• Hi, I am the owner and main administrator of Styleforum. If you find the forum useful and fun, please help support it by buying through the posted links on the forum. Our main, very popular sales thread, where the latest and best sales are listed, are posted HERE

    Purchases made through some of our links earns a commission for the forum and allows us to do the work of maintaining and improving it. Finally, thanks for being a part of this community. We realize that there are many choices today on the internet, and we have all of you to thank for making Styleforum the foremost destination for discussions of menswear.
  • This site contains affiliate links for which Styleforum may be compensated.
  • We would like to welcome House of Huntington as an official Affiliate Vendor. Shop past season Drake's, Nigel Cabourn, Private White V.C. and other menswear luxury brands at exceptional prices below retail. Please visit the Houise of Huntington thread and welcome them to the forum.

  • STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

    Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

    Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

    Styleforum is supported in part by commission earning affiliate links sitewide. Please support us by using them. You may learn more here.

The high end Chinese Shoe Thread

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
I’m definitely interested in Jim Jun as it has at least a website and TM has a ton of them so he definitely likes them enough (and I like the plain toe lazyman model Jim Jun has on its website). Only thing is the handwelt version is a bit steep...

Based on how many TM has, should be a good indicator that he is pleased with them. Saying that, I would be curious if several people have shoes from JimJun, Lu Yang, Yim and ACME. ACME I would imagine would be difficult to get a read on (they haven't been around long). Similar story with JimJun.

However, the two Bespoke makers I would have imagined there would be more information of people's experiences about these shoes. Not much information is available surprisingly enough.
 

clee1982

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
28,817
Reaction score
24,620
I would imagine a lot local client not on SF, I would imagine SF is pretty US centric? Or at least English speaking centric
 

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
I would imagine a lot local client not on SF, I would imagine SF is pretty US centric? Or at least English speaking centric

There should be some representation of Chinese speaking folks on SF who have a pulse on the local Chinese shoe market experience then. Perhaps a sister site or equivalent, no?
 

clee1982

Stylish Dinosaur
Joined
Feb 22, 2009
Messages
28,817
Reaction score
24,620
I know there are some Taiwanese shoe group ( no where as big as SF). I’m sure there are some in mainland but I don’t follow .

I might guess maybe some wechat group rather than forum which is kind a bit ancient technology by today’s social network standard (in its presentation and how information are consumed and shared, though it has certain content depth advantage). on that kind stuff it feels like China typically adepts whatever is new and move on
 

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
I know there are some Taiwanese shoe group ( no where as big as SF). I’m sure there are some in mainland but I don’t follow .

I might guess maybe some wechat group rather than forum which is kind a bit ancient technology by today’s social network standard (in its presentation and how information are consumed and shared, though it has certain content depth advantage). on that kind stuff it feels like China typically adepts whatever is new and move on

Well if anyone uncovers this information, and you find it useful transfer it over to SF. I am confident most would find it advantageous. At worst, it will provide others with a speckle of information to apply towards their next commission.
 

Complete Novice

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 24, 2018
Messages
94
Reaction score
166
Personally I definitely can see a point for new emerging brands to offer shoes/give discounts to "influencers" and bloggers etc, it's a quick and cheap way to get your name and product out. Seeing it from the brands point of view, we do it every now and then with the company I work for and our Yanko and TLB offers. In those cases it's not really to get reviews though, but one thing to get some knowledge about the products out there, other thing to get good photo content (it's very expensive to hire professional photographers and model, way more expensive than sending out a few shoes).

Talking from the other point of view, I do receive products every now and then for reviews/buying guides. In those cases though, I always state that it's the case, and the brand don't have any say in what I write. I've been both praising and bashing in these reviews, in most cases a little bit of both, but usually you aren't sent out crappy stuff so there's more positive things to say. If I knew things are bad (for the price, worth noting) it's not interesting for me to review it, and I turn down a lot of offers from various brands of getting free stuff or get stuff to review. I only accept it if I can see that it would be of interest doing content on it for my readers, and that it's not something that is well-known already (for example, reviewing a pair of Crockett & Jones or Edward Green shoes would be no point, wouldn't add anything new, so that I say no thanks to).

And, also importantly, I have never contacted a brand to ask for free shoes/discounts to do reviews or so. If I'm not up to paying the full price, why would any of my readers be that, and hence, why would it then be of interest to write it? It has happened that I've been offered a pair once though after I've reached out to buy it, in that case I've accepted but then also stated that it was a review pair. Also, I would never review something that I'm obviously biased towards, like a brand that we sell at the company I work for etc, see no point in that. How others act with their reviews etc, that will be on them.

For those who know cultures, they would know that if I were after free stuff it would be stupid to go after so many Japanese makers. In Japan, you always pay what things are worth, it's never even a discussion about anything else. On the other hand, as a guest you are never able to pay for anything at dinners etc though, so maybe I've levelled things up with all the nice stuff I've been out at when visiting ? (this goes whether you've purchased shoes from anyone or not though).

Thank you for the insight @j ingevaldsson.

I now understand that the situation between manufacturer, consumer and reviewers is more nuanced than I had originally thought but my concerns remain.

On the reviewers side;
- as long as good independent journalism exists, the best case I can come up with for a paid review is that is creates additional imagery at low cost.
- worst case, it is a form of hidden tax upon consumers, exploits vulnerable producers and distorts truth for financial gain.

As you say "If I'm not up to paying the full price, why would any of my readers be?".

As consumers:
- the most impactful thing we can do to safeguard truth is to create an economic advantage towards the most impartial opinion, by immediately unsubscribing to paid review.

I wonder if this action hurts or hinders the vulnerable young brands / manufacturers we are discussing though - what better choices do they have?.

Your advice most gratefully sought .............
 
Last edited:

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
As consumers:
- the most impactful thing we can do to safeguard truth is to create an economic advantage towards the most impartial opinion, by immediately unsubscribing to paid review.

I wonder if this action hurts or hinders the vulnerable young brands / manufacturers we are discussing though - what better choices do they have?.

Whilst I am not a proponent of paid reviews, I do appreciate the imagery provided by the reviewers. As @j ingevaldsson mentioned, photography is expensive so companies wouldn't necessarily flood their web pages with dozens of pictures of the footwear (or products) they are selling. Thus, consumers must accept the 4 or 5 studio shots that are available.
So if we unsubscribe (not that I do subscribe), we effectively eliminate the incentive for the reviewer to continue to upload those beneficial images.

Moreover, we eliminate a small company's inexpensive conduit of information. Not that I am involved in marketing but I believe inexpensive multimedia marketing (via influencers and its derivatives) does assist in providing a semblence of equality in a competitive marketplace, especially against those companies with enormous marketing budgets.

Therefore, focused marketing (to an influencer's audience) should yield a higher percentage of consumers, compared to general advertisements, which ultimately increases revenue.

I do see your point though that by subscribing to an influencer's page we are encouraging and rewarding biased opinion. At the end, you just have to take from the review what you find beneficial. As stated, for me that is the pictures/videos. I find the information provided by reviewers tends to be regurgitated company bullet points, so that aspect of the review is rather useless.
 

JohnMRobie

Distinguished Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
4,256
Reaction score
32,293
I can’t help but laugh at the idea that there needs to be some effort to be the arbiter of truth in the promotional world and that paid promotion or giveaways to influencers are some sort of scourge upon the “#menswear” world and that it is bad behavior in some way that should be punished.
Let’s be really honest - Most people aren’t coming to SF to find out about clothes and shoes - They aren’t following shoe influencers on social media or anything like that. The people on here aren’t the typical consumer - and we know where we can go to get feedback on various brands fit/construction/finishing for more nuanced feedback.
If getting someone to do a YouTube video or blog post by sending them a pair of shoes brings in new eyes and introduces new people to the hobby or a brand they never would have heard of that’s a net positive IMO unless your goal is trying to have a world of shoes/menswear filled with gate keepers where only those who are in the know, dedicated enough to track down SF or live in select cities where they have access to different brands have access to it - What would you even search to find SF if you were looking for the best shoes if you didn’t know SF existed or the brand name? If that’s your goal then that’s fine even though I disagree with it.
Even if the traditional consumer had the resources to buy or desire to have something better for a lot of the world that means maybe they have a Nordstrom or Neiman to find Ferragamo, To Boot NY, Gucci or Santoni, maybe it means there’s an Allen Edmonds nearby. Hell - I live in a decent sized city in the US and can get pretty much whatever I want clothes-wise but shoes? Forget it - there’s nothing even from the English makers stocked within 300 miles of me let alone any of the more niche brands.
With the democratization of the review world, ease to set up a blog or YouTube channel now someone can look up “best shoes” and find stuff from people who I know after having watched for a while have disclosed they got something at discount or for free but find out about a dozen brands they never would have heard of in half an hour.
 
Last edited:

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
I can’t help but laugh at the idea that there needs to be some effort to be the arbiter of truth in the promotional world and that paid promotion or giveaways to influencers are some sort of scourge upon the “#menswear” world and that it is bad behavior in some way that should be punished.
Let’s be really honest - Most people aren’t coming to SF to find out about clothes and shoes - They aren’t following shoe influencers on social media or anything like that. The people on here aren’t the typical consumer - and we know where we can go to get feedback on various brands fit/construction/finishing for more nuanced feedback.
If getting someone to do a YouTube video or blog post by sending them a pair of shoes brings in new eyes and introduces new people to the hobby or a brand they never would have heard of that’s a net positive IMO unless your goal is trying to have a world of shoes/menswear filled with gate keepers where only those who are in the know, dedicated enough to track down SF or live in select cities where they have access to different brands have access to it - What would you even search to find SF if you were looking for the best shoes if you didn’t know SF existed or the brand name? If that’s your goal then that’s fine even though I disagree with it.
Even if the traditional consumer had the resources to buy or desire to have something better for a lot of the world that means maybe they have a Nordstrom or Neiman to find Ferragamo, To Boot NY, Gucci or Santoni, maybe it means there’s an Allen Edmonds nearby. Hell - I live in a decent sized city in the US and can get pretty much whatever I want clothes-wise but shoes? Forget it - there’s nothing even from the English makers stocked within 300 miles of me let alone any of the more niche brands.
With the democratization of the review world, ease to set up a blog or YouTube channel now someone can look up “best shoes” and find stuff from people who I know after having watched for a while have disclosed they got something at discount or for free but find out about a dozen brands they never would have heard of in half an hour.

My contention is if gifting a pair of shoes to some well connected influencers assists in minimizing marketing costs, increases sales, leads to the production of a better product (because a penny saved is a money earned) then that's a win. A win for me as I receive a good to great shoe, and a win for the company as they can keep keeping on ??.

Keep on subscribing I say, although I don't partake in the endeavor. I just enjoy the tiny morsels (pictures/videos) left on the table ?.
 

JohnMRobie

Distinguished Member
Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2019
Messages
4,256
Reaction score
32,293
My contention is if gifting a pair of shoes to some well connected influencers assists in minimizing marketing costs, increases sales, leads to the production of a better product (because a penny saved is a money earned) then that's a win. A win for me as I receive a good to great shoe, and a win for the company as they can keep keeping on ??.

Keep on subscribing I say, although I don't partake in the endeavor. I just enjoy the tiny morsels (pictures/videos) left on the table ?.
This is spot on and I think a lot of times people have no idea what the raw costs of advertising are unless you’re around it. Aside from the benefits to the whole hobby of exposing new people that I tried to explain earlier here’s an attempt at expanding on B Coll and Jespers contention on the costs and showing why it’s good for a company since there was a question of how it benefits a new company and put them into some real numbers people can understand. Say I have a new pair of shoes I want to get out there and they cost $1,000 and I’m a small, new company - I send them to 5 influencers, reviewers or youtubers for free. Obviously true cost is less than the 1k but we’ll use it because it’s an easy number. So I am in for $5000 in my cost on this ad campaigns budget by sending out 5 pairs of shoes. Assume between all 5 maybe I can get 100,000 views combined. So my CPM (cost per 1,000 impressions) is $50. Sounds high - and it is fairly high but also not unheard of. But I’m getting 100,000 impressions of people who actually wanted to watch and care about the product (targeted) and spent the time to actively watch (quality), were engaged (quality) and the vast majority are actively contemplating a purchase (dream universe as an advertiser). Then you realize that the actual completion rate on video ads is pretty low with a lot of people hitting that skip button. Say I’ve got an awesome video though so I get 25% (for ease of calculating) to watch to the end. So it takes me 400,000 impressions to get 100,000 completions. If I’m buying high quality targeted video and getting 25% completion and my CPM is like $15 I’m out for $4,800 in digital advertising placement costs. Almost a 1:1. Even then what are the odds that all 400,000 of those people were actively seeking out info on high quality shoes, can afford them and are contemplating a purchase? The number of impressions I need to hit 100,000 of those jumps again to hit those. Now I’m probably coming out ahead by giving out free shoes. The cost I hadn’t told you about yet? Production costs because our theoretical company is new, small and doesn’t have anyone in house to do this. Say I want a professionally done 90 second web video that I can use as an ad. Professionally shot in 4K, scored with some music and maybe a professional voiceover and some time in the editing bay to get it done. On the lowest of low ends? I’m out $10k before I ever try and get people to watch it with paid advertising - Probably closer to 25ish. Add in another $5,000 on paid advertising and I’m up by sending 5 pairs of shoes to be reviewed instead and still probably ended up with fewer high quality impressions.
 

j ingevaldsson

Distinguished Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2011
Messages
2,475
Reaction score
4,133
Thank you for the insight @j ingevaldsson.

I now understand that the situation between manufacturer, consumer and reviewers is more nuanced than I had originally thought but my concerns remain.

On the reviewers side;
- as long as good independent journalism exists, the best case I can come up with for a paid review is that is creates additional imagery at low cost.
- worst case, it is a form of hidden tax upon consumers, exploits vulnerable producers and distorts truth for financial gain.

As you say "If I'm not up to paying the full price, why would any of my readers be?".

As consumers:
- the most impactful thing we can do to safeguard truth is to create an economic advantage towards the most impartial opinion, by immediately unsubscribing to paid review.

I wonder if this action hurts or hinders the vulnerable young brands / manufacturers we are discussing though - what better choices do they have?.

Your advice most gratefully sought .............

What is a paid review? Is it when a shoe is given away for free to the reviewer who then writes/says whatever he/she thinks, or when a shoe is given and there are set demands on what should be written/said, or when it's basically a paid ad where brands pay and completely control the content? If you also include the first, then I don't agree with you at all. There's sure bad examples, but to put an equal sign between products given away for review and an unbiased review is just historyless.
If we look at our segments, I think few would say that reviews on for example Shoegazing or Permanent Style are biased adverts for the products, even if we in cases have been given the products to be reviewed.

What one have to think about is that if I would praise stuff just due to been given it for free, but the general opinions from other regular customers would be completely different, there would be no trust whatsoever left for me as a reviewer. Me as a reviewer have no stake whatsoever to not write the actual truth. And I mean, if the shoes are bad, why wouldn't I write it? So I could get another free pair of bad shoes?

Apart from this I agree with much of the above stated by Jmr928 and Bcoll.

But if anyone don't think someones content isn't of value at all, all you have to do is not read it/watch it.
 
Last edited:

BColl_Has_Too_Many_Shoes

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2017
Messages
5,585
Reaction score
28,994
What is a paid review? Is it when a shoe is given away for free to the reviewer who then writes/says whatever he/she thinks, or when a shoe is given and there are set demands on what should be written/said, or when it's basically a paid ad where brands pay and completely control the content? If you also include the first, then I don't agree with you at all. There's sure bad examples, but to put an equal sign between products given away for review and an unbiased review is just historyless.
If we look at our segments, I think few would say that reviews on for example Shoegazing or Permanent Style are biased adverts for the products, even if we in cases have been given the products to be reviewed.

What one have to think about is that if I would praise stuff just due to been given it for free, but the general opinions from other regular customers would be completely different, there would be no trust whatsoever left for me as a reviewer. Me as a reviewer have no stake whatsoever to not write the actual truth. And I mean, if the shoes are bad, why wouldn't I write it? So I could get another free pair of bad shoes?

Apart from this I agree with much of the above stated by Jmr928 and Bcoll.

But if anyone don't think someones content isn't of value at all, all you have to do is not read it/watch it.

That is the other aspect about shoe companies and review(ers). The reviewer themself. A reviewer earns his/her following based on the type of content produced. Provided the content is useful, or truthworthy, or entertaining, the information should generate a following. If it is consistently good, he/she retains that following. Conversely if it is mediocre content, he/she is just making noise on the net.

A respected reviewer maintains, or (hopefully) earns more subscribers based on quality content. Reputation and trust become critical. Prospective collaborators are aware of this. As @j ingevaldsson mentioned, would he be willing to lose subscribers, potential advertiser dollars, ruin his relationship with those that have placed their trust in him, disregard the years he has spent in the trade, for some crappy shoes? HELL NO!

So really it boils down to who is reviewing the shoes and how much or little do you value his/her opinion. The main guys/gals are popular for a reason. I'm not necessarily implying they are all reputable because of popularity. However, what I am suggesting it is in their best interests to review as truthfully as possible whatever product is given. Probably not an understatement to say that their livelihood depend on it.
 

ijustknow

Senior Member
Joined
Mar 5, 2019
Messages
224
Reaction score
183
Based on how many TM has, should be a good indicator that he is pleased with them. Saying that, I would be curious if several people have shoes from JimJun, Lu Yang, Yim and ACME. ACME I would imagine would be difficult to get a read on (they haven't been around long). Similar story with JimJun.

However, the two Bespoke makers I would have imagined there would be more information of people's experiences about these shoes. Not much information is available surprisingly enough.
I have a pair of RTW from Jimjun, the last is authentic and good, fitting to Westerners' narrow feet.

The leather is average.

Details are all good especially for machined Goodyear welted construction, bevelled sole and cuba heel.

Anyway, Jimjun is very hard to communicate and arrogant, those will be my last pair from him.
 

Featured Sponsor

How important is full vs half canvas to you for heavier sport jackets?

  • Definitely full canvas only

    Votes: 55 35.5%
  • Half canvas is fine

    Votes: 60 38.7%
  • Really don't care

    Votes: 17 11.0%
  • Depends on fabric

    Votes: 27 17.4%
  • Depends on price

    Votes: 28 18.1%

Forum statistics

Threads
505,174
Messages
10,579,195
Members
223,888
Latest member
LisaAtkinsu
Top