# Clifford James & Samuel Windsor shoes



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

Does anybody know much background information about these companies ?
Clifford James is a mail order outfit with a retail shop off the A3 in Ripley Surrey. It sells cheap stuff with a target market of pensioners.
However, it makes a very good offer of two pairs of all leather shoes for £25. They are a bit clumpy rather than sleek, but I can hardly get new soles on one pair of shoes for that money. I have the oxfords and brogues they polish up fine in black for a solid working shoe. The other styles are naff. They are not the finest shoes in the world but they do a job. To take it in context they are an all leather shoe for less than the price of a nasty trainer. The sort of thing that has vanished from the High Street.


Samuel Windsor are their more costly offering - but you are only looking at 40 quid for a goodyear welted shoe with a calf upper. I am not really looking for opinions on style. I would really like to know more about the companies and where the shoes are made.


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

Wow, according to the pop-up, you buy one pair @ 24.99 GBP and get a second pair, of your choice, for free! While I know nothing about the manufacture of the shoes in question, they certainly look OK and one can certainly not find fault with the low price. Have you tried them and, if so, are they comfortable?


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

eagle2250 said:


> Wow, according to the pop-up, you buy one pair @ 24.99 GBP and get a second pair, of your choice, for free! While I know nothing about the manufacture of the shoes in question, they certainly look OK and one can certainly not find fault with the low price. Have you tried them and, if so, are they comfortable?


I have tried the oxfords and brogues which are comfortable and polish up nicely. I have not tried the Samuel Windsor range.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

I have heard that the shoes are made in India. At that price they must be made somewhere where the labour costs are next to nothing! Amazing prices for sure but I would worry about the conditions under which they are made. I know some of us are more sensitive about that than others but that's where I am.


----------



## Trimmer (Nov 2, 2005)

Leather man said:


> I have heard that the shoes are made in India. At that price they must be made somewhere where the labour costs are next to nothing! Amazing prices for sure but I would worry about the conditions under which they are made. I know some of us are more sensitive about that than others but that's where I am.


Their website contains the interesting claim that Samuel Windsor shoes are "available direct at a price that rewards the craftsmen not the retailer."


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

Looking on the sole of a pair of oxfords I have not yet worn it says
'Designed in Italy. Styled for comfort'

There are no other markings on the shoe to indicate where it was made.
The box merely states 'Black.Box.9'

The stitching on the sole seems fairly widely spaced, but the pairs I have worn have been robust as well as comfortable.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Kingstonian said:


> Looking on the sole of a pair of oxfords I have not yet worn it says
> 'Designed in Italy. Styled for comfort'
> 
> There are no other markings on the shoe to indicate where it was made.
> ...


I am always suspicious of the intentions of companies that are happy to tell me where their products are " designed or styled" and even which region has " influenced" their product , but rather circumspect about where the product is actually made - it makes me think they have something to hide.

Their claim to "reward the craftsman not the retailer" may well be genuine - on the other hand it may just mean that the factory owner ( rather than the men and women at the benches) gets all the money and there is no further mark up because the "middle man" is cut out.

I suspect they are good enough basic shoes that will give good service for the price ( heck one year would be good for that price! - but I am sure they will last longer from what has been said already) however there is always a price to pay for products that seem to cheap to be true - and the price is not being borne by the consumer. Sorry to be a misery guts but there it is.


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

You are probably right about low cost labour.

Initially I had suspected a bankruptcy purchase, but they have been doing these particular shoes too long for that to be the case.

They used to have some great near wholecut styles with nice soft leather for £25 but they disappeared after last year's sales.

I suppose, as a conscience salve, you could argue that if the workers are in sweat shops at least they are making leather shoes. They could be just as badly off making trainers.


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

Here is more on Samuel Windsor and their legal battle with Charles Tyrwhitt :-



I assumed that Windsor shoes would be English made from the details given though they do not specify the manufacturer.

I note they also sell 7 fold ties and very expensive shirts which surely cannot compete with Jermyn Street.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Kingstonian said:


> Here is more on Samuel Windsor and their legal battle with Charles Tyrwhitt :-
> 
> I assumed that Windsor shoes would be English made from the details given though they do not specify the manufacturer.
> 
> I note they also sell 7 fold ties and very expensive shirts which surely cannot compete with Jermyn Street.


Samuel Windsor certainly are a conundrum. If they are as handmade as any Northampton-made shoe and using as good leather as they say then I am " gob-smacked"! When Loake need to resort to making their uppers ( I suspect only for ranges below 1880) in India, surely Clifford James must be making these shoes somewhere like that under worrysome conditions. But of course that is only conjecture - I doubt we will ever have the whole truth. It is a bit like the much nicer looking TM Lewin shoes - that are apparently made under licence by a Northampton firm in India - some say Cheaney. Until I found that out I couldn't work out how they sold their shoes so cheaply either.

Still it is hard to gain-say a goodyear welted leather shoe for between £49 and £99 - leather lined too!


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Loake 1880 line Burford:



Samual Windsor "Semi Brogue Boot":





Awfully similar (particularly the unusual medallion), don't you think?


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Mmm.........you may have a point there TKDKid:idea: But is that medallion so unusual? And isn't that a pretty standard brogue boot?


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Yes it's a standard brogue boot; it was more the medallion which made me think of Loake than anything else.

The medallion is unusual insofar as I've never come across it before (you've been collecting shoes longer than I have, does it look familiar?), so to see the exact same medallion again on a model from a different company just made me wonder if there's some sort of link.

It'd be quite amusing if it turns out than Samuel Windsor shoes are just rebranded lower-end Loakes, given that Loake also make the shoes for... Charles Tyrwhitt. :icon_smile:


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

TKDKid said:


> Yes it's a standard brogue boot; it was more the medallion which made me think of Loake than anything else.
> 
> The medallion is unusual insofar as I've never come across it before (you've been collecting shoes longer than I have, does it look familiar?), so to see the exact same medallion again on a model from a different company just made me wonder if there's some sort of link.
> 
> It'd be quite amusing if it turns out than Samuel Windsor shoes are just rebranded lower-end Loakes, given that Loake also make the shoes for... Charles Tyrwhitt. :icon_smile:


Well I do wonder if that is what CT are getting all steamed up about!!


----------



## Anthony Jordan (Apr 29, 2005)

I've seen the handmade welt on Clifford James shoes and it is quite distinctive (and rather ugly on the example that I own.) I'd say therefore that it is unlikely that Loake, who use the machine-made welt, are the manufacturers for Clifford James/SW as well. I would imagine that all of them, except the suede and possibly the anituque tan, are corrected-grain.

I've bought a couple of the ties as Christmas presents, one for my father and another for my grandfather. I took a look at them (of course!) before I wrapped them and they seemed nice enough, although not wildly exciting.


----------



## 15DollarMan (Dec 28, 2005)

Kingstonian said:


> Does anybody know much background information about these companies ?
> Clifford James is a mail order outfit with a retail shop off the A3 in Ripley Surrey. It sells cheap stuff with a target market of pensioners.
> However, it makes a very good offer of two pairs of all leather shoes for £25. They are a bit clumpy rather than sleek, but I can hardly get new soles on one pair of shoes for that money. I have the oxfords and brogues they polish up fine in black for a solid working shoe. The other styles are naff. They are not the finest shoes in the world but they do a job. To take it in context they are an all leather shoe for less than the price of a nasty trainer. The sort of thing that has vanished from the High Street.


From the Clifford-James checkout page.

"...Unfortunately, we are unable to deliver to the Channel or Scilly Islands and overseas."

I guess no $25 leather shoes for me (in USA).


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

If it is any consolation, the US will be cheaper for most purchases than the UK.

It is not called 'rip-off Britain' for no reason.


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

I can now report that Clifford James retail shops charge more than the internet business. Two pairs for £99 as opposed to £80.

The shops may not have every shoe in every size either. Check before you go if you have a long journey.

I presume the pricing is a result of the trading standards investigation. There never used to be a price difference between the shop and internet/mail order side of the business.

There is no substitute for seeing the merchandise up close. Their Chelsea boots are not very nice at all. Chukka boots and antique tan brogues were sound though. Monk shoes were not bad either.


----------



## Geoff Gander (Apr 4, 2007)

Although I doubt I'll ever buy anything from this line, does anyone have any photos of the antique tan or monk shoes that they'd be willing to share?

I suppose if I was in a bind, £25 (mailed via a friend) would be more than reasonable for a pair of beaters. They would be far more sound than most of the crap that you find on this side of the pond.

Geoff

PS - Happy New Year everyone!!

PPS - I scored a nice Merkur safety razor set (with stand, badger brush, and soap) for Xmas. Saint Nick was very kind, indeed! :icon_smile_big:


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

All shoes are shown on the site

Monk shoes


Antique tan


They are £40 each if you buy 2 - not £25.

The other shoes are the 2 for £25.


----------



## Kingstonian (Dec 23, 2007)

Further to the Loake connection, I have a pair of dark brown shoes, from a range Clifford James no longer offer, that look exactly like a Loake Norwich.


----------



## Geoff Gander (Apr 4, 2007)

Thanks for the link. Yikes, that pair of monks looks to be made out of plastic! It's so shiny it hurts my eyes! :icon_smile_wink:

But seriously, I find that amateur photos present a more accurate picture of what the shoes really look like - that's what I was getting at. Compare the stock photo of any AE with home photos, and you'll see that the difference is literally night and day.

Geoff


----------



## chrstc (Jun 11, 2007)

*They are (or were) made in India*



Leather man said:


> Samuel Windsor certainly are a conundrum. If they are as handmade as any Northampton-made shoe and using as good leather as they say then I am " gob-smacked"! When Loake need to resort to making their uppers ( I suspect only for ranges below 1880) in India, surely Clifford James must be making these shoes somewhere like that under worrysome conditions. But of course that is only conjecture - I doubt we will ever have the whole truth. It is a bit like the much nicer looking TM Lewin shoes - that are apparently made under licence by a Northampton firm in India - some say Cheaney. Until I found that out I couldn't work out how they sold their shoes so cheaply either.
> 
> Still it is hard to gain-say a goodyear welted leather shoe for between £49 and £99 - leather lined too!


Hi,
I contacted the company about these shoes about 6 months ago after having received the full catalogue with one of the newspapers that I read. I was told that the shoes are indeed made in India although that may have changed by now I suppose.

Hope this helps a little,
Chris.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

chrstc said:


> Hi,
> I contacted the company about these shoes about 6 months ago after having received the full catalogue with one of the newspapers that I read. I was told that the shoes are indeed made in India although that may have changed by now I suppose.
> 
> Hope this helps a little,
> Chris.


Thanks for posting - that's interesting info.


----------



## VincentC (May 23, 2008)

Ive just ordered a pair of tan chukkas, with an extra pair thrown in for £70. They said they are out of stock of the black pair and they will deliver in a months time. I hope this company dont give me too many problems.

But they look OK on the website.


----------



## VincentC (May 23, 2008)

Samuel Windsor boots arrived today. Ther are definately imperfections in the boot, but for £38 i would buy from them again.
There were scuffs in the leather and a few other imperfection. But you can tell Samuel make an effort in trying to buy you into the thinking you are buying a elegant name and brand and you kind of get sucked in.
But because the attention to detail isnt as high as other makers like loakes etc they are cheaper. The shoe trees were awful btw.

I have heard some bad things about this company. But for the price i would stick with this company and i am happy with my first purchase, but this is only after one day. I could change my mind in the near future. I was in the rain today and i think the boot was letting in a bit of water if im not mistaken. I also hope they dont take too long to deliver the extra black pair i have requested. But they say they are out of stock even though it dont mention it on their website.
I hope they dont give me any problems, like charging me again, or forgetting to actually deliver them when they are supposed to do.


----------



## Portly_polar_bear (Oct 15, 2008)

I ordered a pair of Oxfords and a pair of Chukka boots on their two for £60 deal over a year ago. I too got the letter saying they were out of stock and continued to receive this letter every two weeks for a couple of months. Eventually they arrived but were too big - you can return shoes for any reason and for free so I sent them back for a smaller size.

A year later the replacement pairs arrived (admittedly this was largely my tardiness in chasing up the missing shoes) but one of the Oxfords was terribly built. It seemed they'd made a mistake with the heel so had just glued in an extra insole or something, the result being I couldn't get my foot into the shoe. Neither pair were good quality - I think you're getting what you pay for, that is to say they're £30 shoes, not £100 as they claim.

I ended up buying a pair of Loakes which are worlds better. But then they're three times the price, and if I was willing to spend £300 then they'd be worlds better than my Loakes. You really do get what you pay for.


----------



## Hector Freemantle (Aug 2, 2008)

VictorC said:


> I was in the rain today and i think the boot was letting in a bit of water if im not mistaken.


The test for 'letting in water is whether of not your feet got wet, Victor. If that happened you will be right. You could confirm this by standing in a bucket of water (or a river or lake or the sea or something equally WET) for a few hours and verify if the boots are 'leaky' not.

BTW What's the problem with the shoe trees?


----------



## VincentC (May 23, 2008)

Hector Freemantle said:


> The test for 'letting in water is whether of not your feet got wet, Victor. If that happened you will be right. You could confirm this by standing in a bucket of water (or a river or lake or the sea or something equally WET) for a few hours and verify if the boots are 'leaky' not.
> 
> BTW What's the problem with the shoe trees?


It was only raining very lightly, and i felt my toes a bit wet. But that might be my sweaty feet. I was only in the rain for a short period. If it was the rain that got in, the quality of the samuel windsor are awful. I think the rain did get in after only about 3 minutes walking on a wet pavement rather than it raining. But am trying to kid myself it wasnt the rain.

The shoe trees are the springy type and the plastic front bit is so small i cant imagine it keeping the shape of the shoe at all.


----------



## Hector Freemantle (Aug 2, 2008)

Sounds as if you need to buy wooden shoe trees to absorb the sweat. Barring that you should at least stuff them with newspaper to dry them out. Personally, I do not use shoe trees as I have failed to buy any in my locality.
As a substitute, I use a toilet roll insert cut open and shaped slightly stuffed with tissue to maintain the shape of the shoes. It seems to work very well.


----------



## VincentC (May 23, 2008)

Hector Freemantle said:


> Sounds as if you need to buy wooden shoe trees to absorb the sweat. Barring that you should at least stuff them with newspaper to dry them out. Personally, I do not use shoe trees as I have failed to buy any in my locality.
> As a substitute, I use a toilet roll insert cut open and shaped slightly stuffed with tissue to maintain the shape of the shoes. It seems to work very well.


IVe been thinking of buying a pair of wooden shoes trees as ive got quite a few pair of shoes. 
But these new pairs of samuel windsor should never allowed rain in anyway. They advertize as really good shoes but they dont deliver. Its one thing claiming your good, but the word will soon get out that your not so good and you wont fool anyone. But they claim theyve been around since 1890. Hard to believe really. But saying that they are cheap. But even cheap shoes dont let in the rain.


----------



## Hector Freemantle (Aug 2, 2008)

VictorC said:


> But saying that [Samuel Windsor]are cheap. But even cheap shoes dont let in the rain.


Perhaps you are meant to wear two pairs at one time and that's why they offer a free pair. I suppose they might not leak then. The second pair could act like an overshoe.


----------

