The Bespoke Shoes Thread

[ericgereghty]

jesus ok that's even worse - I am definitely not one to judge when it comes to ridiculously high priced shopping but that hurts but I also gotta question why buy shoes that make up 60% of your partners income? any way doesn't help you now and good luck to you.

Admittedly assuming (and also rather hoping lol), but would guess Shack is the breadwinner and partner’s income is more bonus than crucial to maintaining life/lifestyle.

 

[shackletonian]

Just to be clear for @dauster about the cost of the shoes relative to my partner's income, she encouraged me to do it -- because I usually help take care of her family's needs and comforts, though it does require careful budgeting, and she wanted me to splurge on something that I had always dreamed of doing and do something for me. I felt somewhat guilty and selfish doing it anyway, but then seeing the result and experience was doubly embarrassing and distressing. She also works in bridal alterations, so she could easily spot the issues, even without being well-versed in men's footwear.

I was, to be truthful, terribly embarrassed by the experience. I avoided telling my family about the status of the shoes (my partner knew) because I had been so excited that I told friends and family about getting bespoke shoes. In the end, I realized that it's not anything for which I should be ashamed, but also that I wished that other people who had bad experiences had been more transparent about their experience. Many, perhaps out of shame or a sense of 'politeness,' avoid details about their experience, so it's hard to understand what went wrong or why something happened. After I posted my initial saga, I had a number of people tell me their experiences and I am definitely sympathetic, but wish that they had said so earlier. I've heard whispers and murmurs about bloggers and insiders having issues, but they sort of shilled for GJC and then went quiet when it came to problems. That's their business, but I thought that I'd at least be transparent about the experience, not to hurt anybody, but just to let others make more informed decisions.

 

[marlinspike]

I think in part a lot of people with strong online presence are shills, and in part many people don't want to admit, sometimes even to themselves, that they were cheated.

 

[dieworkwear]

Just to be clear for @dauster about the cost of the shoes relative to my partner's income, she encouraged me to do it -- because I usually help take care of her family's needs and comforts, though it does require careful budgeting, and she wanted me to splurge on something that I had always dreamed of doing and do something for me. I felt somewhat guilty and selfish doing it anyway, but then seeing the result and experience was doubly embarrassing and distressing. She also works in bridal alterations, so she could easily spot the issues, even without being well-versed in men's footwear.

I was, to be truthful, terribly embarrassed by the experience. I avoided telling my family about the status of the shoes (my partner knew) because I had been so excited that I told friends and family about getting bespoke shoes. In the end, I realized that it's not anything for which I should be ashamed, but also that I wished that other people who had bad experiences had been more transparent about their experience. Many, perhaps out of shame or a sense of 'politeness,' avoid details about their experience, so it's hard to understand what went wrong or why something happened. After I posted my initial saga, I had a number of people tell me their experiences and I am definitely sympathetic, but wish that they had said so earlier. I've heard whispers and murmurs about bloggers and insiders having issues, but they sort of shilled for GJC and then went quiet when it came to problems. That's their business, but I thought that I'd at least be transparent about the experience, not to hurt anybody, but just to let others make more informed decisions.

I'm reminded of JefferyD's quote on here many years ago, where he said that people come here to get feedback on their Indochino suit whereas bespoke customers come here to brag. So there's often a selection bias. This also reminds me of DocHolliday's comment many years ago, where he said that hell hath no fury like a man who bought his first pair of Allen Edmonds Seconds. This customer will inspect their shoes with a microscope and scream online about any visible flaws. People who buy bespoke clothes/ shoes, on the other hand, either keep quiet about bad commissions or when they post, others are too polite to say anything. I've seen things here that I thought had some serious errors. But when someone just dropped $5k on a garment or a pair of shoes, and they're excited about it, it would be rude to say something. (At least in my thinking).

I'm also reminded of a tailor I know who used to do bespoke and alterations. A year or two ago, he cut off alterations unless you're a bespoke customer. He said that alterations customers are sometimes difficult, whereas he doesn't have this problem with bespoke, despite the higher price. His theory: alterations customers spend ten minutes with you and then leave. Bespoke customers spend four hours (four meetings, three of which are fittings, and each of those meetings is an hour-long). He suspects that alterations customers are difficult because you don't already have that established personal connection.

I've had things made through various makers where things have gone wrong. I pay full price for all my commissions, so there are never any freebies or even discounts. But one instance comes to mind: at some point in the process, the person invited me over to their home for drinks, and we hung out. I met their family, got to know them, and we became friends (as much as you can with business acquaintances). At some point, my order went wrong and the person was unable to make it back to my city for fittings. They offered to fly me out to NYC, where they still visited, for fittings. But I'm not willing to fly from San Francisco to NYC just for clothes. I chalked up the loss to just the dangers of bespoke.

I spoke up about that incident on the forum, but this tailor also serves a few members here who are loyal and happy customers. Again, one doesn't want to be too rude about things, so you speak up quietly about your experience and let it lay.

In all my experiences with bespoke makers, when things go wrong, I always just assume the person tried their best. Certainly, I've been hired to do things, tried my best, and I simply didn't produce things to a standard that my client or boss had hoped. So I try to be understanding.

For me, the GJC experience stands alone in that the experience was so slick and gross, the management seemingly unwilling to correct problems, and the quality so astoundingly shabby. I feel like this happens so often, they pass people on from one bad order to the next. I echo @dauster's thoughts when he says he doesn't understand the business model. I can only assume that most people have no idea they're getting bad shoes, and they can't imagine that a firm so big and reputable can produce bad work. When I got my shoes at first, I didn't really know what was wrong with them, but I felt something wasn't right (I was also drunk at the time, to my defense). It was only the next morning when I inspected them closely that I send them an email. The situation just got worse from there with bad customer service.

 

[taxgenius]

I'm reminded of JefferyD's quote on here many years ago, where he said that people come here to get feedback on their Indochino suit whereas bespoke customers come here to brag. So there's often a selection bias. This also reminds me of DocHolliday's comment many years ago, where he said that hell hath no fury like a man who bought his first pair of Allen Edmonds Seconds. This customer will inspect their shoes with a microscope and scream online about any visible flaws. People who buy bespoke clothes/ shoes, on the other hand, either keep quiet about bad commissions or when they post, others are too polite to say anything. I've seen things here that I thought had some serious errors. But when someone just dropped $5k on a garment or a pair of shoes, and they're excited about it, it would be rude to say something. (At least in my thinking).

I'm also reminded of a tailor I know who used to do bespoke and alterations. A year or two ago, he cut off alterations unless you're a bespoke customer. He said that alterations customers are sometimes difficult, whereas he doesn't have this problem with bespoke, despite the higher price. His theory: alterations customers spend ten minutes with you and then leave. Bespoke customers spend four hours (four meetings, three of which are fittings, and each of those meetings is an hour-long). He suspects that alterations customers are difficult because you don't already have that established personal connection.

I've had things made through various makers where things have gone wrong. I pay full price for all my commissions, so there are never any freebies or even discounts. But one instance comes to mind: at some point in the process, the person invited me over to their home for drinks, and we hung out. I met their family, got to know them, and we became friends (as much as you can with business acquaintances). At some point, my order went wrong and the person was unable to make it back to my city for fittings. They offered to fly me out to NYC, where they still visited, for fittings. But I'm not willing to fly from San Francisco to NYC just for clothes. I chalked up the loss to just the dangers of bespoke.

I spoke up about that incident on the forum, but this tailor also serves a few members here who are loyal and happy customers. Again, one doesn't want to be too rude about things, so you speak up quietly about your experience and let it lay.

In all my experiences with bespoke makers, when things go wrong, I always just assume the person tried their best. Certainly, I've been hired to do things, tried my best, and I simply didn't produce things to a standard that my client or boss had hoped. So I try to be understanding.

For me, the GJC experience stands alone in that the experience was so slick and gross, the management seemingly unwilling to correct problems, and the quality so astoundingly shabby. I feel like this happens so often, they pass people on from one bad order to the next. I echo @dauster's thoughts when he says he doesn't understand the business model. I can only assume that most people have no idea they're getting bad shoes, and they can't imagine that a firm so big and reputable can produce bad work. When I got my shoes at first, I didn't really know what was wrong with them, but I felt something wasn't right (I was also drunk at the time, to my defense). It was only the next morning when I inspected them closely that I send them an email. The situation just got worse from there with bad customer service.

I wish people were more forthcoming when they had a bad experience to save us all some grief - and money.

 

[j ingevaldsson]

^^^ As I've talked about before, the fact that there can be issues ordering bespoke is given, and has happened to me several times. It's all how this is handled that matters, IMO. For all the ones I've used, in the cases things have occurred, this has been addressed and fixed accordingly (I've never had to deal with a maker similar to the GJC experience here when fixes don't work and one have no trust in the maker). Sometimes been quite easy fixes, sometimes full remakes have needed to be done. But to me such things is not the same thing as a bad experience. All that matters is the end result, and if **** happens along the way I don't see it as a problem if it's taken care of in a good way by the maker. Sure, one can have to wait a bit more and stuff like that, but personally it's no biggie.

 

[women_in_tailoring]

I visited Francis Waplinger at his workshop. He was very nice and I was able to try on some fitting shoes for his MTO offering; which is basically a house last that he can make some modifications. He makes all of his shoes on his own which is pretty impressive which is super impressive it also explains the pricing which given that it's a solo show, is a bit more reasonable. His current MTO last is limited to a classic round but he mentioned that he was working on some other shapes as well. He showed me some examples of some beautiful pegged waist construction as well. Ultimately, it's a bit more than what I would want to spend. Given that Gaziano & Girling charges about $4000 for a similar handmade MTO, I would opt for Francis and support local craftspeople.

However for my needs I think I'm going to go with Acme Shoemaker based on some recommendations for folks here and just ogling their Instagram. They're just a bit more of what I am looking for style-wise. I took some measurements at home and Oliver at Acme said they should be able to accommodate my measurements. I think I'm going to get this exact one with some fun brass monogramming.

I was going back and forth between a plain cap-toe, which is more formal and a punched cap. I think the punched cap is a bit more interesting but a standard cap-toe is the classic option.

Any thoughts?

View attachment 1723393

While this thread is responding to the recent GC incident (I look back 5 pages), I want to respond to the Acme comment.

I am their MTM customer, who has gone through 2 pairs of test shoes (initial order placed in Aug - Sep) and waiting for the final delivery.

I order a pair of single monk in Q90 last, upper material in hatch grain. Everything is done remotely, I measured myself with my wife's help, following what I could remember from my TYE process.

The communication is super smooth and pleasant. I was up-front with Oliver (who is handling customer communication) that I have difficult feet (size 35-35.5, high instep, wide feet, not your usual dealing ). He advised me to do remote MTM and we got on with it.

First test shoes - quite spot on. Didn't have the usual MTM test shoes that I have encountered with Bestetti or SC, which usually run way big. Some tension around the widest part of my foot and a little too loose for the right ankle, no biggie. The test shoes were really well made that I could tell right out of the box. Therefore I put in 10km ish walking before I gave my testing feedback.

2nd test shoes - the tension points from the first pair are addressed properly, however, the arch seems to slip back for a good 1-2cm toward to the back of my right foot. Even Oliver himself is a little confused how that happened, oh well.

With their updated website, I hope more people will find their price (1650USD) and the level of finished product are fantastic.

I have a few ideas in terms of how to treat the well made testing shoes (obviously not throw them away). Keep you all posted.

 

[corpseposeur]

While this thread is responding to the recent GC incident (I look back 5 pages), I want to respond to the Acme comment.

I am their MTM customer, who has gone through 2 pairs of test shoes (initial order placed in Aug - Sep) and waiting for the final delivery.

I order a pair of single monk in Q90 last, upper material in hatch grain. Everything is done remotely, I measured myself with my wife's help, following what I could remember from my TYE process.

The communication is super smooth and pleasant. I was up-front with Oliver (who is handling customer communication) that I have difficult feet (size 35-35.5, high instep, wide feet, not your usual dealing ). He advised me to do remote MTM and we got on with it.

First test shoes - quite spot on. Didn't have the usual MTM test shoes that I have encountered with Bestetti or SC, which usually run way big. Some tension around the widest part of my foot and a little too loose for the right ankle, no biggie. The test shoes were really well made that I could tell right out of the box. Therefore I put in 10km ish walking before I gave my testing feedback.

2nd test shoes - the tension points from the first pair are addressed properly, however, the arch seems to slip back for a good 1-2cm toward to the back of my right foot. Even Oliver himself is a little confused how that happened, oh well.

With their updated website, I hope more people will find their price (1650USD) and the level of finished product are fantastic.

I have a few ideas in terms of how to treat the well made testing shoes (obviously not throw them away). Keep you all posted.

This is inline what I've been hearing from everyone who has recommended Acme. I'm doing a straight MTO (without test shoes) as Oliver did not seem to think it was needed. As with any first time order, I'm a bit nervous but hoping for the best.

 

[bernoulli]

I have some horror stories here in Shanghai but nothing that is worth dwelling on much. Shoemakers are small operations and they did not cost me a fortune. I appreciate the extensive feedback on some makers that people shared. Very helpful.

 

[RJman]

^^^ As I've talked about before, the fact that there can be issues ordering bespoke is given, and has happened to me several times. It's all how this is handled that matters, IMO. For all the ones I've used, in the cases things have occurred, this has been addressed and fixed accordingly (I've never had to deal with a maker similar to the GJC experience here when fixes don't work and one have no trust in the maker). Sometimes been quite easy fixes, sometimes full remakes have needed to be done. But to me such things is not the same thing as a bad experience. All that matters is the end result, and if **** happens along the way I don't see it as a problem if it's taken care of in a good way by the maker. Sure, one can have to wait a bit more and stuff like that, but personally it's no biggie.

Coming in here since @dauster kindly mentioned my book and me. I agree completely that issues arise over the course of dealing with any maker - a custom tailor, shoemaker, whatever. What matters is what they do to make things right. Sometimes those issues arise because the client didn't give the artisan the right information -- that was my problem on my first pair of lace-up shoes from Delos, where I didn't realize how they should be fitting/feeling when I wore the trial shoes and didn't let him know there was too much height on the instep of one shoe. I later took them back to him and he made it right.

There are various kinds of customer-posters online. Some want to protect their prestige as connoisseurs (or not make themselves look stupid) by never admitting that they've had a misfire from a maker. Some are commercially intertwined with makers. But then there are also some who are perpetually dissatisfied and run down everyone because they had a disappointing experience. I don't think anyone in this thread is doing the last.

Unfortunately, Cleverley has managed to make itself into a flashy brand through its Mr Porter tie-ups and Kingsman tie-ins, as well as shoeing various celebrities. They seem to be deriding anyone who notices problems in good faith as being internet pedants. But when we try to find out if their shoes are actually handmade, or the quality of their skins, or when we need them to fix egregious errors, we are acting on the reputation they have built their prestige on: custom shoemaking in the West End manner, hand welted and lasted, in the finest leathers, with warranted fit. We're not trying to split hairs, we're trying to confirm things that in the past a firm of that prestige would never have behaved in a manner to call into question. It's really too bad, until about a decade ago it was a great firm.

 

[Zerase]

They even post their subpar looking shoes on their IG. I know that the owner seemed happy about them in the comments, and that is what matter the most I guess. But, having said that, just look at the scale of the leather on the vamp. It is noticeably different and I would have been pretty disappointed if those were my shoes. It would also be pretty hard to swallow my pride and adress the issue after spending a smaller fortune to commission them.

I know this has been posted before, just a reminder that they are either incompetent, or just don't give a **** about such things as the scale of the scales(?).

 

[j ingevaldsson]

Coming in here since @dauster kindly mentioned my book and me. I agree completely that issues arise over the course of dealing with any maker - a custom tailor, shoemaker, whatever. What matters is what they do to make things right. Sometimes those issues arise because the client didn't give the artisan the right information -- that was my problem on my first pair of lace-up shoes from Delos, where I didn't realize how they should be fitting/feeling when I wore the trial shoes and didn't let him know there was too much height on the instep of one shoe. I later took them back to him and he made it right.

There are various kinds of customer-posters online. Some want to protect their prestige as connoisseurs (or not make themselves look stupid) by never admitting that they've had a misfire from a maker. Some are commercially intertwined with makers. But then there are also some who are perpetually dissatisfied and run down everyone because they had a disappointing experience. I don't think anyone in this thread is doing the last.

Unfortunately, Cleverley has managed to make itself into a flashy brand through its Mr Porter tie-ups and Kingsman tie-ins, as well as shoeing various celebrities. They seem to be deriding anyone who notices problems in good faith as being internet pedants. But when we try to find out if their shoes are actually handmade, or the quality of their skins, or when we need them to fix egregious errors, we are acting on the reputation they have built their prestige on: custom shoemaking in the West End manner, hand welted and lasted, in the finest leathers, with warranted fit. We're not trying to split hairs, we're trying to confirm things that in the past a firm of that prestige would never have behaved in a manner to call into question. It's really too bad, until about a decade ago it was a great firm.

On the latter, yeah it's indeed a true shame to see what this firm has turned into. I would have had no problem with all the Mr. Porter-Kingsman-celebs stuff as long as they had kept doing their main thing - bespoke footwear - to a high standard (and not lied on a bunch of stuff on the first things there). It's good that we have companies trying to reach broader with fine footwear in various ways, as long as it's done properly.

I don't think we'll see a change for the better as long as the Glasgow's run the ship. This based on my own interactions with them, and all I've heard from people who have/are working for them. It's not a surprise that so many good makers have left the firm the past years, and I feel sad for the good ones still there struggling. I know they've tried selling, but as I understand the price they want for the firm will likely keep all potential good buyers that could take on Cleverley the way I wish away forever.

 

[RJman]

On the latter, yeah it's indeed a true shame to see what this firm has turned into. I would have had no problem with all the Mr. Porter-Kingsman-celebs stuff as long as they had kept doing their main thing - bespoke footwear - to a high standard (and not lied on a bunch of stuff on the first things there). It's good that we have companies trying to reach broader with fine footwear in various ways, as long as it's done properly.

Good point. I don't mean to begrudge them material success. What I mean is that their prominence is growing and making them unassailable as they become a known luxury brand despite their flagship bespoke product being so shoddy for us normies. For the record my normal RTW Cleverley shoes are my best fitting pair of RTW shoes (by C&J) and my Anthony Cleverley shoes, whoever's factory machine made them, are beautiful. I do have Cleverley bespoak but those were made by someone who left the firm since.

 

[j ingevaldsson]

Good point. I don't mean to begrudge them material success. What I mean is that their prominence is growing and making them unassailable as they become a known luxury brand despite their flagship bespoke product being so shoddy for us normies. For the record my normal RTW Cleverley shoes are my best fitting pair of RTW shoes (by C&J) and my Anthony Cleverley shoes, whoever's factory machine made them, are beautiful. I do have Cleverley bespoak but those were made by someone who left the firm since.

Absolutely. And what's sad is to think of all the folks who've they, with their approach, managed to attract to actually order bespoke shoes, and who receive an inferior product and believe that "ok that's all there is". These are maybe not hurt financially, but surely won't be that keen on going to another bespoke shoemaker, and will not spread it to friends etc. Cause it's definitely my experience that also folks with very little shoe knowledge can feel the difference between an excellent fitting shoe and one that is not, and see the difference of an excellent made shoe of top material and one that is not, even if they perhaps can't really assess and evaluate it fully. Cause indeed everyone who has experienced superb bespoke shoes - be it extreme shoe nerds or some rich bloke who just buy what his friend says he should buy - will rave about it.

 

[BomTrady]

I'm reminded of JefferyD's quote on here many years ago, where he said that people come here to get feedback on their Indochino suit whereas bespoke customers come here to brag. So there's often a selection bias. This also reminds me of DocHolliday's comment many years ago, where he said that hell hath no fury like a man who bought his first pair of Allen Edmonds Seconds. This customer will inspect their shoes with a microscope and scream online about any visible flaws. People who buy bespoke clothes/ shoes, on the other hand, either keep quiet about bad commissions or when they post, others are too polite to say anything. I've seen things here that I thought had some serious errors. But when someone just dropped $5k on a garment or a pair of shoes, and they're excited about it, it would be rude to say something. (At least in my thinking).

I'm also reminded of a tailor I know who used to do bespoke and alterations. A year or two ago, he cut off alterations unless you're a bespoke customer. He said that alterations customers are sometimes difficult, whereas he doesn't have this problem with bespoke, despite the higher price. His theory: alterations customers spend ten minutes with you and then leave. Bespoke customers spend four hours (four meetings, three of which are fittings, and each of those meetings is an hour-long). He suspects that alterations customers are difficult because you don't already have that established personal connection.

I've had things made through various makers where things have gone wrong. I pay full price for all my commissions, so there are never any freebies or even discounts. But one instance comes to mind: at some point in the process, the person invited me over to their home for drinks, and we hung out. I met their family, got to know them, and we became friends (as much as you can with business acquaintances). At some point, my order went wrong and the person was unable to make it back to my city for fittings. They offered to fly me out to NYC, where they still visited, for fittings. But I'm not willing to fly from San Francisco to NYC just for clothes. I chalked up the loss to just the dangers of bespoke.

I spoke up about that incident on the forum, but this tailor also serves a few members here who are loyal and happy customers. Again, one doesn't want to be too rude about things, so you speak up quietly about your experience and let it lay.

In all my experiences with bespoke makers, when things go wrong, I always just assume the person tried their best. Certainly, I've been hired to do things, tried my best, and I simply didn't produce things to a standard that my client or boss had hoped. So I try to be understanding.

For me, the GJC experience stands alone in that the experience was so slick and gross, the management seemingly unwilling to correct problems, and the quality so astoundingly shabby. I feel like this happens so often, they pass people on from one bad order to the next. I echo @dauster's thoughts when he says he doesn't understand the business model. I can only assume that most people have no idea they're getting bad shoes, and they can't imagine that a firm so big and reputable can produce bad work. When I got my shoes at first, I didn't really know what was wrong with them, but I felt something wasn't right (I was also drunk at the time, to my defense). It was only the next morning when I inspected them closely that I send them an email. The situation just got worse from there with bad customer service.

Adding a little different perspective, we sometimes underestimate how the behavior we protect on SF contributes to a disincentive for people to launch complaints against merchants, particularly on the dedicated threads. We have all seen people write about, what they believe to be, inferior quality products, inadequate customer service or other commercial mishaps and proceed to get mercilessly slaughtered by some members, many of whom seem to harbor some kind of weird sycophantic fealty to thread retailers. I will admit that I have also seen complaints hardly worthy of serious attention, nevertheless, felt that beyond expressing my own satisfaction with the merchant to counter a meritless grievance, it is appropriate to allow others to determine their own level of sensitivity to their sales experiences no matter how ludicrous or trivial the complaint appears to me. SF members and readers are smart enough to give the appropriate weight to complaints and would hardly punish a well-meaning merchant based on a quibble from a dissatisfied customer.

We have come to think of dedicated threads more as vehicles to praise retailers instead of a forum to both commend and hold retailers accountable. All of us have a responsibility to help shape the purpose of SF and, while reasonable persons may differ, I believe we should not allow this important discussion and debate medium to become a refuge for some merchants to escape accountability to others merely because these same merchants serve our own personal sartorial goals well.