The CM Graveyard: First Sartoria Partenopea... next J. Crew?

[zalb916]

I think it’s pretty straightforward. He sells expensive shoes to well-off D.C. dudes who aren’t shoe hobbyists and just like nice, expensive things. Those transactions are easy and lucrative, albeit likely not that frequent.

He also deals with a lot of hobbyists who come to his store, because it’s the only local place that carries certain brands. In the past and currently, that’s included Vass, Carmina, C&J, Locke, EG, and Lobb. They get to see the goods in-person either for fun or to purchase cheaper online.

The latter type annoys him, and he does a terrible job of assessing who fits into that category and with interacting with them once he thinks he’s sniffed them out. He also doesn’t seem to realize that there are customers who actually are well-off and hobbyists.

 

[crazn]

This is so true. Paris 10 years ago - stuffy. Was in Paris last week, and they were friendly. I think it's that service people are getting younger and less formal and the world is getting smaller with social media.

I’ll add that the younger service staff are actually more Americanized with TV and other pop culture stuff. They have less de Gaulle induced hung ups about how offensive it is to communicate in English with a stranger who refuses to even respect french and France. Old white french bureaucrats rail at macron for speaking the language of the enemy. But the generational change is already in progress. The dissolution of gay marriage laws could only happen with the clearance of the generations that were brought up on much stricter religious moral backgrounds. It’s more a passage of time than anything else.

 

[crazn]

I'm tempted to share what I heard yesterday from our minister of trade prior to seeing Trump but that'd be leaking state secrets. Interesting stuff going on with US vs China behind the media.

Juicy... hehe. I don’t have such vaunted connections. Dear Riva please introduce me...

 

[crazn]

also true. they speak/know english but don't like to use it.

Apparently the reason is that they feel embarrassed hearing their own inaccurate pronunciation. This is very different from the Chinese who speak loudly despite being awful in speaking English because they know in order to further improve they need to practice more.

 

[crazn]

This is so true. Paris 10 years ago - stuffy. Was in Paris last week, and they were friendly. I think it's that service people are getting younger and less formal and the world is getting smaller with social media.

It has moved from a you-don’t-deserve-this-**** attitude to a I-know-you-have-a-shopping-list attitude.

 

[Riva]

It has moved from a you-don’t-deserve-this-**** attitude to a I-know-you-have-a-shopping-list attitude.

It's hard to refuse a Chinese biz proposition. Even the Japanese here, the younger well travelled gen, started selling chinese brands. Mainlanders are loaded and they're willing to bleed for 5-6 years to establish marketshare. Their English is much better and mind sharper than the Japanese. Also those brands having the communist party or some officials as co-owners helps a lot.

In regards to Paris I dressed super shabby last year to avoid the pesky thieves, though my phone still got snagged and returned by those "surveyors", went to Hermes pick up wife's belt and they actually "refused" to sell it I must confess Foo did come to mind at that annoying moment and I muttered something about Simon being wrong about clothes aren't important. It's about the extra convenience not the vanity.

 

[crazn]

It's hard to refuse a Chinese biz proposition. Even the Japanese here, the younger well travelled gen, started selling chinese brands. Mainlanders are loaded and they're willing to bleed for 5-6 years to establish marketshare. Their English is much better and mind sharper than the Japanese. Also those brands having the communist party or some officials as co-owners helps a lot.

In regards to Paris I dressed super shabby last year to avoid the pesky thieves, though my phone still got snagged and returned by those "surveyors", went to Hermes pick up wife's belt and they actually "refused" to sell it I must confess Foo did come to mind at that annoying moment and I muttered something about Simon being wrong about clothes aren't important. It's about the extra convenience not the vanity.

Sorry what are Surveyors?

My story is similar. I pre ordered some stuff though the sales manager. Entered Fauborg store post red eye in like crumpled clothing etc that obviously went through quite a bit of sweating with last minute packing woes. They eyed me as a little pickpocket until their floor manager came out to welcome me. Lol. I took the opportunity to molest a fair amount of goods. Had to troll them since I was discriminated LOL

I actually brought decent clothes for Michelin meals, but I didn’t really want to be a target across Paris whilst carting that visible orange target.

 

[am55]

That’s assuming every idea and influence is beneficial and benign. The Iraq war proved that the USA was willing to blindside their other NATO allies to disregard their own national intelligence collection with a forged dossier. In this instance a dose of skepticism is extremely healthy which is what I think has earned the French a huge amount of goodwill for those who think America is grandstanding and expect the rest to march in rhythm because they are paying for everything. It’s no wonder now that people have developed a healthy distrust of American foreign policy. There might even be the unfortunate conclusion that the lesser of 2 evils is the weakened former colonial master is not as malevolent as the USA.

I disagree. Empires are on a spectrum and reflect competition in ideas, with the most effective ideas "surviving", without moral considerations (except in so far as they are advantages to a particular culture of a particular empire).

The worst type of empire is probably the Soviet, and even that had some upsides in the early years (let's not forget the Russians thought it an improvement upon being a serf under the Tsars). Camaraderie, industrialisation, mass education, etc.

The European empires were private land grabs formalised through a series of events forcing government intervention to enforce the property rights of the land grabbers. E.g. India in the mid 19th century following the 1857 Rebellion. These developed into a strange relationship of using colonies as captive export markets and natural resource producers to finance the centre. The cost of maintaining these colonies was not just financial - as we saw when De Gaulle yielded to enormous popular opinion and let Algeria go - perhaps a first sign of moral considerations being, in this case, a handicap to influence.

The US empire post WWII was a large improvement in that by virtue of being the strongest exporter, it was setup as a giant free market with the USN protecting the trade routes (and if necessary the land based forces doing the necessary work, as they did in South East Asia, where the local politicians have a very different POV of the Vietnam war from Americans). This was massively beneficial to the US, naturally, but also increased net global welfare at the cost of partial cultural destruction and a loss of status for the former colonial powers, who were broke anyway by that point, and shuddered at the idea of becoming the extractive colonies that they used to run.

I'm not sure whether global trade and exchange of ideas would have been possible without an overbearing imperialist power imposing its version of the Code Civil (e.g. Japanese constitution post-MacArthur) and moving its carrier groups around "just in case". Singapore shows a different way, but the man was a literal genius unparalleled in his own century and the various communities would argue they did lose a fair bit of culture since the Kampung days. In any case it was a forced cultural change anyway (e.g. English schools). From that POV I'm relieved that Xi screwed up and moved to the third phase of the Great DXP China Plan 20 years too early, because a world with two matched superpowers is not a comfortable one to live in, game theoretically.

 

[Riva]

Sorry what are Surveyors?

My story is similar. I pre ordered some stuff though the sales manager. Entered Fauborg store post red eye in like crumpled clothing etc that obviously went through quite a bit of sweating with last minute packing woes. They eyed me as a little pickpocket until their floor manager came out to welcome me. Lol. I took the opportunity to molest a fair amount of goods. Had to troll them since I was discriminated LOL

I actually brought decent clothes for Michelin meals, but I didn’t really want to be a target across Paris whilst carting that visible orange target.

On streets and parks you see all these young guys trying to distract tourists by handing out surveys to fill out while their friends pickpocket you.

 

[crazn]

I disagree. Empires are on a spectrum and reflect competition in ideas, with the most effective ideas "surviving", without moral considerations (except in so far as they are advantages to a particular culture of a particular empire).

The worst type of empire is probably the Soviet, and even that had some upsides in the early years (let's not forget the Russians thought it an improvement upon being a serf under the Tsars). Camaraderie, industrialisation, mass education, etc.

The European empires were private land grabs formalised through a series of events forcing government intervention to enforce the property rights of the land grabbers. E.g. India in the mid 19th century following the 1857 Rebellion. These developed into a strange relationship of using colonies as captive export markets and natural resource producers to finance the centre. The cost of maintaining these colonies was not just financial - as we saw when De Gaulle yielded to enormous popular opinion and let Algeria go - perhaps a first sign of moral considerations being, in this case, a handicap to influence.

The US empire post WWII was a large improvement in that by virtue of being the strongest exporter, it was setup as a giant free market with the USN protecting the trade routes (and if necessary the land based forces doing the necessary work, as they did in South East Asia, where the local politicians have a very different POV of the Vietnam war from Americans). This was massively beneficial to the US, naturally, but also increased net global welfare at the cost of partial cultural destruction and a loss of status for the former colonial powers, who were broke anyway by that point, and shuddered at the idea of becoming the extractive colonies that they used to run.

I'm not sure whether global trade and exchange of ideas would have been possible without an overbearing imperialist power imposing its version of the Code Civil (e.g. Japanese constitution post-MacArthur) and moving its carrier groups around "just in case". Singapore shows a different way, but the man was a literal genius unparalleled in his own century and the various communities would argue they did lose a fair bit of culture since the Kampung days. In any case it was a forced cultural change anyway (e.g. English schools). From that POV I'm relieved that Xi screwed up and moved to the third phase of the Great DXP China Plan 20 years too early, because a world with two matched superpowers is not a comfortable one to live in, game theoretically.

There’s is some recent theoretical debate about reuniting with Malaysia since now politically the governments are slightly more aligned after a 50 year astrological hindrance. But any reunification needs to be done soon because Singapore is getting too far ahead of the rest of Malaysia and SEA culturally

 

[Riva]

I disagree. Empires are on a spectrum and reflect competition in ideas, with the most effective ideas "surviving", without moral considerations (except in so far as they are advantages to a particular culture of a particular empire).

The worst type of empire is probably the Soviet, and even that had some upsides in the early years (let's not forget the Russians thought it an improvement upon being a serf under the Tsars). Camaraderie, industrialisation, mass education, etc.

The European empires were private land grabs formalised through a series of events forcing government intervention to enforce the property rights of the land grabbers. E.g. India in the mid 19th century following the 1857 Rebellion. These developed into a strange relationship of using colonies as captive export markets and natural resource producers to finance the centre. The cost of maintaining these colonies was not just financial - as we saw when De Gaulle yielded to enormous popular opinion and let Algeria go - perhaps a first sign of moral considerations being, in this case, a handicap to influence.

The US empire post WWII was a large improvement in that by virtue of being the strongest exporter, it was setup as a giant free market with the USN protecting the trade routes (and if necessary the land based forces doing the necessary work, as they did in South East Asia, where the local politicians have a very different POV of the Vietnam war from Americans). This was massively beneficial to the US, naturally, but also increased net global welfare at the cost of partial cultural destruction and a loss of status for the former colonial powers, who were broke anyway by that point, and shuddered at the idea of becoming the extractive colonies that they used to run.

I'm not sure whether global trade and exchange of ideas would have been possible without an overbearing imperialist power imposing its version of the Code Civil (e.g. Japanese constitution post-MacArthur) and moving its carrier groups around "just in case". Singapore shows a different way, but the man was a literal genius unparalleled in his own century and the various communities would argue they did lose a fair bit of culture since the Kampung days. In any case it was a forced cultural change anyway (e.g. English schools). From that POV I'm relieved that Xi screwed up and moved to the third phase of the Great DXP China Plan 20 years too early, because a world with two matched superpowers is not a comfortable one to live in, game theoretically.

The genius also came from a neighboring country where it wasn't as poor as Singapore. So maybe a different mindset with a rare chance to make a difference.

 

[am55]

I’ll add that the younger service staff are actually more Americanized with TV and other pop culture stuff. They have less de Gaulle induced hung ups about how offensive it is to communicate in English with a stranger who refuses to even respect french and France. Old white french bureaucrats rail at macron for speaking the language of the enemy. But the generational change is already in progress. The dissolution of gay marriage laws could only happen with the clearance of the generations that were brought up on much stricter religious moral backgrounds. It’s more a passage of time than anything else.

Well, technically gay marriage, and indeed relationships, are still illegal in SG

Those are cosmetic, and era-based changes. The real French culture, the timeless part that is slowly eroded, is for example not valuing people purely on the basis of their ability to produce economic value, or the desirability of some redistribution (i.e. thinking of "a nice society to live in" as an externality to be addressed, and priced). The US is becoming more European in concentrating power both Federally and in the hands of hereditary groups, and in having more and more policy being passed in opaque ways "for reasons of state"; Europe is becoming more American in that social status is increasingly linked to wealth and redistribution is increasingly looked down upon, whilst the European project can be seen as a mini-experiment in free trade and exchange of ideas. OTOH the corruption has not really left and power is still opaque and linked to personal interest (e.g. systematic use of internal intelligence services to spy on the opposition and of the press and justice to take down members of it). In its lack of respect for absolute rule of law the European countries are very not-American, but then so is America drifting that way. A shame for those of us who admired the original ideas behind the country, which were based on the best ideas of every great civilisation and then improved on them.

 

[Texasmade]

On streets and parks you see all these young guys trying to distract tourists by handing out surveys to fill out while their friends pickpocket you.

I’ve been trying to convince my friend to run the survey pick pocket scam on the surveyorsin Paris. I’ll have a cheap wallet with nothing in it in my pocket and let myself be pick pocketed while my friend tries to pick pocket those surveyors.

 

[crazn]

Well, technically gay marriage, and indeed relationships, are still illegal in SG

Those are cosmetic, and era-based changes. The real French culture, the timeless part that is slowly eroded, is for example not valuing people purely on the basis of their ability to produce economic value, or the desirability of some redistribution (i.e. thinking of "a nice society to live in" as an externality to be addressed, and priced). The US is becoming more European in concentrating power both Federally and in the hands of hereditary groups, and in having more and more policy being passed in opaque ways "for reasons of state"; Europe is becoming more American in that social status is increasingly linked to wealth and redistribution is increasingly looked down upon, whilst the European project can be seen as a mini-experiment in free trade and exchange of ideas. OTOH the corruption has not really left and power is still opaque and linked to personal interest (e.g. systematic use of internal intelligence services to spy on the opposition and of the press and justice to take down members of it). In its lack of respect for absolute rule of law the European countries are very not-American, but then so is America drifting that way. A shame for those of us who admired the original ideas behind the country, which were based on the best ideas of every great civilisation and then improved on them.

I’m just saying that generational change will happen whether people want it or not. Like french youth being less adversarial to English. Gay marriage getting more accepted or correctly put more people don’t care enough to enforce the ban. The issue here is whether you are able to recognise the trend. The Colin kaepernick advert was an exercise in this point. Nike renewed their customer base by systematically ditching the old consumers for the younger ones. How many old white folk will be buying more sneakers anyway. The thing I see with trump personally it’s like a last hurrah for the dwindling baby boomer population to try to secure their legacy before they get overwhelmed by the millennial demographic.

 

[crazn]

I’ve been trying to convince my friend to run the survey pick pocket scam on the surveyorsin Paris. I’ll have a cheap wallet with nothing in it in my pocket and let myself be pick pocketed while my friend tries to pick pocket those surveyors.

Conveniently I can always claim I speak no francais or Anglais and quickly run away. Never really got any issues with these folk. As my mom says. Stay near old rich white people. LOL. But I really want to thank this french grandpere who gestured to me and my travelling companion to sit next to him when a fight broke out in the Parisian subway between the black and beur gangs on my first trip there. I Guess there was no way they would be attacking white privilege if they didn’t want to screw up big time. LOL