# Deadstock Vintage Lacoste - Acquired!



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

So, after a seemingly endless series of losses at the hands of evil rival bidders, I found a Lacoste Polo that was unworn old stock. It arrived today!

Details:
-Label is "Chemise Lacoste", no mention of Izod.
-Made in USA! Woohoo!
-100% Cotton, no polyester. Woohoo!

Trying on the medium size, fits well in the shoulders, sleeves are 3/4 length of bicep, and fabric seems soft. Cut is analogous to the standard PRL polo. Have not washed it yet, but the creases are understandably a little deep considering how long this shirt has sat around unworn.

Pics to come post washing I think. Anyhow, any info some of you fans of Lacoste (the old, good Lacoste) can share on when this label dates the shirt to? 

I'm not sure if I'm excited or disappointed that they seem as nice as I remember. Now I have to try to find the right sizes, colors and in unworn deadstock! Yikes!


----------



## trolperft (Feb 7, 2007)

Probably it's from 1980s.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

I'm eager to see pics. I'm far from an expert, but I've not seen a Lacoste item made in the USA without IZOD branding as well. Is it crocless?


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Nope, it's full on Croc style.  I've noticed some light dirt and dust from being folded for decades, so I've got to toss it in the wash. 

Here's the auction:


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

Looks niiice! Here's the ONE I've ever seen in this style - it's quite a bit larger, I'm afraid, and in my closet! There's just SO many different Lacoste, Izod Lacoste, Izod of London, Lacoste of London, Chemise Lacoste, yaddayaddayadda in various iterations. These made in USA Chemise Lacoste do seem to be very nice, though. I'd say 26 bucks is a pretty sweet price for a true dead stock example!

(clickable thumbnail)


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

Ah, I'm envious. That was a very nice buy.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Now to keep the rest of you away from all the deadstock examples I can find!


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

If that's the shirt you bought, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but it's a fake.

The mis-aligned croc is a dead giveaway. On the real shirts, the croc is centered between the second button and the bottom of the placket.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

Uh-oh. Controversy. If real, it was a nice buy.


----------



## mjo_1 (Oct 2, 2007)

I wonder who would go to the trouble to fake an older style? It does appear that the gator is a raised, sewn on patch as with the real shirts. Looks as if it could go either way. Maybe they changed gator placement over the years?


Best,

Michael


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

It's not a "fake of an older style." It's a generic polo-style shirt with counterfeit trademarks. In other words, a bad fake.

There are other problems, as well. The labels are wrong. Lacostes were never sized S-M-L. The croc is also poorly stitched, and lacks detail.

Compare the croc in the auction to this genuine one:



Sorry...I hate to be a buzz kill. The fakes far outnumber the genuine ones on the Internet, so caveat emptor.


----------



## ZachGranstrom (Mar 11, 2010)

I thought Lacoste polos only used white/ivory MOP buttons. (please correct me if I'm wrong)


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

ZachGranstrom said:


> I thought Lacoste polos only used white/ivory MOP buttons. (please correct me if I'm wrong)


No, you're correct. That's another problem with this one.


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

I'm wondering if what you're saying isn't true for the labeling that just says "Lacoste" - that is, the later stuff - especially the "designed in France made in Peru" stuff. I have several of those, and they all meet up with the points you describe perfectly. I also have several Izod Lacostes, and this one Chemise Lacoste, (note:none of these whatsoever purchased online, all in real life, no matter what the label) and they are NOT the same - but the Chemise Lacoste matches up perfectly with the Izod Lacostes. That would seem to jibe with what I've read about the Chemise Lacoste made-in-USA stuff being more of an Izod Lacoste creation rather than anything from the European side of things. It didn't last long, and was seen to have largely failed, IIRC - I can't find the page right now, but it's out there.

That said, this one does NOT match up perfectly with my Chemise Lacoste on further inspection. The buttons don't match - mine are white, where these are black - but particularly the tag - which definitely does NOT exactly match, and I've NEVER seen a 1/2 patron tag! The tag worries me more, on further inspection - it looks printed, even, where mine are definitely sewn, each and every one.


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

Topsider said:


> If that's the shirt you bought, I hate to be the one to break it to you, but it's a fake.
> 
> The mis-aligned croc is a dead giveaway. On the real shirts, the croc is centered between the second button and the bottom of the placket.


I think the "misalighned croc" method of spotting fakes is falsehood spread by ebay "how to spot a fake guides.
If you go by it the crocs on the shirts on the lacoste website are incorrect,

Still, I think it might be a fake too, because of the SML sizing and the odd looking gator.


----------



## Cajunking (Apr 30, 2010)

Not sure how much it applies, but I do have a few Lacoste polos purchased in the past few years that have black buttons (they're still a little shimmery like ivory) -- these were purchased online straight from Lacoste.


----------



## P Hudson (Jul 19, 2008)

Nothing definitive here, but I have an old Lacoste pullover rain jacket from my grandfather-in-law's closet, bought in the 1980s. The croc is about the same location as on this shirt, and is attached in a somewhat crude manner. Also, the item is sized as L. He would have bought it at one of Chicago's better department stores, so it is unlikely to be fake.

If the parallels mean anything, sizing and croc stitching are not conclusive.


----------



## JDDY (Mar 18, 2006)

I've noticed that too, where my older ones were white. I'm a little picky and prefer the white, which some of the new ones have. Can't figure out why some new ones have the white and some don't.


----------



## WouldaShoulda (Aug 5, 2009)

I have a Lacoste/Izod Baracuta jacket from the late 80s size "xl"


----------



## D&S (Mar 29, 2009)

Cajunking said:


> Not sure how much it applies, but I do have a few Lacoste polos purchased in the past few years that have black buttons (they're still a little shimmery like ivory) -- these were purchased online straight from Lacoste.


I have only two Lacostes, one bought in Paris at Les Galleries Lafayette in 2005 and another from George Dean's in Athens, Georgia in 2008 (so both are definitely real). The Paris one was made in France and the Georgia one was made in Peru, but both have black "shimmery" buttons (though slightly different from one another) and the Crocodile is positioned between the base of the placket and the first button, as one poster mentioned. I guess this doesn't reveal too much about the originals, but Lacoste has used other buttons (besides mother of pearl) in the past. More damning is the Croc placement - while all of my '80s-era Izod Lacostes are long gone, I would think that the modern versions would not be styled differently in this important aspect.


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

D&S said:


> the Croc placement - while all of my '80s-era Izod Lacostes are long gone, I would think that the modern versions would not be styled differently in this important aspect.


The 70's-80's Izod Lacoste era stuff can and did vary from the European-based stuff whether made in France, Peru, or wherever. The tips here and the Ebay seller guides are all based on modern stuff - for which those are great tips, and apparently Lacoste *does* now use black buttons on polos! I do in fact have a long-sleeved shirt from them that has black buttons, but did not think it was relevant because it wasn't a polo. Same "sheen" on those that others have mentioned, so I would guess it's all the same buttons. Anyway, just noting that the made-in-USA OLD Lacoste Izod era stuff WAS sometimes different from the "European" manufacture - I don't know how prevalent fakes of Izod Lacoste stuff were in the 70's-80's, but it seems safe to say less prevalent than today's knockoffs of straight-up Lacoste, with the advent of ever-cheaper knockoffs from Asia.


----------



## Tonyp (May 8, 2007)

I have never seen Lacoste use S-M-L to indicate size. I have worn them since the late 70's. the sizing was numerical or in the word Patron, Grand patron etc..


----------



## Ron_A (Jun 5, 2007)

There obviously is a lot of fake Lacoste stuff on ebay, but it does seem odd that a seller would go to the trouble to counterfeit a vintage, Made in the USA, Chemise Lacoste.


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

If this thread is instructive on anything, it is that branding is a poor substitute for quality. When it is clear that a lacoste is not just a lacoste, then one must question what it is. If it is real, the sheer number of possible actual makes and levels of quality means that the brand name is worthless as an indication of anything. If it is not real, but is indeed as fine an item as was described in the OP, then why care if it is real? All of this is just too difficult, and why I have gotten out of the brand name/logo game.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Ron_A said:


> There obviously is a lot of fake Lacoste stuff on ebay, but it does seem odd that a seller would go to the trouble to counterfeit a vintage, Made in the USA, Chemise Lacoste.


It might be easier for a thief to fabricate an older version than a newer one.

Fakes are bad, they ruin the brand, they make the wearer look foolish when spotted, it is bad.

Part of the appeal of these brands is they are exclusive. People do not buy a $400,000 Ferrari because it is the fastest car on the market. They buy it because it is quality and exclusive.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Youngster said:


> If this thread is instructive on anything, it is that branding is a poor substitute for quality.


If you buy the real genuine Lacoste, you are getting the best quality available at $100.

Fakes are garbage, the quality can vary from batch to batch. Even if you get an above average fake, it is still a fake. It is like spending $5000 to fabricate body panels for a Mustang to make it look like a Ferrari. At the end of the day, it is a fake no matter what it is.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

To weigh in, I'll add more pics once it gets out of the wash. It does appear to be old, and something I don't think all of you are getting here is that Lacoste took a SERIOUS dive in "exclusivity" in the 80's. I wore these shirts regularly as a kid, and my mom didn't spend a ton of money on my clothes. Izod took Lacoste to a level of oversaturation, so I think profit was the driving force. Back in the day, I didn't know an elementary school student who DIDN'T have one of these.

I'm convinced it's vintage and old, but it's definitely an American creation. Fabric is thin but not unsubstantial, and the tags look old. The interior tag also shows an older style of printing, and all modern international washing logos are noticeably absent.

Here's the last thing I'll say about why it was bought: I loved wearing little crocodiles on my shirts when I was a kid. I still like it, but I think (having bought one of the new models) that the new stuff is junk. I'd much rather have the vintage style while saving a bunch of money.

Lacoste to me isn't "exclusivity and quality", it means I think little crocs on my shirts are cool.


----------



## joenobody0 (Jun 30, 2009)

Pink and Green said:


> To weigh in, I'll add more pics once it gets out of the wash. It does appear to be old, and something I don't think all of you are getting here is that Lacoste took a SERIOUS dive in "exclusivity" in the 80's. I wore these shirts regularly as a kid, and my mom didn't spend a ton of money on my clothes. Izod took Lacoste to a level of oversaturation, so I think profit was the driving force. Back in the day, I didn't know an elementary school student who DIDN'T have one of these.


I too owned these shirts as a child and my family was very far from rich. It still surprises me that these are considered luxury goods by many people.


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

Ron_A said:


> There obviously is a lot of fake Lacoste stuff on ebay, but it does seem odd that a seller would go to the trouble to counterfeit a vintage, Made in the USA, Chemise Lacoste.


I agree, I think ebay counterfeiting on non-new items is rare.

However this could be a NOS fake lacoste (if that makes sense).

They were certainly making fakes back in the 80's, I have an old, late-80s fake.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Pink and Green,

Consider yourself lucky your parents could afford Lacoste.

Lacoste invented the polo. If there was no Lacoste, there would be no polo.

I am very sorry if you purchased a fake. Don't judge the original based on a fake. I would be very upset if someone sold me a fake. Take your anger out on the seller.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

He doesn't sound that angry, but of course he should address this with the seller if he feels the need.

The idea of NOS counterfeit merchandise is interesting. As time goes on, there have been efforts to replicate original products in more detail, but there is also a decline in some areas. Sadly, there has also been decline of quality and quality _control_ in many _real_ products. It would be ironic if NOS fakes exceeded the quality of today's authentic products.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Well, at the risk of helping counterfeit artists, I'll post some pics that I believe prove (in my mind anyhow) that it's a real vintage item.

Plus, I don't think you could get the light dust and such on it, nor the deep creases from being folded for years. When I inquired of the seller where he got it (as I wanted more!), he replied he found it at a thrift store.

I believe it's 100% legit. I've seen fakes and they are definitely lower quality than this one. I may be crazy, but the "feel" seems right to me from what I wore in the 80's.

I purchased one Lacoste new, hated it, and sent it along to a friend. No more doing that! Vintage for me.


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

I have heard from many older friends of my parents, and friends parents, that back in their day it was common to rip the croc off of a Lacoste. And now folk buy em just for that croc!
What bothers me about this is just that Lacoste is so licensed that their is no consistent product; what does that name mean if it could have come from any of 50 factories? This debate about authenticity cannot every really be concluded, for we cannot know all of the Lacoste makes over the years, nor can we really say that it be a "real licensed lacoste" makes it all that real. It certainly is substantially from the original version, and in that is it not a "fake" in a certain way? We certainly would not tolerate our Gitman's being licensed out- I would not, in any case.
I came to this forum to learn more about the intrinsic qualities of the clothes- this debate misses that entirely. The real question should be; for the price, was this a good value?


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

For me, the purchaser, the answer is yes. Normal, athletic fit, sleeves that aren't too long, a product of the US, 100% cotton, all the desirables.

I am certain now that it is authentic - the inspected by tag is an old style, and the batch tag is printed in a way I've not seen since the 80s. This is the real deal, it just took 20+ years for it to be worn by someone. The dust, dirt and folds all came out in the wash and it's looking quite nice. I only wish there were more deadstock old 80's Lacostes out there...


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Youngster said:


> I have heard from many older friends of my parents, and friends parents, that back in their day it was common to rip the croc off of a Lacoste. And now folk buy em just for that croc!
> What bothers me about this is just that Lacoste is so licensed that their is no consistent product; what does that name mean if it could have come from any of 50 factories? This debate about authenticity cannot every really be concluded, for we cannot know all of the Lacoste makes over the years, nor can we really say that it be a "real licensed lacoste" makes it all that real. It certainly is substantially from the original version, and in that is it not a "fake" in a certain way? We certainly would not tolerate our Gitman's being licensed out- I would not, in any case.
> I came to this forum to learn more about the intrinsic qualities of the clothes- this debate misses that entirely. The real question should be; for the price, was this a good value?


It is really bad to buy fakes, it is stealing. People who defend fakes probably buy them.

I own Lacoste polos and they are the best polo available at the $100 price point.

To the best of my knowledge, Lacoste is not made in 50 different factories. Even if that was true, Lacoste purchases the high quality thread, purchases the mother of pearl, has quality control and can make an identical product in different locations. A fake uses lower quality thread, buttons, and has lower quality control. They try and trick people who do not know into buying a fake.

Either you own an authentic, or you don't.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Pink and Green said:


> For me, the purchaser, the answer is yes. Normal, athletic fit, sleeves that aren't too long, a product of the US, 100% cotton, all the desirables.
> 
> I am certain now that it is authentic - the inspected by tag is an old style, and the batch tag is printed in a way I've not seen since the 80s. This is the real deal, it just took 20+ years for it to be worn by someone. The dust, dirt and folds all came out in the wash and it's looking quite nice. I only wish there were more deadstock old 80's Lacostes out there...


That is fantastic, that you purchased a real authentic Lacoste! It hurt me to think you had a fake that could not be worn.

When will you post the pictures with close ups?


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

I'll go mow the yard and throw a few pics up on Flickr. I debated doing it, but seeing as no one will counterfeit a 30 year old shirt, I'll show the "tells" of authenticity.

Keep in mind some aspects were in better shape before I washed it - it is a brand new shirt, but will look a little different now. I'm nostalgic for 20+ years ago, but I draw the line at 20+ year old dirt!


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> It is really bad to buy fakes, it is stealing. People who defend fakes probably buy them.
> 
> I own Lacoste polos and they are the best polo available at the $100 price point.
> 
> ...


I pulled 50 out of my ass, but over the years, how many different factories have produced Lacotse? How many subcontractors? They are not all the same, so should we treat them as the same item?
Regardless, you are missing the point. There HAVE been differences in different makes of Lacoste (as well as many other brands who have licensed their productions) and thus quality control is not as simple and consistent as we could hope. But regardless, you assume that a fake must be bad, or an imitation must be worse than an original. If the fake is half as good at half the price, then nothing is lost. If it is half as good at a quarter of the price, then it is a better value. But the only thing that makes it a disgrace is that little croc, which shames you for being a pretender. One does not fake Brooks OCBD because there is no external symbol. The only thing that mater in this case is intrinsic quality. This is what I look for. The debate of logos and brands only confounds the search for what we are really after- better fit, finish and quality. No croc or pony, regardless of quality control, can guarantee that.


----------



## Got Shell? (Jul 30, 2008)

What a thread! Fake dirt, fake ponies, and fake crocodiles!!


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

I'm even beginning to wonder if I am legit!

(checks back in mirror) Made in China?!?

*faints*


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

I buy Lacoste because it is the best polo for $100 or less. I buy Lacoste because the mother of pearl buttons are much nicer than plastic. I buy Lacoste because I know it will last many years and the color will not fade. I buy Lacoste beacuse it is a good fit and nice design. I buy Lacoste for the history of its founder winning multiple Tennis championships. I buy Lacoste for the history of being the first polo designed.

A fake has none of that. A fake steals from the brand name and reputation.


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

^^^ OK, we get it, give it a rest 

Brian


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> I buy Lacoste because it is the best polo for $100 or less. I buy Lacoste because the mother of pearl buttons are much nicer than plastic. I buy Lacoste because I know it will last many years and the color will not fade. I buy Lacoste beacuse it is a good fit and nice design. I buy Lacoste for the history of its founder winning multiple Tennis championships. I buy Lacoste for the history of being the first polo designed.
> 
> A fake has none of that. A fake steals from the brand name and reputation.


Your devotion is practically religious. One would assume that you have stock in Lacoste. I for one, will maintain that dollar for dollar, there are better polos, and logo free ones at that.


----------



## Got Shell? (Jul 30, 2008)

I don't buy lacoste because the fit is terrible. I am tall and slender, and the shirts are just too wide all around and too short; sleeves, body, everything. The fabric is nice and I like the color selection, but the fit is absolutely terrible for me compared to Polo and BB polos. I've tried to play tennis in my lacoste polo, and my stomach shows on every stroke, especially serves. I've tried size "5", and I don't see how another size could work. Oh! I should add that this was a "real" one purchased by my wife in las vegas at at Lacoste store. And she IS real.


----------



## gordgekko (Nov 12, 2004)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> I buy Lacoste because it is the best polo for $100 or less. I buy Lacoste because the mother of pearl buttons are much nicer than plastic. I buy Lacoste because I know it will last many years and the color will not fade. I buy Lacoste beacuse it is a good fit and nice design.


I'm sure there was a time when all of that was true. We were all much, much younger then.



> I buy Lacoste for the history of its founder winning multiple Tennis championships.


Ummm...I buy Brooks Bros. because Lincoln was shot wearing one of their capes? Just as germane as your reason I suppose.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Sorry for resurrecting this mostly finished thread, but I promised pictures. Was so wiped out from mowing that I forgot these were on my camera until today.

The polo in question, post-washing.









Note no international washing logos - not yet devised when this was made.









This here seems to be the clincher - I've seen these old type of tags and printing on many vintage shirts, including some my mother bought me from Sears. This seems to be the late 70's to 80's style of inventory tag if I remember right. 









Old school inspection sticker - was in perfect shape before washing.









Raaawwwrr! Watch out!









Ahh the magic formula: Made in USA, all cotton! If only one could get such cut and quality down at Sears today! Note also the fresh hole in the label - where the price tag was attached.










Sorry to bore with an old thread, but I promised something and I like to deliver, even if it's a bit late. (and forgive the filthy nails! Again - just got done mowing when these were taken).


----------



## swb120 (Aug 9, 2005)

Sorry, but I can't get past the tag and the croc...looks fake to me. Here is another "old stock" Lacoste on fleabay, with the same tag, croc and made in USA:


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

I doubt it is a fake, but it looks nice enough that one should not care too much either way. 
However, this thread has reaffirmed my stance against the purchase Lacoste, real or fake, as well as all other logo'ed goods. It's far too hard to enjoy a well made shirt when are so busy picking thru every detail to see if it is a counterfeit. 
It's best for folk to look at me in my new shirt and think "he looks nice."
It's good for folk to look at my new shirt and think "it looks nice."
It's not so good for folk to look at the the logo on my new shirt and think "that look expensive." 
And of course it is worst for folk to look at me, then the logo and think (A guy like him in a shirt like that? Must be fake or stolen.)

(in summation- Haters gonna hate! Wear your shirt with pride P&G! But lets try to avoid this logo game. The back and forth real/fake stuff leaves a bad taste in my mouth.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Youngster said:


> I doubt it is a fake, but it looks nice enough that one should not care too much either way.
> However, this thread has reaffirmed my stance against the purchase Lacoste, real or fake, as well as all other logo'ed goods. It's far too hard to enjoy a well made shirt when are so busy picking thru every detail to see if it is a counterfeit.
> It's best for folk to look at me in my new shirt and think "he looks nice."
> It's good for folk to look at my new shirt and think "it looks nice."
> ...


If someone has an authentic Lacoste that person can wear it with pride.

If someone has a fake, they have good reason to be embarrased.

There is a good reason for the logo. It looks good. Many people like it. It adds a touch of color and design to a solid color shirt. An artist signs his paintings.

The logo makes it more difficult to be copied. It is one more detail the copy cat has to try and reproduce, and they can't make it perfect. There is only one place to buy it perfect, and that is from the people who sell authentic originals.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Youngster said:


> It's not so good for folk to look at the the logo on my new shirt and think "that look expensive."


Why is it bad?

The best dressed people wear expensive clothing. People who have the money can buy anything they want. If the cheap stuff was good, they would be buying it.


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

I think it's real, lacoste licensed their name out enough that I'd believe this is legitimate.


Worst case scenario is that it's a deadstock fake from the 80s.
There's a zero chance it's a modern fake.


----------



## vwguy (Jul 23, 2004)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> The best dressed people wear expensive clothing. People who have the money can buy anything they want. If the cheap stuff was good, they would be buying it.


Wow...I might have to add this as my signature.

Brian


----------



## Youngster (Jun 5, 2008)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> If someone has an authentic Lacoste that person can wear it with pride.
> 
> If someone has a fake, they have good reason to be embarrased.
> 
> ...


LV was the first to use a "logo" of any kind- LV is also the most counterfeited. The logo is what creates and enables counterfeit. Nobody counterfeits AE shoes because there is no logo. You don't get counterfeits when goods are for quality- that is too hard to fake. It's the easy and superficial that get faked. The logo is ideal because so many people buy shirts for the croc and not for the shirt itself. It's a damn shame what the logo has done to quality clothes- turned us into walking billboards- and we pay extra for the privilege to do it!

BTW- can a mod look into a certain Lacoste shilling poster? I think he wander in from under a bridge, and we would like him sent back there.


----------



## Got Shell? (Jul 30, 2008)

OldSchoolCharm said:


> Why is it bad?
> 
> The best dressed people wear expensive clothing. People who have the money can buy anything they want. If the cheap stuff was good, they would be buying it.


 I understand your point, but there are way too many people out there who buy more conspicuous and expensive items of lesser quality when they have the money to buy better, cheaper items. Clothing and shoes are probably the best example of this. "the best dressed people wear expensive clothing" - That is pretty subjective and may generally be true, but there are many people who dress well on the cheap, such as the thrifters we have on this forum.


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Got Shell? said:


> I understand your point, but there are way too many people out there who buy more conspicuous and expensive items of lesser quality when they have the money to buy better, cheaper items. Clothing and shoes are probably the best example of this. "the best dressed people wear expensive clothing" - That is pretty subjective and may generally be true, but there are many people who dress well on the cheap, such as the thrifters we have on this forum.


People of all income levels can dress well. A $250 suit, a $900 suit, and a $2000 suit may all look well, but I think most people will see an improvement at each price point.


----------



## C. Sharp (Dec 18, 2008)

For what is worth the RN number is for CRYSTAL BRANDS, INC, It matches the WPL number I have seen on some older shirts. Which indicates that this could be a contracted piece that was made during the period that IZOD/Lacoste stuff was licensed.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Wow that's some serious detective work! Thanks for the info, although I'm entirely unsure of how you'd go about finding that info.

Now if you could find me more old stock polos, I'd be more appreciative.


----------



## C. Sharp (Dec 18, 2008)

Here is the RN database 
If you have an RN or a WPL you can find out who made things. Your RN was on the back of the tag you showed. It is the same company that has a WPL of 1100.



Pink and Green said:


> Wow that's some serious detective work! Thanks for the info, although I'm entirely unsure of how you'd go about finding that info.
> 
> Now if you could find me more old stock polos, I'd be more appreciative.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Wow, we have a font of knowledge here on the forum!

Thank you for contributing some real knowledge to this thread. I'd gotten so tired of the "Is it real" debate I was almost sick of my own shirt!

I knew it was because this is what they looked like when I wore them, but oh well, what do I know.
Again, my thanks. I wonder if they are still cranking stuff out in the US?


----------



## OldSchoolCharm (Apr 12, 2010)

Pink and Green said:


> Wow, we have a font of knowledge here on the forum!
> 
> Thank you for contributing some real knowledge to this thread. I'd gotten so tired of the "Is it real" debate I was almost sick of my own shirt!
> 
> ...


I was at a Lacoste store and saw their club line. It is "Designed in France. Made in France". The cloth felt very nice. I went to Nordstrom and saw it there too. Maybe there will be a rebirth of made in France?


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

I checked the RN number myself before I posted about it being fake. While it does match up to Crystal Brands, who did have a contract with Izod Lacoste at one time, it doesn't validate the shirt. All but the most egregious fakes will copy the text from a genuine label, including the RN number.

And, no...there are no Lacoste shirts currently being manufactured in the US. It's unlikely that your fake is actually of US manufacture, either. Most are Chinese.

The debate really should end with the logo. Note the obvious differences between:

Genuine

...and fake (the OP's shirt):


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Hmm. So its a really old fake shirt. Interesting.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Hard to say how old it is, but fake Lacostes have been around for almost as long as real ones.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

At the risk of incurring another diatribe about their excellence, how sad that an old fake bests a real new one, at least in my book. I wish they'd make the new ones A.for normal human beings and B. out of fabric that doesn't shrink if it's humid outside.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

So, I suppose the question is now whether it's a recent fake playing on the market for NOS, or an actual NOS fake.


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

I'll say yet again that that logo is from recent Lacoste - and that Izod Lacoste era can, and DID, often have differences. Remember that different factories have made Lacoste over the years - especially when it was Izod Lacoste. That exact logo that you've pictured DID NOT EXIST back in the 50's 60's originally - they literally couldn't sew it!

A challenge: *Show me an 80's Izod Lacoste that has that exact croc on it.* I really find it hard to believe that each and every one of the dozens and dozens I've seen is a fake. I'm not going to take pictures of dozens of shirts to show you, but I think the difference is pretty clear if you actually look at real, OLD, shirts, not just ebay guides and NEW lacoste stuff. Of course modern Devanlay licensed stuff is going to match up - but you CANNOT evaluate OLD shirts by the NEW criteria (relatively new) and expect to get anywhere. Modern Lacoste is a 100% different animal from old 80's lacoste, and I don't think you're recognizing that.

As an aside, a week or two ago I actually saw a string of fake 80's - in hindsight, I should have bought them and taken them home just to show you guys, but it wasn't worth THAT much. There were about six of them - all were very very distinguishable, and there would be NO debate such as this. Cheap plastic buttons, crocs with VERY misshapen features - I mean, SERIOUSLY distinguishable. I wouldn't expect fakes from that era to be as high-quality as fakes produced today, either - and it's pretty ridiculous to think fakers would be trying to fake NOS now, given that they can work much more profitably with the "Lacoste" only branding that's more modern. Remember, honestly, outside this forum and the memories of people who wore them, the idea of Izod Lacoste is pretty much out of the public consciousness. We're just more aware of the market for NOS Lacoste - that market is INFINITESIMAL compared to the market for modern Lacoste on, say, Ebay, and that's what fakers look at. As evidence: 3200+ listings for lacoste polo - THIRTEEN for NOS Lacoste of any kind. Like someone else said, I don't think you all realize how whored out the Izod Lacoste brand got in the 80's - it wasn't really exclusive at all. The whole "omg exclusive" thing is more a poster child of the "modern era" Lacoste and the $100 polo. These 80's Izod Lacostes were never $100 polos...


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Thirteen? (Runs to eBay)

Ha, just kidding. TheWGP (World's Greatest..?), I appreciate your contribution.

To all, I find this thread fascinating. The more knowledge we have the better. I'm glad I bought the shirt mostly so I can wear it, but secondly because we've gotten to talk about my old favorite clothing, which doesn't exist in the fashion I remember it anymore.

If you have more, keep at it. I as well am interested in croc closeups from the 80s. I'll keep trying for NOS examples to purchase and show you. I have my eye on two now...


----------



## Thom Browne's Schooldays (Jul 29, 2007)

TheWGP said:


> I'll say yet again that that logo is from recent Lacoste - and that Izod Lacoste era can, and DID, often have differences. Remember that different factories have made Lacoste over the years - especially when it was Izod Lacoste. That exact logo that you've pictured DID NOT EXIST back in the 50's 60's originally - they literally couldn't sew it!
> 
> A challenge: *Show me an 80's Izod Lacoste that has that exact croc on it.* I really find it hard to believe that each and every one of the dozens and dozens I've seen is a fake. I'm not going to take pictures of dozens of shirts to show you, but I think the difference is pretty clear if you actually look at real, OLD, shirts, not just ebay guides and NEW lacoste stuff. Of course modern Devanlay licensed stuff is going to match up - but you CANNOT evaluate OLD shirts by the NEW criteria (relatively new) and expect to get anywhere. Modern Lacoste is a 100% different animal from old 80's lacoste, and I don't think you're recognizing that.


Is this in response to P&G or topsider?


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

Here's an 80's-vintage logo from a windbreaker that I still have. It has less detail than the modern logo. You be the judge. I don't have a horse in this race.


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

This does fit with what I've seen examining the older Izod models, and the older technology of the time. I wish I could say I remember how they looked - I only remember how they fit and felt, however. It never occurred to me to examine closely the croc.

I don't want to discourage anyone in this thread if you're having fun, but I love the shirt either way. If it's real, super. If it's fake, too bad. Unfortunately there aren't too many more where this one came from.


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Dragging up this dandy of a thread for a "Fake or Not Fake: The Lacoste Game"

I picked up this bright red, long sleeve "Chemise Lacoste" from the thrift store today. I don't particularly care if it's fake or not, but hadn't seen a label this old on a Lacoste from a thrift store so I bought it. On the "real" side: MOP buttons, vintage "Made in France" tag with the WPL for Crystal Brands (U.S. distributor), fabric feels right, no fading after what has obviously been many washes. On the "fake" side: croc is not as detailed as the modern crocs, croc is considerably below the end of the placket.

What says the jury?


----------



## TheWGP (Jan 15, 2010)

I've seen that exact label several times, though for various reasons I've never picked any of them up. Suffice to say, shirts that old tend to be in bad shape, in my experience - for example, I've seen three or four of the Izod Lacoste orlon acrylic sweater-button-ups that are from the early Izod Lacoste days that were just ruined beyond hope of saving. But yes, that label does appear to be either legitimate or a really widespread fake - and honestly, with the old stuff, I may have come off a little harsh earlier in the thread - my point is mostly the difference between modern Lacoste and old Izod Lacoste/Chemise Lacoste is so great, we may never know the real story for a lot of this stuff.

I've come to the conclusion that your approach is right - not caring whether it's real or not so long as it's nice!


----------



## Pink and Green (Jul 22, 2009)

Have we found a rival for the vaunted hobby of "Shell or not shell?" 

I vote real, BTW. Not that it matters. As long as it "really" covers your body, it's legit enough as a shirt.


----------



## Taken Aback (Aug 3, 2009)

Well, price becomes the key issue then. At $2 I wouldn't wrack my brain over whether it's truly real. However, off eBay at some exorbitant price, it's something I would pass over.


----------



## Cardinals5 (Jun 16, 2009)

Here's a nice pic from AP this morning - it clearly shows a croc much lower on the chest than contemporary ones.










Ike in 1958 - also posted by AP


----------



## hsc89 (Oct 14, 2009)

Cards - Thanks for the pics! I remember the croc being lower as well on the old IZOD/Lacoste shirts I wore in the late 70's and into the 80's. In fact, I seem to recall it could be a bit irritating (physically) on occasion, particularly when the shirt was new and the croc was still a bit stiff.


----------



## C. Sharp (Dec 18, 2008)

https://theivyleaguelook.blogspot.com/2009/04/crocodiles-shirt.html

https://theivyleaguelook.blogspot.com/2009/07/izod-presents-famous-lacoste-1956.html

https://theivyleaguelook.blogspot.com/2009/07/france-le-crocodile-1967.html

https://theivyleaguelook.blogspot.com/2009/07/sporty-emblems-sell-shirts-1980.html


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

1953 Vic Seixas









Tony Traber w/ Seixas


----------



## C. Sharp (Dec 18, 2008)

Here is a co branded shirt for Brooks Brothers


----------



## Bradford (Dec 10, 2004)

C. Sharp said:


> Here is a co branded shirt for Brooks Brothers


Wow, that is ugly.


----------

