Allen Edmonds vs. Alden--Which American Great Do You Prefer?!! OFFICIAL

[bespoken pa]

I have spoken to my current provider of Egs. He believes he is the oldest purveyor EGs in the states. I discussed the gemming issue with him, he could not recall an instance where it was an issue. I would think (totally anecdotal on my part) of gemming were that big of issue we would see more issues cropping up on SF.

 

[MoneyWellSpent]

I have spoken to my current provider of Egs. He believes he is the oldest purveyor EGs in the states. I discussed the gemming issue with him, he could not recall an instance where it was an issue. I would think (totally anecdotal on my part) of gemming were that big of issue we would see more issues cropping up on SF.

That's the heart of the debate. There isn't a high enough frequency of failure to automatically render the construction method to be a poor choice for everyone. There is for some. 100% agree that Goodyear-welting has it's place.

Rather, it is simply the fact that the ultimate foundation of the shoe depends upon cement (Goodyear-welted shoes) rather than leather stitched to leather (hand-welted shoes). Leather stitched to leather is stronger than leather stitched to canvas which is glued to leather. That doesn't mean your shoes will implode, or that they will fail within a decade, or two, depending upon their level of use. It just means that there is a stronger construction method available than what is employed in the Goodyear-welting process. Nothing more or less. Some people just don't seem to be able to recognize this, and I think it's a refusal to see this simply because they don't want to be told that their $1,200 shoes aren't the best money can buy. It comes back to the issue of being confident in your purchase.

 

[bespoken pa]

I think it is mostly an ego issue as opposed to a referendum on EG or JL etc. Certainly there are better shoes in this world with that said *for me* EGs are priced fairly. I like the aesthetics of the shoe simply because they appeal to me. I am not concerned with EG's pecking order in the eyes of others on the interwebz.

I agree though so often others become entrenched in their position to justify their purchase.

Gemming shoes are not as well constructed as their hand welted cousins. However there are many things that go into make a quality shoe. I do not however believe that all gemmed shoes are of poor quality.

I can not for the life of me understand why some are so concerned with defining the best. EG, AE, St.C etc are all great shoes and I shall leave it at that. I respect each for their particular aesthetics and what they provide at their respective price points.

 

[MoneyWellSpent]

I think it is mostly an ego issue as opposed to a referendum on EG or JL etc. Certainly there are better shoes in this world with that said *for me* EGs are priced fairly. I like the aesthetics of the shoe simply because they appeal to me. I am not concerned with EG's pecking order in the eyes of others on the interwebz.

I agree though so often others become entrenched in their position to justify their purchase.

Gemming shoes are not as well constructed as their hand welted cousins. However there are many things that go into make a quality shoe. I do not however believe that all gemmed shoes are of poor quality.

I can not for the life of me understand why some are so concerned with defining the best. EG, AE, St.C etc are all great shoes and I shall leave it at that. I respect each for their particular aesthetics and what they provide at their respective price points.

Fully agree.

 

[aerosurferlv]

I think this argument can be solved with one question.

Which brand can be found at Nordstrom's in any mall alongside UGGS and Converse... And which brand isn't?

(Answer: Allen Edmonds are sold at Nordstrom's)

 

[dddrees]

I have my preferences and even that has changed over the last couple of years. However given both of their loyal followers I fail to see any losers here, either between the two shoemakers or the men that use either one of the two brands mentioned.

 

[aerosurferlv]

I will say that both are definitely respectable shoe brands. However, if we are going to debate which of the brands is superior, the price point and availability are very strong indicators. Allen Edmonds is at a disadvantage going into the fight because of the price point of $400 vs the Alden price point of $500.

I would be hard pressed to find a convincing argument proving that despite the 20% price disparity, Allen Edmonds are superior in any way to Aldens, besides their affordability. Again I am not trying to disparage AE, but I believe that when it comes to the question of superiority, the argument can be settled by simply looking at the prices these shoes command as well as where they are sold, and their availability. When was the last time Leffot featured an exclusive AE pre order?? (Never, yet Leffot does new Alden pre orders nearly every month)

If we were going to truly hash it out between which American brand is better, then why not call Johnston & Murphy into the ring to contend as well? After all, they too are an "American brand" despite having outsourced their production. Their price point is also far lower, starting at about $150 if I'm not mistaken. I don't think anyone reading these forums is under the delusion that J&M shoes somehow compare to Alden, right?

I recall a time when the only shoes I would justify buying for myself were Clark's, and dang it, I was more than happy with them. At the same time, I didn't try to trick myself into believing that my $100 Clark's were in any way superior to more distinguished, more expensive brands.

The point is, no brand is the wrong choice. But arguing that AE is somehow superior to Alden is like trying to say that Chevy is superior to BMW, despite a large and obvious price disparity. That is also to say that consumers who drop the extra money on Aldens are ignorantly and fruitlessly wasting their money.

There is a reason why I own 1 pair of AE, and 9 pairs of Alden. There is a reason why, after having my taste of both brands, I stopped at that first pair of AE, yet continued purchasing and developing a deeper passion for Alden shoes. There is a reason why my AEs get worn once every three months, whereas my Aldens never get a break.

But don't listen to me, compare the Styleforum pages. As of today, the Alden entries are at 91,000, whereas AE comes in at about 54,000.

Bottom line, AE is an excellent choice for consumers comfortable spending $400. But I always say don't let a $100 price difference stand between you and GLORY.

 

[aDrummingDude]

I will say that both are definitely respectable shoe brands. However, if we are going to debate which of the brands is superior, the price point and availability are very strong indicators. Allen Edmonds is at a disadvantage going into the fight because of the price point of $400 vs the Alden price point of $500.

I would be hard pressed to find a convincing argument proving that despite the 20% price disparity, Allen Edmonds are superior in any way to Aldens, besides their affordability. Again I am not trying to disparage AE, but I believe that when it comes to the question of superiority, the argument can be settled by simply looking at the prices these shoes command as well as where they are sold, and their availability. When was the last time Leffot featured an exclusive AE pre order?? (Never, yet Leffot does new Alden pre orders nearly every month)

If we were going to truly hash it out between which American brand is better, then why not call Johnston & Murphy into the ring to contend as well? After all, they too are an "American brand" despite having outsourced their production. Their price point is also far lower, starting at about $150 if I'm not mistaken. I don't think anyone reading these forums is under the delusion that J&M shoes somehow compare to Alden, right?

I recall a time when the only shoes I would justify buying for myself were Clark's, and dang it, I was more than happy with them. At the same time, I didn't try to trick myself into believing that my $100 Clark's were in any way superior to more distinguished, more expensive brands.

The point is, no brand is the wrong choice. But arguing that AE is somehow superior to Alden is like trying to say that Chevy is superior to BMW, despite a large and obvious price disparity. That is also to say that consumers who drop the extra money on Aldens are ignorantly and fruitlessly wasting their money.

There is a reason why I own 1 pair of AE, and 9 pairs of Alden. There is a reason why, after having my taste of both brands, I stopped at that first pair of AE, yet continued purchasing and developing a deeper passion for Alden shoes. There is a reason why my AEs get worn once every three months, whereas my Aldens never get a break.

But don't listen to me, compare the Styleforum pages. As of today, the Alden entries are at 91,000, whereas AE comes in at about 54,000.

Bottom line, AE is an excellent choice for consumers comfortable spending $400. But I always say don't let a $100 price difference stand between you and GLORY.

My experience with the two brands mirrors yours, except I didn't keep one pair of Allen Edmonds because I couldn't even get a good pair to keep. Crooked seems, mismatched dyes, lumpy welts, misaligned uppers, you name it. After four rounds of trying to get a good pair of shoes from AE, I threw in the towel.

Alden, by contrast, hasn't sent me a bad pair of shoes EVER, and especially now that AE have raised their prices to be within a stones throw of Alden, my choice is clear.

 

[AldenLuver]

^^^
Alden also has it own issues with some QC. I haven't had any problems myself, but QC problems are well-documented on the Alden Appreciation thread. I have both, but much prefer Alden. I find them to be infinitely more comfortable.

To those who are critical of Alden for its "clunkier" lasts, it's absurd to make that kind of a blanket statement. While the barrie (and Trubalance) last is a bit round and chunky, I prefer it for my (business)-casual wardrobe. The aberdeen last (and even the hampton last) is quite nice for my dressier needs. I don't need a European tapered look that will destroy my feet after a long day. I like my Strands, but will not go to it if I know I will be on my feet most of the day.

In the end, it all boils down to whether or not you can afford $500-$750 shoes (Alden). If not, AE's seconds from the Shoe Bank are a great place to get well-constructed shoes for around $150-250. For firsts, I don't think the $365 retail price for AE's is worth the investment. I would rather fork over $500 for the Alden calf, chrome excel, or suede. As for shell cordovan, it's not even close... the two are pretty much the same in price and Alden shell shoes are unequivocally superior, even if they cost $100 more in some cases.

 

[RogerP]

I can afford $500 - $750 shoes. I choose to buy Carmina and Vass at that price point.

 

[AldenLuver]

I can afford $500 - $750 shoes. I choose to buy Carmina and Vass at that price point.

You are certainly within your rights to do so. I think you have the wrong thread though...

.

I believe Carmina falls within that price range (with calf at the bottom end--$500+ and shell cordovan at the top end--$750). I believe Vass is more expensive with these same materials. While I like Vass, Carmina is disappointing imo. Keep in mind that most of my opinions come from my preference for shell cordovan.

 

[dddrees]

I can afford $500 - $750 shoes. I choose to buy Carmina and Vass at that price point.

I would definitely agree with you Roger, even if we are in the wrong thread.

 

[RogerP]

Oh dear, are we both lost?

Even if the buyer is somehow restricted to choosing only AE or Alden, it's a bit of a false dichotomy to say the decision turns on whether the buyer can afford Alden's higher price, or not.

The buyer may well be able to comfortably afford Alden, but legitimately prefer AE aesthetics and / or legitimately perceive that AE offers better value for money.

Oh, and I'll take Carmina shell over Alden shell any time.

 

[archibaldleach]

I disagree that Roger is in the wrong thread. We don't live in a world where there are only two shoe brands and price does enter the picture when we look at our preferences. Historically Allen Edmonds served as an acceptably quality entry level shoe that was well made. For a slight premium, one could buy Aldens. Prior to buying my last pair of Aldens in 2009, I would argue that Alden provided a superior product in most cases for a minor price premium (and at a price that was materially lower than other high quality brands). Since that time, the premium has increased and has caused me to stop purchasing Alden shoes. I can buy C&J or something similar for very little extra, so Alden has lost its value proposition relative to Allen Edmonds.

 

[AldenLuver]

Oh dear, are we both lost?

Even if the buyer is somehow restricted to choosing only AE or Alden, it's a bit of a false dichotomy to say the decision turns on whether the buyer can afford Alden's higher price, or not.

The buyer may well be able to comfortably afford Alden, but legitimately prefer AE aesthetics and / or legitimately perceive that AE offers better value for money.

Oh, and I'll take Carmina shell over Alden shell any time.

This is certainly possible, but I suppose my point was that AE does not offer a better value for the money, unless you go with their seconds from the Shoe Bank. That is how I value AE and thus that's how I come to my dichotomy about price and affordability. This is simply my opinion and contribution to a thread comparing AE and Alden. You are certainly entitled to your opinions @RogerP and @archibaldleach . I have several C&J models and have had Carmina shoes as well. I will enjoy my Aldens, AE, and C&J, but will pass on Carmina