English Balmoral Boots

Holvart · Oct 23, 2009

Hi,

a nice gentleman offered me these boots at a price of 1400 $ . He purchased them at a harness store in the US. And the boots also wear the insignia of the company. His description was that the boots are a custom oder in the 50s from the english shoemaker Jackson & Son in London.
I wanted to ask some specialists here what they think of the shoes.
Is that an acceptable price?
Of course one can see the quality of the work and the materials and the shoes are in a very good condition too. But i dont realy know if i should pay that much for worn boots with unknown heritage. What do you think?

Bird's One View · Oct 23, 2009

For a similar cost you could have new MTO EG Shannons. Is there something about these boots that makes them more desirable to you?

It is hard to predict how durable 60 year old leather will be. Sometimes it's as good as new; sometimes it crumbles to dust.

nmprisons · Oct 23, 2009

Way too much for used boots, in my opinion. For that money you could get any number of top makers to produce a pair to your specifications.

MarcellHUN · Oct 23, 2009

Too expensive for a machine-sewn stuff.

Holvart · Oct 23, 2009

Originally Posted by Bird's One View

For a similar cost you could have new MTO EG Shannons. Is there something about these boots that makes them more desirable to you?

It is hard to predict how durable 60 year old leather will be. Sometimes it's as good as new; sometimes it crumbles to dust.

Somehow the leather seems too look very warm, as if it were alive. The Shannons dont seem to have that character right out of the box. I dont know if this is due to the patina it has developed throughout the years. I dont have any experience with old leather-goods. I dont know which factors determine the behaviour of old leather. Would be nice to know.

If you tell me an EG Shannon looks the same after some years with proper treatment i will definitely go for the Shannons or another new pair of the same quality.
But then why do some John Lobbs have that warm lively look right from the beginning without any patina and without being worn or waxed or creamed at all?

nate10184 · Oct 23, 2009

Those don't look 60 years old and the leather doesn't look that great IMO. They also don't have a channeled sole which I would expect from a shoe in that price range.

Not worth $1400 or even half that. A pair of Shannon's would look infinitely better new or after a few years of wear.

I saved pics of a pair of vintage JL St. James bespoke shoes with a much better patina than these. I'll post them tonight for reference (they sold for well under 1k IIRC).

Originally Posted by Holvart

Somehow the leather seems too look very warm, as if it were alive. The Shannons dont seem to have that character right out of the box. I dont know if this is due to the patina it has developed throughout the years. I dont have any experience with old leather-goods. I dont know which factors determine the behaviour of old leather. Would be nice to know.

If you tell me an EG Shannon looks the same after some years with proper treatment i will definitely go for the Shannons or another new pair of the same quality.
But then why do some John Lobbs have that warm lively look right from the beginning without any patina and without being worn or waxed or creamed at all?

Holvart · Oct 23, 2009

Thanks a lot for your advices gentlemen.
I would love to have a pair of JL Golosh boots. Is there a reference in this forum or somewhere else where i could read about the approximate price ranges for JL shoes in general?

I. Gentantithesis · Oct 23, 2009

They're Loake > http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/f...ad.php?t=74410

The adhesive paper leather symbols, alone, would tend to indicate production within the past thirty years.

fcuknu · Oct 23, 2009

300 or 400 would be pushing it.

Douglas · Oct 23, 2009

Originally Posted by Holvart

a nice gentleman offered me these boots at a price of 1400 $ .

He may be nice, but asking $1400 for those, he is no gentleman.

gsugsu · Oct 23, 2009

Way too much. Are these particularly noteworthy or historic or just old boots in reasonable shape? Unless you have been searching for these for years as a crowning glory for your shoe museum I would give them a pass. Were you planning on buying them to wear? No, let them go.

ajv · Oct 23, 2009

far too expensive. If you research a bit the forum, you'll find that one can have new ones, better made and cheaper...

jon5986 · Oct 23, 2009

Too expensive for that type of boot. I would expect something of a better quality.

I. Gentantithesis · Oct 23, 2009

So, full revelation via link on Post 8 is just too much trouble?

Mencken was right, why bother.

Holvart · Oct 23, 2009

Originally Posted by I. Gentantithesis

They're Loake > http://www.askandyaboutclothes.com/f...ad.php?t=74410

The adhesive paper leather symbols, alone, would tend to indicate production within the past thirty years.

I've crawled through the forum a bit before i asked and i found just the same thread you've linked to. First i thought maybe its just a similar construction but now i think you're right. He must have replaced the soles. I cant imagine the leather symbols on original soles. Even on loakes.

English Balmoral Boots

Member

Distinguished Member

Distinguished Member

Senior Member

Member

Distinguished Member

Member

Senior Member

Distinguished Member

Stupid ass member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Classic Menswear Featured products

FEATURED PRODUCTS

Similar threads

Featured Sponsor

Definitely full canvas only

Half canvas is fine

Really don't care

Depends on fabric

Depends on price

Forum Sponsors

Forum statistics

FOLLOW STYLEFORUM ON: