• 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.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • 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.

Cost of Quality Men's Shoes through the Decades?

Blake Stitched Blues

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 30, 2016
Messages
1,836
Reaction score
1,903
To show the waterproof qualities of the boot, a pair of Lotus Veldtschoen Boots was displayed in a bucket of water for many years in Cordings’ window at number 19 Piccadilly

:slayer::slayer::slayer:
 

Peking_Gent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
37
I think this trend has something to do with its target market. Welted leather shoes used to be almost every man's necessity, but now it is more of a luxury item. Therefore, the market for welted leather shoes has become a more expensive and luxury one, and so did the price of the shoes.

On the other hand, this could be the result of the greater decrease in supply relative to the decrease in demand. There used to be a larger demand for welted leather shoes fifty years ago (I'm not sure since the population increased significantly and it may have compensated for the decrease in demand), but there was also a significantly larger supply.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
I think this trend has something to do with its target market. Welted leather shoes used to be almost every man's necessity, but now it is more of a luxury item. Therefore, the market for welted leather shoes has become a more expensive and luxury one, and so did the price of the shoes.

On the other hand, this could be the result of the greater decrease in supply relative to the decrease in demand. There used to be a larger demand for welted leather shoes fifty years ago (I'm not sure since the population increased significantly and it may have compensated for the decrease in demand), but there was also a significantly larger supply.

I think it's some combination of things. This seems especially the case with cordovan, as we know cordovan has become effectively a niche product with there being only a single tannery left for it.
 

Peking_Gent

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2020
Messages
53
Reaction score
37
I think it's some combination of things. This seems especially the case with cordovan, as we know cordovan has become effectively a niche product with there being only a single tannery left for it.
There are also Shinki and Italian cordovans, but they are nowhere as good as Horween's.

It's disappointing to see how much they charge for a pair of shoes now, especially the English makers. I'm pretty sure Crockett used to be in 300 USD range and Gaziano in 500 USD range. For now, I think Spanish makers offer a lot more bang for the buck, I really wish one of the Spanish makers can buff up their shoes and march into the market of those high-end English makers.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
There are also Shinki and Italian cordovans, but they are nowhere as good as Horween's.

It's disappointing to see how much they charge for a pair of shoes now, especially the English makers. I'm pretty sure Crockett used to be in 300 USD range and Gaziano in 500 USD range. For now, I think Spanish makers offer a lot more bang for the buck, I really wish one of the Spanish makers can buff up their shoes and march into the market of those high-end English makers.

The problem with Spanish makers for me is that they rarely make shoes for a wide foot. I want to invest more, and I have one pair of old Mezlans, but so many places are like "well you could try our derbys, they are more roomy".

They're nice to offer the option, but a derby is not going to be roomy enough to fit my foot just because it's a derby

But yes, it really is sincerely sad to see prices go up. I was especially mad when I saw Church's sells "polished bookbinding" leather shoes--corrected grade garbage leather--for 750 dollars.

This sincerely makes me want to never buy a Church's shoe.
 

Count de Monet

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jun 15, 2013
Messages
2,625
Reaction score
8,276
I’d wager horses are WAY less plentiful in the US and Canada than 60-80 years ago. Less need for them as work animals. Fewer shells = higher prices.

Cow and calf hides, particularly higher quality ones, are more rare, too.

By the way, and the best I can remember, a new pair of AE McAllisters (wing tip oxfords) were about $110 in 1985. I bought a pair upon graduation from college.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
I imagine the biggest increase in cost isn't leather, but wages and land. The countries mentioned have largely shifted into post-industrial economies, where wage growth is mostly concentrated in knowledge-intensive service sectors. Manufacturing has stagnated and it's no longer efficient to manufacture things in these economies. It's cheaper to produce elsewhere and keep certain service sectors here (e.g. advertising, legal work, design, engineering, research, etc).

To get those prices down, you would probably have to automate production more to save on wages. But I imagine technology isn't there yet.

There was an NYT article about the reshoring of the cotton industry a while ago. It touched on this cost and automation issue.

It's perfectly possible to have GYW shoes manufactured in China if there was enough demand. Whether there's a demand for GYW shoes and whether the manufacturing is done in post-industrial economies seem to be two separate questions.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
I imagine the biggest increase in cost isn't leather, but wages and land. The countries mentioned have largely shifted into post-industrial economies, where wage growth is mostly concentrated in knowledge-intensive service sectors. Manufacturing has stagnated and it's no longer efficient to manufacture things in these economies. It's cheaper to produce elsewhere and keep certain service sectors here (e.g. advertising, legal work, design, engineering, research, etc).

To get those prices down, you would probably have to automate production more to save on wages. But I imagine technology isn't there yet.

There was an NYT article about the reshoring of the cotton industry a while ago. It touched on this cost and automation issue.

It's perfectly possible to have GYW shoes manufactured in China if there was enough demand. Whether there's a demand for GYW shoes and whether the manufacturing is done in post-industrial economies seem to be two separate questions.

I think there is also this consideration:

For a man who doesn't care that much about shoes, there are plenty of perfectly decent looking, comfortable, and affordable options in the basic, entry level shoe market. A man need not be embarrassed to wear Rockports or Cole Haans. For a gentleman who doesn't need a higher level of worksmanship, but does need to present himself for business, these are perfectly acceptable shoes out there and you can get them for under 100 dollars. Lots of people might not care that they'll last for just a year when you can often find them on sale for half that.

On the other hand, gentlemen who wear finer quality dress shoes usually have disposable income, or if they don't, they care enough to spend enough. There is therefore no downward pressure on shoes.

I'll give you another example:

Growing up, it was common for men to dress well for church and the theatre. And by growing up, I mean in the 90s, as I am 33 years old. As a boy, only bums went to church or the theatre in jeans and sneakers. Like, you would have been looked down upon to come to church not wearing proper clothes.

I went to see Come from Away on Broadway last year, and the audience was filled with people not just wearing jeans and sneakers--I wish that was the norm--but flip flops, shorts, baseball caps, and t-shirts. Perfectly acceptable beach attire, but they might not have let you in the theatre 30 years ago wearing that.

Think of how David Letterman caused quite a stir by wearing sneakers with his suit on his show in the 80s.

Anyway, when you have that level of informality becoming prominent, there also shows there's not that much competition for nice shoes. Shoe companies are not battling it out anymore, and are more able to define their product as luxury goods. Dress shoes weren't really luxury goods for most men. They were, in effect, work uniforms for the white collar middle class.

As for the wages, though, wouldn't inflation factor into that? Real wage growth hasn't exceeded inflation for decades now, so I don't think it's just that American or European costs of labour are higher.

If the shoes just kept up pace with inflation, they'd be half or even 1/4th of what they are now.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
I’d wager horses are WAY less plentiful in the US and Canada than 60-80 years ago. Less need for them as work animals. Fewer shells = higher prices.

Cow and calf hides, particularly higher quality ones, are more rare, too.

By the way, and the best I can remember, a new pair of AE McAllisters (wing tip oxfords) were about $110 in 1985. I bought a pair upon graduation from college.

The horse issue makes sense. I imagine horses right now might be quite expensive compared to what they once were. Even 50 years has probably made a difference in respect to the horse market in the US. Horses are now ridden and raced and rarely worked. It isn't like, say, we are using police horses for shell.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
I think there is also this consideration:

For a man who doesn't care that much about shoes, there are plenty of perfectly decent looking, comfortable, and affordable options in the basic, entry level shoe market. A man need not be embarrassed to wear Rockports or Cole Haans. For a gentleman who doesn't need a higher level of worksmanship, but does need to present himself for business, these are perfectly acceptable shoes out there and you can get them for under 100 dollars. Lots of people might not care that they'll last for just a year when you can often find them on sale for half that.

On the other hand, gentlemen who wear finer quality dress shoes usually have disposable income, or if they don't, they care enough to spend enough. There is therefore no downward pressure on shoes.

I'll give you another example:

Growing up, it was common for men to dress well for church and the theatre. And by growing up, I mean in the 90s, as I am 33 years old. As a boy, only bums went to church or the theatre in jeans and sneakers. Like, you would have been looked down upon to come to church not wearing proper clothes.

I went to see Come from Away on Broadway last year, and the audience was filled with people not just wearing jeans and sneakers--I wish that was the norm--but flip flops, shorts, baseball caps, and t-shirts. Perfectly acceptable beach attire, but they might not have let you in the theatre 30 years ago wearing that.

Think of how David Letterman caused quite a stir by wearing sneakers with his suit on his show in the 80s.

Anyway, when you have that level of informality becoming prominent, there also shows there's not that much competition for nice shoes. Shoe companies are not battling it out anymore, and are more able to define their product as luxury goods. Dress shoes weren't really luxury goods for most men. They were, in effect, work uniforms for the white collar middle class.

As for the wages, though, wouldn't inflation factor into that? Real wage growth hasn't exceeded inflation for decades now, so I don't think it's just that American or European costs of labour are higher.

If the shoes just kept up pace with inflation, they'd be half or even 1/4th of what they are now.

Hm, I'm a bit older than you and that's not how I remember dress norms. I went to my first Broadway show about twenty years ago. I vaguely remember people dressed pretty casually. I know I went wearing a t-shirt, jeans, and some sneakers, and so did my peers. I didn't feel out of place.

Growing up, I wore streetwear and Ralph Lauren. I remember dress norms to be pretty casual. Some people "dressed up" for church, but it was just the standard business casual stuff you see now -- mostly low-grade leather shoes, button-up shirt, and chinos. I don't have much love for that look, to be honest, so I'm not particularly nostalgic for it.

There are some people who talk about a time when more men wore tailored clothing. I think that was before I was born. Most of the subjects in Robert Frank's landmark book The Americans, which was shot in the 1950s, weren't wearing a coat and tie. By the 1970s, as I've read about clothing history, it was all but gone. The decline of the kind of tailored clothing discussed on this forum was well on its way by the time I was born.

I imagine it may differ by region. I grew up in California. I think the coat-and-tie lasted a bit longer in certain parts of the East Coast.

Regarding inflation, inflation only measures the changing cost of a basket of goods, not necessarily shifts in comparative advantage. Nationally, our comparative advantage has shifted to knowledge-intensive services, such as design, engineering, medicine, legal work, etc. Nationally, we export services and import manufactured goods. The changing cost of that basket of goods can be made of different exports/ imports depending on our comparative advantage.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
Hm, I'm a bit older than you and that's not how I remember dress norms. I went to my first Broadway show about twenty years ago. I vaguely remember people dressed pretty casually. I know I went wearing a t-shirt, jeans, and some sneakers, and so did my peers. I didn't feel out of place.

Growing up, I wore streetwear and Ralph Lauren. I remember dress norms to be pretty casual. Some people "dressed up" for church, but it was just the standard business casual stuff you see now -- mostly low-grade leather shoes, button-up shirt, and chinos. I don't have much love for that look, to be honest, so I'm not particularly nostalgic for it.

There are some people who talk about a time when more men wore tailored clothing. I think that was before I was born. Most of the subjects in Robert Frank's landmark book The Americans, which was shot in the 1950s, weren't wearing a coat and tie. By the 1970s, as I've read about clothing history, it was all but gone. The decline of the kind of tailored clothing discussed on this forum was well on its way by the time I was born.

I imagine it may differ by region. I grew up in California. I think the coat-and-tie lasted a bit longer in certain parts of the East Coast.

Regarding inflation, inflation only measures the changing cost of a basket of goods, not necessarily shifts in comparative advantage. Nationally, our comparative advantage has shifted to knowledge-intensive services, such as design, engineering, medicine, legal work, etc. Nationally, we export services and import manufactured goods. The changing cost of that basket of goods can be made of different exports/ imports depending on our comparative advantage.

Oh, I am not saying men wore suits all the time on the street. But growing up in NY, there was an expectation that certain places deserved certain dress.

I did begin to see the shift in the earlier 2000s, though, so that matches your experience not feeling too out of place. But I remember just a few years prior to that, in the mid 90s, when the majority of people were at least business casual if not a bit higher.

At least from my outsider's perspective, California has always been a more casual place than NY given the hot weather and the California lifestyle. Meanwhile, the North East has a pretty long tradition of preppy types, business men, and a general more seriousness.

There isn't as much difference nowadays, though.

---

In respect to inflation, that's all true. GYW have definitely not been, for the most part, exported to the cheap places yet. China and India are not greater producers of quality men's shoes.

Could the price have gone up, in effect, to keep them afloat v. foreign competition? If they are selling less, but each individual unit is worth more, they might have a viable plan. Allen Edmonds never sold for as little as Hanover, for instance. Indeed, their shoe costs were quite a great deal more expensive during the same years - 33 vs. 23.
 

dieworkwear

Mahatma Jawndi
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Apr 10, 2011
Messages
27,320
Reaction score
69,979
The different characters in the film Falling Down are probably most representative of the different strata of society I saw growing up in California. There was a very small minority of people who dressed like the film's protagonist (antagonist?). Basically business casual. Everyone else dressed according to their subculture.

Hard to know what exactly drives the difference in cost, but I would attribute it to inefficiencies in manufacturing things in post-industrial economies. It's very expensive to manufacture things here compared to other potential uses for that land and labor.

My impression is that people have an overly rosy view of dress norms in the past, maybe colored by nostalgia, but also because people look at a very specific slice of American society (mostly well-to-do). One of the reasons why I like Robert Frank's book The Americans is that he looked at much broader cross-section of people. Lots of people in that book wore workwear: bomber jackets, chambray shirts, flannels, etc.

Here's a photo from the mid-1950s by Frank. I believe this is of a theatre. Note that only half the men are in a coat and tie. The others are in casualwear.


12.jpg


Some other images:

e1ap3vaf-720.jpg

indelibleimages_nov08_631.jpg

JuxtapozRobertFrank12.jpg

unnamed.jpg



Certainly, tailored clothing and dress shoes were more common as you go further back in history (and including the 1950s). But I don't remember them being common in the 1980s and '90s.

I feel like "business casual" was already well into the death of tailored clothing and what people here would consider "nice shoes." Cole Haans and Rockports are basically the kind of cheap imports people lament.
 

JFWR

Distinguished Member
Joined
Feb 9, 2020
Messages
6,065
Reaction score
10,017
The different characters in the film Falling Down are probably most representative of the different strata of society I saw growing up in California. There was a very small minority of people who dressed like the film's protagonist (antagonist?). Basically business casual. Everyone else dressed according to their subculture.

Hard to know what exactly drives the difference in cost, but I would attribute it to inefficiencies in manufacturing things in post-industrial economies. It's very expensive to manufacture things here compared to other potential uses for that land and labor.

My impression is that people have an overly rosy view of dress norms in the past, maybe colored by nostalgia, but also because people look at a very specific slice of American society (mostly well-to-do). One of the reasons why I like Robert Frank's book The Americans is that he looked at much broader cross-section of people. Lots of people in that book wore workwear: bomber jackets, chambray shirts, flannels, etc.

Here's a photo from the mid-1950s by Frank. I believe this is of a theatre. Note that only half the men are in a coat and tie. The others are in casualwear.


View attachment 1423124

Some other images:

View attachment 1423123
View attachment 1423125
View attachment 1423126
View attachment 1423127


Certainly, tailored clothing and dress shoes were more common as you go further back in history (and including the 1950s). But I don't remember them being common in the 1980s and '90s.

I feel like "business casual" was already well into the death of tailored clothing and what people here would consider "nice shoes." Cole Haans and Rockports are basically the kind of cheap imports people lament.

Some great photographs there.

Is the first picture in a theatre or in a movie theatre? It seems a little strangely cramped. Also, most are wearing over coats and such, so it is hard to tell, but I see a good amount of ties.

Great film reference also, by the way.

Fall's best new fashion accessory: A rocket launcher?
 

norcaltransplant

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
2,522
Reaction score
163
Here is another data point. My first pair of Edward Green were purchased from the old NYC Oxxford store in early 2002. I paid around $350 on sale, marked down from $695. I have another pair of Chelseas in edwardarian antique on the 202 last. Same era, also $695 msrp
 

Phoenician

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 19, 2020
Messages
930
Reaction score
2,795
The problem with Spanish makers for me is that they rarely make shoes for a wide foot. I want to invest more, and I have one pair of old Mezlans, but so many places are like "well you could try our derbys, they are more roomy".

They're nice to offer the option, but a derby is not going to be roomy enough to fit my foot just because it's a derby

But yes, it really is sincerely sad to see prices go up. I was especially mad when I saw Church's sells "polished bookbinding" leather shoes--corrected grade garbage leather--for 750 dollars.

This sincerely makes me want to never buy a Church's shoe.

It's not just Church's with the bookbinder pleather, Tricker's, Allen Edmonds and a couple others do it as well. If someone wants a maintenance free shoe and know what they're getting into with unsightly creases and eventual cracking, then fine; but most don't know what they've purchased until it's much too late to return them
 

Featured Sponsor

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

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.5%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 60 38.7%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 11.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.4%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 28 18.1%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,180
Messages
10,579,211
Members
223,888
Latest member
alitamartin07
Top