Who Would Make The Same Shoe Better? EG or C&J

Below are the three most recent posts from this thread http://www.styleforum.net/showthread.php?t=200823. It basically asked for help in identifying the maker of a pair of Wildsmith badged punched cap toes, but also raised some interesting questions and comments. So, a retailer comes to both EG and C&J (or any other reputable shoe maker) with the same specs for a pair of shoes, is there any reason to expect that the resulting shoes from one maker would be superior to the other? Opinions?

Originally Posted by lee_44106

Click to expand...

Is it not a fallacy to assume that a re-badged EG would automatically be "better" than one by C&J? Both makers would make said shoes to the specified quality

Originally Posted by tonylumpkin

Click to expand...

Both being highly competent shoemakers, I believe this statement to be pretty much on the mark.

Originally Posted by meister

Click to expand...

A very interesting point/comment and should be opened for discussion.

Originally Posted by tonylumpkin

Click to expand...

So, a retailer comes to both EG and C&J (or any other reputable shoe maker) with the same specs for a pair of shoes, is there any reason to expect that the resulting shoes from one maker would be superior to the other? Opinions?

To my mind, at least, it depends upon a few factors.

Firstly, it is generally accepted that EG make better shoes than C&J, at the present time at least. It is also generally accepted that EG's current shoes are better than the shoes they made a couple of decades ago. Therefore, EG has gone to some effort to improve the quality (and the reputation) of their shoes. I think that it stands to reason that EG would wish to protect that investment in quality and that it would, therefore, not be willing to compromise on the quality of its product so as to win a re-branding contract for fear that its reputation would be damaged.

Therefore, I suppose I am arguing that the shoes of one maker could quite possibly be superior to another.

However, if we accept the above to be the case, then in all likelihood EG would also charge more and thus they would, presumably, not be engaged to make the shoes at they would not meet the relevant price point. This is one reason why Peal & Co for BB use C&J and Alfred Sargent to make their shoes, as both manufacturers are of similar quality.

Just my 0.2c worth, and happy to be debated!

Even if you go just on looks EG makes a prettier shoe. Their attention to detail of the design and the finishing of the leather is much better than C&J. Also not speaking from factual knowledge, but I would assume EG sources its leathers and materials from tanneries that produce better quality leathers that not only look better but age better over time and are more durable giving you a longer lasting shoe. There is also the oak bark soles EG uses, which last much longer.

Originally Posted by patrickBOOTH

Click to expand...

Even if you go just on looks EG makes a prettier shoe. Their attention to detail of the design and the finishing of the leather is much better than C&J. Also not speaking from factual knowledge, but I would assume EG sources its leathers and materials from tanneries that produce better quality leathers that not only look better but age better over time and are more durable giving you a longer lasting shoe. There is also the oak bark soles EG uses, which last much longer.

Keep in mind that we're talking about both makers adhering to the retailers specs, which would include quality of leather, soles used, etc.

Retailer asks for:

Full leather
Goodyear Welting
Tan colour
Brougeing
Trade price of $150
Retail price of $450
Delivery of 600 Units in 4 months

I would argue that in this scenario EG and C&J would be evenly matched, both would be using materials to a cost and would aim to deliver the best possible for the price. Ignoring the supply chain issues which would impact leather quality, I would have thought both companies would be using their skilled workers and proven techniques.

Its the finishing touches that defines both brands, and at this level neither brand is going to sacrifice their already trimmed down profit margin in favour of an extra level of polish.

The only constant factor in this discussion would be tools, equipment, personnel, and material used. Everything else, such as the execution using the aforementioned, is basically moot. Seen as very few of us have intimate knowledge of the above, I don't think this discussion can be solved to an adequate extent.

I would say the maker's opinion on which hides to use and where to cut the patterns out on the hides as well. Certain areas of the hide are proven to be stronger, better looking, better matched and such. That comes down to the experience of the personnel. I know that Lobb, I am sure among others end up throwing away a lot of the hide to get the best results.

Unlike most other Northampton manufacturer, EG has only one line (standard) of shoes, leaving the tiny output of "˜top-drawer' out of the equation. C&J, Barker, Grenson, Sargent, Cheaney will produce shoes at various price points, and, probably, mix and match to hit your desired wholesale price.

I remember a few years ago there was the fuss between P. Lal in Kuala Lumpur and EG. EG had agreed to deliver P. Lal and then withdrew from the arrangement. In turn. P. Lal published all the correspondence on the web. If I remember correctly, five years ago, EG's wholesale price was GBP 220. Which, it is fair to presume, will have risen in the meantime.

Originally Posted by Blackhood

Click to expand...

Retailer asks for:

Full leather
Goodyear Welting
Tan colour
Brougeing
Trade price of $150
Retail price of $450
Delivery of 600 Units in 4 months

Sorry, shop proprietor Blackhood, no EGs for your miserly $150, probably no C&J either. Barker, Grenson, Cheaney, Sargent are likely to match your price point with one of their cheaper lines.

Actually, the Sales Reps at C&J and EG love me and my shop so much they actually offered me a better deal, because I'm such a nice guy. Needless to say I countered with a higher price, just so the nice reps wouldn't loose their jobs in their exuberance at having me as a partner.

EG, no question.

Some of the stuff I've seen leave the C&J factory and passed off as first quality left me wanting. They attribute these flaws as "normal" for shoes made by hand.

Has anyone ever even see an EG second?

Originally Posted by bigbris1

Click to expand...

Has anyone ever even see an EG second?

A large selection of shoes from their semi-annual sales are seconds. I have a pair of seconds due to growth marks on the leather around the quarters. I never notice them and the flaw is minor. Great shoes.

As to the OP, I much prefer EG primarily because EG's fit me much better. I do also think the leather quality and finishing is much better.

Lots of companies boast that they obtain leather from the same source as Lobb and EG. However, I'm sure that there are different levels of quality from the same supplier. It's like restaurants going to the local fish purveyor. Some guys are more connected than others and get better stuff.

Originally Posted by Slewfoot

Click to expand...

A large selection of shoes from their semi-annual sales are seconds. I have a pair of seconds due to growth marks on the leather around the quarters.

Interesting. Do they mark them as such?

Originally Posted by bigbris1

Click to expand...

Interesting. Do they mark them as such?

I don't believe so. I'm guessing they justify it that the flaws are so minor they are not worth mentioning.

Thanks, Dave. I just can't bring myself to purchase C&J or anything else anymore. I'm even on the fence about a pair of G&G.

Originally Posted by bigbris1

Click to expand...

Thanks, Dave. I just can't bring myself to purchase C&J or anything else anymore. I'm even on the fence about a pair of G&G.

I know the feeling! It's all about Vass and EG for me for RTW stuff simply because they feet my narrow and awkward feet best.

Still need to sort out the AS custom last stuff as some adjustments need to be made and tough for me to manage overseas.