Allen Edmonds Appreciation Thread 2020 - News, Pictures, Clothing, Accessories, etc.

[Shoenut]

It doesn’t say that everyone is making masks either.

I could have sworn that it said they are using 80% capacity for masks. That leaves some wiggle room for shoes.

 

[Shoenut]

i don’t believe they have updated their computer system since 1983. I have it on good authority that the hamsters on the wheels all wear leggings

I have hope that they will upgrade to jeggings.

 

[savvysartorial]

Black shell Monday.

Spoiler: Plain toe bal

 

[Roycru]

Wearing Rust Stinger Beckleys and waiting in line at Trader Joe's.

No "A-E In The Wild" picture today. To make up for the lack of an "A-E In The Wild" picture, a picture of people unclear on the concept of standing in line 6 feet apart, even though there are pieces of yellow tape on the ground spaced 6 feet apart.

At least it wasn't raining any more.

On the non shoe related subject many are talking about, two charts from the UCLA Health COVID-19 website.

As of midnight last night.

As of midnight a week ago last night.

Since I didn't go to Medical School not sure what this all means, other than it looks like around 10% (or less) of the people who test Positive need to be hospitalized and around 10% (or less) of all the people with symptoms UCLA doctors order tests for test Positive.

 

[DawgPound]

WFH like most and haven’t worn my new strandmoks. Whelp, figured since I’m working, might as well start dressing more like it (albeit much more casual). I’m enjoying these a lot today.

 

[ProfilaBinding]

^^^^
So beautiful.

 

[James1051]

WFH like most and haven’t worn my new strandmoks. Whelp, figured since I’m working, might as well start dressing more like it (albeit much more casual). I’m enjoying these a lot today.

View attachment 1367188

Those are fantastic! Congrats
In your picture they look like a mid-blue leaning almost slate blue. Is that how they appear to you IRL? online they look more like a sky (cough Carolina cough) blue

 

[suuteebird]

 

[CommanderMcBragg]

Men:

I realize this is the Edmonds thread, but I would like to go off the board here if I may. (Nobody answers the Oak Street/SF thread.)

For non-work (or non-AE) situations, my go-to casual shoe is a Horween hand-sewn from Oak Street Bootmakers. These are exactly like the old LL Bean Bluchers I wore in the 1980s, only they are much better quality than Leon Leonwood's offerings of yore. I'm not a sweater-tied-around-the-neck guy nor a rugby shirt guy, but I find these shoes to be so beautiful in their simplicity; so timeless in their understated styling, that they sort of feel like the Fender Telecaster of footwear.

Before I get to my inquiry, I offer the disclaimer that this question is directed to the neurotic shoemen amongst us--a balanced, rational person will find this annoying. Just warning you up front. With that out of the way...

Whenever I find quality article--clothing, sauté pans, shoes--I always make sure I have two, so that I have backup when the one in use wears out. With this particular pair of Oak Streets, they seem to last me @2 years before the camp soles get thin on tread and the shoes generally look blown out and worn. I wait for them to go on sale from the original $280 down as low as $180 once in a blue moon, and then I pounce. My dilemma is that I am ready to break out a new pair, and I have to choose between a new-in-box pair I bought 2-3 years back, and a pair I just purchased. The shoes are the same model and are virtually identical in construction, but as with AE, close inspection reveals subtle differences, like different inner sole styles and marginally different eyelets. Is it recommended to go FIFO, and release the older pair into the wild, or do I preserve the older ones and start wearing the newer productions? The Horween chromexcel leather appears equally supple, so I don't think that's a point in favor of going with the older ones.

I'm curious to see how others make this determination.

 

[Lionel Hutz]

Men:

I realize this is the Edmonds thread, but I would like to go off the board here if I may. (Nobody answers the Oak Street/SF thread.)

For non-work (or non-AE) situations, my go-to casual shoe is a Horween hand-sewn from Oak Street Bootmakers. These are exactly like the old LL Bean Bluchers I wore in the 1980s, only they are much better quality than Leon Leonwood's offerings of yore. I'm not a sweater-tied-around-the-neck guy nor a rugby shirt guy, but I find these shoes to be so beautiful in their simplicity; so timeless in their understated styling, that they sort of feel like the Fender Telecaster of footwear.

Before I get to my inquiry, I offer the disclaimer that this question is directed to the neurotic shoemen amongst us--a balanced, rational person will find this annoying. Just warning you up front. With that out of the way...

Whenever I find quality article--clothing, sauté pans, shoes--I always make sure I have two, so that I have backup when the one in use wears out. With this particular pair of Oak Streets, they seem to last me @2 years before the camp soles get thin on tread and the shoes generally look blown out and worn. I wait for them to go on sale from the original $280 down as low as $180 once in a blue moon, and then I pounce. My dilemma is that I am ready to break out a new pair, and I have to choose between a new-in-box pair I bought 2-3 years back, and a pair I just purchased. The shoes are the same model and are virtually identical in construction, but as with AE, close inspection reveals subtle differences, like different inner sole styles and marginally different eyelets. Is it recommended to go FIFO, and release the older pair into the wild, or do I preserve the older ones and start wearing the newer productions? The Horween chromexcel leather appears equally supple, so I don't think that's a point in favor of going with the older ones.

I'm curious to see how others make this determination.

View attachment 1367218

FIFO, I start rotating in the second pair before the first is toast. That way the second is well broken in when the first is dead.

 

[Shoenut]

Men:

I realize this is the Edmonds thread, but I would like to go off the board here if I may. (Nobody answers the Oak Street/SF thread.)

For non-work (or non-AE) situations, my go-to casual shoe is a Horween hand-sewn from Oak Street Bootmakers. These are exactly like the old LL Bean Bluchers I wore in the 1980s, only they are much better quality than Leon Leonwood's offerings of yore. I'm not a sweater-tied-around-the-neck guy nor a rugby shirt guy, but I find these shoes to be so beautiful in their simplicity; so timeless in their understated styling, that they sort of feel like the Fender Telecaster of footwear.

Before I get to my inquiry, I offer the disclaimer that this question is directed to the neurotic shoemen amongst us--a balanced, rational person will find this annoying. Just warning you up front. With that out of the way...

Whenever I find quality article--clothing, sauté pans, shoes--I always make sure I have two, so that I have backup when the one in use wears out. With this particular pair of Oak Streets, they seem to last me @2 years before the camp soles get thin on tread and the shoes generally look blown out and worn. I wait for them to go on sale from the original $280 down as low as $180 once in a blue moon, and then I pounce. My dilemma is that I am ready to break out a new pair, and I have to choose between a new-in-box pair I bought 2-3 years back, and a pair I just purchased. The shoes are the same model and are virtually identical in construction, but as with AE, close inspection reveals subtle differences, like different inner sole styles and marginally different eyelets. Is it recommended to go FIFO, and release the older pair into the wild, or do I preserve the older ones and start wearing the newer productions? The Horween chromexcel leather appears equally supple, so I don't think that's a point in favor of going with the older ones.

I'm curious to see how others make this determination.

View attachment 1367218

You are definitely a shoe abuser. Both should be put into the wild and not jailed in a box or closet. This is truly against the People for Ethical Treatment of Shoes. PETS will hunt you down if this situation continues.

 

[EZB]

https://www.bizjournals.com/milwaukee/news/2020/04/06/allen-edmonds-temporarily-furloughs-employees.html

 

[madhat]

I'm cornfused guys. I know it's 11EE vs 11.5E, but why do my burgundy Randolph's toe profile closer match the brown Patriot toe than the bourbon Randolph? #datswack
I was looking at them side by side and was a bit flabbergasted by the visual difference, so I compared in profile.

 

[DawgPound]

^^^^
So beautiful.

Those are fantastic! Congrats
In your picture they look like a mid-blue leaning almost slate blue. Is that how they appear to you IRL? online they look more like a sky (cough Carolina cough) blue

Thanks! I love them! They’re a little lighter in blue, little more sky, than in the photo. My collection has gotten to the point where I’m looking for things more like this, on the casual end of things. Very happy

 

[Shoenut]

I'm cornfused guys. I know it's 11EE vs 11.5E, but why do my burgundy Randolph's toe profile closer match the brown Patriot toe than the bourbon Randolph? #datswack
I was looking at them side by side and was a bit flabbergasted by the visual difference, so I compared in profile.
View attachment 1367250 View attachment 1367249

They finally got the Randolph right?