Filson Bag Thread: With Pictures

[woodsjw]

I owned a Barbour Ashby jacket for about a year, but just didn't find it very warm without a liner and it felt way too bulk with a liner add. That's what I liked about the Martindale jacket... it had the classic look but a built in liner that added warmth. I'd like to own a Barbour again, but I'm gonna have to do a lot more research to figure out what model will work for me before I pull the trigger.

Set my eBay alerts for a Martingale right after posting this and 4-5 have popped up since... most in really bad shape and for too much $$$. Today I found one, in what appears to be really good shape, for $135 so I ordered it.

Should be here in a week or so! I'm hoping this will replace the one that got away!

 

[Soletrane]

I don't know why... but this made me think of you!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-10...021828?hash=item4b386a0e84:g:jK0AAOSwi4laWSHq

Does it come with 12 reindeer?

 

[speedy611]

I don't know why... but this made me think of you!

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Vintage-10...021828?hash=item4b386a0e84:g:jK0AAOSwi4laWSHq

Hah! I do like the packer jacket but it’s a bit full on in the single colour red. I think Soltrane is right - it just begs the question as to where you parked the sleigh.

Good luck with your Barbour. Keen to hear how @mgrennier is getting on with his Beacon that he got recently too.

 

[speedy611]

Gentlemen

I wonder if any of you are interested in a Filson Alaska Parka? This is one of the very rare Italian black label styles, made only for a year in 2014. Style number is 2955, size is 44, but it’s slimmer fit, so it’s between a large and XL. Waxed outer, blanket lined inner. Condition is excellent.

I have a line on one of these here in the UK, so just looking to gauge interest. Original retail was around $1200 I believe. I guess it’d go now for around $350 plus shipping.

 

[patrick_b]

I have zero issues with what LL Bean has done. I've always wondered when the jerks who take ridiculous advantage would make it go away.

Couldn’t agree more. I always cringed when reading or hearing about someone bragging about returning a pair of worn bean boots for replacement after wearing them for 10 years. That was never the intent of their policy.

 

[M635Guy]

Couldn’t agree more. I always cringed when reading or hearing about someone bragging about returning a pair of worn bean boots for replacement after wearing them for 10 years. That was never the intent of their policy.

I'm copying and pasting this article on Slate so I don't drive ad revenue for a site that would publish this kind of drivel. It made me want to find the guy who wrote it and smack him.

L.L. Bean Has Ended Unlimited Returns, and I Am Fairly Certain It’s My Fault

I’m responsible for this. That was my first reaction when I read Friday morning that outdoorsy retailer L.L. Bean had decided to stop guaranteeing its merchandise for life. For more than a century, L.L. Bean had offered a lifetime return policy, allowing customers to return or exchange L.L. Bean merchandise at any time for any reason—even years after the initial purchase date. Now, citing “abuse” of the policy, the retailer will only offer a one-year exchange period—and, even then, exchanges will only be granted if you have a receipt. I really feel like this is sort of my fault.
Let me explain. About seven years ago, I bought a pair of slip-on shoes at L.L. Bean—brown, bulky, waterproof shoes that were sort of like Merrells except a lot cheaper. (I think they cost $40.) I wore them through the winter, put them away for spring and summer, and broke them out again come fall. I wore the shoes hard, and they were cheap shoes to begin with, so by the end of the year the soles were damaged and the exterior stitching was starting to come undone.

I needed new shoes, and so I went to L.L. Bean to buy a new pair of the same ones that had served me well for a year. Imagine my surprise and delight when the sales associate told me of the store’s generous return policy and invited me to exchange my old shoes for new ones, free of charge. What’s more, I also got a $10 gift card because of an in-store promotion of some sort. Not only did I get free shoes, I also got free money. Six years later, I still count this as one of the greatest days of my life.
I haven’t spent a dollar on closed-toe shoes since then. Every year, around Christmas, I would drive to the L.L. Bean store in the Old Orchard Mall in Skokie, Illinois, near where I grew up, to exchange my old shoes for new ones. Over the years, it became a cherished family outing. My mother, who is amused by my sense of thrift, insists on accompanying me on what she refers to as my “scam.” “You’d better not tell anyone about your scam,” she routinely warned me. “If too many people catch on, they’ll stop doing it.”
Well, they did, but I nevertheless take great umbrage at the idea that it was somehow dishonest for me and other customers to take L.L. Bean up on its policy. The company made much of its lifetime guarantee, advertising it on social media and elsewhere. Judging from my experiences, the company even encouraged its in-store employees to tout that guarantee. I feel no guilt about taking L.L. Bean up on its offer. If they didn’t want people to take the swap, they shouldn’t have offered it!
In a letter to customers posted Friday on the company’s Facebook page, executive chairman Shawn O. Gorman announced the decision and griped that “a small, but growing number of customers has been interpreting our guarantee well beyond its original intent.” While I agree that it’s bad karma for people to buy old L.L. Bean merchandise at yard sales for cheap and then return it at L.L. Bean as if they had purchased it there—Gorman claims that this happened, and I do not doubt him—I am nevertheless annoyed by his blamey statement. Customers of a retail store should not be expected to be strict Constitutional originalists. If the intent behind a given policy varies from the text of the policy, then it’s incumbent on the company to change the text of the policy to better reflect its intent. That’s not the customer’s responsibility.
L.L. Bean’s lifetime warranty might have been a foolish one that was prone to exploitation, but it was their policy, and it’s not one that the company kept secret, either. It was a marketing tool more than anything else, meant to foster good feelings and brand loyalty. I certainly felt warm and fuzzy toward L.L. Bean, and the company’s absurdly generous warranty certainly led me to spend more money there than I would have otherwise. But now the policy is history, and I can no longer count on getting a free pair of new shoes every single year for the rest of my life. It’s the end of an era in Justin Peters’ footwear styles—and my wife, for one, is thrilled. The shoes I’ve been exchanging for six years are hideous.

 

[TinMan3]

I'm copying and pasting this article on Slate so I don't drive ad revenue for a site that would publish this kind of drivel. It made me want to find the guy who wrote it and smack him.

L.L. Bean Has Ended Unlimited Returns, and I Am Fairly Certain It’s My Fault

I’m responsible for this. That was my first reaction when I read Friday morning that outdoorsy retailer L.L. Bean had decided to stop guaranteeing its merchandise for life. For more than a century, L.L. Bean had offered a lifetime return policy, allowing customers to return or exchange L.L. Bean merchandise at any time for any reason—even years after the initial purchase date. Now, citing “abuse” of the policy, the retailer will only offer a one-year exchange period—and, even then, exchanges will only be granted if you have a receipt. I really feel like this is sort of my fault.
Let me explain. About seven years ago, I bought a pair of slip-on shoes at L.L. Bean—brown, bulky, waterproof shoes that were sort of like Merrells except a lot cheaper. (I think they cost $40.) I wore them through the winter, put them away for spring and summer, and broke them out again come fall. I wore the shoes hard, and they were cheap shoes to begin with, so by the end of the year the soles were damaged and the exterior stitching was starting to come undone.

I needed new shoes, and so I went to L.L. Bean to buy a new pair of the same ones that had served me well for a year. Imagine my surprise and delight when the sales associate told me of the store’s generous return policy and invited me to exchange my old shoes for new ones, free of charge. What’s more, I also got a $10 gift card because of an in-store promotion of some sort. Not only did I get free shoes, I also got free money. Six years later, I still count this as one of the greatest days of my life.
I haven’t spent a dollar on closed-toe shoes since then. Every year, around Christmas, I would drive to the L.L. Bean store in the Old Orchard Mall in Skokie, Illinois, near where I grew up, to exchange my old shoes for new ones. Over the years, it became a cherished family outing. My mother, who is amused by my sense of thrift, insists on accompanying me on what she refers to as my “scam.” “You’d better not tell anyone about your scam,” she routinely warned me. “If too many people catch on, they’ll stop doing it.”
Well, they did, but I nevertheless take great umbrage at the idea that it was somehow dishonest for me and other customers to take L.L. Bean up on its policy. The company made much of its lifetime guarantee, advertising it on social media and elsewhere. Judging from my experiences, the company even encouraged its in-store employees to tout that guarantee. I feel no guilt about taking L.L. Bean up on its offer. If they didn’t want people to take the swap, they shouldn’t have offered it!
In a letter to customers posted Friday on the company’s Facebook page, executive chairman Shawn O. Gorman announced the decision and griped that “a small, but growing number of customers has been interpreting our guarantee well beyond its original intent.” While I agree that it’s bad karma for people to buy old L.L. Bean merchandise at yard sales for cheap and then return it at L.L. Bean as if they had purchased it there—Gorman claims that this happened, and I do not doubt him—I am nevertheless annoyed by his blamey statement. Customers of a retail store should not be expected to be strict Constitutional originalists. If the intent behind a given policy varies from the text of the policy, then it’s incumbent on the company to change the text of the policy to better reflect its intent. That’s not the customer’s responsibility.
L.L. Bean’s lifetime warranty might have been a foolish one that was prone to exploitation, but it was their policy, and it’s not one that the company kept secret, either. It was a marketing tool more than anything else, meant to foster good feelings and brand loyalty. I certainly felt warm and fuzzy toward L.L. Bean, and the company’s absurdly generous warranty certainly led me to spend more money there than I would have otherwise. But now the policy is history, and I can no longer count on getting a free pair of new shoes every single year for the rest of my life. It’s the end of an era in Justin Peters’ footwear styles—and my wife, for one, is thrilled. The shoes I’ve been exchanging for six years are hideous.

offering a lifetime guarantee on cheap footwear was a bad policy from the start, but that doesn't mean I agree with his exploitation of the system.

I will say that this guy hit on something important. This guarantee, just like Filson's, is meant to foster brand loyalty and is undoubtedly a marketing tool to get people to spend more money. In this way, it's almost fair when people do take advantage of an existing policy. I'm not that guy, but I think it goes both ways.

Another thing to consider is that 99% of Filson bags will never get enough use to need to be repaired or replaced, but we all LOVE that they have that guarantee. I think it was @OtterMeanGreen that said it is more of a bragging right and than a functional guarantee. For the few out there that do wear out their bags, I hope they take advantage of the policy, because it is certainly built into the price at Filson.

 

[M635Guy]

offering a lifetime guarantee on cheap footwear was a bad policy from the start, but that doesn't mean I agree with his exploitation of the system.

I will say that this guy hit on something important. This guarantee, just like Filson's, is meant to foster brand loyalty and is undoubtedly a marketing tool to get people to spend more money. In this way, it's almost fair when people do take advantage of an existing policy. I'm not that guy, but I think it goes both ways.

Another thing to consider is that 99% of Filson bags will never get enough use to need to be repaired or replaced, but we all LOVE that they have that guarantee. I think it was @OtterMeanGreen that said it is more of a bragging right and than a functional guarantee. For the few out there that do wear out their bags, I hope they take advantage of the policy, because it is certainly built into the price at Filson.

It boils down to a golden rule thing. I don't think the original intent was to be a marketing device, it was a way to describe how they did business. I don't think any of what that guy described was "almost fair."

 

[TinMan3]

It boils down to a golden rule thing. I don't think the original intent was to be a marketing device, it was a way to describe how they did business. I don't think any of what that guy described was "almost fair."

Well, I guess what I am saying, is that if something says it is guaranteed for life, be prepared to guarantee it for life should someone choose to hold you to it. Is there an element of goodwill that should be considered? Absolutely.

You're getting into speaking on behalf of the company by saying the intent wasn't a marketing tool. In my opinion, it is. If it influences your decision on where you buy your products, that is the definition of marketing.

In my opinion, they were right to change their policy to protect themselves while still rewarding those who are loyal to them.

 

[jswitzer31]

Hi,

New here. Does anyone know how to get a hold of one of the black Filson luggage tags (70219-BL)?

I know they were discontinued some time ago, but I'm curious how often they pop up on eBay or the like? I saw an old stock brown one recently on eBay that I believe someone on here won (Geasy?).

Thanks for any help on the quest... and for all of the great info I've found in this thread.

-j

 

[speedy611]

Hi,

New here. Does anyone know how to get a hold of one of the black Filson luggage tags (70219-BL)?

I know they were discontinued some time ago, but I'm curious how often they pop up on eBay or the like? I saw an old stock brown one recently on eBay that I believe someone on here won (Geasy?).

Thanks for any help on the quest... and for all of the great info I've found in this thread.

-j

Hi and welcome. Which bag(s) do you have?
Filson recently reintroduced the tag but it’s now showing as out of stock. I’m not sure if they were avail in black or only brown.
However - google Cranes country store and give them a call (assume you are in the US). They had a few in both colours so you might get lucky. Let us know how you get on.

 

[jswitzer31]

Hi and welcome. Which bag(s) do you have?
Filson recently reintroduced the tag but it’s now showing as out of stock. I’m not sure if they were avail in black or only brown.
However - google Cranes country store and give them a call (assume you are in the US). They had a few in both colours so you might get lucky. Let us know how you get on.

Thanks! I snagged a "reintroduced/closeout/limited edition/old stock" black 257 over the Winter Sale. Perfect for international business travel. Can stuff souvenirs for the little one in it or stash a jacket for the day along with all of my normal work paraphernalia.

Now I'm just on the hunt for the matching black luggage tag. I'll give Crane's a call and report back if I have any luck.

I saw they reintroduced the brown one recently, though I've seen reports that it isn't the same thickness/quality as the OG brown and black ones.

-j

 

[speedy611]

Thanks! I snagged a "reintroduced/closeout/limited edition/old stock" black 257 over the Winter Sale. Perfect for international business travel. Can stuff souvenirs for the little one in it or stash a jacket for the day along with all of my normal work paraphernalia.

Now I'm just on the hunt for the matching black luggage tag. I'll give Crane's a call and report back if I have any luck.

I saw they reintroduced the brown one recently, though I've seen reports that it isn't the same thickness/quality as the OG brown and black ones.

-j

Great. I have a 258 and 256. The 258 can really carry a lot of stuff so your 257 will be excellent. I’ve found that a luggage tag really dresses the bags up so in black with matching tag it’s going to look very classy.
I haven’t seen the very latest version of the tags. I got 2 in brown from cranes last year. They are very solid. But it’s clear from photos of the original that the small leather strap is thinner in my version. I’m not worried about this, it’s still beefier than any other luggage tag I’ve ever seen!
Post a pic of your 257 when you get a moment.

 

[OtterMeanGreen]

@OtterMeanGreen - I assume you’ve seen this- Talon Otter green outfitter bag mis-advertised as a sportsman

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/323062739490

Probably a bit too beaten up for you but...

Lol you assume correct. I did see it but not sure I’m ready for an Outfitter just yet. Thanks anyways for checking

 

[TinMan3]

Lol you assume correct. I did see it but not sure I’m ready for an Outfitter just yet. Thanks anyways for checking

I know, I saw a tan talon outfitter for $239 the other day. It didn’t have a strap and was missing the leather pulls on the zippers, but I almost bought anyways. Then decided the outfitter is just huge and unrealistic for someone like me lol.