Antonio Meccariello Shoes

[yshin10]

Enjoy!! You modified it on the soft square last right?

Modified C4 last

 

[wheresdremote]

THE MYTH OF "COST PER WEAR": This is a mini-rant, please excuse me. My main point is let's please stop using this mistaken idea of "cost per wear" to justify our purchases, especially shoes. Most often we hear this bad advice from YouTube menswear folks who like to say something like, "The cost per wear of a quality item" eventually pays for itself -- or at least makes it cheaper than a poorer quality item. This assumes so many things (incorrectly). For example, I used to wear $130 dress shoes, the same pair five times a week and every six months or so, I'd throw them away and buy a new one. My AMs cost around $1000. I wear them, at most, once a week (if that). Sure, they'll last me a lifetime -- but think about this. First, the cost per wear is spread out over 20-30 years. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of finance knows what you're actually doing is "freezing" $1000 (or let's say $870, since you'd have to buy those crappy shoes) when you could actually be investing it in something that has a return or simply buying groceries and gas. Second, you'll have to eventually resole those shoes. Let's say twice in your lifetime -- and each time is basically the price of a cheap shoe (or two). And third, and most damning of all, to get the cost per wear down to the $130 shoes, you'd have to commit to wearing these once a week for 30 years -- and hope you live that long or that your tastes/feet don't change. Are any of us that committed? I have about 15 shoes in my rotation and I'm always ready to add more. If you want to justify your purchase for some other reason (saving the environment, for example), go for it! Bottom line: Don't try to use a silly justification that doesn't make sense or, worse, fall for a YouTuber trying to sell you something. Just buy those shoes! (And don't let your wife know.)

 

[JohnMRobie]

THE MYTH OF "COST PER WEAR": This is a mini-rant, please excuse me. My main point is let's please stop using this mistaken idea of "cost per wear" to justify our purchases, especially shoes. Most often we hear this bad advice from YouTube menswear folks who like to say something like, "The cost per wear of a quality item" eventually pays for itself -- or at least makes it cheaper than a poorer quality item. This assumes so many things (incorrectly). For example, I used to wear $130 dress shoes, the same pair five times a week and every six months or so, I'd throw them away and buy a new one. My AMs cost around $1000. I wear them, at most, once a week (if that). Sure, they'll last me a lifetime -- but think about this. First, the cost per wear is spread out over 20-30 years. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of finance knows what you're actually doing is "freezing" $1000 (or let's say $870, since you'd have to buy those crappy shoes) when you could actually be investing it in something that has a return or simply buying groceries and gas. Second, you'll have to eventually resole those shoes. Let's say twice in your lifetime -- and each time is basically the price of a cheap shoe (or two). And third, and most damning of all, to get the cost per wear down to the $130 shoes, you'd have to commit to wearing these once a week for 30 years -- and hope you live that long or that your tastes/feet don't change. Are any of us that committed? I have about 15 shoes in my rotation and I'm always ready to add more. If you want to justify your purchase for some other reason (saving the environment, for example), go for it! Bottom line: Don't try to use a silly justification that doesn't make sense or, worse, fall for a YouTuber trying to sell you something. Just buy those shoes! (And don't let your wife know.)

I don’t think anyone on this thread has seriously used cost per wear to justify buying Meccariello. People jokingly throw it around on this thread about how they’re rationalizing a purchase with it but nobody is seriously calculating it out or thinks they’re coming out ahead.

 

[LKittelb]

I don’t think anyone on this thread has seriously used cost per wear to justify buying Meccariello. People jokingly throw it around on this thread about how they’re rationalizing a purchase with it but nobody is seriously calculating it out or thinks they’re coming out ahead.

yeah, we all might think that and argue that with the first pair, but once you get a dozen pairs in, you know you're not in it for the cost ROI over time. you like the shoes, you wear the shoes, you pay outrageous amounts for new shoes. such is the cycle.

there is an ROI in dressing well generally though in a professional setting (or a step above the rest). when i began dressing a bit more sartorially oriented several years ago, it got my boss at work real worried, and shortly after i got a raise (not saying this was the only factor, but it very well may be one). trouble is the effects are so soft, its hard to measure in any concrete numbers. i digress.

 

[BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes]

I don’t think anyone on this thread has seriously used cost per wear to justify buying Meccariello. People jokingly throw it around on this thread about how they’re rationalizing a purchase with it but nobody is seriously calculating it out or thinks they’re coming out ahead.

If you own more than 20 pairs of shoes (boots, derbies, oxfords, etc.) ROI is non-existent. Highly unlikely the owner will outlast the shoes (GYW or HW) within their lifetime.

If you are hovering at around 10 pairs (lowest priced GYW & HW), you might be breaking even. This is using a 20 year barometer.

As it pertains to this thread's namesake, doubtful you'd be having any ROI (unless discounted or used or both) even if it were one pair, as there are lower priced GYW/HW'd options available.

 

[ViaSartoria]

1000€ can buy you a pair of ****** sneakers from a fashion brand.

Or a pair of exquisite handmade shoes by a real artisan.

That’s how I see it.

 

[wheresdremote]

yeah, we all might think that and argue that with the first pair, but once you get a dozen pairs in, you know you're not in it for the cost ROI over time. you like the shoes, you wear the shoes, you pay outrageous amounts for new shoes. such is the cycle.

there is an ROI in dressing well generally though in a professional setting (or a step above the rest). when i began dressing a bit more sartorially oriented several years ago, it got my boss at work real worried, and shortly after i got a raise (not saying this was the only factor, but it very well may be one). trouble is the effects are so soft, its hard to measure in any concrete numbers. i digress.

"Such is the cycle." Well said! I'm just grateful that I'm in a position where I can afford these shoes -- and that I work in a field where the expectation is still suit and tie, five days a week, so that I have a job that provides cover for my purchases!

 

[Johnny80]

and that I work in a field where the expectation is still suit and tie, five days a week

To wear a suit is something about yourself and how you see yourself...is something that i like and i got used to like over the years. I dont need a field or someone to expect that from me...its just a choice i make
Its better for you to chose not to be chosen for you.
In an era of everything is on fast forward and so much chaos, the suit/ smart casual dress code is golden

 

[nishant]

Armiticos to work ..

 

[Crispyj]

Armiticos to work ..



View attachment 1805312 View attachment 1805313 View attachment 1805314 View attachment 1805315

I'm sorry but you wear a light navy blue jacket with tan windowpanes and a light blue glencheck patterned pants together???

 

[nishant]

I'm sorry but you wear a light navy blue jacket with tan windowpanes and a light blue glencheck patterned pants together???

I sure did and got plenty of compliments as well.

 

[hysteria]

I sure did and got plenty of compliments as well.

Big fan of your watches, and pretty much everything you wear lol. You really don't skimp on quality.

 

[hysteria]

Hey Folks,

I would appreciate your collective thoughts on the following.
I finally heard back from Antonio/Silvana regarding their analysis of all my measurements and their recommendations.
As you might recall, I haven't owned a pair of AM's before; this would be my first, so I wanted to go with a RTW option in case it doesn't fit well. Antonio suggested I start with oxfords instead of going straight for monks since it would more difficult to ascertain fit for the monks, especially with his high instep lasts for those and my average to low instep.

Here's their recommendation regarding the Roma C4:

"to get a precise size in the chisel 4 .we should go in size 7 and increase a little ( 1 cm) the insteph
the fitting change at insteph costs 50 euro .(for the service)
If you instead go in size 7.5 ,shoes not needs modifications at insteph ,but shoes will turn out loose at the Vamp( so could be necessary put an insole to reduce Toe room volume)
we can include for free"

Antonio did say that basically, most Argentum should give me a decent fit in 7.5, but vamp could leave a bit more room than desired and he would send an insole to fix it.

^^My question for you is: which of the two options provided above makes more sense considering my position?
On one hand, it sounds like the 7UK with instep adjustment will going to provide the best fit. I don't mind paying the small fee either. However, this would make it unrefundable. If I have made any measurement errors or the shoes don't fit well for some reason, I would be forever stuck with a pair that also won't fit anyone else. I did sent them all photos of all my measurements to reduce risk of measurement error, but some risk remains. If I get the 7.5UK, then no adjustments are made, and it's returnable, but it seems like the fit may not be as good. "Good" is subjective. 95% perfect is pretty good for RTW, but 80-85% less so.

I have never had to stick an extra insole into a shoe to fill up volume, but I just imagine it as not feeling great - perhaps it's not that big of a deal and you don't notice a difference?

I suppose, if they trust my photos and measurements enough to make adjustments based on it, then perhaps I should trust that the measurements are good enough and probably will yield a satisfactory result? I get the feeling that the consensus will be - "bite the bullet and do it", but I thought I'd give y'all a shout anyways since everyone here has provided invaluable advice before. I'm aware that I'm probably over-thinking at this point, and I have every intention to put in an order by the end of the week.


@Jmr928 @BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes @clee1982 @yshin10

 

[Crispyj]

@Jmr928 ,@BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes ,@clee1982 , you guys charge how much $ per minute again?

 

[hysteria]

@Jmr928 ,@BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes ,@clee1982 , you guys charge how much $ per minute again?

Don't give em any ideas now. This is a platform for philanthropy