• We would like to welcome Pete and Harry as an official Affiliate Vendor. Pete and Harry, co-founded by Erik (EFV) one of our long time members and friends, offers a wide variety of products, clothes, watches and accessories, antique, vintage, “pre-loved” and new - all at unparalleled prices. Please visit their new thread and give them a warm welcome.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Cheaney

miurasv

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
295
Reaction score
5
I know that Prada own Church's (or do they?) but is it the Church family that own Cheaney? I was told that the company Church's own Cheaney but this is not the case if Prada own Church's and the Church family own Cheaney. Oh I've just confused myself so I must have confused you too.
 

miurasv

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
295
Reaction score
5
Originally Posted by apropos
Church family once used to own Church. Prada did takeover of Church. Church family eventually get annoyed, and then they leave. They then buy Cheaney. So Cheaney is now owned by the Church family.
Thank you for that information. In many shoe shops that sell Cheaneys they will tell you that Church's own Cheaneys as if they are the same company, which is not correct then, and it is what I incorrectly assumed. You will often see Cheaney shoes advertised as Church's Cheaneys which is of course correct in a way. What you are not told is that Church's don't own Church's and that the Church's Shoe Manufacturing Company has nothing to do with the Cheaney Shoe Manufacturing Company, if what I now assume is correct.
 

Leather man

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
299
Reaction score
6
Originally Posted by AMZ
Some friends and I had a factory tour at Cheaney last week and, having read some of the comments on this thread, I wanted to share my findings with you.

We were shown around by Mr William Church and personally speaking I was really impressed with what I saw. William is a true English gent and very passionate about British footwear and his brand.

They have about 120 people working for them and some are the third and fourth generation at Cheaney. I was brave enough to ask if they import any of the uppers as some other "English" makers (Loake, Barker et al), this was vehemently denied.

They have a large "clicking" area where the skins are cut into uppers. Most of this was done by hand using a traditional knife that looked so ancient I bet modern Health and Safety would freak! All legal I was reassured.

The uppers were sewn together by a team of 35 women mostly. I never realised there were so many types of sewing machines available and watching the skill of the ladies working was mind blowing!

I took quite number of photographs so if you guys are interested I'll post them when I get more time...


At last a common sense and truthful post - good grief there have been some ridiculous things written here!

IME Cheaney are not as good as C&J / Churches etc. Also IME ( note the "E" rather than just "O") Cheaney's leather quality can be great or it can be meh...... I know they heat dry their uppers rather than air drying them as C&J and Churches do and this will lead to them performing less well on wear. However its too early to tell how quality issues will be going forward. I think the next two years will tell us more.

And just to add to the above quote - I know for a fact ( unless several very well informed people are lying to me) that all the work on Cheaney's shoes is done in England.
 

miurasv

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
295
Reaction score
5
Church's the company must have once owned Cheaney as look at the pic of the inside of a pair of Cheaney made shoes for sale on the bay.
 

Leather man

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
299
Reaction score
6
Originally Posted by miurasv
Church's the company must have once owned Cheaney as look at the pic of the inside of a pair of Cheaney made shoes for sale on the bay.

They did. Church's bought Cheaney's in the 1960s. In 1999 John Church, looking for a buyer for Church's shoes ( including Cheaney) sold to Prada.

Whatever the actual reasons, and AFAIK only the Church cousins know the reasons, cousins Jonathon and William Church made the decision to leave the Church's board. Prada wanted to offload Cheaney and so they saw this as their opportunity to work for themselves once again.

So today, Church's shoes is Prada owned and Prada run. Cheaney shoes has been sold by Prada to the Church cousins who now own and run Cheaney.

All clear?
 

miurasv

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 18, 2010
Messages
295
Reaction score
5
Originally Posted by Leather man
They did. Church's bought Cheaney's in the 1960s. In 1999 John Church, looking for a buyer for Church's shoes ( including Cheaney) sold to Prada.

Whatever the actual reasons, and AFAIK only the Church cousins know the reasons, cousins Jonathon and William Church made the decision to leave the Church's board. Prada wanted to offload Cheaney and so they saw this as their opportunity to work for themselves once again.

So today, Church's shoes is Prada owned and Prada run. Cheaney shoes has been sold by Prada to the Church cousins who now own and run Cheaney.

All clear?


Loud and clear.
Thanks very much for the clarification, Leather man.
 

bengal-stripe

Distinguished Member
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Mar 23, 2002
Messages
4,585
Reaction score
1,139
Originally Posted by Leather man
So today, Church's shoes is Prada owned and Prada run.

I believe, there are still members of the Church family on the board of the company. How much the board members are involved in decision making, or if all decisions are dictate from Milan, I wouldn't know.

William and Jonathan (not quite sure about J.) used to be on the Church board until they resigned to run Cheaney (as a potential competitor to Church"˜s).
 

DWFII

Bespoke Boot and Shoemaker
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
10,039
Reaction score
5,436
Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH
Originally Posted by Gent I don't understand this "sourced from India" crap either. Even with workmanship this argument is used very poorly around here, but now we're talking about raw materials. What difference does the source of the material make? Absolutely none, it's the quality that counts.
I don't know if I agree with this. With natural products the source of the material does affect quality.

Source does matter...not only in the environmental factors that affect the quality of the raw skin but also, if tanned in country, the state of technology and the raw materials/chemicals used in tanning. That said, (and someone like Bengal Stipe can expand upon this) the British were instrumental in setting up the Indian tanning industry. At one point in time some of the best leather in the world was East India Kip. I'm not sure I've ever sen any although I do use kip. But a century plus later it is still talked about in reverent terms.
 

Chuckie Egg

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
141
Reaction score
16
Hello :)

Sorry to bump an old thread but i did a search before posting. What is the opinion on Cheaney's quality today since the Church family buyout?

I have just bought a pair of Cheaney Avon for £300. For a little more I could bought the Crockett & Jones Pembroke. I do like the Avon but have read some old views here saying that Cheaney are at the low end of the quality shoe hierarchy... Is this still true?

Thanks.
 

Yowzer

Senior Member
Joined
May 16, 2013
Messages
271
Reaction score
34
Provided the Cheaney is still made in the UK, the quality would be still very good. I have a few pairs Herring Premiers made by Cheaney and they are among my favourite shoes. Have no issues with their quality at all. On SF, they're not considered as 'prestigious' as C&J but to each their own. Mine are nearly a year old and wearing well. The oxford dark leaf is developing an interesting patina on the toecap... hehe.
 

add911_11

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2010
Messages
2,995
Reaction score
274

Provided the Cheaney is still made in the UK, the quality would be still very good. I have a few pairs Herring Premiers made by Cheaney and they are among my favourite shoes. Have no issues with their quality at all. On SF, they're not considered as 'prestigious' as C&J but to each their own. Mine are nearly a year old and wearing well. The oxford dark leaf is developing an interesting patina on the toecap... hehe.

I actually prefer my Cheaney Imperial to my crockett and jones handgrade. The latter has problems with their colouring process.
 
Last edited:

steffenbp11

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
794
Reaction score
1,976
I own a pair of the Imperial range oxfords. Beautiful shoe. Would buy more if I had the money. Compared with the pair of Carminas I own, I prefer Cheaney. Better soles, better leather, better finishing. Of course, the imperials are horribly expensive now compared to when I bought them two years ago...Back then they were more or less the same as Carmina
 

Chuckie Egg

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 12, 2013
Messages
141
Reaction score
16
Thanks all for your opinions & sharing your ownership of your Cheaneys. :) I believe they are still all made in England. At least that's what it says on my shoes.

I did handle the Crockett & Jones Pembroke instore which was very nice & if they had it in the burgundy i might have chosen it but to my non-expert eye it didn't seem vastly superior to the Cheaney.
 

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by

Featured Sponsor

Sneakers with tailoring: yes, no, maybe?

  • No, never.

  • Yes, it can be done tastefully.

  • Not sure.


Results are only viewable after voting.

Related Threads

Forum statistics

Threads
464,606
Messages
10,035,324
Members
209,579
Latest member
lesnikaldimera
Top