# Your opinion on Church's



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

Gentlemen,

in Vienna a couple of weeks ago I could not resist and I bought a pair of those:



I really like them a lot. They are classic, but in a way also a bit of a fashion statement. Qualitywise, it's difficult, but I think they are well made and durable such as all the competition (Alden, C&J,...)

What is your opinion and experience with Church's?
Since Prada took over, some problems (imagewise) seemed to be on the agenda. 

Yesterday, I just got a pair of Brisbane:


They did not arrive yet, but I am really looking forward.

My shoe rack until recently was mainly equipped with Alden, AE, Dinkelacker, Reiter MackJames, Tods and others. Church's in my view stand out because of an increased elegance (especially compared to Dinkelacker which are a bit bulky). 

This one here is a rather elegant Dinkelacker 

I got it about 5yrs ago. Outstanding quality. 

This one here I bought around christmas:

Bulky seems to describe it. Imagine them in black...


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

I for one am very happy with Church's. A lot of people on this board find them overpriced and prefer Crocket & Jones. 
I'd like to get some Dinkelackers actually, but I don't know of anyone who stocks them in France.


----------



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

Depending on your location in France, it might make sense to hop over the border and get them in Germany.

They are worth every penny, completely handmade. Not goodyear, but handwelted! Outstanding. You have to like the style, but it's really an almost perfect shoe.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

mannaman said:


> Depending on your location in France, it might make sense to hop over the border and get them in Germany.
> .


This is probably what I will do in the end!


----------



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

I read all press releases on their website and it looks like they will expand into other European and American markets soon. 

In 2004, the CEO of Porsche and some other guys bought the company from the owner, who retired and could not talk his kids into the shoe business. 
They keep it small and simple, they are not trying to squeeze everything out of that firm. Wiedeking says he was a fan of Dinkelackers since his university days and he wants to keep it the way it was. I like the idea...


----------



## bengal-stripe (May 10, 2003)

Rich said:


> I'd like to get some Dinkelackers actually, but I don't know of anyone who stocks them in France.


Two years ago, I saw a smallish selection of Dinkelacker shoes at Donegan in Paris. They might have stopped carrying the line. Checking Dinkelacker's web-site,
I cannot find any French stockists.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

Thanks B-S. Are you by any chance a customer of Donegan's? If so I'd very much like to know what you think of them.


----------



## Brideshead (Jan 11, 2006)

*Getting back to the original subject......*

...mannaman, you obviously rather like brogues! What are the first pair pictured?

My opinion on Church's is that they are often done a disservice on these boards. Having had pre and post-Prada Church's shoes I have not noted any appreciable down-turn in quality. In fact my most recent Diplomats (2006) are fully leather lined whereas the ones they replaced (1999) were part fabric lined.










I currently have two other pairs of Church's shoes - the svelte Lingfield black plain toecap Oxford (108 last) and the Glen dark brown ankle boot, very much in the Prada style.

I also have four pairs of their slippers. I have recently had to return a two month old pair of Ajax slippers because the leather was starting to split, but they were exchanged immedately without fuss.


----------



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

The first one is called Gunthorpe and is a 108 last. It has a very tiny brogue pattern with very small holes punched into the leather.
This picture is a bit larger:



I like them a lot, they might look a bit pradaish, but their overall apperance is very elegant.

I cannot see anything wrong with Church's. The quality return for the marginal euro spend in this price range is very small. 

A cheap payless leather shoe for $50 and an AE for $200, the increase of quality is enormous. But between Alden and EG? It's both good year welted. Just a matter of personal taste and the urgent willingness to own a pair of legendary Greens. 

Same with other brands.


----------



## Brideshead (Jan 11, 2006)

I love the 108 last and will certainly be getting another pair soon. I have seen the Gunthorpe and while at first I thought it too 'fashion forward' your pictures have made me see it in a new light.


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

I've got the Gunthorpe: I find it a tad eye-catching - more a going-out shoe than a business shoe, but it's young and elegant.


----------



## rkipperman (Mar 19, 2006)

They are all very nice, but how much do they cost??? Are shoes of such quality and beauty available at cheaper prices?


----------



## Zubberah (Sep 29, 2003)

Nice shoes...I'd happily buy any of those pictured. I have a few pairs of Church's too...top shoes and I reckon they are dealt with harshly on this BB. But they do ruin your feet when new whilst breaking them in! But one must suffer ...


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

mannaman said:


> I like them a lot, they might look a bit pradaish, but their overall apperance is very elegant.


Is your mind playing tricks on you? I don't see anything about those shoes that makes them 'pradaish'.

I've never really found Church's appealing. They are much more expensive than Aldens, but not necessarily any better looking to me. If I'm going to spend more, I want shapelier shoe.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Heavy...stiff...good British shoes. Better than Allen Edmonds, about the same as Alden. The thing that gets me is their "ladies" shoes. Just because you make it shaped to a lady's foot doesn't mean a wintip is suddenly a lady's shoe.


----------



## smr (Apr 24, 2005)

mafoofan said:


> I've never really found Church's appealing. They are much more expensive than Aldens, but not necessarily any better looking to me. If I'm going to spend more, I want shapelier shoe.


I suppose it depends on the model, but for me, back in the 90's, I found Church's shoes somewhat more elegant (sleeker) looking than Alden or AE shoes, both of which I already owned, so I bought quite a few pairs of Church's at their NYC and Chicago stores where Church's shoes were frequently on sale, and especially at their then outlet store in NJ where factory seconds could be had for $135. While I still like Church's quite a bit, their prices have just gotten too high.


----------



## rkipperman (Mar 19, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> Heavy...stiff...good British shoes. Better than Allen Edmonds, about the same as Alden. The thing that gets me is their "ladies" shoes. Just because you make it shaped to a lady's foot doesn't mean a wintip is suddenly a lady's shoe.


Is it the construction or the quality of the leather that exceeds Allen Edmonds?


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

rkipperman said:


> Is it the construction or the quality of the leather that exceeds Allen Edmonds?


Both.

However, I will say this: they don't exceed AE by the amount of the price gap. The prices of Church's are EXTREMELY high for what they are because of the current US-UK Pound relationship. Just a few years ago, they cost up to $450 (with most being about $400). Now they cost $550 plus.


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

It seems that pre-1990s, Church's were THE English shoe to have for American men. From the mention in the infamous Official Preppy Handbook to manufacturing the BrooksEnglish offerings, it seems many of a certain generation still regard them as THE shoe. This is why I find it so odd that Church's shoes have a poor reputation amongst AAAC members. Granted Church's has produced a few sub-par offerings in the past 5 years, but a pair of classic Chetwynds (full brogue oxfords), Diplomats (semi-brogue oxfords), or Consuls (cap-toe oxfords) in full-grain leather are just as elegant as they always were (and these exact models on these lasts have been produced for decades).

Church's "Custom Grade" line quality seems to me to be equal to or slightly above C&J Benchgrade, yet prices are between C&J Benchgrade and C&J Handgrade. Does this evaluation of quality sound about right?


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

Just don't get 'Binder' calf, which is corrected grain.

Consul:
https://www.herringshoes.co.uk/prod...D=6&shoeID=1&selectedSizeID=0&selectedFitID=0

Diplomat:
https://www.herringshoes.co.uk/prod...=6&shoeID=28&selectedSizeID=0&selectedFitID=0

Chetwynd:
https://www.herringshoes.co.uk/prod...=6&shoeID=18&selectedSizeID=0&selectedFitID=0

I also love the wider laces which Church's still uses on its shoes. Such laces were de rigeur years ago, but now it seems that only Church's still uses them.

Herring Shoes sells Church's seconds online at discounted prices -- this Consul, for example, is GBP 165 including VAT.
https://www.herringshoes.co.uk/prod...0&selectedSizeID=12&selectedFitID=2&seconds=1


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

qwerty said:


> This is why I find it so odd that Church's shoes have a poor reputation amongst AAAC members.


The Gentleman's Guide To Grooming and Style (written by a German mainly focused on English style, though some coverage of American and Italian in 1999) says this: "For welted shoes the following makers are appropriate: Church's, Allen-Edmonds, Alden, Tricker's, Foster & Son, Edward Green, John Lobb Paris, Ludwig Reiter, Crockett & Jones, Cheaney, Lotusse....The order in which they are given is not arbitrary, but represents a sort of rating. Crockett & Jones marks the start of the upper middle rank."

Now, I disagree with the ranking of Church's below AE, but I do think they are somewhere in the bottom of the list of good shoes (btw, the author does note that there are good brands that he does not mention). I'm not quite sure why Cheaney is so high...actually, I never figured out what they meant because there doesn't seem to be any order to the shoes.


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

C&J ahead of EG and JLP? What?


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

qwerty said:


> C&J ahead of EG and JLP? What?


Note the edit to my post. I think perhaps something in the order was screwed up in translation. The funniest thing is that it then goes on to do a spread about John Lobb (just as it does about Hermes, Brioni, and I forget which British suitmaker) as a way of saying "here's how the best do it." If only I could find a German version of the book.


----------



## Mike147 (Jan 15, 2006)

*Church's Madison Avenue Store*

I stopped into the store a few months ago and found the staff to be rude and aloof. In addition, the salesperson I spoke with didn't seem to know very much about their shoes. I walked out without trying anything on.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Mike147 said:


> I stopped into the store a few months ago and found the staff to be rude and aloof. In addition, the salesperson I spoke with didn't seem to know very much about their shoes. I walked out without trying anything on.


I didn't find them rude, but I did find them aloof. Walk into the DC Church's and you will find yourself some old school shoe salesmen who actually know their product.


----------



## kbuzz (Apr 2, 2005)

*aloof in nyc*



marlinspike said:


> I didn't find them rude, but I did find them aloof. Walk into the DC Church's and you will find yourself some old school shoe salesmen who actually know their product.


I would love to see the Gunthorpe in person but i cant stand the now ubiquitious aloof nyc retail expereince. IT's affected BS, particularly in this day and age. I don't get it. Ignore it

Why is it the staff at BG or even the polo mansion which serves some of the highest earning income buyers around are not aloof and quite helpful at all levels.

Lately when it happens and if i have time, (or have my young twins with me) i feel like deliberately going up to anyone with that attitude and make them run around the store for me!!!!! If the salesperson is particuarly rude ask them to help while telling them you run a hedge fund. They jump much higher and move quicker. Then leave it up to your ethics to buy or just leave n laugh.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

kbuzz said:


> I would love to see the Gunthorpe in person but i cant stand the now ubiquitious aloof nyc retail expereince. IT's affected BS, particularly in this day and age. I don't get it. Ignore it
> 
> Why is it the staff at BG or even the polo mansion which serves some of the highest earning income buyers around are not aloof and quite helpful at all levels.
> 
> Lately when it happens and if i have time, (or have my young twins with me) i feel like deliberately going up to anyone with that attitude and make them run around the store for me!!!!! If the salesperson is particuarly rude ask them to help while telling them you run a hedge fund. They jump much higher and move quicker. Then leave it up to your ethics to buy or just leave n laugh.


Well, I think that's just NYC. Something I've found is that just about everything in NYC, including the "best" stores, have the worst service, I don't know what's wrong with that city. In that city, BG is definitley the exception, not the rule, IMO.


----------



## kbuzz (Apr 2, 2005)

*aloof*

Imho its often a deliberate sales strategy. Kind of like reverse psych. The affected aloofness is some kind of signal to ignorant "fresh monied" folks and thier wives, that these are "the" places they should now shop. Then when you act equally aloof, and have no qualms with obnoxious showings to the staff that you can now afford to shop in their establishment, and then staff then serves you well. It is kind of counter intuative, but works quite more often then one would think.

This stratagy probably only works in some unique locales like nyc, particularly where some stores, and their staff can make their nut with obesquious service to one or two customers who, riding the finance market drop tens of thousands at a one time. This then feeds the stores "aloofness" by prejudging most other customers as hoi poloi

As a further example to my point above, I have also recieved outstanding mindblowing service at loro piania on even non mortage blowing purchases. Yet another example of why the aloof sales stratagy is BS. PS is a prime example where both methods of sales can be utilized in the same store by different departments or salesman. Drop in some time and see it in action.

The similar game is also played in NYC resturants.....heck im a life long nyer and it still is ridiculous to me.


----------



## qwerty (Jun 24, 2005)

NYC Church's -- visited last in 2004. I do not remember them being aloof, but they were certainly CLUELESS.

DC Church's, last I was there (2003), had a sales team not-too-common for today's MTV world. The DC salesman I worked with knew the product very well, was very courteous, and seemed to enjoy his job. It was a breath of fresh air.


----------



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

mafoofan said:


> Is your mind playing tricks on you? I don't see anything about those shoes that makes them 'pradaish'.
> 
> I've never really found Church's appealing. They are much more expensive than Aldens, but not necessarily any better looking to me. If I'm going to spend more, I want shapelier shoe.


If you see this shoe in natura, you will understand what I mean. It is more fashion forward than pre Prada shoes. But it is still quite elegant.

In my view, the Gunthorpe is suitable for going out but also for the boardroom.

The difference between the G and other full broque oxfords is, that is has a thinner sole, slightly more pointed front and very small brogue pattern.

The Brisbane is a bit more heavy and fits the classic description of a broque.

I got the latter from herringshoes.co.uk, it's a sale item. The first one (G) was rather expensive, no discount. But it was a nice and very successful trip to Vienna, I wanted to reward myself. Some people go to a stripclub, some to a nice restaurant, I buy shoes. Man, I am too feminine. I should start playing football again...


----------



## Brideshead (Jan 11, 2006)

marlinspike said:


> Note the edit to my post. I think perhaps something in the order was screwed up in translation. The funniest thing is that it then goes on to do a spread about John Lobb (just as it does about Hermes, Brioni, and I forget which British suitmaker) as a way of saying "here's how the best do it." If only I could find a German version of the book.


I believe the book you refer to is called 'Gentleman - A Timeless Fashion' in its 2004 guise which is the version I have. By Bernhard Roetzel.

I think he is suggesting that the company named first i.e. Church's is top of the list and not bottom. Even so the ranking seems arbitrary and I believe Roetzel has since accepted that it could do with reviewing.

In this country there are still many men who aspire to Church's shoes. At full retail they do seem a little over priced and this is perhaps part of the trick. Church's position their products in the marketplace just a little above their true position....Even so I am one of those men and I look forward to my next purchase!


----------



## Trommel (Sep 27, 2006)

Blair's eighteen-year-old "lucky" brogues are Church's Chetwynd - he wore them at every single PMQ. 

Apparently he even tried to make Blunkett buy some. He can't do much walking - they have only been re-soled once in that time ...


----------



## fritzl (Jun 5, 2006)

mannaman said:


> The first one (G) was rather expensive, no discount. But it was a nice and very successful trip to Vienna, I wanted to reward myself. Some people go to a stripclub, some to a nice restaurant, I buy shoes. Man, I am too feminine. I should start playing football again...


No discount? I thought you bought them at Schuhmanns at a good price.

Gaggl in the Mariahilferstrasse,

Phone: +43 1 5864364

has always some Church's in their windows. Price tag € 400,- Ask for discounts. It's a institution. One of the old fashioned men's shops in Vienna.

PS: Some people go to a stripclub, to a nice restaurant and buy shoes. You - too feminine? Sort of boring


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Thanks for the question Mannaman. As others on this thread will know I am a fan of Church's shoes and agree with others who have said Church's get an unfairly bad press on this and other fora. A friend of mine (in the trade) who goes to the Church's factory from time to time said they had a pair of C&Js cut in half at Church's to have a look at what goes into C&Js. He said less goes into the construction of a C&J shoe. This makes them rather more forgiving on the feet when new, but less durable in the long run. It also explains why their "benchgrade" shoes are a little cheaper than Church's - more work more cost! It seems to be as simple as that!

I love the Gunthorpe you've posted and some other 108 last shoes, and I love the traditional styles too. As someone who is also and Edward Green fan I still think Church's are great shoes, great quality lovely styles and huge variety. Only sorry they cost soooooooooo much in the States - I can see this from looking at US site and comparing them to UK sites even with the exchange rate there seems to be some mark up going on. 

For service, I have found the factory shop ( can call them) or Herrings Shoes give such wonderful service ( and you can return anything that doesn't fit - costs I know) that I wouldn't bother going into a store with snooty staff!

Happy shopping!


----------



## des merrion (Oct 1, 2006)

A superb shoe but much overlooked, my own choice of shoe, for what that's worth, is Blakes.

The leather used by Church's is just MARGINALLY softer/better than Blakes, but, Blakes are 1/2 the price.

I have worn Blakes for over 25 years now.

www.desmerrionbespoketailor.com


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

*Church's London shops*

Whilst I have posted my admiration for the product I was speaking to someone who works for Church's this month whose anonimity I will protect who told me that when they went to London to the Church's shops they were ignored and when they asked for service were treated like dirt! Even though they were wearing Church's shoes it felt like they didn't look rich enough to warrant attention! When they got back to work they phoned the shops concerned and complained of the treatment they got. On discovering the person concerned works for Church's the shop managers were mortified - but "too late was the cry". An ordinary customer would never return!

So, it seems stick to buying Church's shoes from the web sites like Style Drops , Herrings or Soleys or contact the factory shop in Northampton - they are very friendly and helpful IME. It is a pity because it is lovely to be able to browse lots of styles in a shop but then if they insist on shooting themselves in the foot what else can one do? My own experience mirrors this but I find the staff in the EG shop very friendly and helpful.

LM


----------



## ccffm1 (Jul 31, 2005)

des merrion said:


> A superb shoe but much overlooked, my own choice of shoe, for what that's worth, is Blakes.
> 
> The leather used by Church's is just MARGINALLY softer/better than Blakes, but, Blakes are 1/2 the price.
> 
> ...


I´ve never heard of them. Do they have a website?


----------



## dopey (Jan 17, 2005)

qwerty said:


> . . .Granted Church's has produced a few sub-par offerings in the past 5 years, but a pair of classic Chetwynds (full brogue oxfords), Diplomats (semi-brogue oxfords), or Consuls (cap-toe oxfords) in full-grain leather are just as elegant as they always were (and these exact models on these lasts have been produced for decades). . .


I don't think this is true. Church's changed the lasts on these models after the Prada purchase. They used to be made on the *73 last (973 or 873 or just 73, I forget). Before I had foot problems, these were my favorite shoes and I loved the fit of the old last and the fact that it was available in the narrow width I needed. I thought the quality was great, although I did wear through the linen quarter linings that were on most models faster than I did with the leather linings that were on some of the others. Still, I had pairs that made it through a couple of resolings. I used to buy them in every style I could that was made on that last in my width and had the Chetwynd in black, brown and brown Cape Buck as well as the Diplomat and the Consul model.

Herring shoes in the UK does special runs of these shoes on the old lasts, but note the different names for their models. The standard offerings from Church's in the Chetwynd, Diplomat, Consul, etc. use different lasts.


----------



## Trimmer (Nov 2, 2005)

If you do a web search for 'Prada' and 'Church's' you will find virtually nothing about shoes and a lot about 'brands'. 

Prada is a brand. People (not people like us) buy brands because they want to associate themselves, and be associated with, the 'life style' images that these brands (allegedly) represent. That means they pay a premium.

Prada is proud to have 'relaunched' Church's. Now they can add £100 or so to the price of every pair because customers are buying 'into' a luxury life style as well as buying a pair of shoes.

Obviously the shoes have to be of a certain quality to fulfil expectations - and Church's shoes are good - but you are paying for more than the leather.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Hey Trimmer be fair! Church's shoes have not gone up by anything like £100 since Prada took them over - I should know I have bought far too many before and after the take over!! Church's have put up their prices by £20 across the range since July 2007 which according to the factory shop is the highest rise they have ever seen ( in one go) - I asked the manager why and she told me that there is a crisis in the leather market - due to cattle being raise on growth hormones - this has been with us for a number of years but apparently it is just getting harder and harder to source excellent quality hides. Lets see if the other makers follow suit. I doubt Loake will because they already don't use such good leather and find ways to hide the flaws ( fair enough for the price - no criticism) but lets see what C&J, Lobb and EG do!

LM


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

To Dopey - you might be interested to know that Church have introduced a 173 last - and from October all shoes now made on the 100 last will be made on this last. I have a few pairs on this last already and the toe shape is the same as the 73 last asa is the fit along the shoe but the instep is like that of the 100 last - which is a little deeper than the 73 last. The new last is a brillant fit for my feet and I appreciate the return of the more elegant 73 last toe shape :icon_smile: 

LM


----------



## dopey (Jan 17, 2005)

Leather man said:


> To Dopey - you might be interested to know that Church have introduced a 173 last - and from October all shoes now made on the 100 last will be made on this last. I have a few pairs on this last already and the toe shape is the same as the 73 last asa is the fit along the shoe but the instep is like that of the 100 last - which is a little deeper than the 73 last. The new last is a brillant fit for my feet and I appreciate the return of the more elegant 73 last toe shape :icon_smile:
> 
> LM


Thanks, but I am on to other things as I require orthotic corrections. I loved the old last because the fit was great but things have changed at my end. I did think the old 73 shape was the perfect look.


----------



## Trimmer (Nov 2, 2005)

Leather man said:


> Hey Trimmer be fair! Church's shoes have not gone up by anything like £100 since Prada took them over - I should know I have bought far too many before and after the take over!! Church's have put up their prices by £20 across the range since July 2007 which according to the factory shop is the highest rise they have ever seen ( in one go) -
> 
> LM


What I meant was that you could probably deduct a £100 or so from Chuch's shop prices to make an accurate comparison with other 'brands'. The Royal collection (which I think you told me about) goes for around £390 which is £50-60 more than C and J handgrade and I do not think they come up to the standards of the latter. They are good shoes. I would place them between C and J bench and handgrades, so I'd 'rate' them at about £290.

My main point though was that you are paying a lot for the name with Church's. Most people have never heard of Crockett and Jones so they can't charge much of a premium.


----------



## Tonyp (May 8, 2007)

Church's definetly makes a good shoe especially if you like a Brogue or a Plain Balmoral. I saw them in Saks in San Francisco for Around $600.00 Frankly, I would pay more for an EG not only because the quality IMO is better but also the Styling is better.

I just don't find Church's to be that appealing of a shoe. Having said that, I see many men dressed beautifully wearing what I call a very conservative English Benchman shoe Like a Church's Alden or AE type.

I like to spark it up a bit with a JLP, EG, Stefan Obi, Bontoni etc....


----------



## fritzl (Jun 5, 2006)

Tonyp said:


> I like to spark it up a bit with a JLP, EG, Stefan Obi, Bontoni etc....


As long as you are not ready for the bespoke route, you do not spark it anywhere.


----------



## marlinspike (Jun 4, 2007)

Brideshead said:


> I believe the book you refer to is called 'Gentleman - A Timeless Fashion' in its 2004 guise which is the version I have. By Bernhard Roetzel.
> 
> I think he is suggesting that the company named first i.e. Church's is top of the list and not bottom. Even so the ranking seems arbitrary and I believe Roetzel has since accepted that it could do with reviewing.
> 
> In this country there are still many men who aspire to Church's shoes. At full retail they do seem a little over priced and this is perhaps part of the trick. Church's position their products in the marketplace just a little above their true position....Even so I am one of those men and I look forward to my next purchase!


No, it is Roetzel, but it's a different book. However, Church's full retail wasn't all that high until the pound:dollar value got so out of hand.


----------



## mannaman (Aug 26, 2005)

fritzl said:


> No discount? I thought you bought them at Schuhmanns at a good price.
> 
> Gaggl in the Mariahilferstrasse,
> 
> ...


Well, no discount. I think the tag was 460 Euro and I did not ask for a discount. I am too shy.

But I had a close to stripclub experience in a very nice and old fashioned perfumery (the one next to Knize)

But the story only works in German.
I was looking for this and that and after purchasing several items, I asked the very good looking lady for some small bottles and things that will take all my after shave, hair gel and so on, so that I can take them onboard an airplane. Safety regulations and stuff, you know it...

So she came back with a giant box of several bottles, tubes and all that, all refillable, all below 100ml and she explained every item very precisely. I took some things and said "well, it is really very nice of you to take such good care of your customers"

her response was "Ich zeige Ihnen gerne alle meine Döschen."
("I really like to show you all my little jars")

To understand that, you have to be aware of the fact that "döschen", which is the German word for little jar / little bottle is also a synonym for private parts. I was speechless.


----------



## fritzl (Jun 5, 2006)

mannaman said:


> But the story only works in German.
> 
> I was looking for this and that and after purchasing several items...
> 
> ...


Das stimmt.

Ich vermute einmal stark, dass sich die Dame an dem "deutschen" Akzent orientiert hat. Ansonsten bezweifle ich, dass sie das Wort "Döschen" verwenden würde. Es heisst zwar hier auch Dos'n, aber ja. Situationskomik steckt dennoch in diesem Erlebnis.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Trimmer said:


> What I meant was that you could probably deduct a £100 or so from Chuch's shop prices to make an accurate comparison with other 'brands'. The Royal collection (which I think you told me about) goes for around £390 which is £50-60 more than C and J handgrade and I do not think they come up to the standards of the latter. They are good shoes. I would place them between C and J bench and handgrades, so I'd 'rate' them at about £290.
> 
> My main point though was that you are paying a lot for the name with Church's. Most people have never heard of Crockett and Jones so they can't charge much of a premium.


I have given your reply a lot of thought Trimmer. I still don't agree entirely with what you are saying. I think on balance it is true that one is paying a bit extra for the name, but only about £20 or so. My C&J handgrades cost me £360, though I know it depends on the style. Yet most commonly they cost £350. When you wrote your reply Church's Royals cost £370 not £390 - though they do cost £390 now! Let us see if C&J put up their prices in the New Year. So the price difference between C&J and Church's top line of shoes is about £30 - £40. I own both as well as C&J benchgrade and Church's normal grade ( for want of a better word) shoes. My sincere opinion is this: Church's standard shoes are built to a better standard than C&J standard grade - leather quality being about the same. C&J Handgrade are slightly more refined than Church's Royals, because they have chanelled soles, but both use Oak bark tanned sole leather. For that reason alone one cannot price the Church's Royals at £290 - a mere £20 - £30 more than C&J benchgrade. Channeled soles aside, in some aspects the finish on the Church's Royals is more refined than that of the C&J Handgrade - heel counter and sole edge for example. The leather is slightly softer on the C&J, the Church's has that more robust English feel to it which I love - but the smoothness of the grain is superb on both. Let us remember that channeled soles are a nice touch and a sign of craftsmanship but have no effect on the life expectancy of the sole unit. 
The leather on the Church's Royals is noticeably better than their standard range and noticeably better than C&J standard range - that plus the oak bark tanned soles puts their true value well above £290 - remember C&J charge £330 for their cheapest Handgrade shoe - a loafer and £350 - 360 for the rest of their range - I suspect Church's price increase simply predates one from C&J by 6 months.

Where Church's do let themselves down and badly I think is in not advertising their full range of Royals - it seems they want to get us into their London shops. I found out on a factory shop visit that Herrings offerings - which to be fair to Adrian are all that is in Church's catalogue are only half the range! They also make two double strap monk shoes - one with a brogued toe and a boot ( elasticated side style - Chelsea boot) and they use other leathers too - I have ordered one ( Charles) in a beautiful "Chestnut Caviar" leather - it is a small grain finish and the colour simply glows (in a lovely rich and deep chestnut sort of way)- and I ordered the brogued toe cap double strap monk ( the other is plain). Even the lady in the factory shop didn't know if they do other styles but thought they did! She told me it is their rep who tells the shops all the available styles. At least C&J put them all in their catalogue!

Well, I have said my piece:icon_smile: Justice is served and now to peruse the Edward Green catalogue - oh boy! Such wonderful shoes - well they should be at £100 a pair more than Church's top range and £ 175 a pair more for MTO:icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

Leather man said:


> the Church's has that more robust English feel to it which I love - :


I feel the same way: they feel like "real shoes" - yet this is one feature of Church's shoes generally that many people don't like (robustness being equated with stodginess, I suppose). One English lady recently told me Church's shoes were "po-ey" - I didn't know the expression - can you apply it to things other than shoes - to people, for instance?


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

It is nice Rich to have someone who understands and agrees with my point of view on Church's shoes on AAAC:icon_smile: 

I don't know how this lady pronounced "po-ey" - was is "poo-ey" or "poh-ey" - it matters because one means just horrible, rubbish and the other means stodgy, old fashioned, lacking a sense of fun! I have never heard the second one applied to anything other than people - but it would make more sense than the first I think - given that some people see Church's as stodgy as you say Rich. However I don't think they can have seen the 002 last, the 108 last or the 173 last and the all new 131 last:icon_smile_wink: 

Thanks for your support Rich

LM


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

Leather man said:


> stodgy, old fashioned, lacking a sense of fun!
> 
> LM


I think that's what she meant! And of course I agree about the lasts (I don't think I've seen the 131...).


----------



## Trimmer (Nov 2, 2005)

Leather man said:


> When you wrote your reply Church's Royals cost £370 not £390 - though they do cost £390 now! Let us see if C&J put up their prices in the New Year.


I don't think I was making this up or just (accurately) guessing their next price hike! In your own post of March 12 you say they are £375.
https://askandyaboutclothes.com/community/showthread.php?t=66255&highlight=church+royal



Leather man said:


> My sincere opinion is this: Church's standard shoes are built to a better standard than C&J standard grade - leather quality being about the same.


I wouldn't disagree with this. They certainly more solid. It is just that it shows ("the more robust English look")! 



Leather man said:


> C&J Handgrade are slightly more refined than Church's Royals . . . The leather is slightly softer on the C&J, the Church's has that more robust English feel to it which I love - but the smoothness of the grain is superb on both.


I would just want to change your 'slightly' into 'distinctly'. 

Shalom.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Thanks Trimmer for you reply and shalom to you as well:icon_smile: My thought is we are discussing shoes here not a life and death matter - oh gosh did I just say that on AAAC!! Well, OK it is a subject dear to our hearts then:icon_smile_big: 


It seems to me that much of these differences of opinon are just that. I would not accept the change from "slightly" to "distinctly" but fully accept your view is as valid as mine. My grounds are that the only real greater refinement on the Handgrades is the channeled sole as I stated before but in other ways they seem to me to be a little less refined. Another problem I have with the Handgrades is that the embossed label inside the shoes digs into the bottom of my foot - most uncomfortable! 

Nevertheless I think we have some agreement having read your reply and it is good to find common ground:icon_smile: 

Sorry about the misquote on the price - though there is still one website advertising the Royals at £370 - Soleys of Liverpool - so I have not quite fallen out of my tree yet:icon_smile_big: 

With all good wishes

LM


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Just one other point in Church's favour:icon_smile_big: When folks complain about the modest price difference between C&J and Church's they always seem to forget that variety costs a lot of money for the manufacturer. C&J fall down in my book because they offer only one, yes one, width fitting on most ( though not all) of their range including Handgrade. So if one is not an english "E" fit, and I am not then it is tough - C&J is not for you - Weymouth fit me because it is a whole cut. Church's offer two, yes two width fittings on ALL their range and on a few shoes THREE width fittings. Moreover C&J offer only one sometimes two choices of colour on each model of shoe - Church's offer always three but mostly five or six colours including suede on ALL their models. 

That alone is enough to explain the price difference between Church's and C&J.

LM


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Leather man said:


> My C&J handgrades cost me £360, though I know it depends on the style. Yet most commonly they cost £350. When you wrote your reply Church's Royals cost £370 not £390 - though they do cost £390 now! Let us see if C&J put up their prices in the New Year. So the price difference between C&J and Church's top line of shoes is about £30 - £40.


Most people on AAAC and StyleForum probably get their C&J Handgrades from PLal (or Pediwear + price watch) for just over GBP 200.


----------



## upnorth (Jun 18, 2007)

I would've gotten C&Js from PLAL had it not been for the restrictions that C&J have WRT fittings. I require a G fitting and find Church's shoes to fit my demands although it bothers me a great deal that I have to pay a premium over C&Js, which would have been a better acquisition from a value perspective. 

If C&Js are wise, they should be listening to this now. I have no loyalty to Church and would jump ship if I can.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Very well said Upnorth! I don't think it should be about brand loyalty, rather about what fits and what you like. Please remember of course that if Church's were available on PLaL they would be discounted. And all my American friends please remember that the prices I am quoting for C&J and Church include VAT! If I ordered from PLaL I would not be able to get C&J handgrades for £200!! I would need to pay import duties on top of that and 17.5% VAT on top of all that!! Let remember the old saying " compare apples with apples not apples with pears!"

But also remember Upnorth that if C&J brought out their shoes in 2 - 3 width fittings like Church's do and increased the colours on offer, like Churchs do the price would go up significantly. This is a point no one has yet addressed in this thread. No one seems to accept the obvious logic that comparing C&J prices with Church's prices ( UK prices ) is comparing apples with pearsic12337: The quality of shoe might be comparable - and Handgrades better than or equal to Royals but theres more to buying a shoe than the quality of leather and manufacture - although of course this is a HUGE part of it! Why do you t hink so many of us go to EG - because we can choose from a wide range of width fittings and lasts and leather colours as well as of course getting a sublime shoe in terms of asthetics and quality.:icon_smile_wink: 

Today I took deliver of a pair of new style Church's - on their new 131 last. It is a hybrid of the very old 31 last with the 100 last - a real beauty - and the broguing is exquisite. Oh and the price? £125 - yes you read that right £125.00 :icon_smile_big: I bought it over the phone from their factory sale - Church's have brilliant sales from their factory shop. And the shoe is not Corrected Grain - sorry to all you guys who think that is all Church's use They are made from a beautiful and soft brown full grain calf leather, and the brogue pattern on the toe is the finest and most interesting I have ever seen - it is even finer and a more wonderful design than my beloved EGs 

I rest my case:icon_smile:


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Leather man said:


> If I ordered from PLaL I would not be able to get C&J handgrades for £200!! I would need to pay import duties on top of that and 17.5% VAT on top of all that!! Let remember the old saying " compare apples with apples not apples with pears!"


You won't have to pay import duties if you buy them from Pediwear with price watch.

My point was that many C&J Handgrade models are readily available for less than the price of GBP 350 you quoted, and ultimately this lower price is the relevant one for people buying them.



> But also remember Upnorth that if C&J brought out their shoes in 2 - 3 width fittings like Church's do and increased the colours on offer, like Churchs do the price would go up significantly. This is a point no one has yet addressed in this thread.


Suppose C&J decided to introduce a new width or colour for some of its existing models. Are you saying that you would expect C&J to raise prices across their whole catalogue as a result, despite the extra sales they would expect to achieve?

Even if so, how do you know that the price would go up significantly? C&J's minimum order size from a retailer is only , so the extra cost involved in introducing something new into their production line is unlikely to be that high.

In any case, I'm sure I read somewhere (I think it was the Robert Old website) that a UK F fitting on the 337 last is on its way.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Robert Old say an "F" fitting is available in the Tavistock - but when I enquired it was still a special order costing £150 extra!!

No, I am not saying what if C&J increased width fittings and colour choices on some of their range - still an apples with pears situation - I am saying on ALL of their shoes on the WHOLE of their range in EVERY style - then and only then can we compare their prices with Church's.

Pediwear would not give me a price watch price like the one you quote because they know I cannot get C&J from PLaL at that price!! So I have to pay their normal price of - yes you've guessed it - £350 pounds or thereabouts depending on the model. I note with interest that you live in London - have you bought C&J Handgrade from Pediwear for £200 - because they told me that price was only for customers outside the UK - they said mainly American customers who come to them. Don't get me wrong Pediwear are a great company and I would encourage people to support them!

So I read your post with interest TKDKid but it does not answer my main points at all really.

LM


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Leather man said:


> Robert Old say an "F" fitting is available in the Tavistock - but when I enquired it was still a special order costing £150 extra!!


I see. Guess we have to keep waiting then...



> No, I am not saying what if C&J increased width fittings and colour choices on some of their range - still an apples with pears situation - I am saying on ALL of their shoes on the WHOLE of their range in EVERY style - then and only then can we compare their prices with Church's.


Well, I imagine C&J would only increase width fittings and colour choices on their models if they feel that the extra sales would justify it. So, unless Church's is facing demand for all width fittings across all of their models, it seems a bit silly of them. :icon_smile_big:

Note that the C&J retail shops are franchises and so they probably order stock from the (family owned?) C&J factory like any other retailer, albeit at a larger scale.



> Pediwear would not give me a price watch price like the one you quote because they know I cannot get C&J from PLaL at that price!! So I have to pay their normal price of - yes you've guessed it - £350 pounds or thereabouts depending on the model. I note with interest that you live in London - have you bought C&J Handgrade from Pediwear for £200 - because they told me that price was only for customers outside the UK - they said mainly American customers who come to them. Don't get me wrong Pediwear are a great company and I would encourage people to support them!


No I haven't bought Handgrades from Pediwear for GBP 200 - but forum member jjl5000 has. I'm not ready to spend GBP 350 on a pair of shoes yet and I feel uneasy about taking advantage of Pediwear, so I've resorted to buying Handgrade seconds.

...

...

...

Please don't start comparing the price of C&J factory rejects with Church's. :icon_peaceplease:


----------



## Rich (Jul 10, 2005)

Leather man said:


> C&J fall down in my book because they offer only one, yes one, width fitting on most ( though not all) of their range including Handgrade. So if one is not an english "E" fit, and I am not then it is tough - C&J is not for you - Church's offer two, yes two width fittings on ALL their range and on a few shoes THREE width fittings.
> 
> LM


Precisely why I have no C&J.


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Rich said:


> Precisely why I have no C&J.


That's the point that I cannot get across to so many of our forum collegues Rich. You are spot on. What is the use of C&J being such a wonderful shoemaker if so many of us cannot wear their shoes? It makes no sense.

Equally Church's are not second best to C&J as many here and on Styleforum state - with no back up I must say. I have seen plenty of both in the flesh, and I own the one Handgrade I can fit into because it is a wholecut plus one Benchgrade. Once again, the benchgrade are not better than Church's and being used to Church's I was disappointed when my first C&J arrived. The Handgrade are a different animal to their benchgrade but so are Church's Royals compared to their other shoes.

Why is it not obvious to our fellows that it costs a huge amount to add variety of width fittings and colours to a range - and why is it not obvious that a flexible and cheap MTO service like the one Church's offer is worth a lot whereas C&J charge so much it is like saying "go away" politely.

Rich, let me assure you I know someone who is very much inside the shoe industry in Northampton and he tells me that Church's shoes are very high quality and infact are better quality than C&J because much more goes into making them. He says the leather is as good as it gets without goiing to John Lobb or Edward Green prices, and that in fact Church's are very good value for money - and this guy designs shoes himself!! It is as if our fellow members are saying " I don't care what anyone says , Church's are overpriced mediocre shoes because we say so and no evidence to the contrary will be considered"

Whilst we buy Church because C&J don't make shoes for people with normal width or wide feet they are not second best, full stop. They cost more because a) they are better constructed; b) they offer more choice; c) they are a more responsive company to customers needs.

I guess many of our collegues will answer as if they don't believe a word I have said or just overlooking everything that is inconvenient to the urban myth that abounds in the fora that C&J are far better shoes and better value for money than Church's and of course that Church's only use corrected grain leather - but you and I know different:icon_smile:

I am sorry to have a bit of a rant but I do feel the facts are just being completely ignored. Let me assure everyone - I love quality, anyone who knows me knows I spot it a mile off and I would not defend Church' shoes if they were not excellent quality. Of course they are not an EG or JL but then they are not that price either are they?


----------



## TKDKid (Mar 20, 2004)

Leather man said:


> That's the point that I cannot get across to so many of our forum collegues Rich. You are spot on. What is the use of C&J being such a wonderful shoemaker if so many of us cannot wear their shoes? It makes no sense.


Who's "so many of us"? Have you tried all of their lasts? While most of them are marked as UK E fittings, they all fit differently with some narrower or wider than others. I think the looks great, isn't particularly narrow nor wide, and also comes in an F fitting.



> Once again, the benchgrade are not better than Church's and being used to Church's I was disappointed when my first C&J arrived.


What did you get?

I think there's quite a lot of variation in quality in C&J's regular line shoes. I had a pair of and thought they were fantastic and the quality of the leather was great. However, the leather on my is stiffer and nowhere near as nice, although they're my rainy day shoes so I'm not too bothered.

C&J also have their fair share of corrected grain shoes as well.

The models on the are great though (and it looks like F fittings are available), but they're also a bit more expensive.



> Why is it not obvious to our fellows that it costs a huge amount to add variety of width fittings and colours to a range


Why are you convinced that it costs a huge amount to add variety of width fittings and colours to a range? The shoes are machine-made and I'm pretty sure they use the same patterns for the uppers across different widths, so where's the extra cost coming from?

Unless you're saying Church's aren't expecting to sell what they produce, the only thing I can think of is if they're creating a new last, although this is very much an uneducated guess.



> and why is it not obvious that a flexible and cheap MTO service like the one Church's offer is worth a lot whereas C&J charge so much it is like saying "go away" politely.


I don't remember reading anything about Church's MTO service - what's it like?



> I guess many of our collegues will answer as if they don't believe a word I have said or just overlooking everything that is inconvenient to the urban myth that abounds in the fora that C&J are far better shoes and better value for money than Church's and of course that Church's only use corrected grain leather - but you and I know different:icon_smile:


Value for money means different things to different people. For some it relates to construction and materials and it may be true that Church's beats C&J in this department - I don't own any Church's to pass comment. For others, aesthetics plays a large part. I had the opportunity to buy some calf leather Church's (Consul and Diplomat I think) at very low prices (< GBP 100), but decided against doing so as they didn't appeal to me aesthetically and that I wouldn't want to wear them, even as "beaters". Harsh, but true. :teacha:


----------



## Leather man (Mar 11, 2007)

Thanks TKDKid for the info on the 348 last. I just looked it up and it is a very attractive last indeed.

About costs - anything that requires a deviation from a standard norm or a larger stock in a warehouse or a more varied production process costs a manufacturer a lot of money - however you are right - Church's do sell everything they make - in fact they are at full stretch in the factory because the demand is in danger of outstripping what they can supply. This may explain their recent £20 across the board price hike. 

Church's MTO service costs around £70 - 75 and they will make anything you want on their current range of lasts in any colour you want. I think this is pretty flexible and creditable. Some retailers ( not Church's own) will wave the MTO charge or reduce it for you - that is a matter of asking at the time IME. As I said C&J charge £150. Robert Olds told me that one way C&J keep their costs down is by insisting everything is ordered in 12s ( I think someone here said 6s - so not sure who is right) and by discouraging MTOs. 

Thanks for the help and I will look more closely at the C&J lasts you recommend:icon_smile:


----------

