• 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.

Shoe prices

Mystic-poot

Active Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2011
Messages
29
Reaction score
0
I've been looking at Herring Shoes, showed a couple to dad and he's told me that anything above £140 is unreasonable for shoes. I'm going to be wearing them with a £300-£400 suit. Is this true?
 

entrero

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2009
Messages
1,079
Reaction score
12
That was true last year. Sadly those £140 shoes are now £180
 

yesssir

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2010
Messages
347
Reaction score
145
I'm guessing your dad is telling you to buy Cole Haans or Kenneth Cole too.
 

ShaneB

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 27, 2010
Messages
405
Reaction score
1
Originally Posted by Mystic-poot
I've been looking at Herring Shoes, showed a couple to dad and he's told me that anything above £140 is unreasonable for shoes. I'm going to be wearing them with a £300-£400 suit. Is this true?

You have to determine what proportion you're paying for the brand, craftsmanship, and the materials used. In some instances your dad is right, in others he isn't.
 

tom_s252

Active Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
29
Reaction score
12
Like anything else, shoes are subject to the law of diminishing returns.

£140 gets you to the bottom rung of high quality dress shoes; Loakes and their ilk. I expect your Dad's point is that beyond there, the improvements to be gained are relatively small and expensive from the point of view of the average person. You can, should you so wish, spend two or three times that amount and ascend to the ranks of truly handmade English shoes, but you may be the only person you know who can tell the difference, especially given that no-one is ever likely to get down on their hands and knees and examine the fine detail of the stiching, edging, leather grain etc.

My dad, for instance, has gone through life with a pair of black Loake captoe Oxfords as his only black shoes for ever. He takes care of them, keeps them out of the rain and polishes with Kiwi paste. Once every ten years or so he replaces them, and for a while he also had a half brogue to alternate with. By the standards of his friends and colleagues, he remains a man who wears good shoes.

Like anything else, if you have the money to spend and the discernment to know when you're getting more bang for your additional bucks, there are benefits to be had in quality of materials and craftsmanship. Your £140 will get you a better pair of shoes than most of your friends/colleagues, simply because most of them are now buying £70 square/pointy monstrosities from Office or Jones Bootmaker that will never take a proper shine and are glued together. Does that mean that you shouldn't spring £280 for a pair of Cheaney/Church's/Trickers? Your call!
 

DWFII

Bespoke Boot and Shoemaker
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
10,132
Reaction score
5,714
Originally Posted by tom_s252
Like anything else, shoes are subject to the law of diminishing returns.
Sorry, not true. If you look objectively at the history, traditions, and the processes that have been associated with shoemaking, there is one fundamental standard of quality. That standard has evolved over literally thousands of years. Currently the best representation, and the exemplar of quality for the last several hundred years, is the hand-welted bespoke shoe. Everything else is a diminution of quality. Everything else is an attempt to emulate that standard with cheaper materials, less skill intensive, less time consuming techniques. But emulation, almost by definition, always falls short of the mark. There are very good shoes out there at various price levels, but they are all, to varying degrees, emulations of something else--that one standard of quality. It is not diminishing returns, it is diminishing credibility.
 

Samovar McGee

Senior Member
Joined
May 10, 2011
Messages
138
Reaction score
9
Originally Posted by DWFII
Sorry, not true. If you look objectively at the history, traditions, and the processes that have been associated with shoemaking, there is one fundamental standard of quality. That standard has evolved over literally thousands of years.

Currently the best representation, and the exemplar of quality for the last several hundred years, is the hand-welted bespoke shoe.

Everything else is a diminution of quality. Everything else is an attempt to emulate that standard with cheaper materials, less skill intensive, less time consuming techniques.

But emulation, almost by definition, always falls short of the mark.

There are very good shoes out there at various price levels, but they are all, to varying degrees, emulations of something else--that one standard of quality.

It is not diminishing returns, it is diminishing credibility.


I agree with what you're saying, DWFII. But the fact is, the vast majority of people are no longer literate in these details. My father was a manufacturer of coats for a very long time, now he makes canvas boat roofing and upholstery. Time and again, people have shown him that they are not interested in precise and quality craftsmanship and the rate it garnishes; they are looking for 'good enough' at a lower price.

I would argue that people know what nice things are. But to many, an emulation that comes close is just fine. Credibility will finish last in this sphere. If you want credibility, there will always be those that want it, and those that don't care.
 

Patek

Distinguished Member
Joined
Nov 22, 2010
Messages
4,063
Reaction score
1,755
Very high quality shoes start about $1,000 at retail.

Obviously quality shoes start much lower than that.
 

tom_s252

Active Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2011
Messages
29
Reaction score
12
Originally Posted by DWFII
Sorry, not true. If you look objectively at the history, traditions, and the processes that have been associated with shoemaking, there is one fundamental standard of quality. That standard has evolved over literally thousands of years.

Currently the best representation, and the exemplar of quality for the last several hundred years, is the hand-welted bespoke shoe.

Everything else is a diminution of quality. Everything else is an attempt to emulate that standard with cheaper materials, less skill intensive, less time consuming techniques.

But emulation, almost by definition, always falls short of the mark.

There are very good shoes out there at various price levels, but they are all, to varying degrees, emulations of something else--that one standard of quality.

It is not diminishing returns, it is diminishing credibility.


Originally Posted by Samovar McGee
I agree with what you're saying, DWFII. But the fact is, the vast majority of people are no longer literate in these details. My father was a manufacturer of coats for a very long time, now he makes canvas boat roofing and upholstery. Time and again, people have shown him that they are not interested in precise and quality craftsmanship and the rate it garnishes; they are looking for 'good enough' at a lower price.

I would argue that people know what nice things are. But to many, an emulation that comes close is just fine. Credibility will finish last in this sphere. If you want credibility, there will always be those that want it, and those that don't care.


I think Mr DWFII and I are looking at the same scale from two opposite ends. I was describing one cash-limited individual's attempt to pick the best point on a scale of price and quality; I would maintain that that scale, like most other goods, is subject to the law of diminishing returns.

Mr DWF on the other hand began from the top of that scale and looked down from there. In essence, we agree with one another, it's just that he and I hold different views on what should be considered acceptable.
 

DWFII

Bespoke Boot and Shoemaker
Dubiously Honored
Joined
Jan 8, 2008
Messages
10,132
Reaction score
5,714
Originally Posted by tom_s252
I think Mr DWFII and I are looking at the same scale from two opposite ends. I was describing one cash-limited individual's attempt to pick the best point on a scale of price and quality; I would maintain that that scale, like most other goods, is subject to the law of diminishing returns. Mr DWF on the other hand began from the top of that scale and looked down from there. In essence, we agree with one another, it's just that he and I hold different views on what should be considered acceptable.
Just call me DW... In one sense of course you're correct. That said, which direction you look from is crucial. Looking at it from the perspective of "diminishing returns" creates a situation in which the consumer is always prepared to accept less, never cultivates the knowledge or understanding which, in turn, leads to judgement, appreciation, discrimination, good taste, or wisdom (all of which speaks to Samovar's point...with which I also agree). Looking at it from the top down, with all the "unrealistic" implications that may have for some, at least allows the consumer to understand where the realistic trade-offs are. And yes, better quality will cost more. In one sense, however, distinguishing between levels of quality is misleading. We (myself included) do it all the time. But realistically it is like 'gilding the lily'. Something is either quality or it is not. Implying that a product which falls short of a widely respected standard is somehow equivalent is fundamentally deceptive. But then all advertising depends on it. All business depends on it.
 

Quadcammer

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
306
Originally Posted by DWFII
Just call me DW...

In one sense of course you're correct. That said, which direction you look from is crucial.

Looking at it from the perspective of "diminishing returns" creates a situation in which the consumer is always prepared to accept less, never cultivates the knowledge or understanding which, in turn, leads to judgement, appreciation, discrimination, good taste, or wisdom (all of which speaks to Samovar's point...with which I also agree).

Looking at it from the top down, with all the "unrealistic" implications that may have for some, at least allows the consumer to understand where the realistic trade-offs are. And yes, better quality will cost more.

In one sense, however, distinguishing between levels of quality is misleading. We (myself included) do it all the time. But realistically it is like 'gilding the lily'. Something is either quality or it is not. Implying that a product which falls short of a widely respected standard is somehow equivalent is fundamentally deceptive.

But then all advertising depends on it. All business depends on it.


I think we are all in agreement that the more you pay, the better quality shoe you get.

Whether you say that a hand welted bespoke shoe is the only "acceptable" option or whether you start at the bottom and say that a C&J benchgrade is a big step up from say a Loake Design product doesn't really matter.

In terms of tangible benefits that the end consumer will see and feel, there are diminishing marginal returns from moving from a solid goodyear welted non-CG shoe (such as lets say the aforementioned C&J benchgrade) to something like a $1,200 pair of Gaziano Girlings.

In your terms, I'd argue going from aforementioned GG to the C&J, there are increasing marginal losses.
 

Quadcammer

Distinguished Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
2,963
Reaction score
306
Originally Posted by DWFII
Just call me DW...

In one sense of course you're correct. That said, which direction you look from is crucial.

Looking at it from the perspective of "diminishing returns" creates a situation in which the consumer is always prepared to accept less, never cultivates the knowledge or understanding which, in turn, leads to judgement, appreciation, discrimination, good taste, or wisdom (all of which speaks to Samovar's point...with which I also agree).

Looking at it from the top down, with all the "unrealistic" implications that may have for some, at least allows the consumer to understand where the realistic trade-offs are. And yes, better quality will cost more.

In one sense, however, distinguishing between levels of quality is misleading. We (myself included) do it all the time. But realistically it is like 'gilding the lily'. Something is either quality or it is not. Implying that a product which falls short of a widely respected standard is somehow equivalent is fundamentally deceptive.

But then all advertising depends on it. All business depends on it.


Furthermore, as far as I know, even the GG and EG RTW models are machine welted. As such, both are "lower quality emulations" compared to this bespoke hand welted product. And therefore, that puts them in the same universe as the "lower quality emulations" produced by C&J, Trickers, Church, etc.
 

Leather man

Senior Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2008
Messages
299
Reaction score
7
I hate to disagree with your dad - he is your dad after all , but in my opinion he is quite wrong. In fact the ratio of the cost of your shoes to your suit should be the other way around IMHO. You can get away with a reasonably priced suit if it fits well but "reasonably priced shoes" will always look just that - reasonably priced. Moreover you will get much more comfort and longevity from shoes costing £350 plus - the law of diminishing returns kicks in at a much higher price tag than your £140 IME
 

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
505,162
Messages
10,579,073
Members
223,883
Latest member
Darru
Top