How is J Press Different than Brooks Brothers

[vegancrabcakes]

Why is it that anything traditional has to be tweaked until it bares scantr resemblance to what it once was. Men wore the sack suit from Brooks Brothers and J throughout the twentieth century , and we're always considered properly dressed. These captains of industry were hardly considered 'overweight country bumping with orthopedic shoes"
Since the traditional business suit was standard dress in major American metropolitan areas , the 'country bumpkin" designation suggests a severe bias on the part of previous poster , rather than an opinion based in reality

Let me ask you a question: why are you under the impression that the J Press of today is keeping to a certain form/tradition of excellence, when by many accounts they have lost their way and are now a shadow of their former self? I am a huge fan of the dartless sack jacket for instance, but whatever J. Press is doing right now is not it, and will certainly not make customers look like HW Bush or JFK.

 

[Leander walker]

I am in the store on a weekly basis. Everything I have purchased is of top quality and the styles continue to be timeless. Oxford cloth shirts still quite robust in material and construction. I don't know where they have "lost their way". It is a very precise and perhaps boring style but it is timeless and I do not notice a change in quality , as unfortunately I had with Brooks Brothers. Brooks Brothers was always my favourite store for quality and classic style. Under the ownership of Marks and Spencer and with Joe Gromek as Brooks ceo,Brooks began chasing the trendy 20-something shopper with horrendous ,,garriish styles. The traditional customer ran away in droves, , seeking refuge at J Press. Sadly,Brooks has never recovered and the ineptness in how Brooks Brothers was run during this period and the corresponding decline would make for a great book and stands as a glaring example of how not to retain long time cystomers

 

[sargeinaz]

I am in the store on a weekly basis. Everything I have purchased is of top quality and the styles continue to be timeless. Oxford cloth shirts still quite robust in material and construction. I don't know where they have "lost their way". It is a very precise and perhaps boring style but it is timeless and I do not notice a change in quality , as unfortunately I had with Brooks Brothers. Brooks Brothers was always my favourite store for quality and classic style. Under the ownership of Marks and Spencer and with Joe Gromek as Brooks ceo,Brooks began chasing the trendy 20-something shopper with horrendous ,,garriish styles. The traditional customer ran away in droves, , seeking refuge at J Press. Sadly,Brooks has never recovered and the ineptness in how Brooks Brothers was run during this period and the corresponding decline would make for a great book and stands as a glaring example of how not to retain long time cystomers

I think you’re exaggerating what we’re saying. I have no issue with the quality. I think it’s fair for what they charge. We’re saying small tweaks like shortening sweater length or giving the jackets a liiiittle more shape in the waist and softer, more rounded shoulder. Very small, carefully thought out changes that would probably still make them look “boring and old man” to the vast majority of people.

Nothing crazy. Nothing like what brooks did. We all know how that story turned out. Nobody ever said follow exactly what brooks brothers did.

Would these small changes make traditional customers run in droves? I don’t know. Maybe. Would that make you run away from them?

Also, you could turn around and say “just shop at Rubato or Drakes or the Armoury if you want those clothes”. And you’d be correct as well. I don’t claim to have all the answers, I just feel the changes were proposing would help people like us buy more AND retain people like yourself as a customer in my humble opinion.

 

[rdstour]

Let me ask you a question: why are you under the impression that the J Press of today is keeping to a certain form/tradition of excellence, when by many accounts they have lost their way and are now a shadow of their former self? I am a huge fan of the dartless sack jacket for instance, but whatever J. Press is doing right now is not it, and will certainly not make customers look like HW Bush or JFK.

The reasons you outlined in your post are basically meant to be addressed by J. Press' Pennant Label. Check them out here: https://jpressonline.com/collections/pennant-tailored-clothing

Mainline Press is super TRAD for a reason, and they see no point in changing that. I wouldn't expect O'Connell's or similar brands to do that either unless they introduce a new fit or a sub-label (to indicate something different from their historical norm)

 

[rdstour]

I am in the store on a weekly basis. Everything I have purchased is of top quality and the styles continue to be timeless. Oxford cloth shirts still quite robust in material and construction. I don't know where they have "lost their way". It is a very precise and perhaps boring style but it is timeless and I do not notice a change in quality , as unfortunately I had with Brooks Brothers. Brooks Brothers was always my favourite store for quality and classic style. Under the ownership of Marks and Spencer and with Joe Gromek as Brooks ceo,Brooks began chasing the trendy 20-something shopper with horrendous ,,garriish styles. The traditional customer ran away in droves, , seeking refuge at J Press. Sadly,Brooks has never recovered and the ineptness in how Brooks Brothers was run during this period and the corresponding decline would make for a great book and stands as a glaring example of how not to retain long time cystomers

As for Brooks, I think that's a wholly different story. Brooks Brothers has had way more cultural and stylistic influence over a wider part of the population (e.g., Mens and Womens, Formal and Casual) -- Look at a BB Catalog from the 70s-80s and you'll see they were chasing trends and introducing differentiated collections for a long time. While the M&S era was a disaster in terms of getting away from the basics, I'd argue that the whole Vecchio era was about righting the ship and trying to keep relevant. Macro-level, formalwear has been on the decline over the last 4 decades -- so to expect that Brooks Brothers not try to "modernize" or update things would have been catastrophic for them.

The die-hard Trad has always been a shrinking minority -- it makes sense to cater to such a segment if you're hyper-focused and localized (Press, O'Connells), but far less sense when you're an international clothing chain with tons of retail stores and outlets -- you need to look after multiple segments and appeal to them in different ways. Doesn't mean they didn't make mistakes along the way, but I think trying to pin Brooks Brothers to J Press is an apples-to-oranges comparison from the late 70s onwards.

 

[comrade]

Haven't been in Press in several years. This comment may sound like a heresy, but their
prices are too low for quality trad garments. Check O'Connells and Andover Shop, where I
recently got an MTM sport coat. I used to shop at Chipp, now gone. In the late 80s an MTM
suit ran me around $650. Press's prices were comparable in those days.

 

[vegancrabcakes]

The reasons you outlined in your post are basically meant to be addressed by J. Press' Pennant Label. Check them out here: https://jpressonline.com/collections/pennant-tailored-clothing

Mainline Press is super TRAD for a reason, and they see no point in changing that. I wouldn't expect O'Connell's or similar brands to do that either unless they introduce a new fit or a sub-label (to indicate something different from their historical norm)

Thanks for sharing. While I like how these items look, I am not a huge fan of the completely unstructured construction, nor the fact that they are all imported (esp. given that the prices of Pennant label are only marginally lower than mainline, which is mostly made in USA/Canada).

While I hope not to get too pedantic, I have not yet seen a convincing argument as to why the mainline items are more "trad" compared to the Pennant items (purely from a stylistic point of view). If anything, the Pennant items seem to stick more closely to Ivy features including 3-roll-2, 2-button cuffs, dartless front, and patch/flap pockets whereas many of the mainline sports coats/blazers now have jetted pockets and 3 button cuffs. I also think the fabrics in these Pennant sport coats look quite classic to me, whereas the mainline tweeds are too loud (e.g., the gun checks and glenn plaid checks; in my opinion, they would look a lot better if they were subtler and lower contrast).

Sweaters covering the crotch is not "trad", they are just too long. Not stocking sizes 36 and 38 is not "trad", it's just avoiding stocking smaller sizes. Shaggy dogs being excessively scratchy is not "trad", it is just using wool with too-coarse fibres.

 

[St. Anger Snare Tone]

Why is it that anything traditional has to be tweaked until it bares scantr resemblance to what it once was.

Me when they took the lead out of petrol

 

[Leander walker]

For all here who think j press has to totally change to be "relevant ' for today , consider Brooks Brothers , who did exactly what is being proposed in this forum. There was no more iconic and respected chain men's retailer for a large part of the twentieth century. A bastion of good taste , quality products largely made in United States and England. Marks and Spencer destroyed the company chasing the millenial shopper and trying to stay " relevant". When DelVechhio bought the company he was hailed as a savior who would return Brooks to its former glory. But he didn't do that. While quality improved in some products,the products were largely made in Italy and the styles reflected the continental silhouette,slim and extra slim shirts,exagerased. tapered waist suits. No more Peal and Co shoes made for them in England. No more Peal briefcases made by Swaine Adeney in England. Instead,Italuan shoes of lesser quality and briefcases and accessories made in Italy and China Bankruptcy followed and the Simon malls saved the company. I still visit nyc store once a month and while there are some offerings that are quality , it is quite sad what has happened to this beloved retailer. 346 Madison was a rite of passage for so many,the excitement of getting your first suit and visiting this mecca of business clothing and good taste. I'm glad they still exist,but today it is a couple of steps above Charles Tyrwhitt. So changing what works dones not guarantee success , and Brooks Brothers is exhibit A

 

[rdstour]

For all here who think j press has to totally change to be "relevant ' for today , consider Brooks Brothers , who did exactly what is being proposed in this forum. There was no more iconic and respected chain men's retailer for a large part of the twentieth century. A bastion of good taste , quality products largely made in United States and England. Marks and Spencer destroyed the company chasing the millenial shopper and trying to stay " relevant". When DelVechhio bought the company he was hailed as a savior who would return Brooks to its former glory. But he didn't do that. While quality improved in some products,the products were largely made in Italy and the styles reflected the continental silhouette,slim and extra slim shirts,exagerased. tapered waist suits. No more Peal and Co shoes made for them in England. No more Peal briefcases made by Swaine Adeney in England. Instead,Italuan shoes of lesser quality and briefcases and accessories made in Italy and China Bankruptcy followed and the Simon malls saved the company. I still visit nyc store once a month and while there are some offerings that are quality , it is quite sad what has happened to this beloved retailer. 346 Madison was a rite of passage for so many,the excitement of getting your first suit and visiting this mecca of business clothing and good taste. I'm glad they still exist,but today it is a couple of steps above Charles Tyrwhitt. So changing what works dones not guarantee success , and Brooks Brothers is exhibit A

I don't think you're giving enough credit where credit is due for the Del Vecchio's ownership:

• Peal and Co shoes and leather goods continued under their tenure (You're overstating the product shift away from Made in England goods; the Made in Italy stuff was very solid)
• Despite deteriorating financial conditions, they held onto their USA factories in MA, NC, and NY (which produced about 7% of their total goods) -- for their neckties, dress shirts etc.
• They still did MTO and MTM, in addition to RTO stuff
• Unlike lesser priced competitors, they stuck to Dress-Shirt Sizing vs Alpha-sizing everything
• They still had USA-made clothing at a higher priced-tier offering
• They attempted to navigate a mix of TRAD vs Modern with their fits and lineup (e.g. Golden Fleece vs Black Fleece, Fitzgerald vs Madison Fits etc.) and expanded their Womenswear collection to appeal to a broader base (e.g. bringing on Zac Posen etc.)
• 346 Madison Ave and other flagships were retained throughout

Yes, they did shift production to other countries, but what large big-box retailer/clothing company hasn't? This isn't the 70s/80s any more. Free trade and manufacturing capabilities have all moved off-shore. If anything Del Vecchio era was very much a "Yes And" approach -- to try and retain what was still classic Brooks, but restlessly innovate and push the envelope.

It wasn't perfect, but the ABG/Simon era is a great juxtaposition to what came before it.

 

[sargeinaz]

I don’t know why you keep saying that we think J Press should do exactly what brooks did or “totally change to be relevant”. Nobody is saying that. I already outlined what we meant, but you keep saying that we all want J Press to do everything brooks did. It’s weird.

 

[mak1277]

I don’t know why you keep saying that we think J Press should do exactly what brooks did or “totally change to be relevant”. Nobody is saying that. I already outlined what we meant, but you keep saying that we all want J Press to do everything brooks did. It’s weird.

I just don’t understand why you care. Just shop somewhere else. Do you try and “fix” every business that doesn’t suit your tastes?

Boy, I wish McDonald’s would serve steaks and seafood. I’d be more likely to eat there.

 

[sargeinaz]

I just don’t understand why you care. Just shop somewhere else. Do you try and “fix” every business that doesn’t suit your tastes?

Boy, I wish McDonald’s would serve steaks and seafood. I’d be more likely to eat there.

No I don’t and it’s a clothing forum and it’s just a discussion? And I literally already said earlier in this thread that someone can just say “don’t shop at J Press then” and they’d be correct in saying that. I mean you cared enough to comment on it no?

 

[Bavo]

I agree that J Press' sack jackets, especially their models being made by Empire, are excessively boxy even for a sack and when compared to their previous Southwick-made models (don't get me started on their S. Cohen era, which has mercifully ended). However, if you want a bit of waist suppression and shape, it is an easy alteration from the side-seams and one actively encouraged by them when trying on in-store if it suits your build. As was mentioned in a previous post, their prices are fairly low for comparable quality and construction and often available for sale. So even now that I buy from them mostly online, the cost of having this alteration performed locally is palatable.