Dack's Shoes: Bankrupt

Discussion in 'Classic Menswear' started by WildeMan, Dec 16, 2009.

  1. unjung

    unjung Senior member

    Messages:
    6,561
    Likes Received:
    12
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2008
    Location:
    Madrid
    Holt's in Toronto carries lobb's now. It's getting better.
    Good to hear. Maybe eventually they'll realize that Vancouver is doing fairly well, and it's Calgary's skyline in the background on BNN most of the time, not Toronto's.
     


  2. MyOtherLife

    MyOtherLife Senior member

    Messages:
    6,501
    Likes Received:
    473
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    Location:
    The Arena - Centerfield
    Too many dumb posts on this thread to itemize so I'll make a blanket statement.
    None of you know what you are typing about (so far) and you probably typed it wearing Crocs.
    I doubr any of you even own a pair of Dack's shoes.
    If you do, post photos to prove it or shut up.
    Dack's did not charge 2x or 3x the price of anything, unless you are referring to $100 Florsheims.
    The reason Dack's is going under is that 99% of men are too stupid and uneducated to appreciate a good quality pair of shoes in the first place.
    You played it cheap, and that is why better companies go out of business.
    There is no other reason.
    Shop at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, Best Buy, Sams & Costco too, and by your practices,
    you'll see to it that all other Canadian companies go out of business.
     


  3. triathlete

    triathlete Senior member

    Messages:
    195
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2007
    Alas it's Canada's passion for mediocrity that kills us in retailing. I too am waiting for J Crew to show up.

    That's the funniest thing I've read in a while.
     


  4. fwiffo

    fwiffo Senior member

    Messages:
    1,468
    Likes Received:
    15
    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto
    25% is not much for the Made in England shoes. They were 50% off when the store in the Richmond Adelaide building went under.

    But I'll definitely swing by and check it out as sizes seem to go fast and they also take % off the shoe trees which is nice.

    I saw the news on CP24 while at the bar at Royal York.
     


  5. Bill Smith

    Bill Smith Senior member

    Messages:
    1,430
    Likes Received:
    58
    Joined:
    Mar 31, 2008
    Location:
    Mellonville, Canada
    That's the funniest thing I've read in a while.

    Too many dumb posts on this thread to itemize so I'll make a blanket statement.
    None of you know what you are typing about (so far) and you probably typed it wearing Crocs.
    I doubr any of you even own a pair of Dack's shoes.
    If you do, post photos to prove it or shut up.
    Dack's did not charge 2x or 3x the price of anything, unless you are referring to $100 Florsheims.
    The reason Dack's is going under is that 99% of men are too stupid and uneducated to appreciate a good quality pair of shoes in the first place.
    You played it cheap, and that is why better companies go out of business.
    There is no other reason.
    Shop at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, Best Buy, Sams & Costco too, and by your practices,
    you'll see to it that all other Canadian companies go out of business.


    Better companies don't go out of business, they go bust because there was either something wrong with the product, or alternately they had no marketing strategy to engage their potential customers. The top of Dack's product assortment is roughly the same price as Allan Edmonds. The last time I bought dress shoes, I picked up AE because they had a little more style than Dack's

    Dack's big problem was not so much their flagship product line, it lay in their head office and it was still stuck somewhere in the past in terms of doing business.
     


  6. Chargersfan

    Chargersfan Senior member

    Messages:
    278
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Aug 10, 2009
    Too many dumb posts on this thread to itemize so I'll make a blanket statement.
    None of you know what you are typing about (so far) and you probably typed it wearing Crocs.
    I doubr any of you even own a pair of Dack's shoes.
    If you do, post photos to prove it or shut up.
    Dack's did not charge 2x or 3x the price of anything, unless you are referring to $100 Florsheims.
    The reason Dack's is going under is that 99% of men are too stupid and uneducated to appreciate a good quality pair of shoes in the first place.
    You played it cheap, and that is why better companies go out of business.
    There is no other reason.
    Shop at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, Best Buy, Sams & Costco too, and by your practices,
    you'll see to it that all other Canadian companies go out of business.


    You must be from TO...the buying public are just too stupid to understand the wonderfulness of the crappy, overpriced product no one is buying. And I wasn't wearing crocs when I made my post....just black, vibram-soled, gortex, standard issue military boots. They're the only thing work will let me wear.

    BTW I only purchase ammo at Wal-Mart, never clothing...
     


  7. WildeMan

    WildeMan Senior member

    Messages:
    110
    Likes Received:
    7
    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2009
    Man of Lint, your post seems overly (and unnecessarily) agressive.

    I didn't detect anything but genuine regret from SF members over the demise of Dack's. I think most people were rather wistful that their product offering wasn't more appealing.

    Plenty of high-end Canadian companies thrive - Lululemon, Roots, Fairmont & Four Seasons hotels, RIM, to name a few --- because they offer what people want. The market is always right.

    Interestingly, your avatar is a pair of shoes. Not Dack's, though.
     


  8. MyOtherLife

    MyOtherLife Senior member

    Messages:
    6,501
    Likes Received:
    473
    Joined:
    Sep 30, 2009
    Location:
    The Arena - Centerfield
    Man of Lint, your post seems overly (and unnecessarily) agressive. I didn't detect anything but genuine regret from SF members over the demise of Dack's. I think most people were rather wistful that their product offering wasn't more appealing.
    Don't worry, I do have Dack's shoes right here, and have owned plenty a pair in the past. The only agression in this thread came from those who revealed their ignorance of a product they have clearly never owned, and are therefore not qualified to offer input.
    Plenty of high-end Canadian companies thrive - Lululemon, Roots, Fairmont & Four Seasons hotels, RIM, to name a few --- because they offer what people want. The market is always right. Interestingly, your avatar is a pair of shoes. Not Dack's, though.
    Fairmont & Four Seasons are hotels, not shoe manufacturers and are not high end either. Lululemon, Roots...high end? [​IMG]
     


  9. racetrack

    racetrack Senior member

    Messages:
    140
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Dec 2, 2008
    Location:
    Toronto
    The only agression in this thread came from those who revealed their ignorance of a product they have clearly never owned, and are therefore not qualified to offer input.


    i.e. 90% of the posts on SF. You haven't been lurking here very long to get upset about this. [​IMG]
     


  10. SuitMyself

    SuitMyself Senior member

    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    8
    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Too many dumb posts on this thread to itemize so I'll make a blanket statement.
    None of you know what you are typing about (so far) and you probably typed it wearing Crocs.
    I doubr any of you even own a pair of Dack's shoes.
    If you do, post photos to prove it or shut up.
    Dack's did not charge 2x or 3x the price of anything, unless you are referring to $100 Florsheims.
    The reason Dack's is going under is that 99% of men are too stupid and uneducated to appreciate a good quality pair of shoes in the first place.
    You played it cheap, and that is why better companies go out of business.
    There is no other reason.
    Shop at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, Best Buy, Sams & Costco too, and by your practices,
    you'll see to it that all other Canadian companies go out of business.


    I agree with you 100%, Man Of Lint. A lot of people always seem to forget that a lower price does not always mean a better value. Without value, we have nothing. I'd rather own only twopairs of really good shoes than eight pair of also-rans.
     


  11. HEWSINATOR

    HEWSINATOR Senior member

    Messages:
    1,050
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2006
    Location:
    Edmonton
    Hmm, missed this post. Anybody pick anything up? Anybody in Edmonton check out their store? Any chance of anything left now?
     


  12. ZackyBoy

    ZackyBoy Senior member

    Messages:
    758
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Apr 30, 2009
    Too many dumb posts on this thread to itemize so I'll make a blanket statement.
    None of you know what you are typing about (so far) and you probably typed it wearing Crocs.
    I doubr any of you even own a pair of Dack's shoes.
    If you do, post photos to prove it or shut up.
    Dack's did not charge 2x or 3x the price of anything, unless you are referring to $100 Florsheims.
    The reason Dack's is going under is that 99% of men are too stupid and uneducated to appreciate a good quality pair of shoes in the first place.
    You played it cheap, and that is why better companies go out of business.
    There is no other reason.
    Shop at Wal-Mart, Future Shop, Best Buy, Sams & Costco too, and by your practices,
    you'll see to it that all other Canadian companies go out of business.


    Wow... yes it's all our fault the retailer can't stay in the green. Boo hoo hoo hoo hoo.
     


  13. LA Guy

    LA Guy Opposite Santa Staff Member Admin Moderator

    Messages:
    34,527
    Likes Received:
    12,120
    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2002
    Location:
    Moscow, Idaho
    I bought a pair of Dack's for a "formal" once, a long time ago, so I have nostalgic memories about the brand - but it really seems to me that they went the way of the dodo because they did not adapt to the modern marketplace. And before Man of Lint blasts me, companies can adapt to the market without compromising their strengths. But companies with a strong product can still become obsolete, and not just in the "nice shoe" category.
     


  14. Doc4

    Doc4 Senior member

    Messages:
    799
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    May 15, 2008
    Location:
    British Columbia, Canada
    Too bad to see them go. FWIW, though, they hadn't seemed like much of a presence in the shoe market for a while now.

    I bought 4 pairs of shoes from them in the mid-90s, and regret not buying a few more. Two pairs have long-since died (from a low-end line made in South Aftrica) but two pairs have survived rather well (a camel brogue blucher, and a water buffalo wholecut). Still nice shoes.
     


  15. robdpittman

    robdpittman Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    71
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jan 7, 2010
    Location:
    St. John's, Newfoundland, Canada
    Lululemon may not be high-end, but it's the best yoga clothes money can buy. Though many "high-end" designers also manufacture (or contract) yoga and athletic clothes, in my experience the quality isn't as good as Lulu, and the prices are usually higher, sometimes significantly so.

    That said, in general, the Canadian penchant for mediocrity is not an illusion, as is clearly displayed in our politics, infrastructure, media, banking, business and public attitudes. Furthermore, it's clearly present in the Canadian "spirit". Our culture is one of merely being satisfied. "Peace, Order and Good Government" is the national motto, as opposed to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness".

    Apologies for my digressions.
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by