Australian Members

[jas0nt]



Then there are the shoes - they look like something that a 1920s peasant or mine worker would have worn, but boots and shoes from brands like Guidi often cost $1500 or more, even though they often look lumpy, uneven and poorly made. 

<Cough> Sneakerboy for all your astronaut booting needs

Or if you have a cool $1k you can buy a Pharrel Wiliams polka dot collab trackie jacket with Adidas:

http://www.sneakerboy.com/shop-clot...ka-dot-pack-suede-track-jacket-ss15adip6.html

 

[Journeyman]

Read that these shoes don't cost more than $50 to make per pair...

Frankly, I'd be very surprised if they cost that much.

Late last year, I remember reading an article by someone who studied Nike (and who had access to Nike info) as part of their post-grad business studies in Portland, Oregon, near Nike's headquarters. He concluded that, on average, it cost about $30 all up for Nike to make and transport a pair of sneakers. Nike then sells those sneakers for a wholesale cost of $50.

Interestingly, he also concluded that, averaged across each pair of sneakers, Nike also has "selling, general and administrative" expenses of $15 (I assume that this includes advertising and sponsorships) and so the average profit (for Nike) on each pair of sneakers was $5 (or 10% of the wholesale price).

 

[andrewjamesdean]



<Cough> Sneakerboy for all your astronaut booting needs

Or if you have a cool $1k you can buy a Pharrel Wiliams polka dot collab trackie jacket with Adidas:

http://www.sneakerboy.com/shop-clot...ka-dot-pack-suede-track-jacket-ss15adip6.html

It's made of suede to be fair, but if I was going to spend $1k on a suede bomber it sure as hell wouldn't be a polka dotted Adidas one!

 

[DartagnanRed]

I have a junghans max bill automatic and someone asked "is that a daniel wellington" the other day. Almost slapped them.

 

[Journeyman]

I have a junghans max bill automatic and someone asked "is that a daniel wellington" the other day. Almost slapped them.

Ouch! An unfortunate illustration of the power of marketing over product quality.

 

[blahman]



I have a junghans max bill automatic and someone asked "is that a daniel wellington" the other day. Almost slapped them.

Did Junghans copy Daniel Welington's designs?

 

[Prince of Paisley]

Daniel's IP lawyers should be all over this.

 

[LonerMatt]

I didn't know you're a Buddhist!
edit: @Dusty and to think that in Melbourne, in 2015, we still get this ****.


edit again: Been looking through End Clothing site and maybe I am a bit practical sort, but I really don't understand the price of baller brands like Visvim. $550 for an off the rack OCBD shirt etc.

Visvim is a joke - the pricing continually goes up even though the quality is the same.

JM: Guidis aren't $1500 or more, even the most expensive leather models are $1200/$1300 AUD. They are incredibly well made though.

If you want insane pricing look at Paul Harnden - just beyond ridiculous - $800 for a cotton shirt, $2500 for a jacket, etc. Buttons don't even stay on.

 

[Oli2012]

Daniel's IP lawyers should be all over this.

 

[blahman]



I would actually buy that.... No backwards D logo is definitely an upgrade to the DW.

 

[Journeyman]

JM: Guidis aren't $1500 or more, even the most expensive leather models are $1200/$1300 AUD. They are incredibly well made though.

If you want insane pricing look at Paul Harnden - just beyond ridiculous - $800 for a cotton shirt, $2500 for a jacket, etc. Buttons don't even stay on.

LM - My mistake. It looks as though you're generally correct with regard to men's boots by Guidi. The women's shoes/boots seem to cost quite a bit more, for some reason: http://www.farfetch.com/au/shopping/women/guidi/items.aspx?q=Guidi#ps=1&pv=60&oby=5

I know that they are hand-made, but I'm not so sure that Guidi are well-made. Then again, perhaps this example from Mr Porter are an exception:





If you look at the above pics, you can clearly see that the boot on the left is twisted and that the sole is uneven and that it doesn't sit flat. The boot on the right also doesn't look great as you can see that the quarters are a bit uneven as the laces are slanted, instead of being horizontally aligned.

I've got nothing against round-toed, utilitarian boots, as I've got some country boots and hiking boots that I wear regularly. However, speaking personally, if was spending $1100 on a pair of boots, I'd prefer it if they didn't look lumpy, twisted and uneven straight out of the box.

 

[The Ernesto]

They are meant to look imperfect, aren't they?

 

[Journeyman]

They are meant to look imperfect, aren't they?

I suspect that you're right.

However, maybe it's just me, but there's something rather peculiar about paying $1100 for boots that are *deliberately* imperfect.

Also, I strongly suspect that the people that are paying $1100 for twisted, imperfect boots would be horrified at the thought of, say, pre-distressed denim, as the idea is that you buy heavy denim and wear it in yourself. So, why is it desirable to spend big bucks on one deliberately imperfect item (boots) but it's very, very uncool to spend money on another deliberately imperfect item (jeans)?

I thought that people who buy these cult brands like to seek out small, "artisanal" brands which they regards as authentic. However, wouldn't it be properly authentic to buy perfect boots and then wear them in yourself so that they look battered, uneven and twisted, rather than get boots which have deliberately been made to look uneven, twisted and imperfect? That, to me, doesn't seem very authentic.

Then again, maybe I just don't understand the SW&D mindset.

 

[blahman]

It's a case of form over function and the designers charging a premium to make something new based on the looks of something old and well worn and weathered. And then the consumers of said pieces think they are the bees knees and admire the designers creativity and happily fork over the dosh.

I cannot imagine these boots will do too well for your feet.

 

[LonerMatt]

LM - My mistake. It looks as though you're generally correct with regard to men's boots by Guidi. The women's shoes/boots seem to cost quite a bit more, for some reason: http://www.farfetch.com/au/shopping/women/guidi/items.aspx?q=Guidi#ps=1&pv=60&oby=5

I know that they are hand-made, but I'm not so sure that Guidi are well-made. Then again, perhaps this example from Mr Porter are an exception:





If you look at the above pics, you can clearly see that the boot on the left is twisted and that the sole is uneven and that it doesn't sit flat. The boot on the right also doesn't look great as you can see that the quarters are a bit uneven as the laces are slanted, instead of being horizontally aligned.

I've got nothing against round-toed, utilitarian boots, as I've got some country boots and hiking boots that I wear regularly. However, speaking personally, if was spending $1100 on a pair of boots, I'd prefer it if they didn't look lumpy, twisted and uneven straight out of the box.

I'm sure some of the knee-high, etc boots are really expensive, but then they do use significantly more leather and weigh more.

I think you're maybe conflating 'design' with 'quality' - Guidis (along with many artisinal boots/shoes) are meant to look slightly deformed, ugly and misshapen. However, while the looks are not for everyone they do hold up incredibly well.

One member - nicelynice - has a pair he's done literally everything in - salt laden slush in the snow, hiked mountains, worn without socks in SE Asia, worn to work, he's just really abused them and they still hold up fin (maybe a resole).

There are definitely artisinal shoes that are a rip: Elena Dawson, Paul Harden come to mind as not only being peculiar looking but also fragile to the point of insanity.

This is not to suggest Guidi are good value or priced fairly - I've no idea if that's true. But from all owners' reports, with the exception of laces, they are pretty sturdy.