** Quintessential Crockett & Jones Thread ** (reviews, quality, etc...)

[Pascal1980]

I could get the "Albany 4" in Ivywood in my size....got it! Pick it up when I am in London in February & March.

Here are pictures of their Ivywood, which looks like a light hazelnut brown:

Langham 2 Ivywood Burnished Calf

Monk FactsThe Langham 2 is a classic slim tasseled loafer. Typically worn without socks, it is the perfect summer shoe; however it is equally elegant and comfortable worn with woolen socks in the colder months. The tassel embellishment owes its beginnings to a debonair man-about-town named Paul...

doublemonk.com

Best regards

Pascal

 

[DorianGreen]

It does, the Ivywood, which also seems to be a lighter brown, something like hazelnut brown. I like such lighter shades of brown for blue suits.

Best regards

Pascal

It looks like a medium brown to me. I also prefer medium to dark brown, or burgundy, over black shoes for pairing with blue trousers.

 

[DorianGreen]

I could get the "Albany 4" in Ivywood in my size....got it! Pick it up when I am in London in February & March.

Here are pictures of their Ivywood, which looks like a light hazelnut brown:

Langham 2 Ivywood Burnished Calf

Monk FactsThe Langham 2 is a classic slim tasseled loafer. Typically worn without socks, it is the perfect summer shoe; however it is equally elegant and comfortable worn with woolen socks in the colder months. The tassel embellishment owes its beginnings to a debonair man-about-town named Paul...

doublemonk.com

Best regards

Pascal

Hmm, the Ivywood Antique Calf looks much darker though.

https://eu.crockettandjones.com/collections/mens-oxfords-collection/products/albany-4-ivywood-calf

By the way, interesting site, that Double Monk, which I didn't know.

 

[Pascal1980]

Hmm, the Ivywood Antique Calf looks much darker though.

View attachment 2320079


https://eu.crockettandjones.com/collections/mens-oxfords-collection/products/albany-4-ivywood-calf

By the way, interesting site, that Double Monk, which I didn't know.

Unfortunately "Double Monk" is Australian. If I import shoes, the 5% customs fee and the 19% EU/German VAT Taxes apply. That is an additional costs of 24% and sucks.

Best regards

Pascal

 

[lumow]

Barrington 2s on the amazingly comfortable 363 last.

 

[shoefan57]

Out of curiosity, what is the sentiment at those conferences since Davos seemed to make it clear ESG is dying and climate has fallen out of favor. Europe is now questioning their abundance of regulation since their economy is in the dumps.

I am not in the industry but I think the downer on ESG is overblown. The ESG part of my share portfolio is doing very well. On climate investment, renewable energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels ( sorry DT) so I doubt European countries will row back on that. Not sure about regulation though, don’t feel qualified to comment.

 

[Pascal1980]

Barrington 2s on the amazingly comfortable 363 last.
View attachment 2320115

That shoe looks great, elegant and classic without being elongated. I guess sufficient room in the toe box is also given.

Best regards

Pascal

 

[Keyser_Söze]

I am not in the industry but I think the downer on ESG is overblown. The ESG part of my share portfolio is doing very well. On climate investment, renewable energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels ( sorry DT) so I doubt European countries will row back on that. Not sure about regulation though, don’t feel qualified to comment.

ESG may be doing well for your portfolio but the numbers show you'd have done much better by ignoring it completely.

 

[shoefan57]

ESG may be doing well for your portfolio but the numbers show you'd have done much better by ignoring it completely.

Yes, that’s true but I wanted my ethical views to be reflected in my portfolio, rather than be driven by performance alone. I think that what I was trying to say was that ESG still does well in that it’s beating inflation and cash and bonds but , yes, the rest of my portfolio is doing better.

 

[Pascal1980]

I am not in the industry but I think the downer on ESG is overblown. The ESG part of my share portfolio is doing very well. On climate investment, renewable energy is now cheaper than fossil fuels ( sorry DT) so I doubt European countries will row back on that. Not sure about regulation though, don’t feel qualified to comment.

Hello,

I am a consultant for ESG & Sustainability for the financial industry, in particular asset managers, insurances and pension funds.

The USA is divided, because some states like Illinouis, NewYork and California are progressing with their state legislation on Greenhouse Gas reductions and disclosures by companies, as well as stricter GHG emission limits of cars. The strict limits in California with the testing of the actual emissions on the road caused the investigation in the diesel scandal with manipulated fuel management software by VW and other car manufacturers. On a federal level the US legislation has been pushed back already by new republican leaning governeurs in the SEC board, which never happend in votes on SEC legislation before.

The rest of the world is moving either to the European sustainability accounting regime, the "Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive" (CSRD) that enforces the "European Sustainability Reporting Standards" (ESRS) that cover climate change and environmental externalities (ESRS E1 to E7), labor and social related issues (S1 to S5) and corporate governance including tax behaviour, code of conduct, etc. (G1 to G3).

The international Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) is a subsidiary of the "International Financial Reporting Standards" Board (IFRS), which is the internal body to set global financial accounting and reporting standards in audited annual financial statements of, mostly listed, companies. In the last 20+ years local financial accounting and reporting standards have been aligned with the IFRS/IAS standards. The same is now happening with the Sustainability Reporting Standards under ISSB S1 / S2, that includes the sustainabilty governance principles (S1) and the disclosure of affects on climate change with GHG-emissions Scope 1, 2 and 3 and GHG-reduction paths, or transmission strategies.

The international ISSB standards are extend to account for biodiversity and other nature related disclosures, because the "Task-Force on Natural related financial disclosures" (TNFD) has been adopted, or taken over, by the ISSB, similarly to its predecessor, the "Task Force on Sustainability-related Financial Disclosures" (TSFD).

The OCED 27 countries are aligning their sustainability guidelines as well, because in 2023 the "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises" have been updated to be almost 1-to-1 aligned and compatible with the CSRD/ESRS reporting guidelines.

The ISSB standards and all others are aligning with the CSRD/ESRS as well. The so-called "interoperabilty guidelines" have been published from June to August last year. We are helping financial institutions to understand and implement these international sustainabiltiy guidelines in the most efficient manner within a comprehensive sustainability management system, an integrated IT-architecture, that is aligned with their internal financial accounting and reporting systems.

The EU is even exporting its CSRD/ESRS, because the "Non-EU ESRS" (NESRS) have been published on December 17th and include the ESRS reporting guidelines for Non-EU companies that have at least 150 million € revenues in the EU and at least a subsidiary or branch physically located in the EU. Hence Microsoft Corp., Toyota, Amazon, Royal Dutch Shell, Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank, etc. are all required to fully report on the CSRD/ESRS due to their extensive business operations in the EU.

The only OECD-27 country not adopting anything at the moment is the Federal USA, followed by most central African countries and a few left-leaning Middle- and South-American countries. The rest of the world, including China, is either adopting the ISSB standards or the CSRD/ESRS standards, the EU-27 countries.

-> There is no real role back, because the economic accounting and reporting of externalities, hence the negative and positive effects on nature, climate change, labour and social effects, as well as tax evasion and compliance, are in full swing.

-> in the long-run USA multinational companies, that report in Europe by 2027 under the "Non-EU ESRS" (NESRS) and in UK, Japan, Australia and China, to name a few, under the ISSB standards will lobby to adopt something very similar, aligned and interoperable with the global sustainabilty reporting standards.

The link of the sustainability reporting to the IT-implementation, sustainability risk mangement (my field), regulation (my field) as well as the alignment with the financial accounting (upcoming) will take at least until 2030 to be fully adopted and implemented.

Just today we kicked-off a joint industry research project to develop the sustainabiltiy risk models for physical climate risks in solar/photovoltaic systems, because these models for risk management do not exist yet, are required already since last year, and are needed to estimate the expected losses in monetary terms. Until end of February we want to hand in the research proposal with a funding proposal to the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action. Besides my consultancy, as I am also a university lecture in my leisure time, a university, a research center, a solar / photovoltaic investor, a solar module engineering company and hopefully a reinsurance company are part of the research project.

The project in London helps to create the data extraction of sustainability date from company reports, around 16000 companies per year globally, by means of artificial intelligence with Large-Language Models (LLM) comparabel to ChatGPT.

Hence the subject is damn interesting and fun!

Enjoy our weekend and best regards

Pascal

 

[shoefan57]

Hello,

I am a consultant for ESG & Sustainability for the financial industry, in particular asset managers, insurances and pension funds.

The USA is divided, because some states like Illinouis, NewYork and California are progressing with their state legislation on Greenhouse Gas reductions and disclosures by companies, as well as stricter GHG emission limits of cars. The strict limits in California with the testing of the actual emissions on the road caused the investigation in the diesel scandal with manipulated fuel management software by VW and other car manufacturers. On a federal level the US legislation has been pushed back already by new republican leaning governeurs in the SEC board, which never happend in votes on SEC legislation before.

The rest of the world is moving either to the European sustainability accounting regime, the "Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive" (CSRD) that enforces the "European Sustainability Reporting Standards" (ESRS) that cover climate change and environmental externalities (ESRS E1 to E7), labor and social related issues (S1 to S5) and corporate governance including tax behaviour, code of conduct, etc. (G1 to G3).

The international Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) is a subsidiary of the "International Financial Reporting Standards" Board (IFRS), which is the internal body to set global financial accounting and reporting standards in audited annual financial statements of, mostly listed, companies. In the last 20+ years local financial accounting and reporting standards have been aligned with the IFRS/IAS standards. The same is now happening with the Sustainability Reporting Standards under ISSB S1 / S2, that includes the sustainabilty governance principles (S1) and the disclosure of affects on climate change with GHG-emissions Scope 1, 2 and 3 and GHG-reduction paths, or transmission strategies.

The international ISSB standards are extend to account for biodiversity and other nature related disclosures, because the "Task-Force on Natural related financial disclosures" (TNFD) has been adopted, or taken over, by the ISSB, similarly to its predecessor, the "Task Force on Sustainability-related Financial Disclosures" (TSFD).

The OCED 27 countries are aligning their sustainability guidelines as well, because in 2023 the "OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises" have been updated to be almost 1-to-1 aligned and compatible with the CSRD/ESRS reporting guidelines.

The ISSB standards and all others are aligning with the CSRD/ESRS as well. The so-called "interoperabilty guidelines" have been published from June to August last year. We are helping financial institutions to understand and implement these international sustainabiltiy guidelines in the most efficient manner within a comprehensive sustainability management system, an integrated IT-architecture, that is aligned with their internal financial accounting and reporting systems.

The EU is even exporting its CSRD/ESRS, because the "Non-EU ESRS" (NESRS) have been published on December 17th and include the ESRS reporting guidelines for Non-EU companies that have at least 150 million € revenues in the EU and at least a subsidiary or branch physically located in the EU. Hence Microsoft Corp., Toyota, Amazon, Royal Dutch Shell, Royal Bank of Scotland, Barclays Bank, etc. are all required to fully report on the CSRD/ESRS due to their extensive business operations in the EU.

The only OECD-27 country not adopting anything at the moment is the Federal USA, followed by most central African countries and a few left-leaning Middle- and South-American countries. The rest of the world, including China, is either adopting the ISSB standards or the CSRD/ESRS standards, the EU-27 countries.

-> There is no real role back, because the economic accounting and reporting of externalities, hence the negative and positive effects on nature, climate change, labour and social effects, as well as tax evasion and compliance, are in full swing.

-> in the long-run USA multinational companies, that report in Europe by 2027 under the "Non-EU ESRS" (NESRS) and in UK, Japan, Australia and China, to name a few, under the ISSB standards will lobby to adopt something very similar, aligned and interoperable with the global sustainabilty reporting standards.

The link of the sustainability reporting to the IT-implementation, sustainability risk mangement (my field), regulation (my field) as well as the alignment with the financial accounting (upcoming) will take at least until 2030 to be fully adopted and implemented.

Just today we kicked-off a joint industry research project to develop the sustainabiltiy risk models for physical climate risks in solar/photovoltaic systems, because these models for risk management do not exist yet, are required already since last year, and are needed to estimate the expected losses in monetary terms. Until end of February we want to hand in the research proposal with a funding proposal to the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Climate Action. Besides my consultancy, as I am also a university lecture in my leisure time, a university, a research center, a solar / photovoltaic investor, a solar module engineering company and hopefully a reinsurance company are part of the research project.

The project in London helps to create the data extraction of sustainability date from company reports, around 16000 companies per year globally, by means of artificial intelligence with Large-Language Models (LLM) comparabel to ChatGPT.

Hence the subject is damn interesting and fun!

Enjoy our weekend and best regards

Pascal

Wow, thank you, for a fulsome and very interesting account. I find it mostly encouraging, the current U.S. administration’s position excepted.

 

[Pascal1980]

Yes, that’s true but I wanted my ethical views to be reflected in my portfolio, rather than be driven by performance alone. I think that what I was trying to say was that ESG still does well in that it’s beating inflation and cash and bonds but , yes, the rest of my portfolio is doing better.

In the short-term,

with the annual budgeted increase of the costs per ton of GHG-emissions the heavly carbon-depending business models come under pressure to reduce their GHG-emissions footprint. The jump from 100€ to 150€ in January 1st 2024 caused already a spike in costs of the German steel industry that forgot to update their steel melting systems that are energy inefficient. Others, like Fortress Metals Group (FMG), in Australia are investing into modern steel melting technologies that save 30% energy, thus costs. Royal-Dutch-Shell, EnBW; and other energy and utility companies are using the high revenues from their oil- and goal business, and selling carbon-intensive energy, to invest into renewables at an enourmous scale and fast. Last year 86% of all new energy-creating capacity added worldwide were renewable energy.

Only China, India and a few smaller emerging economies are building new coal-fired power plants. The rest of the world, including the USA under the "Inflation Reduction Act" (IRA) is investing heavily into renewables.

The idea of new nuclear powerplants is nice, but without large government subsidies no private utilities company invests into new nuclear powerplants, because the project risks of delays, cost increases etc. are just to high. the UK "highley Point C" new nuclear powerplant is already twice over budget and delayed by several years. It needs a govermental guaranteed price of 90 GBP per GwH to be profitable, which is much more expensive than electricity from renewables. France lobbied to make nuclear energy "EU-Taxonomy Aligned", or "Green", to lable the required ~ 50 billion € investments to refurbish its over 50 nuclear powerplants, to sell the bonds as green bonds, because "Energy de France" (EDF) is highly indebted and otherwise would have difficulty in raising the required funds, even with a state guarantee, if these funds were not "green".

Fusion Power is still in the early industrial research stage.

Best regards

Pascal

 

[Keyser_Söze]

Only China, India and a few smaller emerging economies are building new coal-fired power plants. The rest of the world, including the USA under the "Inflation Reduction Act" (IRA) is investing heavily into renewables.

The idea of new nuclear powerplants is nice, but without large government subsidies no private utilities company invests into new nuclear powerplants, because the project risks of delays, cost increases etc. are just to high. the UK "highley Point C" new nuclear powerplant is already twice over budget and delayed by several years. It needs a govermental guaranteed price of 90 GBP per GwH to be profitable, which is much more expensive than electricity from renewables. France lobbied to make nuclear energy "EU-Taxonomy Aligned", or "Green", to lable the required ~ 50 billion € investments to refurbish its over 50 nuclear powerplants, to sell the bonds as green bonds, because "Energy de France" (EDF) is highly indebted and otherwise would have difficulty in raising the required funds, even with a state guarantee, if these funds were not "green".

So the two largest populations are not caring about clean energy and the EU cannot do it financially responsibly? How is this something that should be promoted?

 

[othertravel]

If we're talking economics...Brexit has been a disaster for shoemakers.

 

[Menninki]

Shell chukka

View attachment 2317707

Crafty, is this model the Chukka or Chiltern? Is this by any chance from Gentlemen's Footwear?