Wildsmith shoe brand resurrected

[masernaut]

Very interesting lacing pattern on the wholecut.

 

[e8487]

Never heard about Wildsmith before I'm now magnetised by this story of Tradition, Quality, Business, branding and sagas.

 

[Fiddler]

Nice website, good looking shoes, simple buying process, cheap shipping worldwide.

And they have worded their claims quite carefully.

I like their unlined and saddle loafers.

 

[md2010]



Nice website, good looking shoes, simple buying process, cheap shipping worldwide.

And they have worded their claims quite carefully.

I like their unlined and saddle loafers.

I agree. The navy monk is beautiful - sold out ! The price is very reasonable.

 

[Wildsmith]



I agree. The navy monk is beautiful - sold out ! The price is very reasonable.

It's interesting how they have change from using the' Royal We' and are referring to 'Original Wildmith' instead of implying they are the same business....

incidentally that's not way to obtain a Royal Warrant, having an old ledger insert in your gallery of an HRH.....

As to John Wildsmiths 'integral' role on 'the board' a marketing gimmick I'm sure, although I do not understand why you would have someone who was 'integral' to the demise of the original business in the first place on-board.....there's a reason he closed the shop some years back......and it wasn't to retire.....

 

[VRaivio]

The Telegraph has an interview with Wildsmith's new owners, the guys who brought us Cad&Dandy:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/...-and-the-Dandy-tailor-made-for-our-times.html

 

[TimH]



I have no real quarrels with the ‘new Wildsmith’ other than that they are trading on what would have been 6 generations of Wildsmith ethos, perhaps we won’t count the last proprietor, under a modern perspective. The way I see it, it’s a firm calling themselves Wildsmith selling shoes as opposed to a firm selling ‘Wildsmith Shoes’. I have seen a sign on their Facebook (on Savile Row?) which says WILDSMITH ESTD. 1847. Should it not read “Wildsmith ESTD 2013…….??”

My grounds for sheer anger, annoyance, and disappointment is the selfishness, greed and damn right disgusting way in which he has brought un abrupt end to the Wildsmith line of tradition. Sour grapes it may sound, however I’m of the opinion that if you inherit a family business of good standing you have the responsibility to continue the line on for future generations, not just selfishly take the money and run!!
In reality, J Wildsmith is entitled to do whatever he wishes to do with the company; however I’m not sure I’d sleep well knowing I had done what he has.

For me, having never had any involvement with the business, it has never about owning a business, the success of it, but always been the great sense of pride that I had, knowing what my ancestors had worked up to build, the clientele the shop attracted, it’s (previous) reputation and the iconic designs that were produced on the bench.

Perhaps I’ll quit now before I say something I might really regret

Hi Wildsmith,

I fully understand how you feel and sympathise greatly - your values are to be applauded.

I've never understood how new owners are able to use established dates and or names as they do when they have had no input into the company's past.

Similar things have happened to me with regard to using my name but hey ho?

Best,

Tim Hardy

Hope all turns out well for you.

 

[Wildsmith]

Hi Tim,

Thank you. I think from an outsiders view, they think I'm just throwing my toys out of my pram because things haven't gone my way. But it's about so much more than that!

If you look at companies house it doesn't say Wildsmith....Registered 1847........also the colour scheme seems to have been lifted from John Lobb......just an observation....

The one thing I can have a little comfort is all the historical document and leather boots made by Wildsmith in the good ol' day.......which unlike my grandfather I shall not be relinquishing ownership of.....
I can almost picture it now.....my future children sitting on my knee, fire place roaring, slippers on and Songs of Praise has just finished......."Daddy why is there a shoe business with our slightly unusual surname, It can't be a coincidence...." "Well sit back, relax and let me tell you a story about greed, selfishness, bad taste and damn right bad form!"

It really does hurt to think about what might and what should have been, I just have to take solace in the fact that I live and breath a clear head, have not been underhanded, dishonest, disloyal and that people always get their comeuppance........always!

Best regards

Wildsmith ( a real one )

 

[add911_11]

The new range looks very promising. I wonder what is the upper leather like.....

 

[Grammaton Cleric]

The 'real' Wildsmith can pout all he wants, but the simple fact remains that under his family's stewardship the company declined first into mediocrity and eventually dissolution. The CATD team is welcome to take a crack at resurrecting a once-great brand, and the use of the original date of incorporation is common practice (they did, after all, buy the brand). Sour grapes.

 

[Wildsmith]

Perhaps if you took time to read my previous comments on this thread you'd know you were talking out of the wrong part of your body...

Plus M. Wildsmith & Sons was founded in 1847.......not 'Wildsmith'.......where is the continuity....

 

[Wes Bourne]

If there was still doubt re the maker: style name/size cutout in the lining, as well as other details point to AS.

 

[TimH]

Whatever mistakes, injustices or such like have occurred , I think one can only look forward and as a 'Wildsmith' you have all the necessary pedigree if you can make footwear which counts for much more perhaps.

Remember 'out of every problem comes an opportunity'

 

[Grammaton Cleric]



Perhaps if you took time to read my previous comments on this thread you'd know you were talking out of the wrong part of your body...

Plus M. Wildsmith & Sons was founded in 1847.......not 'Wildsmith'.......where is the continuity....

I have plodded through every one of your whiny comments on this thread. As per your own admission, you have had no involvement with the business, but now, all of a sudden, you feel grief, disappointment, and disgust at the way a sale has happened. Huh? - what am I missing here?

When your young children, sitting on your knee, ask the inevitable follow-up question, "But, Daddy - what did you do to stop these bastards from stealing our company?" - you can proudly reply, "I went and whined on an internet forum, sonny!"

This whole matter of the date of incorporation is a bit of nonsense. It is common practice that the acquirer gets to use all the trademarks and elements of the acquired entity. When Blancpain or A. Lange & Sohne were resurrected a few years ago, despite them being defunct for decades, the original dates of incorporation from the 18th / 19th centuries were used. There is nothing unusual in that. It's a bit disingenuous, but the entire luxury products industry is guilty of your charge.

What I find most amusing about this whole episode is how you sniff and slander a couple of entrepreneurs who are making a concentrated effort to revive a great old brand. Rather than focusing on how they're rebuilding something from scratch, you have narrowed in on your own petty insecurities.

 

[TimH]



I have plodded through every one of your whiny comments on this thread. As per your own admission, you have had no involvement with the business, but now, all of a sudden, you feel grief, disappointment, and disgust at the way a sale has happened. Huh? - what am I missing here?

When your young children, sitting on your knee, ask the inevitable follow-up question, "But, Daddy - what did you do to stop these bastards from stealing our company?" - you can proudly reply, "I went and whined on an internet forum, sonny!"

This whole matter of the date of incorporation is a bit of nonsense. It is common practice that the acquirer gets to use all the trademarks and elements of the acquired entity. When Blancpain or A. Lange & Sohne were resurrected a few years ago, despite them being defunct for decades, the original dates of incorporation from the 18th / 19th centuries were used. There is nothing unusual in that. It's a bit disingenuous, but the entire luxury products industry is guilty of your charge.

What I find most amusing about this whole episode is how you sniff and slander a couple of entrepreneurs who are making a concentrated effort to revive a great old brand. Rather than focusing on how they're rebuilding something from scratch, you have narrowed in on your own petty insecurities.

Looks like this is developing into another typical 'time to leave ' thread - bye bye.