Well my "shoe people" thread was a targeted strike at the issue but I guess it did not have the potency that I thought. Here is my issue. Expensive shoes are an affordable luxury - they sit around a price point that given a certain level of income are accessible to just about everyone. The problem is instead of investing in expensive quality shoes that will withstand trends or fads people go apeshit and buy things with buttons, side laces, butterfly fronts, two-or-three tone, green, blue, purple suede, etc. In other words, I see a lot of it as throwing good money away. And I'm not speaking about this from an ivory tower, I've done it myself with regret. My advice is this - next time your faced with a "great" buying opportunity for a pair of purple suede shoes - stop, think and step away. Do this three or four times in a row and then use the combined money to buy a pair of Lobb City II or EG Westminsters. You'll thank me in the long run. Have you been hanging out with the ? While this is not the drunken rant I was hoping for to bring the afternoon lulz, I do understand your point and somewhat agree... But what if someone has all the basics covered? Alternately, have you considered that some have tastes that do not tend towards the classics? Btw, I don't consider Lobb's museum calf to be classic. Sure, it's instantly recognizable by shoe geeks, but not really classic imo. Fwiw, I'm not a huge fan, but would make an exception for a pair of these Towcesters.