One thing that I haven't seen much discussed in these threads is how much you are paying simply for the name. For example, you can buy an absolutely top-of-the-line Spanish shotgun for, maybe $30,000. A current "London Best" shotgun will cost you probably 2 1/2 times as much. There probably will be about in nickel's worth of difference between the Spanish and the English guns, but the fact is that names like "Purdey" and "Holland & Holland" have a cachet and instant recognition that "Arrieta" or "Grulla" do not. Given the cultic devotion displayed toward Greens, I can't help wondering whether you are paying a substantial surcharge just for the name. (This of course would be even more emphatic in the case of JLL.)
post #35 of 49
You may be right if you consider conservative styles. If you look for black oxfords AE is probably a very good value but if you are interested in something different then alternatives get more limited. If you want something like -say- Berluti shoes then the high price you pay is not just the name, you buy from them because nobody else makes the same kind of shoe.
post #36 of 49
[quote]
Quote:
Originally Posted by jcusey,April 05 2005,20:42
However, as I previously stated, in my world in slovenly California the difference between A-E, on the one hand, and Vass, C&J Handgrade or EG, on the other, would be simply a matter of gilding the lily. If I were driving up a dusty road among starving villagers in Bourkina Fassou, it would probably matter little to them or me whether I was driving a Cadillac or a Rolls. If I lived in the more upscale parts of Beverly Hills, it would probably be of great significance.
What I meant is that I buy my shoes for myself and myself only. I want what I buy to be situationally appropriate, of course, but it's completely immaterial to me whether anyone else notices anything at all unusual about them. I don't want shoe geeks to notice anything about them other than that they look good. I know what makes them special, and that's enough.
Quote:
One thing that I haven't seen much discussed in these threads is how much you are paying simply for the name. ... Given the cultic devotion displayed toward Greens, I can't help wondering whether you are paying a substantial surcharge just for the name. (This of course would be even more emphatic in the case of JLL.)
Well, you're paying a significant markup for the Allen-Edmonds name, too (or, at least, you would be if you paid retail for them). Allen-Edmonds is a luxury brand. Not to the extent that Edward Green is, certainly, but it is a luxury brand. So, yes, Edward Green can charge more than they otherwise would be able to because of the reputation of the Edward Green name. That doesn't mean that anyone is getting rich from making EG shoes, and it doesn't change the fact that you can't buy a shoe equivalent to an EG from any other manufacturer at any price. Other shoes may have their own virtues and may be superior to EG shoes in any of a variety of characteristics, but they are not EGs. The same can be said of a Vass shoe or a Lattanzi shoe or a Kiton shoe.
post #37 of 49
Duveen: Interesting post. I wonder if anybody's ever addressed the questions you've brought up. We could use that logic in the current events section of this forum; I'm trying to point out why a Pareto improvement doesn't exist in the real world. I'd also point out how age should play a role in the decision of whether or not to buy alota AE shoes or fewer AEs in exchange for a high quality Edward Green. I'm going to have to make several assumptions first: that since we established that after AE, we're talking about diminishing returns, that AE is a really good shoe. The Green is more expensive because its more stylish and uses better leather, however this does not necessairly translate to a longer lifetime. And, that the person truly likes every shoe he buys on discount. Otherwise, he's not really saving money by buying things he doesn't like and thus doesn't end up wearing. Let's look a young man who ends up buying 23 AEs. Since he can rotate all these shoes so that he minimizes the wear on each one, these shoes end up lasting a lifetime. So, this person ends up spreading the cost of $3000 from 2 years to 40 years. In this case, it might be better for the person to buy more AEs. However, the older man who doesn't have as many years to spread out the cost of the shoes. Let's say he ends up living 2 more years. Then, it doesn't matter if he rotates the shoes and minimizes the wear and tear on each individual shoe. In that case, it might be wiser to have bought fewer, more expensive shoes. The one problem with the first scenario is that nobody ends up maintaing the same standards as their incomes improve. Thus, with increased pay, the person moves to a nicer house, buys nicer things, etc... As good as AE is, I wonder if the person would continue wearing them and not eventually move up to a Alden, etc... at some point and thus lose the value of the investment he initally put in.
post #38 of 49
Quote:
Quote:
(JLibourel @ April 05 2005,22:30) A plain cap toe bal C&J handgrade will no doubt be more carefully made than an A-E Park Avenue. Maybe it will be more elegantly lasted, but really won't only the most discerning and educated eye be able to descry the nice differences?
Yes, but I'll know. I don't really buy shoes for the impact that they'll have on others. I'm more concerned with their impact on me, and that impact is much greater for, say, a Vass shoe than it is for an Allen-Edmonds shoe. (I'm not at all trying to disparage your shoe collection, your buying methodology, or your value judgments. I'm just pointing out that everyone's value judgments are different.)
I totally agree with Jcusey, I buy to please myself and not others... and the simple knowledge that the shoe that I'm wearing is __ (fill in the blank with your own criteria), is enough for me. As for my feelings towards AE, I personally find them unattractive; the last and patterns being inelegant. Again, that is just me.
post #39 of 49
Quote:
As for my feelings towards AE, I personally find them unattractive; the last and patterns being inelegant. Again, that is just me.
Wait 'till you've seen my white bucks . MtB
post #40 of 49
I like AE, mainly for their no nonsense styling, conservative taste, and great customer service. In my younger days, when I was starting out in my career, I wore them almost exclusively. Lexington was my model of choice. Since then, I have moved on to EG as my go to shoe, but I still have a soft spot for AE. The best thing about them for me personally, in the last few years, is I have sent many pairs back to the factory to have golf soles put on them. I wouldnt wear my AE's often anymore anyway, but as a golf shoe, they have a second career. They are comfortable, long lasting, and I just dont wear them on rainy days on the course.
post #41 of 49
Wanted to chime in once more. First, JLibourel makes the point that 'a cap-toe is a cap-toe'. I am not sure that I agree with that - there are definitely differences and while they might be somewhat subtle, I would say that they are real. I do see what he means in the sense that he also said 'I wouldn't want to ruin a gorgeous pair of shoes' and when looking at maximizing value. That was the point of 10 A-Es in 'basic styles' - those are your workhorse shoes. While I'd advocate having a couple of absolutely first-rate classics to bring out for major business occassions, I can see being satisfied with A-Es for many basic styles (again, if that is your preference - I am generally not crazy about the last shapes in any except the Park Avenue). The point of the additional spending on discrete items (e.g. paying full price to get the shoe that you really want or that is truly distinctive) I was advocating earlier is less to get superlative basics, but rather to get the special shoes that you just love. There are plenty of styles that A-E definitely won't do as well (or at all) - maybe that's suede, Budapest last shoes, monks, or even true spectators. I certainly understand the 'wife alert' risk of a single significant expense, but I'd argue that if you were really only buying one or two shoes for the year (having already acquired the 10 pair you need for day to day), you might be able to sneak it by somehow. And I would certainly say that there is no way to compare A-E Broadstreets to most of the other spectators discussed on the boards - they are all one leather and the ones I have seen are black and white, with a $100 fee above the full retail (which all agree is a bit high) to get brown and white.
post #42 of 49
I like AE shoes a lot. They are very comfortable, which is not something you can say for may other dress shoes. In addition, their "clunky" styling has some features. When I wear fuller, weightier trousers (corduroy, flannel), or trousers cut more generously, I find that the clunky AE scale looks much better than my svelte little italian shoes which get lost under all that drape. -boston
post #43 of 49
Quote:
I like AE shoes a lot. They are very comfortable, which is not something you can say for may other dress shoes. In addition, their "clunky" styling has some features. When I wear fuller, weightier trousers (corduroy, flannel), or trousers cut more generously, I find that the clunky AE scale looks much better than my svelte little italian shoes which get lost under all that drape. -boston
What do you mean by "svelte little Italian shoes"? Surely not the shoes posted by RIDER of the Marteganis, Borgiolis, and Gravatis? Or even Santoni, Lattanzi, Kiton? Or were you thinking along the lines of Gucci and Artioli?
post #44 of 49
Quote:
What do you mean by "svelte little Italian shoes"?
Tanino Crisci Grayson
post #45 of 49
Very much enjoying reading this thread, as it's making me seriously think about my shoe buying strategy. I agree with jcusey that the shoes I wear are for me only (I work in an environment where very few know or care about shoes), but I'm also looking to build a core wardrobe of well-made, workhorse shoes. Still hoping to build the core around Grenson's from Bennies, purchased near the AE price point. If that doesn't happen by May, I'll need to re-consider how much I can spend on the core and how many styles I really need as workhorse shoes. Based on other threads about "indispensible shoes", etc., the plan is to buy: 1. black, plain-toe bluchers (don't wear suits very often, this is the shoe style I most commonly wear) 2. brown wingtip 3. monkstrap or maybe a loafer (can I wear them with jeans?) 4. shoe for rainy, slushy weather (suggestions?) If the Grenson's don't materialize, I may need to look at AEs from the ebay store, or acquire them over time.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Classic Menswear
Styleforum › Forums › Men's Style › Classic Menswear › How do others rate Allen Edmond Shoes