Dunhill clothing and Dunhill tobacco

[Horace]

Is the old Dunhill pipe-making, tobacco, and requisities outfit still (or was it ever) attached to the clothing shops? Or was this stuff licensed?

Anyone know if Dunhill will still blend cigarettes for you?

 

[William Massena]

Dunhill is fully owned by the Richemont Luxury Group  (Cartier, Montblanc, Vacheron, Baume & Mercier, Piaget, etc..)whose controlling Shareholders is the Rupert Family.

The Rupert family is also a major shareholders of BAT (British American Tobacco) and fully owns Rothman Cigarettes.

I am sure that Dunhill tobacco was licensed but still technically remains "in house".

Finally, I also wondered about the future of Dunhill a few years back. However, the Richemont group after closing Sulka and Seeger from Germany seems determined to revive the Dunhill brand. It seems that they have the money and manpower to do it. I recently read (British GQ November 2004) that Dunhill is the Nr1 Men's label in China.

William

 

[ernest]

Is the old Dunhill pipe-making, tobacco, and requisities outfit still (or was it ever) attached to the clothing shops?  Or was this stuff licensed?

Anyone know if Dunhill will still blend cigarettes for you?

I think it is not the same brand. Just by chance both are in the same group.

Dunhill is an English brand.

The cigarette are not English but American or South African?

 

[RJman]

I believe Seeger was folded into Montblanc as its leather goods maker, for purposes of brand, well, synergy.  British GQ sometimes makes very dubious assertions.  Dunhill may be big in China but I'd imagine it's also close to being the Nr1 faked brand in China too (along with LV et al).  Dunhill's had pretensions to the same level of quality and luxury (esp in its accessories) as Hermes, Asprey, etc., but is never quite up there IMHO.  The White Shirt Bar/Heritage Boutique stuff is very cool but excruciatingly expensive (4000 euro for bespoke shoes, 500 euros for a bespoke shirt).  Now that it's had to absorb the inventory from the regular dunhill store it's kind of lost its cachet.  
Dunhill is constantly trying to pitch some new thing, whether it's a barber shop or state-of-the-art lighting simulators in its Jermyn St store, double-licensed (someone for Poulsen Skone for Dunhill) Poulsen Skone shoes in England and NY, and now its four design consultants (sic): Bill Amberg for leather goods, Tom Bolt for watches, Richard James for shirts/ties/tailoring and I forget the fourth fellow.  (I wish one of their consultants would get them to stop making cufflinks with those naff toggle backs.)  The problem I see with this is that at least two of these consultants (sic) are in direct competition with Dunhill in their own right.  I haven't yet seen the Amberg leathergoods to see if they resemble Bill Amberg's own-label satchel style, but the clothes now on their website resembles very much what Richard James has done recently -- the odd denim blazer, the intricately patterned tie, the subtle uses of color.  I don't see how this helps either one of them.  (I recognize that RJ for one is a much smaller operation.)  Dunhill must be spending enormous amounts of money on these gimmicks for what can't be great returns in most western markets.  I come across scads of their ties at Off 5th on every one of my recent visits there.

 

[William Massena]

I believe Seeger was folded into Montblanc as its leather goods maker, for purposes of brand, well, synergy. Â British GQ sometimes makes very dubious assertions. Â Dunhill may be big in China but I'd imagine it's also close to being the Nr1 faked brand in China too (along with LV et al). Â Dunhill's had pretensions to the same level of quality and luxury (esp in its accessories) as Hermes, Asprey, etc., but is never quite up there IMHO. Â The White Shirt Bar/Heritage Boutique stuff is very cool but excruciatingly expensive (4000 euro for bespoke shoes, 500 euros for a bespoke shirt). Â Now that it's had to absorb the inventory from the regular dunhill store it's kind of lost its cachet. Â Dunhill is constantly trying to pitch some new thing, whether it's a barber shop or state-of-the-art lighting simulators in its Jermyn St store, double-licensed (someone for Poulsen Skone for Dunhill) Poulsen Skone shoes in England and NY, and now its four design consultants (sic): Bill Amberg for leather goods, Tom Bolt for watches, Richard James for shirts/ties/tailoring and I forget the fourth fellow. Â (I wish one of their consultants would get them to stop making cufflinks with those naff toggle backs.) Â The problem I see with this is that at least two of these consultants (sic) are in direct competition with Dunhill in their own right. Â I haven't yet seen the Amberg leathergoods to see if they resemble Bill Amberg's own-label satchel style, but the clothes now on their website resembles very much what Richard James has done recently -- the odd denim blazer, the intricately patterned tie, the subtle uses of color. Â I don't see how this helps either one of them. Â (I recognize that RJ for one is a much smaller operation.) Â Dunhill must be spending enormous amounts of money on these gimmicks for what can't be great returns in most western markets. Â I come across scads of their ties at Off 5th on every one of my recent visits there.

RJMan, Seeger was indeed folded into Montblanc but I seriously do not think that was intended when they purchased it. As seeger did enjoy a good reputation in Germany  as a fine purveyor of leather goods like Hermes does in France and elsewhere. I must admit that I am not too familiar with Dunhill's offerings besides the odd lighter, and  some cufflinks I did receive as gift which are gathering dust somewhere. However I am somewhat familiar with Tom Bolt, who incidentally has written a few ignorant self serving articles about vintage watches. This self proclaimed Watch guru sells vintage Rolex at insane prices but that is a matter between him and his customers. However, Tom Bolt did something absolutely stupid for a watch collector.  A few years back, he bought THE James Bond Rolex submariner used as a prop in the movie "Live and let die" at Christie's and decided to "restore it". That watch was a non working prop that had a system activating the bezel to be used in the movie plot. Tom Bolt "restored" it to make it an ordinary Rolex submariner  with the James Bond connection instead of leaving it as a movie prop. For that alone he should be shot. William PS: My apoloigies for highjacking this thread http://people.timezone.com/staff/CYR...let%20die2.jpg http://people.timezone.com/staff/CYR...let%20die1.jpg