• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • 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!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

Contrary to popular SF belief, shoes with glued-on soles don't disintegrate immediately

BigRob

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
13
For most of my life, I have only owned one pair of black dress shoes. They all had corrected grain uppers glued on to rubber soles, and each lasted me for years and years. I wore them to school on most weekdays -- in all weather, without shoe trees, and not in a rotation of shoes. It's hard to estimate, but I must have worn each pair easily 500 times. When I replaced them, it was either due to my feet growing out of them or the upper becoming irreparably marred (from salt etc.), not because they ripped or became unglued.

I now wear only Allen Edmonds dress shoes -- I'm up to six pairs, bought over the last two years or so -- and although they look much nicer than the cheapos, it's clear to me that buying $200+ shoes is not a money-saving investment. These shoes would have to last a LONG time (read:fifteen years) to be in the ballpark -- and who knows how long my adhesive construction shoes would have lasted if I had treated them with the same care that I now treat my shoes with.


TL;DR: In my experience, expensive shoes aren't an "investment" in the sense that they save you money in the long-run.
 

taxgenius

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2007
Messages
5,780
Reaction score
1,187

For most of my life, I have only owned one pair of black dress shoes.  They all had corrected grain uppers glued on to rubber soles, and each lasted me for years and years.  I wore them to school on most weekdays -- in all weather, without shoe trees, and not in a rotation of shoes.  It's hard to estimate, but I must have worn each pair easily 500 times.  When I replaced them, it was either due to my feet growing out of them or the upper becoming irreparably marred (from salt etc.), not because they ripped or became unglued.

I now wear only Allen Edmonds dress shoes -- I'm up to six pairs, bought over the last two years or so -- and although they look much nicer than the cheapos, it's clear to me that buying $200+ shoes is not a money-saving investment.  These shoes would have to last a LONG time (read:fifteen years) to be in the ballpark -- and who knows how long my adhesive construction shoes would have lasted if I had treated them with the same care that I now treat my shoes with.


TL;DR: In my experience, expensive shoes aren't an "investment" in the sense that they save you money in the long-run.


You may have worn them for years but I suspect they looked like $hit from day one and certainly after 100 wears.
 

BigRob

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
13
You may have worn them for years but I suspect they looked like $hit from day one and certainly after 100 wears.

Maybe to you, but I'd bet that 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between $70 shoes and $700 shoes if they saw them on another's feet.

The visible difference between sewed or glued soles is ~very~ subtle, and I doubt any more than 1% of the population knows the difference between corrected grain and full grain, let alone how to spot it at a distance of a few yards.
 
Last edited:

redips

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 3, 2010
Messages
45
Reaction score
0
Fwiw, my black cap toes are pushing 15 years and I they still look amazing. My only pair of black shoes, worn roughly 45/ year. A few soles and maticulous maintenance.... Money wasn't the reason, but in retrospect I saved a ton.
 

zippyh

Stylish Dinosaur
Spamminator Moderator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 16, 2007
Messages
11,196
Reaction score
23,018
That "investment" bullshit is just what you use at first to convince yourself to buy nice stuff.
Once you reach Styleforum enlightenment you will realize you just like nice stuff.
 

TheWraith

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2009
Messages
4,951
Reaction score
1,119

Maybe to you, but I'd bet that 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between $70 shoes and $700 shoes if they saw them on another's feet.  

The visible difference between sewed or glued soles is ~very~ subtle, and I doubt any more than 1% of the population knows the difference between corrected grain and full grain, let alone how to spot it at a distance of a few yards.


So? The masses are morons. That's not anything to crow about, mate.
 

EBugatti

Timed Out
Timed Out
Joined
Nov 21, 2009
Messages
504
Reaction score
20
Newsflash-- I doubt many people here buy shoes for (1) long-term "investment" purposes or (2) to impress the masses. People on this site buy high end shoes because they LIKE them.
 

BigRob

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
13
Many people do try to justify buying higher-end shoes as a long-term investment.

There are certainly reasons to buy nice shoes -- I have and will continue to do so -- but the investment argument doesn't seem to me to be valid. Nor the "they look like **** to the very-few in-the-know" argument.
 
Last edited:

PiCcolocV

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 21, 2012
Messages
342
Reaction score
292
Maybe to you, but I'd bet that 99% of people couldn't tell the difference between $70 shoes and $700 shoes if they saw them on another's feet.

The visible difference between sewed or glued soles is ~very~ subtle, and I doubt any more than 1% of the population knows the difference between corrected grain and full grain, let alone how to spot it at a distance of a few yards.
Inaccuracies like this (which I am hoping is hyperbole) undermine any legitimate point you were trying to make, and just come off like a troll. Clearly far more than 1% of the population, at least in the U.S., could determine the difference between shoes at those price points.
 

Gus

Stylish Dinosaur
Dubiously Honored
Supporting Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2007
Messages
18,580
Reaction score
8,076
The first pair of better, handgrade UK made shoes that I bought in London outlasted all the other shoes I had in my closet. I still have them. I bought them in 1984. Black cap toes. They have been resoled 3x.
 

BigRob

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
13
Inaccuracies like this (which I am hoping is hyperbole) undermine any legitimate point you were trying to make, and just come off like a troll. Clearly far more than 1% of the population, at least in the U.S., could determine the difference between shoes at those price points.


I didn't try to pass the 99% figure as fact; obviously I haven't conducted a study and the number is an estimate based off of my experience.

Still: If I could bet money on an over-under with even odds, I'd say fewer than 1% of Americans would be able to tell the difference between the following three shoes if they were able to hold them in their hand, let alone tell the difference by glancing at them on someone else's feet.





(One of these shoes retails for more than twice that of another, which retails for twice that of the third.)
 
Last edited:

jdiaz26

Active Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
26
Reaction score
14
I didn't try to pass the 99% figure as fact; obviously I haven't conducted a study and the number is an estimate based off of my experience.

Still: If I could bet money on an over-under with even odds, I'd say fewer than 1% of Americans would be able to tell the difference between the following three shoes if they were able to hold them in their hand, let alone tell the difference by glancing at them on someone else's feet.





(One of these shoes retails for more than twice that of another, which retails for twice that of the third.)
Come on, it's a piece of cake:

The first pair are some example of ugly shoes from Johnston&Murphy which must retail at around $375.
The second pair are some well known and (IMHO) quite ugly Allen Edmonds. Retail $345.
The third pair are Gucci's Kyoto Cap Toe Oxfords priced at $660. You're paying the Gucci tag here.

Choose wisely, choose John Lobb.
 

GBR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Mar 15, 2006
Messages
8,551
Reaction score
733

You may have worn them for years but I suspect they looked like $hit from day one and certainly after 100 wears.


Exactly so.

Surely one pays more for decent shoes precisely they do look better and not like ****. That said, better shoes can be resoled and with proper care can last a very long time and remain looking good until the end.
 

jdiaz26

Active Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2013
Messages
26
Reaction score
14
I do not see the investment point. Really.
Some of us just like owning high quality items. But I am pretty sure most of my friends will not spend during the rest of their lives the money I have spent last two years on shoes. Mine may look better, but I wouldn't dare to say I made a good investment in terms of long-lasting-good-looking shoes. I made a good investment in happiness as I'm happy with my shoes. Obviously, I never talk about my shoes with them and if I'm ever asked the price I just lie. They would never understand it if they ever got to believe it. But I'm happy wearing shoes none out of SF knows (well, my wife does).
We cannot forget about people who show their nice shoes here to get lots of compliments and get back to their wives: "see what i told you? people who really know about shoes, love them". They are quite happy too, I guess.
Invest in happiness not in shoes, life's too short.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 85 37.6%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 86 38.1%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 24 10.6%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 35 15.5%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 36 15.9%

Forum statistics

Threads
506,438
Messages
10,589,386
Members
224,235
Latest member
Berowne
Top