I have been searching through SF for information on Church's and I found myself, rather surprised, reading some quite bad opinions about Church's quality following Prada's acquisition of the brand. I am surprised as I fail to see how has the quality been affected, especially following a recent visit to the Church's Bond St. boutique and having had a look at the more recent shoes. To me, quality seems the same and my personal experience has been nothing but very good indeed. This is a picture of 3 year old (post Prada) pair of seriously worn Consul. These shoes have been worn at least 3 days a week for 3 years in a row (will post closer pics at first opportunity but what you see here is pretty much what the shoes look like). They have never been to the shop for repairs and have been soaked wet once (inside and out) in a typical British rainy day. Having said that, I admit some money-saving strategy has been put in place at Church's. Namely, the brushes are not as good as they used to be and the shoe trees do not have the brass logo and handle; the logo is now pressed onto the wood and the handle is just a recess also on the wood. All this despite the prices of these products having remained the same. P.S. I'm not comparing Church's to Edward Green et al but to the "old", pre-Prada Church's.