# Custom Shirt Advice: ALex K versus CEGO



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

I want to order shirts in the near future. I've been reading here about Alex K shirts and Carl Goldberg's (CEGO) shirts. I gather there is a big difference in price. I would like to know if this is experience of others and if so what I would be getting with the more expensive shirts of Alex K that I would not be getting with the CEGO shirts. I need shirts soon.

Thank you for your help.


----------



## erdavis (Sep 19, 2004)

Whats next Ferrari vs Catapillar, both are great products but each serves its own niche. 

All I know is that I have been very happy with my CEGO shirts and Carl has really "gone the distance" to do a good job for me with them. Good value, good shirt and great form. 

I sincerely hope in the next few years to try some Alex K shirts, but that is not because I am unhappy with CEGO shirts. I totally belive you chose different shirts etc.. to fit a given audience, look and requirement. 

PS: CEGO turns shirts around pretty fast, but also let it be known that I truely long for the day (which is hopefully soon) when I can go out to Long Island and get the whole deal done bespoke, handsewn by angels etc.. and all done... I would love it for the experience and the resulting product. 

-e


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Without even asking him I can say Carl and I will agree that CEGO shirts are absolutely the best value in New York. I think that we'll also agree that Carl can't make as good a shirt for $100 as I can for $1000. 

With all due respect, however, your question falls somewhat short in the arena of propriety and here's why:

Carl and I provide a large degree of the educational information regarding custom shirts for AskAndy members and have done so for many years. Asking members to opine about "what they would not be getting" kind of puts everyone between a rock and a hard place. 

Perhaps, instead, you might consider using the search function to get a better idea of what each of us do. Better yet, you might ask each of us. I can guarantee you that either of us will send you to the other once we discuss your needs and desires if that is what is appropriate. Hell, we may even send you to Paris or Geneva or even Jantzen ... but that's probably only if you actually turn out to be a total pain-in-the-posterior.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Without even asking him I can say Carl and I will agree that CEGO shirts are absolutely the best value in New York. I think that we'll also agree that Carl can't make as good a shirt for $100 as I can for $1000.
> 
> With all due respect, however, your question falls somewhat short in the arena of propriety and here's why:
> 
> ...


I did not mean to offend you or anyone else. I posed the question because I don't know the answer to my question -- and still don't know the answer. Sure I could ask you and Carl. And will probably do so. But I feel it's also fair to reach out to customers, especially and customers out there who have purchased shirts from each firm. Either a public posting or a PM would be welcome. I am sure each firm is held in high regard on this forum.


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

I first took this as a troll post-if you are not price sensitive, then you need to try both Carl and Alex and decide for yourself.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

healinginfluence said:


> I did not mean to offend you or anyone else. I posed the question because I don't know the answer to my question -- and still don't know the answer. Sure I could ask you and Carl. And will probably do so. But I feel it's also fair to reach out to customers, especially and customers out there who have purchased shirts from each firm. Either a public posting or a PM would be welcome. I am sure each firm is held in high regard on this forum.


I know your post was made honestly and with complete innocence.

As an easy-going, non-combative, kind of laid-back ex-hippie, no offense was taken on my part.

Can't speak for Carl ... he's kind of thin-skinned, easily excitable, and has been known to rant. :icon_smile_big::icon_smile_big::icon_smile_big:


----------



## LaoHu (Sep 16, 2006)

*I can laugh about it now......*



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> ... he's kind of thin-skinned, easily excitable, and has been known to rant. :icon_smile_big::icon_smile_big::icon_smile_big:


:icon_smile_wink: Asking him to make a boiled front formal shirt = guaranteed mega-rant


----------



## kirbya (Nov 10, 2004)

Good question. Alex hit the nail on the head. Carl make an excellent shirt--notwithstanding how much it costs. When you take into account how much his shirts cost, the deal just gets sweeter. My only suggestion would be to make sure that you use one of his local New York shirtmakers, not one of the factories that use computer patterns. When I last used him, which was unfortunately some time ago, he used both as sources of his shirts. The latter is probably a little cheaper, but, in my opinion, you'll get a higher-quality shirt if made by one of his singular shirtmaker...


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

maxnharry said:


> I first took this as a troll post-if you are not price sensitive, then you need to try both Carl and Alex and decide for yourself.


I posted sincerely seeking knowledge and information. I lack both the cash and the inclination to try both. Custom clothing isn't like buying a car where the purchaser can take a test drive.

I see that both Alex and Carl are respected and revered here. OTH, I am a newcomer. If I offended anyone I apologize.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

kirbya said:


> Good question. Alex hit the nail on the head. Carl make an excellent shirt--notwithstanding how much it costs. When you take into account how much his shirts cost, the deal just gets sweeter. My only suggestion would be to make sure that you use one of his local New York shirtmakers, not one of the factories that use computer patterns. When I last used him, which was unfortunately some time ago, he used both as sources of his shirts. The latter is probably a little cheaper, but, in my opinion, you'll get a higher-quality shirt if made by one of his singular shirtmaker...


I didn't know Carl uses different shirtmakers. Thanks for the tip.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

healinginfluence said:


> OTH, I am a newcomer. If I offended anyone I apologize.


 Again, no offense should be taken by anyone. Your post was sincere, honest, and innocent.


----------



## AZTEC (May 11, 2005)

nothing wrong with your post and absolutely no need to apologize. the fact that some merchants post here shouldn't mean we can't discuss or compare their services. 

AZTEC


----------



## ice (Sep 2, 2005)

healinginfluence said:


> I did not mean to offend you or anyone else. I posed the question because I don't know the answer to my question -- and still don't know the answer. Sure I could ask you and Carl. And will probably do so. But I feel it's also fair to reach out to customers, especially and customers out there who have purchased shirts from each firm. Either a public posting or a PM would be welcome. I am sure each firm is held in high regard on this forum.


Carl and Alex are real people, businessmen and artisans, not generic corporations. Blatantly asking for anonymous critiques, from a forum in which they both read and participate, is inappropriate at worst, or ineffective at least.

Use the search function, educate yourself in their products, and ask more specific or subtle questions.

You certainly have fine taste in shirts.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

ice said:


> Carl and Alex are real people, businessmen and artisans, not generic corporations. Blatantly asking for anonymous critiques, from a forum in which they both read and participate, is inappropriate at worst, or ineffective at least.
> 
> Use the search function, educate yourself in their products, and ask more specific or subtle questions.
> 
> You certainly have fine taste in shirts.


I don't feel my post was inappropriate but I agree it has been ineffective.


----------



## mmkn (Jan 14, 2005)

I'm reading that you don't want to waste your money by looking for other's experiences, and submit that you ask how you see your closet in the years ahead and what it is that you see as enough for you . . . a closet full of CG, AK, or other's shirts (e.g. AM) . . .

For instance, I'm having the same kind of question based on what I've read here with regards to bespoke shoes - G&G or Paris Lobb?

Thankfully to Alex, I've found my bespoke suit maker.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

healinginfluence said:


> I don't feel my post was inappropriate but I agree it has been ineffective.


I agree: I don't think it's fair to say that you asked an inappropriate question. Frankly, I'd like to know the answer myself. I don't buy the argument that since they participate in (or in AK's case, moderates) this forum, we're supposed to lay off asking about how their shirts compare.

You didn't ask for Alex and Carl to bash each other's goods. You asked for a comparison, acknowledging that you understand there is a large price difference. Whether the discussion becomes bashing depends on whether Alex and Carl discuss their services in a civil, professional manner; I think it's fair to expect that they would.

If anything, the fact that Carl and AK are shirtmakers or artisans or craftsmen or whichever, means that talking critically about their services should be _promoted_. We are not talking about their characters after all, but services that they charge good money for. They can, and should, take the hits, as professionals. The ramifications otherwise are an undue heaping of praise upon goods that one hasn't even seen or touched simply because an 'artisan' is behind the work.

Note: I don't mean to make it sound like I doubt the quality of either Carl or AK's shirts--I have no experience with either.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

*Mafoofan:* You're not a new member. You have gained a great deal of knowledge as time has passed; sufficient that your blog is actually an enjoyable read. Thus, in contrast to my response to new-member healinginfluence, I have no compunction whatsoever about taking you to task and demonstrating the illogic of your post.



mafoofan said:


> I agree: I don't think it's fair to say that you asked an inappropriate question. Frankly, I'd like to know the answer myself. I don't buy the argument that since they participate in (or in AK's case, moderates) this forum, we're supposed to lay off asking about how their shirts compare.
> 
> You didn't ask for Alex and Carl to bash each other's goods. You asked for a comparison, acknowledging that you understand there is a large price difference. Whether the discussion becomes bashing depends on whether Alex and Carl discuss their services in a civil, professional manner; I think it's fair to expect that they would.


This is utter nonsense. One cannot fairly compare a value-driven product with a quality-driven product. The entire goal set of each is different. Whereas my goal is not to give a hoot about the price of any component or labor cost in my shirts while pursuing the pinnacle of the world's ingredients, Carl's primary goal is to eke the maximum possble value from every stitch, every labor-second, every ingredient. The cost of my buttons alone may equal the entire physical-ingredient cost of one of Carl's basic shirts. Does this mean that one can fairly say, "Alex's buttons are better than Carl's". I don't think so. I'm not going to continue this tack past the button analogy. To do so would be to do exactly as you want ... and exactly the opposite of what logic would dictate. The value/cost ratio of a Cego shirt is infinitely higher than the value/cost ratio of a Kabbaz-Kelly shirt. The value/cost ratio of a Chevy Cavalier astronomically outpaces the value/cost ratio of a Lamborgini Murcielago. Can you fairly compare them beyond saying that both have bodies, tires, engines and seats? Your statement is not only unfair, it also defies logical reasoning.



mafoofan said:


> If anything, the fact that Carl and AK are shirtmakers or artisans or craftsmen or whichever, means that talking critically about their services should be _promoted_. We are not talking about their characters after all, but services that they charge good money for. They can, and should, take the hits, as professionals. The ramifications otherwise are an undue heaping of praise upon goods that one hasn't even seen or touched simply because an 'artisan' is behind the work.


 This ignores years of facts already in evidence. Carl and I have been talking about our work for years. We have been answering members questions about our methods, techniques, and philosophies for years. And members have been writing their critical & complimentary opinions of our work for years. You will find hearty disagreements bewteen Carl and I in a number of those threads. As far as "taking hits", the first year I spent on these fora were nothing but taking hits. Same applies to Carl. Perhaps, if hits are your interest, you might do the research I described above and read through some of it. *The overarching incongruity of your post is not that of talking critically about fruit, it is of comparing apples to oranges.*



mafoofan said:


> Note: I don't mean to make it sound like I doubt the quality of either Carl or AK's shirts--I have no experience with either.


 Never thought you doubted the quality. Having read your excellent review of Ambrosi's pants with great interest, I wondered to myself why you would make this sort of post. Knowing quality as you obviously do, would you fairly be able to compare Ambrosi's pants with a pair of Dockers?


----------



## Concordia (Sep 30, 2004)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> One cannot fairly compare a value-driven product with a quality-driven product.


By framing the discussion in this way and spinning it out as you did, you are in fact making a comparison. Or more precisely, a compare/contrast analysis. If I read OP correctly, this was very likely the sort of discussion that he was hoping to begin.


----------



## AvariceBespoke (Jan 7, 2007)

anyone here a client of geneva?


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Concordia said:


> By framing the discussion in this way and spinning it out as you did, you are in fact making a comparison. Or more precisely, a compare/contrast analysis. If I read OP correctly, this was very likely the sort of discussion that he was hoping to begin.


 I eagerly await your compare/contrast analysis of that $15,000 car with the Lamborgini. If it is good enough, perhaps Joelle will withdraw her objection to my proposed purchase.

Let's start with:

Top Speed vs cost:

Cavalier: 80+/15000
Murcielago: 200+/365000

I guess I'm not getting my car.


----------



## bwep (Apr 17, 2005)

Alex

Will you take me for a spin?


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Look, Alex, I didn't mean to start a fight--and I really think that if you give my comment a re-read, you'll see there's nothing to be offended by. But, for the moment, I will respond to your comments.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> One cannot fairly compare a value-driven product with a quality-driven product. The entire goal set of each is different.


I don't want to have to call the relevance of the distinction between a 'quality-driven' product and a 'value-driven' product _hogwash_, but it is. All goods on the market provide a particular quality for a particular cost. In general, when comparing goods at all cost levels, the higher the ratio of quality to cost, the higher the value. Yet, value is also a measure of that ratio when comparing goods at the same price level. Thus, I don't think you want to start saying that your shirts are not 'value-driven'. Ostensibly, you want to provide the best quality shirts possible at the price you command, and you want to provide better quality at that cost than your competitors. Thus, you are value-driven.

You say you don't want to "give a hoot about the price of any component or labor cost," but the moment those costs escalate beyond a level that allow you to make a profit on your business (hence, you'd be losing money), you'd have to raise prices. So you must give some 'hoot'.

In turn, Carl is as 'quality-driven' as you are 'value-driven'. The key distinction is the price point he has chosen, which is substantially lower than your own. He also wants to provide the best quality possible, but _at his price point_. You both care, quite reasonably, about making a healthy profit: you need to feed yourselves, your families, put a roof over your head, be rewarded for your talent and skill, etc.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> The value/cost ratio of a Chevy Cavalier astronomically outpaces the value/cost ratio of a Lamborgini Murcielago. Can you fairly compare them beyond saying that both have bodies, tires, engines and seats? Your statement is not only unfair, it also defies logical reasoning.


I'm not sure where I am being illogical here. When one accounts for the price a customer is willing to pay, the value ratio he desires, the absolute level of quality he needs, etc., he can easily compare goods at disparate price points. That's for the customer to decide, as only he can. A merchant does best by making it clear what he offers for _his_ price.

Yes, I can compare a Murcielago to a Cavalier. The Murcielago offers more of what I want (it's fast, it's pretty, it's very loud ), but it's an extremely poor value given my current needs. Plus, I can't pay for it. Yet, I can say that by many measures, the 'quality' of the Lamborghini is higher. Is this prejudicial? Only if one fails to distinguish between cost, benefit, and value. And we are all grown-ups here.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Carl and I have been talking about our work for years. We have been answering members questions about our methods, techniques, and philosophies for years. And members have been writing their critical & complimentary opinions of our work for years. You will find hearty disagreements bewteen Carl and I in a number of those threads. As far as "taking hits", the first year I spent on these fora were nothing but taking hits. Same applies to Carl. Perhaps, if hits are your interest, you might do the research I described above and read through some of it. *The overarching incongruity of your post is not that of talking critically about fruit, it is of comparing apples to oranges.*


I never said that you 'don't take hits' or that there _is_ undue heaping of praise. I said that such _would be_ the result _if_ you deny the propriety of queries such as the OP's.

And I'm confused by this: if, in fact, there is plenty of information to answer the OP's question, as fielded by you and Carl, then clearly you have no problem discussing the subject matter the OP is interested in. Why is it okay for you speak about something that is not okay for the OP to ask about?



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Never thought you doubted the quality. Having read your excellent review of Ambrosi's pants with great interest, I wondered to myself why you would make this sort of post. Knowing quality as you obviously do, would you fairly be able to compare Ambrosi's pants with a pair of Dockers?


I'm glad you've enjoyed my blog. Yes, I do like quality. But I have value considerations too. In fact, as I hope I made clear above, value is a _function_ of quality: thus my value considerations _are_ considerations of quality. I won't and can't pay for quality at _any_ price point. There are certain prices I can and am willing to pay, certain base levels of quality I expect, and so forth.

So yes, I can compare Dockers to my Ambrosis. The Dockers are probably a far better value. But they do not reach the quality level I require: they don't fit as well, the fabrics are not as nice, the attention to detail is lacking, the finishing is not as refined, I like hand-sewing, etc. Is this a knock on Dockers or Ambrosi? I don't think so.

You yourself have stated that Carl's shirts are a better value than your own. To make such a statement, you would have to know what quality levels you each offer, and the prices you offer them for. The OP knows the prices. He just wants to know the quality distinctions. It's up to _him_ to decide what value ratio and what quality level is optimal.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

bwep said:


> Alex
> 
> Will you take me for a spin?


 Certainly. Sea Island socks mandatory.

BTW, your signature is my favorite carpenter's catchphrase. Do you also use it in your work?


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> Look, Alex, I didn't mean to start a fight--and I really think that if you give my comment a re-read, you'll see there's nothing to be offended by.


 I didn't think you were trying to start a fight. I simply disagree with your unstated premise that this thread can exercise itself to the full without a fight ensuing. Your argument and mine will now each stand on their merits and others can come to their own conclusions. The last time I participated in a value vs. quality thread, which hopefully everyone has forgotten, it was at the time the longest thread which had ever existed on Andys; everyone went away angry; the thread ended up locked. It is a very contentious issue.

But I do want to respond to just two of your statements:



mafoofan said:


> You say you don't want to "give a hoot about the price of any component or labor cost," but the moment those costs escalate beyond a level that allow you to make a profit on your business (hence, you'd be losing money), you'd have to raise prices. So you must give some 'hoot'.


 Your manner of phrasing, to wit: "You'd *have* to raise prices" hints at price-raising as something bad. To me, price-raising is irrelevant and boring. Price is a multiplier of cost and I do *not* give a hoot what the cost is. My *sole* concern is that I am offering the best which can be offered. If the buttons double in cost tomorrow I shan't even give a nanosecond's thought to changing the buttons for these are the buttons I elect to use.



mafoofan said:


> And I'm confused by this: if, in fact, there is plenty of information to answer the OP's question, as fielded by you and Carl, then clearly you have no problem discussing the subject matter the OP is interested in. Why is it okay for you speak about something that is not okay for the OP to ask about?


Neither of us, if I can take the temporary liberty of opining for Carl, has any problem discussing our work, our methods, our preferences, and our philosophies. The problem lies in the insistence on *comparing* our work. I prefer to use 3.2 mm mother-of-pearl buttons created from shells obtained in New Zealand waters. Carl may, for this I don't know, prefer to use 1.7mm plastic buttons made from amyl-butyl-styrene which can withstand hundreds hammer blows. Both buttons are durable. Both buttons are attractive. They have no relation in material or cost. Again, apples and oranges.

Think seriously about common comparisons again using cars as an example. When the auto magazines select their picks, they don't call them "best". They call them "best of class".


----------



## David Bresch (Apr 11, 2004)

I find hilarious that the AK argued the opposite side when I was being gang-banged for arguing that price could be an aspect of quality! Of course, if quality and price were never, ever related, then comparing Cego and AK shirts would be fine because there would be a universal, price-independant standard.

In any event, ironically, now that I know more than I did at the time, I appreciate the low-cost alternative like Cego and the high-cost one too like the AK shirt. For me, one's wardrobe is properly made of both, the ratio being determined by your discretionary income. And I disagree with the AK that one cannot compare (in a flattering and constructive way) both products. For example, one can compare a Subaru WRX with a Ferrari and neither will suffer.

In fact, I would love to get an AK shirt, but the AK is the only merchant aritsan I know of who brags constantly about the clients he rejects or terminates, and to be rejected by the best shirtmaker in the world would just be too heart-breaking for me! Actually, Carl brags about this too, and if he were to throw me out I think I would cry! It must be a NYC thing!


----------



## bwep (Apr 17, 2005)

AK

Decided it was time for a change. Yes, I try to use it in my line of work, could be the difference between Harvard or 2nd grade..., kidding of course. Just trying to lighten things up. 


As I noted in an earlier post on a different thread, the decision to go bespoke and with which one individual works with is very subjective. It is hard for me to measure value and quality since the factors to determine such are so heterogeneous and multifactoral. Once I get past the objective features (fabrics, style, etc...), there are a number of intangibles that go into a decision for me. I have to have that connection. This is something that has become important to me in the last 2 years.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

David Bresch said:


> I find hilarious that the AK argued the opposite side when I was being gang-banged for arguing that price could be an aspect of quality! Of course, if quality and price were never, ever related, then comparing Cego and AK shirts would be fine because there would be a universal, price-independant standard.
> 
> In any event, ironically, now that I know more than I did at the time, I appreciate the low-cost alternative like Cego and the high-cost one too like the AK shirt. For me, one's wardrobe is properly made of both, the ratio being determined by your discretionary income. And I disagree with the AK that one cannot compare (in a flattering and constructive way) both products. For example, one can compare a Subaru WRX with a Ferrari and neither will suffer.
> 
> In fact, I would love to get an AK shirt, but the AK is the only merchant aritsan I know of who brags constantly about the clients he rejects or terminates, and to be rejected by the best shirtmaker in the world would just be too heart-breaking for me! Actually, Carl brags about this too, and if he were to throw me out I think I would cry! It must be a NYC thing!


I am actually starting to get an answer to my original question although the path is -- well -- a bit unorthodox.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

David Bresch said:


> I find hilarious that the AK argued the opposite side when I was being gang-banged for arguing that price could be an aspect of quality! Of course, if quality and price were never, ever related, then comparing Cego and AK shirts would be fine because there would be a universal, price-independant standard.
> 
> In any event, ironically, now that I know more than I did at the time, I appreciate the low-cost alternative like Cego and the high-cost one too like the AK shirt. For me, one's wardrobe is properly made of both, the ratio being determined by your discretionary income. And I disagree with the AK that one cannot compare (in a flattering and constructive way) both products. For example, one can compare a Subaru WRX with a Ferrari and neither will suffer.
> 
> In fact, I would love to get an AK shirt, but the AK is the only merchant aritsan I know of who brags constantly about the clients he rejects or terminates, and to be rejected by the best shirtmaker in the world would just be too heart-breaking for me! Actually, Carl brags about this too, and if he were to throw me out I think I would cry! It must be a NYC thing!


What amazes me, David, is your complete inability to summarize fairly the argument of someone you disagree with. It's difficult to compare CEGO shirts with Kabbaz-Kelly shirts not because one costs several times more than the other but because they are completely different animals. If someone said to you, "Hey, I need a new car. Should I buy a Subaru or a Ferrari?", wouldn't your first comment be that the two are nothing at all alike and your first question be to ask what the guy was really looking for in a car?

And I have never heard Carl or Kabbaz brag about firing clients. That they are both willing to do so means nothing more than that they won't just sit and take whatever sh!t a client or prospective client tries to dump on them.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Your manner of phrasing, to wit: "You'd *have* to raise prices" hints at price-raising as something bad. To me, price-raising is irrelevant and boring. Price is a multiplier of cost and I do *not* give a hoot what the cost is. My *sole* concern is that I am offering the best which can be offered. If the buttons double in cost tomorrow I shan't even give a nanosecond's thought to changing the buttons for these are the buttons I elect to use.


I'm not sure why you'd take from my statement that I think price-raising is bad. If anything, you should have gathered that I'm a free-wheeling free-market capitalist. Clearly, I myself have no issue with paying for high-price goods: you don't see me saving the whales. I directly commented that you and Carl should have healthy profits from your business. You can't calculate profits without figuring costs.

You may say all that you want that you don't care about costs, but your clients care when they must pay more for their shirts and want to know why. Surely you care about your profits and your clients.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> The problem lies in the insistence on *comparing* our work. I prefer to use 3.2 mm mother-of-pearl buttons created from shells obtained in New Zealand waters. Carl may, for this I don't know, prefer to use 1.7mm plastic buttons made from amyl-butyl-styrene which can withstand hundreds hammer blows. Both buttons are durable. Both buttons are attractive. They have no relation in material or cost. Again, apples and oranges.


This is perplexing. _Of course_, they are related in cost. What isn't? Well, maybe love and kittens, but generally everything either costs 'less' or 'more'. Your shirts and buttons cost 'more' than Carl's.

Carl doesn't use the buttons you use, in part, because he _couldn't_ without raising his prices. As a smart businessman, he probably has figured on what his customers are willing to pay for, and whether he can bring in enough new customers to replace the old ones if he makes the change.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Think seriously about common comparisons again using cars as an example. When the auto magazines select their picks, they don't call them "best". They call them "best of class".


The same car magazines are always opining over what makes one car 'better' than another, or why sports cars aren't wastes of money, or what qualitative differences distinguish an Accord from a Mercedes E-Class.

In fact, in their comparison tests, you will note, they factor in price. The lower the price between two cars, the higher the points it gets for one particular score. This score is balanced against all sorts of other scores (for performance, comfort, styling, etc.). At the end, they tally up the scores, and reach a conclusion as to which car is 'better' (yes, usually within a certain class or given a certain function). Thus, some times, a lower priced car is judged 'better' although it comes a close-second in all other measures.

I say again: it's up to forum members and potential clients of yours to determine what value ratio they like, what measures of qualities they value higher than others, and what they are willing to pay.

Your argument essentially presumes that we are not capable of being rational consumers. The OP just wants to know what makes your shirts different from Carl's. If he values those differences such that he is willing and able to pay the extra ~$500 for it, that's his business.

Frankly, evasion of this discussion is precisely what would make a savvy consumer suspect of a high-priced good.


----------



## Shirtmaven (Jan 2, 2004)

I started to write this earlier, and then customers showed up.

a shirt is made from a woven material. it has a collar, a body sleeves and cuffs, closed with buttons.
it could be a scratchy poly cotton made by automated machinery or it can be made in the finest 2/200 from switzerland by sewn by hand by one person.

there are many variations between the two.

Both Alex and I make a shirt that we stand behind. 
Alex uses fantastic Australian MOP buttons. I use plastic or Throcas shell.
could I use an Australian MOP? sure. but then my price goes up. It is all about perceived value.
There are greater cost involved then the actual raw materials. Today I had several customers in my cramped messy showroom. If I was charging $500 per shirt, then I doubt I would have had so many people in my shop at once. They would have received better attention, a glass of scotch, etc. But that is not my business.Alex is a craftsman, I am a salesman. not that there is anything wrong with being a salesman. if I waited on customers, made my own patterns, cut shirts myself and sewed them as well, that is if I could do all of these things, I could maybe make 10 shirts a week.
MY point to the OP is that you would have to come in andisit both of our business's so that you could make a choice for yourself.
Carl


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

*SEE, NOW THE DAMN FIGHT HAS STARTED JUST LIKE I SAID IT WOULD.*

OK, Goldberg, what is this SCOTCH sh!t? Any respectable shirtmaker is going to be serving a fine brandy and you know it.


----------



## the etruscan (Mar 9, 2007)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> OK, Goldberg, what is this SCOTCH sh!t? Any respectable shirtmaker is going to be serving a fine brandy and you know it.


Ugh. In a world with things as wonderful as Scottish Whiskey, why drink brandy?


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

Shirtmaven said:


> I started to write this earlier, and then customers showed up.
> 
> a shirt is made from a woven material. it has a collar, a body sleeves and cuffs, closed with buttons.
> it could be a scratchy poly cotton made by automated machinery or it can be made in the finest 2/200 from switzerland by sewn by hand by one person.
> ...


Now I understand. I really never thought that much about shirts before. I see a lot depends on the materials, craftsmanship and customer service. Mainly what I want is a well fitting shirt made of good cloth that I can wear with the Canali suits I've ordered. I suspect I can get that from either Carl or Alex. It just depends how far I want to go with the other qualities that can make a shirt special.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

the etruscan said:


> Ugh. In a world with things as wonderful as Scottish Whiskey, why drink brandy?


Personally I'd be happy with a cold glass of water and someone friendly to work with.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> but your clients care when they must pay more for their shirts and want to know why


 To your first incorrect supposition, no they don't; to your second incorrect supposition, no they don't**.

My clients and I follow a policy regarding prices which received Presidential approval during the mid 1990's: They don't ask; I don't tell. That's what billing clerks and accounts payable departments handle.

What my clients want to know about their shirts is:

They will be either as selected by them or as selected by me.
They will be completely correct and will fit properly.
They will arrive when promised; whenever ... if not promised.
They will be made to the same or better standards they have always been.
and
That should any of the foregoing not transpire, the fault is mine.

** Except for Manton. :devil:


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

healinginfluence said:


> Personally I'd be happy with a cold glass of water and someone friendly to work with.


 Now you're in trouble. We're both grouches.


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> To your first incorrect supposition, no they don't; to your second incorrect supposition, no they don't**.
> 
> My clients and I follow a policy regarding prices which received Presidential approval during the mid 1990's: They don't ask; I don't tell. That's what billing clerks and accounts payable departments handle.
> 
> ...


In my experience there is nobody who is truly immune to cost, no matter how much money they have to spend. In fact, my own experience would lead me to believe that the opposite may be true. Now, I don't know who your exact clients are, but I can't imagine that they are materially different than the people who I am talking about. Perhaps, they see value at the prices you charge, and feel no need to question them at these levels, but I highly doubt that anybody is price immune (except the US government.)


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

iammatt said:


> In my experience there is nobody who is truly immune to cost, no matter how much money they have to spend. In fact, my own experience would lead me to believe that the opposite may be true. Now, I don't know who your exact clients are, but I can't imagine that they are materially different than the people who I am talking about. Perhaps, they see value at the prices you charge, and feel no need to question them at these levels, but I highly doubt that anybody is price immune (except the US government.)


 I totally agree and wasn't trying to say any different. After 30 years the worth has been established in my clients' minds or they would have voted with their feet long ago.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> To your first incorrect supposition, no they don't; to your second incorrect supposition, no they don't**.
> 
> My clients and I follow a policy regarding prices which received Presidential approval during the mid 1990's: They don't ask; I don't tell. That's what billing clerks and accounts payable departments handle.


**_Skepticism increasing_**

I doubt your clients truly don't care at all about what you charge them. But let's assume for the sake of argument that what you say is true, although extremely implausible in light of fundamental and uncontroversial economic principles. There are two unpleasant side-effects.

1. _Potential_ clients--whom you may never have known were potential clients in the first place--may very well have considered your price too high given what you offer for it. They may also dislike your opaque pricing strategy.

2. If what you say is true, you are a dangerous businessman to deal with. I would not want to pay a price for a shirt determined entirely by what other clients are willing to pay who have such staggering wealth (or stupidity) that cost is truly no object and they don't care to know what they are paying for.

So, I doubt cost is of _no_ importance to your clients. Thus, I doubt it is of no importance to _you_.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

the etruscan said:


> Ugh. In a world with things as wonderful as Scottish Whiskey, why drink brandy?


Variety, my good man, variety. A world without Scotch whisk*y* would be a much poorer world, but the same is true of a world without brandy, or bourbon, or rye.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> **_Skepticism increasing_**
> 
> I doubt your clients truly don't care at all about what you charge them. But let's assume for the sake of argument that what you say is true, although extremely implausible in light of fundamental and uncontroversial economic principles. There are two unpleasant side-effects.
> 
> ...


Your post presumes a number of things. You presume that I am seeking new clients. I am not which, to stave off a barrage of retort, does *not* mean I don't take new clients.

You presume that pricing strategies should be transparent. Why? Requirements for a transaction include a willing seller and a willing buyer. How the seller decides what to charge and how the buyer decides what he is willing to pay are not germane to the transaction.

The fact that you are unwilling to pay current market rates is also irrelevant. Were there an insufficient number of people willing to pay the market price, said price would fall. This is an accepted axiom in other small, unknown arenas such as the stock market, the art market and other little-known areas.

As one who said earlier, "free market capitalist", you don't seem to be holding true to your precepts.

Finally, I don't mind having this discussion with you but I must say your words are beginning to become somewhat offensive. I would appreciate it if you would dispense with the personally affronting phrases such as 'dangerous businessman', (client) stupidity, and 'skepticism increasing'. Thank you.


----------



## AZTEC (May 11, 2005)

How soon do you need the shirts? 

AZTEC


----------



## the etruscan (Mar 9, 2007)

jcusey said:


> Variety, my good man, variety. A world without Scotch whisk*y* would be a much poorer world, but the same is true of a world without brandy, or bourbon, or rye.


True enough. Good correction to both my claim and my spelling.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

the etruscan said:


> True enough. Good correction to both my claim and my spelling.





jcusey said:


> Variety, my good man, variety. A world without Scotch whisk*y* would be a much poorer world, but the same is true of a world without brandy, or bourbon, or rye.


There's no E in whisky? No wonder I prefer brandy.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> You presume that pricing strategies should be transparent. Why? Requirements for a transaction include a willing seller and a willing buyer. How the seller decides what to charge and how the buyer decides what he is willing to pay are not germane to the transaction.


Did I say there should be some rule _requiring_ you to reveal your pricing strategy? What I said was that if your existing clients really don't factor in cost to their value judgments, then the price reflected by their value judgments will have little relevance to a wider market.

The OP, I, and many others, are part of this wider market since we are not your existing clients. Thus, your price--by itself--reveals nothing about the quality of the shirts you make.

When prices are insulated from the market in such a manner, it is wise for any consumer to try to figure out the underlying pricing strategy. Otherwise, they must trust in your benevolence to believe that you are not charging more than you would had your price been less insulated.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> The fact that you are unwilling to pay current market rates is also irrelevant. Were there an insufficient number of people willing to pay the market price, said price would fall. This is an accepted axiom in other small, unknown arenas such as the stock market, the art market and other little-known areas.


See above. You have defined your clients in such a way that they are fundamentally a _different class of consumer_ that somehow evades rational economic behavior. Thus, your price is not necessarily the _market_ price for the quality of shirt that you sell.

The other markets you describe--for art, stock, etc.--are not analogous to what you have described for your shirts. To evaluate the value of an artwork or a stock share, one must have highly-developed knowledge and analytical skills. This does not deter proper market pricing since there are relatively few people willing to dump untold amounts of money into either art or stock without the knowledge and skills necessary.

On the other hand, you are saying that your clients simply _don't care_ to have the knowledge necessary to determine if your prices are market efficient. This is not only not analogous to the art and stock examples, but their complete converse.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> As one who said earlier, "free market capitalist", you don't seem to be holding true to your precepts.


As a proponent of the free market, I am a proponent of market and price efficiency. This depends on the prevalence of rational actors (both buyers and sellers). If you are right about your clients, then they are not rational buyers, and the market for your shirts is not one that promotes price efficiency.



Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Finally, I don't mind having this discussion with you but I must say your words are beginning to become somewhat offensive. I would appreciate it if you would dispense with the personally affronting phrases such as 'dangerous businessman', (client) stupidity, and 'skepticism increasing'. Thank you.


Notice, I did not say you _were_ a dangerous businessman; I said that you _would be _to a consumer in the wider market if your prices are determined by irrational clients that do not figure for costs when making purchases. This is not a character assessment; it is the implied conclusion of your argument.

I don't think your clients _are_ stupid. I think it's highly unlikely that they really don't care about costs at all--they are likely wealthy _because_ they are good cost-benefit analyzers. But, if they truly don't care about costs, they aren't rational actors in the economic sense, and others would best judge their purchasing decisions as irrational and not allow themselves to be influenced by the prices that result.

But yes, my skepticism _is_ increasing.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> There's no E in whisky? No wonder I prefer brandy.


If it's Scotch, Canadian, or Maker's Mark, no. If it's American (except for Maker's Mark) or Irish, there is. And people say that English spelling is hard to master. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

AZTEC said:


> How soon do you need the shirts?
> 
> AZTEC


I need them now but can make due for a couple of months until what I order is made.


----------



## AZTEC (May 11, 2005)

healinginfluence said:


> I need them now but can make due for a couple of months until what I order is made.


I'm glad you are talking shirts and not underwear!

AZTEC


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

I've been thinking about what was behind my original post. As Carl pointed out my main concern is value. In visiting stores I see MTM shirts, for example, from Zegna for $550. I feel certain that Carl would give me better value than that. I also think Alex would give me better value than that, although for more money.

My sense is that in every marketplace there are sellers who provide good value for the money and those who don't. Even so I reckon everyone sees value in every established vendor. Still some provide better value than others.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

AZTEC said:


> I'm glad you are talking shirts and not underwear!
> 
> AZTEC


Me too . I actually have plenty of shirts. It's just that they are too big now that I have lost weight.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Mafoofan: Let's try this another way.

Given: Your net worth is $1,000,000.00.

Question: How much time can you afford to spend considering the expenditure of $1?


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Mafoofan: Let's try this another way.
> 
> Given: Your net worth is $1,000,000.00.
> 
> Question: How much time can you afford to spend considering the expenditure of $1?


Answer: More time than none .

And if I really didn't spend _any_ time considering the value of one dollar, _I_ would not be a good economic barometer for others that _do_ take time to consider its value.


----------



## zjpj (Sep 19, 2006)

AK, this thread and all its implicit chest thumping doesn't reflect well. I’m sure you don't care, but that’s just my observation. 

Second, as someone who has a bit of money, I have to tell you, your premise that there is some correlative ratio between price and how much someone agonizes over a purchase is simply wrong. I've spent more time worrying about which $2 Hallmark card to buy than which $200,000 car (to bring back your original analogy). And, furthermore, I care much more about value and about what I'm getting for my buck on smaller purchases. This is particularly so when it comes to things I'm passionate and picky about, like clothes. There are many purchases about which I'm not cost-conscious in the least. These tend to be either those in which I maintain carried equity, like my homes, or highly emotional purchases like vacations. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with how much money I make every hour on average. If I approached a street vendor for a Coke and was told it was $100 – or, better still, that he’s not going to tell me the cost but will contact my accountant once I’ve drunk the soda - I wouldn’t buy one. That’s not because I can’t afford to, for I could buy his whole soda stand if I wanted to. It’s something else entirely. Surely you can see that? Some, of course, would slap down a Benjamin and quench their thirst. But I’d be willing to bet that more wealthy people than not would walk away. Generally speaking, you don’t get wealthy by writing blank checks. 

You’re free to run your business however you want to, and you say that you don’t need any new clients, which is great. But as someone who could use your services and chooses not to, I have to say that some of your assumptions about consumers’ thought processes are, at least in some cases, not correct.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> So back to the original point I was making: if your client's give the costs of your shirts nearing-zero consideration, your prices are increasingly insulated from the market and thus less likely to be market efficient. This is no mere academic theory: _I am saying that based on your own assessment of your client base, the prices of your shirts do not provide any reliable guidance of their true market value.
> _


No. The market value of AK's shirts is the price that he can sell them for. Since he's not having trouble getting $1000 or whatever the average price for him is these days for as many shirts as he cares to make, the market value for his shirts averages $1000 per shirt. If he were starting from scratch with no client base or if all of his clients simultaneously decided that they didn't need any more shirts, perhaps the price would fall, but that isn't the case.



> This does _not_ mean that your shirts are necessarily _not_ appropriately priced as according to wider market conditions. It _does_ mean that a consumer in that wider market should dig deeper to figure out if your shirts _should_ command such prices.


Every consumer makes his own determination of what things he values and how much he values them. Of course a potential new AK client would consider whether the shirts that he produces and the service he provides are worth the amount of money he charges for them. The terms and outcome of this consideration will differ greatly from consumer to consumer.



> If a consumer cannot dig deeper or finds little when he does, he _ought_ to be skeptic of your shirts and their pricing.


Kabbaz has been amazingly forthcoming about all things shirts here, in e-mail correspondence, in phone conversations, and at the CSE events over the past three years. For those who care to investigate it, I would wager that one can find more out about Kabbaz and his shirts than about just any other shirtmaker in the world. However, ultimately what matters is the product he produces and the service he offers. Whether he arrives at the prices he charges by calculating his costs and multiplying that figure by a certain percentage or by picking a number he sees on a random license plate has no bearing on the value that his shirts offer is none of my or your business.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

zjpj said:


> AK, this thread and all its implicit chest thumping doesn't reflect well. I'm sure you don't care, but that's just my observation.


 You're surely correct about that. Somehow, by trying to avoid the unpleasant original premise of the thread, I have ended up in the untenable position of trying to explain my business - yet again - to a college student steeped in theory. And I most certainly wish I hadn't ... but that's the price of trying to avoid the alternative. If I came across as chest-thumping, I apologize. I didn't mean to.



zjpj said:


> Second, as someone who has a bit of money, I have to tell you, your premise that there is some correlative ratio between price and how much someone agonizes over a purchase is simply wrong. I've spent more time worrying about which $2 Hallmark card to buy than which $200,000 car (to bring back your original analogy).


 I understand this ... but were you agonizing over the $2 or the poem on the inside of the card?



zjpj said:


> And, furthermore, I care much more about value and about what I'm getting for my buck on smaller purchases. This is particularly so when it comes to things I'm passionate and picky about, like clothes. There are many purchases about which I'm not cost-conscious in the least. These tend to be either those in which I maintain carried equity, like my homes, or highly emotional purchases like vacations. But that has nothing whatsoever to do with how much money I make every hour on average. If I approached a street vendor for a Coke and was told it was $100 - or, better still, that he's not going to tell me the cost but will contact my accountant once I've drunk the soda - I wouldn't buy one. That's not because I can't afford to, for I could buy his whole soda stand if I wanted to. It's something else entirely. Surely you can see that? Some, of course, would slap down a Benjamin and quench their thirst. But I'd be willing to bet that more wealthy people than not would walk away. Generally speaking, you don't get wealthy by writing blank checks.
> 
> You're free to run your business however you want to, and you say that you don't need any new clients, which is great. But as someone who could use your services and chooses not to, I have to say that some of your assumptions about consumers' thought processes are, at least in some cases, not correct.


 Here we do not entirely agree. In the vast majority of cases, my clients treat their clothing purchases similarly to any other accoutrement necessary for the pursuit of their daily lives. Just as they have an aide who is in charge of the florist, the liquor store, and the caterer, they have me. My responsibility is their shirts. If I screw it up, I may lose the job - forever. As long as I don't the entire ball of wax is entrusted to me. They aren't writing blank checks. They are dealing with someone they trust to be sure that their shirt wardrobe is correct, complete, and fit for its purpose at all times. As an aside, in some cases they do have sufficient interest to review fabric patterns. In others it is my responsibility to coordinate shirts with their suit wardrobe.

This is very difficult to explain to a group of fellows who have clothing as one of their primary passions and I do understand a certain degree of incredulity. Nonetheless, the thought processes the majority of my "consumers" utilize are those I have described. That is why, as I have explained countless times in the past, I so enjoy the forum. Here, the members actually have an interest in what I do. That is not the case with the majority of my client roster whose sole interest is that I damn well better get it right ... the first and every time.


----------



## jsprowls9 (Jun 24, 2005)

Wow... it amazes me that people are so curious what tailors earn. I mean, why else would one want to dispute the cost of a garment? Or argue for "price transparency" with such fervor?

Clients come in all shapes and sizes. And, it's our responsibility as business people to figure out what our market is and fill its needs. Carl does so through a value-based proposition (as do I) and Alex does so through a scarcity-based proposition. I decided to rename Alex's market because his clients seek out the fineries in life. His folks don't read Robb Report, they're too busy living it and seeking it out. My clients... well, not so much.

In my practice, I have responded to requests for price transparency. I publish marketing collateral that are updated every year. These list a pricing matrix of my garments and a high-level description of the work that will be performed - in effect: good, better, best. Do clients take this matrix to other tailors and say: "beat this price"? I'm sure they do. But, he's not really in my market, anyway. He'll eventually move on creating room for others.

Any client is free to perform whatever math he wants over the pricing matrix; but, my fees do not change (rush jobs, however, are extra). I do not answer questions about time or duration. I do not answer questions about the cost of inputs. And, I don't answer questions about how much I earn. A gentleman must keep some mysteries to himself. Besides, the appropriate response to any of these questions is: "Are you planning to open a shop for yourself?"


----------



## A Questionable Gentleman (Jun 16, 2006)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> I understand this ... but were you agonizing over the $2 or the poem on the inside of the card?


Every one of those damned greeting card poems causes me agony!

Sorry for the digression. Which way to the thread about the crust-eating nanobuggers?


----------



## zjpj (Sep 19, 2006)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> You're surely correct about that. Somehow, by trying to avoid the unpleasant original premise of the thread, I have ended up in the untenable position of trying to explain my business - yet again - to a college student steeped in theory. And I most certainly wish I hadn't ... but that's the price of trying to avoid the alternative. If I came across as chest-thumping, I apologize. I didn't mean to.
> 
> I understand this ... but were you agonizing over the $2 or the poem on the inside of the card?
> 
> ...


Well, that's great to hear - and because they keep coming back, it's clear that they value the service you provide. My point is, simply, that just because someone has money doesn't mean he doesn't care about value. That's what you seemed to be saying - it's not worth their time to worry about whether you charge $100 or $1,000 or $10,000 a shirt. I don't think that's correct. Whatever you charge may be worth it to them, but that doesn't mean they don't care. Just because someone could drop $100 and not miss it doesn't mean he would do so if he had the choice. 
Best.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Panzeraxe said:


> That's an inept analogy - do you really believe the client in question evaluates each purchase in such a fashion. Just because his net worth jumped up a certain amount in a year it does not mean he follows your reasoning for every purchase he makes. His net worth increase is probably based on a few big bets he has made in a given year and not predicated on his working every second of every day.


 Yes. You are correct. Very poor analogy. Read the followup.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> You're surely correct about that. Somehow, by trying to avoid the unpleasant original premise of the thread, I have ended up in the untenable position of trying to explain my business - yet again - to a college student steeped in theory. And I most certainly wish I hadn't ... but that's the price of trying to avoid the alternative. If I came across as chest-thumping, I apologize. I didn't mean to.


It is now you who are speaking without propriety. I was not offended by your debate with me until now.

First of all, I am not a college student. I am a law student. I would like to assume you made an innocent mistake, but given the rest of your statement, it sounds likely you merely intended to counter my arguments by denigrating my person.

Second of all, and on that note, to insinuate that your position is untenable _because_ I am a student--of whatever sort--or because I am apparently "steeped in theory" amounts to name-calling. In the same way, I might attempt to debase your arguments by insinuating you are merely an over-priced shirtmaker with a self-interest in justifying what you extort from your clients through dubious claims of altruistic artisanship. Of course, you wouldn't like such an insinuation against your character or motivations. I don't either.

Mind you, this is not the first time you have attempted to counter my arguments with reference to my demographic. If you recall, you quite readily questioned my ability to speak on a matter merely because of my age. What next--are you going to insinuate my argument is weak because of my race?

Rather than confront my arguments and thoughts on the face, you have now brought my person into question. I would like to think better of you, but frankly, this amounts to intellectual cowardice.

I have my suspicions about you and your business, but I have not voiced them. I will not at this time because they remain suspicions. However, I think this thread provides reasons why others should have suspicions of a similar sort.


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

I am not sure about what suspicions one might have about a shirtmaker. Do you suspect that he isn't really a shirtmaker, or that he doesn't actually have any customers or that he is lying about the prices he charges. 

I am not a shirt customer of Alex's nor Carl's, but have corresponded with them both through the board and have visited Alex's secret lair. I can confirm that I saw shirts, fabrics, sewing machines and people operating them. 

From the sounds of your exchange with Alex, I think Carl would probably be better for you.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

maxnharry said:


> From the sounds of your exchange with Alex, I think Carl would probably be better for you.


Err, I'm not considering shirts from either. The OP was the one who asked about the differences between them.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> Second of all, and on that note, to insinuate that your position is untenable _because_ I am a student--of whatever sort--or because I am apparently "steeped in theory" amounts to name-calling. In the same way, I might attempt to debase your arguments by insinuating you are merely an over-priced shirtmaker with a self-interest in justifying what you extort from your clients through dubious claims of altruistic artisanship. Of course, you wouldn't like such an insinuation against your character or motivations. I don't either.


Consider what you have done in this thread. Among other things, you have implied that you know Kabbaz's business and clients better than he does. Can you not understand why such an argument makes you look sophomoric?



> Rather than confront my arguments and thoughts on the face, you have now brought my person into question. I would like to think better of you, but frankly, this amounts to intellectual cowardice.


Oh, he did address your arguments, and your statement that he is an intellectual coward is both incorrect and uncalled for. I suggest that you withdraw it.



> I have my suspicions about you and your business, but I have not voiced them. I will not at this time because they remain suspicions. However, I think this thread provides reasons why others should have suspicions of a similar sort.


Suspicions? What suspicions are those? Hinting darkly of suspicions about another man's business without enumerating them is not fair, and it is not appropriate. Either expand on your statement or withdraw it.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

This is getting ridiculous and should be locked.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

jcusey said:


> Consider what you have done in this thread. Among other things, you have implied that you know Kabbaz's business and clients better than he does. Can you not understand why such an argument makes you look sophomoric?


How did I imply that I know AK's business and clients better than he does? If you have been tracking this discussion, you would find that my arguments are based on the assumption that AK's _own_ assessment of his client's economic behavior is accurate. I _did_ say that I find his assessment implausible--as did a number of other posters. _Nonetheless_, I assumed in his favor for the sake of argument.

So no, I don't think I look sophomoric--not to somone who has accurately followed this discussion.



jcusey said:


> Oh, he did address your arguments, and your statement that he is an intellectual coward is both incorrect and uncalled for. I suggest that you withdraw it.


I will not withdraw my statement. Others can judge whether it is appropriate, as they are not children whose ears need to be protected. In fact, I stand by my statement, and I will re-assert it: attempting to debase my arguments because of my status as a student "steeped in theory" is *intellectual cowardice*.



jcusey said:


> Suspicions? What suspicions are those? Hinting darkly suspicions about another man's business without enumerating them is not fair, and it is not appropriate. Either expand on your statement or withdraw it.


I will not withdraw this statement either. I have suspicsions. I am being more fair than necessary by _not_ enumerating them. I did not imply that these suspicions are based on any substantive evidence. I will re-assert for clarity: my suspicions are exactly that, _suspicions_.

Do you think that _you_ look sophomoric for telling me to withdraw my statements as if I could be commanded to do so? I will not. If you wish, you may _delete_ my comments. You may also _ban_ me from this forum. However, do not think for a moment that I will treat with respect anyone who deems fit to command me with ultimatums.


----------



## mmkn (Jan 14, 2005)

*Ipso Loquitur*

I would suggest to the OP that he attends the next Collection of Sartorial Excellence next February and look at AK's and CG's shirts for himself . . . and then decides who fits.

As one can see by the likes of Manton and Smooth Jazz (or the late Film Noir Buff) pursuing this "hobby", it is not just about the physical fit but the mental fit as well . . . and I would submit that the mental fit is much more complex than the physical one.

Best wishes!


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> So no, I don't think I look sophomoric--not to somone who has accurately followed this discussion.


Well, suit yourself. I have been following the discussion, and I believe that I have done so accurately. If you don't see how what you have written can be taken the way that I have taken it, then there's nothing I can do about it.



> I will not withdraw my statement. Others can judge whether it is appropriate, as they are not children whose ears need to be protected. In fact, I stand by my statement, and I will re-assert it: attempting to debase my arguments because of my status as a student "steeped in theory" is *intellectual cowardice*.


Your willingness to take offense about what others say to you seems odd to me when you are completely unwilling to admit that what you say might give offense to others. I will repeat: your accusation of intellectual cowardice is factually incorrect and you should withdraw it.



> I will not withdraw this statement either. I have suspicsions. I am being more fair than necessary by _not_ enumerating them. I did not imply that these suspicions are based on any substantive evidence. I will re-assert for clarity: my suspicions are exactly that, _suspicions_.


Suppose that I were to say that I have suspicions about your academic record but that I refuse to enumerate them. Would that be fair? Of course it wouldn't because it darkens your reputation but lacks the specificity necessary for you to defend yourself at all. Saying that you cheated on the LSAT may be scurrilous, but at least you could refute it. So no, saying here that you have suspicions about Kabbaz's business without enumerating what those suspicions are is not more fair than actually enumerating them. That is why I suggested that you enumerate them or that you withdraw the statement.



> Do you think that _you_ look sophomoric for telling me to withdraw my statements as if I could be commanded to do so? I will not. If you wish, you may _delete_ my comments. You may also _ban_ me from this forum. However, do not think for a moment that I will treat with respect anyone who deems fit to command me with ultimatums.


I could delete your statements, and I could ban you. You're right. I don't intend to do so. I had hoped that you would be willing to think about how what you had written reflected on yourself and that you might want to reconsider them. I suppose that I was mistaken.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Every time this subject arises I do a terrible job of explaining my thoughts. Permit me to try to clarify. In general, Panzer, zjpj, and mafoofan are writing from the point-of-view of a potential client. I am not. While they are trying to investigate my practices I am simply living my business. Here is a more detailed explanation of what I mean by that:

I have had the vast majority of my clients for a very long time. In any sort of bespoke making, over time strong relationships develop between artisan and client. Those relationships are built upon a great degree of trust. I, for my part, am taking my client at his honor that my unsecured investment of $20,000 in his wardrobe will eventually be rewarded with a check for $20,000. My client, for his part when writing the check, is trusting that each and every one of the now paid-for shirts will be exactly as expected when they are ultimately removed from their package and worn. My typical client values most shirts that fit properly, are correctly made, are perfectly appropriate to the situation that they were made for, and come with unquestioned, ongoing service from their maker. The value they place on these things is sufficient that a high-priced shirt which comes with these things provides much more value to them than a moderately-priced shirt which does not. Most folks may place different values on different things and may not be able to conceive of a person who thinks like my typical client does, but that has no bearing on the fact that this is the daily reality of the people for whom I typically make shirts.

It is from that position of mutual trust that I have opined in this thread. I now understand that those who are potential clients have no way of knowing this. When I said that I have written thousands of words about my methods and philosophies I was attempting to counter this lack of knowledge. There is no way that I can, without writing a PR man's dream of a puff piece, detail here all I do in making shirts which I feel is an improvement over other's practices. That would not only be inappropriate but would to many appear to be "badmouthing" the practices of other shirtmakers. This is why I suggested, at the onset of this thread, that a better course might be to use the search function to read all of what Carl and I have said about shirtmaking over the years.

The price issue is the most contentious here and the majority of the responses omit a critical fact. My prices are well known. Any client who requests one is welcome to a price list, published annually in January. When I claim the irrelevance of price to this discussion, it is for those simple reasons. Nobody who is a client, nor anyone considering becoming a client, is unaware of my price structure. Price point is publicly stated on my website; additionally each potential client receives a letter containing price ranges and the parameters therefore. Under no circumstances was I saying that price is not an issue. What I have been trying to convey - unsuccessfully as usual - is that once the decision has been made that this price range is acceptable, price ceases to be an issue.

Mafoofan: You have made some remarks above which I feel deserve a response:



mafoofan said:


> First of all, I am not a college student. I am a law student. I would like to assume you made an innocent mistake, but given the rest of your statement, it sounds likely you merely intended to counter my arguments by denigrating my person.
> 
> Mind you, this is not the first time you have attempted to counter my arguments with reference to my demographic. If you recall, you quite readily questioned my ability to speak on a matter merely because of my age. What next--are you going to insinuate my argument is weak because of my race?
> 
> Rather than confront my arguments and thoughts on the face, you have now brought my person into question. I would like to think better of you, but frankly, this amounts to intellectual cowardice.


 Here you have unwittingly countered your own argument. Only one steeped in the world of academia would take offense at the semantic difference between "college student" and "law student". The simple fact that you have elected to continue for an additional three years of specialized college beyond your baccalaureate degree does not remove you from the general realm of "college student" in the eyes of older folks. Taking offense at this and using it as a club to beat me over the head with seems like a overreaction to me. Obliquely imputing racist motivations to me is much more insidious and is, frankly, despicable.



Mafoofan said:


> I have my suspicions about you and your business, but I have not voiced them. I will not at this time because they remain suspicions. However, I think this thread provides reasons why others should have suspicions of a similar sort.


 This slander by innuendo is the basest form of tactic and should be beneath your dignity. You ought to be ashamed.


----------



## lichMD (Jun 30, 2005)

Interesting.
Wasn't this thread locked?


----------



## son of brummell (Sep 29, 2004)

*There you go again!*

All of you guys get caught-up in an argument of "value vs. price vs. quality vs. beauty" that freshmen have at the pub around 1:00 am.

Essentially, a customer finds a custom maker in this manner:

1. customer needs a custom shirt;

2. customer asks a friend for a recommendation; or customer turns to the custom department of his old, reliable retailer, such as Brooks or Saks or Neimans; or customer does some research on the web, such as Ask Andy; or customer reads a positive review about the maker in either "Departures" or "New York Magazine";

3. customer determines if the maker's prices fit his budget and his "mindset" about what is his maximum price for a custom shirt; there are billionaires who would never spend $200+ for a shirt while there are students who would; N.B. few customers place an order without checking price first; and

4. customer determines whether he is satisfied with the product and customer service and will return for repeat orders; a big part of this determination is the maker's personality.

It's all as simple as that.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

son of brummell said:


> All of you guys get caught-up in an argument of "value vs. price vs. quality vs. beauty" that freshmen have around the pub around 1:00 am.
> 
> Essentially, a customer finds a custom maker in this manner:
> 
> ...


 Would you be available to handle my public relations going forward?


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

son of brummell said:


> All of you guys get caught-up in an argument of "value vs. price vs. quality vs. beauty" that freshmen have at the pub around 1:00 am.
> 
> Essentially, a customer finds a custom maker in this manner:
> 
> ...


This makes perfect sense. When I decided I needed to replace my suits I shopped around the Washington area. I happened into SFA one evening. The store had a trunk show and a salesman introduced me to the Canali rep who I found very knowledgeable. He compared and contrasted the quality of his product to Zegna, Brioni, Kiton, Brooks Bros, Polo etc and had me try on two different fitting Canali models. The Canali rep was also about my height (5' 5") and build. AND I thought he was well dressed in his Canali suits. (I saw him on two different days wearing different suits). So I thought I would look similar given our similar heights and builds. If I like the suits I ordered I will buy more.

I really don't know anyone who buys custom shirts who I think is well dressed. So I have turned to this forum. SFA and NM don't seem to offer good value in MTM shirts. I can get bespoke for what they charge for MTM.

Thanks for your helpful post!


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Mafoofan: You have made some remarks above which I feel deserve a response:
> 
> Here you have unwittingly countered your own argument. Only one steeped in the world of academia would take offense at the semantic difference between "college student" and "law student". The simple fact that you have elected to continue for an additional three years of specialized college beyond your baccalaureate degree does not remove you from the general realm of "college student" in the eyes of older folks. Taking offense at this and using it as a club to beat me over the head with seems like a overreaction to me. Obliquely imputing racist motivations to me is much more insidious and is, frankly, despicable.
> 
> This slander by innuendo is the basest form of tactic and should be beneath your dignity. You ought to be ashamed.


1. I think others would agree that the difference between a college student and a law student is not merely semantic. To go to law school is no mere continuation of my college education, but an endeavor for which I had to achieve the opportunity to pursue through merit and commitment.

Furthermore, you know very little about me. As anyone can attest, law students range widely in age and experience. I have classmates that are perhaps as old as you, Alex. There are some that have been doctors, engineers, and businessmen.

2. Furthermore, you are missing the point. It would not matter if I was a _junior high school_ student. I take offense that you have, on more than one occasion, used my age or status in life to denigrate my arguments. I will say a third time: this is _*intellectual cowardice*_ because it is choosing to attack the person rather than the idea, which is much easier to do.

3. You have frequently demonstrated your inability to understand the distinction between a statement of fact and a conditional statement. So let me clarify for you. I did not say you _were_ a racist; I suggested that if you choose to judge my arguments based on my age or position in life, you might as well do so based on my race.

4. The basis for my suspicions of you and your business are well encompassed by this thread. Anyone is free to read through it.

You have raised implausible economic arguments that conveniently paint you as an altruistic artisan--but then attack counter-arguments as mere theory. You have shown that you have no problem taking issue with someone's station in life. You have shown a reluctance to discuss your shirts when directly asked under the guise or propriety, while you have had no problem speaking against others' methods of production in the past.

In general, you have shown yourself to be extremely defensive and arrogant.

These are not qualities I would associate with 'the best shirtmaker in the world', or even an 'excellent shirtmaker'. I would, in fact, make a point of avoiding such a shirtmaker altogether.

Hence I am suspicious of why so many other clients would tolerate these qualities. Do your 'clients' simply not exist? Or do you hide these qualities from them. Where are the Kabbaz shirts that some on this forum are so sure are the best in the world? Why are so few examples to be found in the hands of forum members--some of whom are clearly wealthy enough to pay the prices you charge? Why would someone so accomplished feel the need to denigrate a mere 'college student'? Why does it seem as if you have so much to prove through your attitude?

Why is it that this thread re-opened at the time you saw fit to answer it, without notice to its other participants (at least, not me)?

I honestly do not know the answers to these questions. If I pretended to, then perhaps you could rightfully accuse me of libel. However, I have made very clear that I _do not_ know the answers.

5. Regardless of whatever talent or accomplishment you may or may not have, you should be ashamed of the way you have comported yourself in this discussion. You've harmed your reputation much more than I ever could.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> Why is it that this thread re-opened at the time you saw fit to answer it, without notice to its other participants (at least, not me)?


It was reopened because Andy saw fit to do so. He is under no obligation to notify anybody when he does so. The fact that it came to the top of the board again should have been enough notice, in any case.



> 5. Regardless of whatever talent or accomplishment you may or may not have, you should be ashamed of the way you have comported yourself in this discussion. You've harmed your reputation much more than I ever could.


For the life of me, I cannot understand why you are so willing to interpret what others write to you in the worst possible light but take extreme umbrage when others do the same to you. You've had a number of hours to reconsider what you have written here, and you've squandered that opportunity.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

jcusey said:


> For the life of me, I cannot understand why you are so willing to interpret what others write to you in the worst possible light but take extreme umbrage when others do the same to you. You've had a number of hours to reconsider what you have written here, and you've squandered that opportunity.


You _are_ aware of the difference between a prejudicial accusation and a statement reflective of one's _actual_ behavior, aren't you?

Feel free to show me where in this discussion I have made a prejudicial comment toward Alexander Kabbaz: that is what I have accused _him_ of doing.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> You _are_ aware of the difference between a prejudicial accusation and a statement reflective of one's _actual_ behavior, aren't you?
> 
> Feel free to show me where in this discussion I have made a prejudicial comment toward Alexander Kabbaz: that is what I have accused _him_ of doing.


Oh, please. You're telling me that you've gone apesh!t because he called you a college student instead of a law student and did so as part of an attempt to argue that maybe, just maybe, he had a better understanding of the economics of his business than you do? That's it? For that, you made dark insinuations about his honesty, character, and ethics and rufused to enumerate them? For that you accuse him of intellectual cowardice and try to leave the casual reader with the impression that he is a racist? All because he implied (quite correctly, as your arguments make clear) that you lack the experience to understand his clients or his business. I'd be ashamed to admit such a thing.


----------



## sheik (Apr 24, 2005)

I find it awkward that Al, a moderator, is going toe to toe with mafoofan.

Obviously the alternatives are difficult:

1. Al recuses himself and never responds to criticisms or
2. Al gives up being a moderator so that he can defend his business.

I don't know if anyone else feels this way, but I do.

To be completely clear (and so that an unnecessary sh!tstorm is not kicked up), I am *NOT* implying that Al is misusing his position as a moderator in this debate. I am simply implying that this exchange makes me uncomfortable, and wanted to see if I were alone or if there were others who agree.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

jcusey said:


> Oh, please. You're telling me that you've gone apesh!t because he called you a college student instead of a law student and did so as part of an attempt to argue that maybe, just maybe, he had a better understanding of the economics of his business than you do? That's it? For that, you made dark insinuations about his honesty, character, and ethics and rufused to enumerate them? For that you accuse him of intellectual cowardice and try to leave the casual reader with the impression that he is a racist? All because he implied (quite correctly, as your arguments make clear) that you lack the experience to understand his clients or his business. I'd be ashamed to admit such a thing.


I have not gone "apesh!t." In fact, I think I have been very patient and as civil as possible.

If Alex can rightfully use my status as a college student to question my understanding of economics, I might as well use my greater level of formal education to question his. But I didn't did I? (And for you and Alex, who apparently are not clear on this: _I am not saying that Alex is wrong *because* he has less formal education_--I'm not even saying there's anything _wrong_ with having less formal education.)

Also, you do realize--not that it is entirely relevant--that I am not the only person in this thread to question Alex's understanding of economics. Is it okay in their cases because they are not merely college students?

I believe I have contributed less to the paltry impression that Alex is a racist than you or Alex have yourselves. I never called Alex a racist--I suggested that his use of my age or status is similar to the use of my race in argument. This I stand by. By defending his right so voraciously to argue against me using my demographics, you are insinuating that my race would be fair game as well. I'm sure you don't like that consequence, as I am willing to bet you are no racist--thus, why can't you admit that it's not honorable or fair to infer from demographic fact in the first place?

At the end, I adimt _I know next to nothing about Alex's particular business_. However, I _do_ have some understanding of economics. Others are free to read my analysis and arguments to determine for themselves how strong my understanding is.


----------



## healinginfluence (Mar 1, 2006)

Guys: In my opinion this is way out of hand. I am truly sorry that a thread I started ended this way. Alex has helped me to understand the custom shirt business and what he offers. Carl has done the same. They are both experienced and reputable businessmen and I would be happy to do business with either or both and I want to express my thanks to both of them.

At this point, I would make a plea to this fine web community for peace among men.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

sheik said:


> I find it awkward that Al, a moderator, is going toe to toe with mafoofan.
> 
> Obviously the alternatives are difficult:
> 
> ...


 I'm sorry if it wasn't perfectly obvious to you as it has been stated countless times in other threads. Monerators cannot and do not moderate any thread in which they are a subject. In these cases, I am automatically recused.

Feel free to ream me a new one. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

mafoofan said:


> I believe I have contributed less to the paltry impression that Alex is a racist than you or Alex have yourselves. I never called Alex a racist--I suggested that his use of my age or status is similar to the use of my race in argument. This I stand by. By defending his right so voraciously to argue against me using my demographics, you are insinuating that my race would be fair game as well. I'm sure you don't like that consequence, as I am willing to bet you are no racist--thus, why can't you admit that it's not honorable or fair to infer from demographic fact in the first place?


This thread was re-opened over my objection and it is not getting any better.

The discussion has nothing to do with clothing. If the disputatious members insist that there be a "winner", kindly take it off line.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

mafoofan said:


> I have not gone "apesh!t." In fact, I think I have been very patient and as civil as possible.


:icon_smile_big: Oh, boy. Do you actually believe that?



> I believe I have contributed less to the paltry impression that Alex is a racist than you or Alex have yourselves. I never called Alex a racist--I suggested that his use of my age or status is similar to the use of my race in argument. This I stand by. By defending his right so voraciously to argue against me using my demographics, you are insinuating that my race would be fair game as well. I'm sure you don't like that consequence, as I am willing to bet you are no racist--thus, why can't you admit that it's not honorable or fair to infer from demographic fact in the first place?


Suppose I say that I'm not going to claim that you're a spoiled brat who has the manners of a pig in slop. It would be disingenuous to claim that I never insulted you and rely on the literal meaning of my words as evidence. What you wrote was a textbook example of paralipsis. If that wasn't you intention, fine, but you shouldn't pretend that that my interpretation and Alex's interpretation of what you wrote was not reasonable. (And, incidentally, invoking a person's youth and inexperience in an argument is hardly the same thing as invoking his race. I'm surprised that you cannot see the difference.)

Alex (and others) have responded repeatedly to your statements about the economics of his business. You chose to latch on to his referring to you a college student (as part of a response that contained much more than that) to turn an interesting thread into a nasty one instead of responding to those responses.

I will repeat this one final time, and then I will be done with this thread: why is it that you choose to put the worst possible interpretation on words that are addressed to you but refuse to understand when others do the same with the words you write that are address to them?


----------



## sheik (Apr 24, 2005)

"I'm sorry if it wasn't perfectly obvious to you as it has been stated countless times in other threads. Monerators cannot and do not moderate any thread in which they are a subject. In these cases, I am automatically recused. 

Feel free to ream me a new one."

^ not perfectly obvious because I don't participate in this forum every day, but thanks for the clarification.

In any case, your title as moderator still elevates you above the rank of a mere member and carries with it certain privileges in a debate -- I hope that this is obvious. I am not implying that you have or would abuse this power, I am just saying that this creates somewhat of an uneven playing field.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Will said:


> This thread was re-opened over my objection and it is not getting any better.
> 
> The discussion has nothing to do with clothing. If the disputatious members insist that there be a "winner", kindly take it off line.


 I believe that we can all agree that the practices, methods, and philosophies of makers ... and the price ranges of their wares ... are the be-all and end-all of bespoke clothing. The fact that these are contentious issues does not make them irrelevant issues; nay, it rather makes them supremely important issues.


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> I believe that we can all agree that the practices, methods, and philosophies of makers ... and the price ranges of their wares ... are the be-all and end-all of bespoke clothing. The fact that these are contentious issues does not make them irrelevant issues; nay, it rather makes them supremely important issues.


If that was what we were reading about I would have no objection to the thread.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

sheik said:


> In any case, your title as moderator still elevates you above the rank of a mere member and carries with it certain privileges in a debate -- I hope that this is obvious. I am not implying that you have or would abuse this power, I am just saying that this creates somewhat of an uneven playing field.


That is extremely unfair. We moderators are volunteers who try to make AskAndy a good forum because we care very greatly for it. To decide that this precludes us from participating equally in the community is to say that those to do the most deserve the least.

I daresay that you will find no place in this thread where my moderator job has held back my most critical antagonist. Moreover, you will find three or four other members who took me to task as well and where they rightfully found me erring I accepted their statements with appropriately apologetic answers.


----------



## sheik (Apr 24, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> That is extremely unfair. We moderators are volunteers who try to make AskAndy a good forum because we care very greatly for it. To decide that this precludes us from participating equally in the community is to say that those to do the most deserve the least.
> 
> I daresay that you will find no place in this thread where my moderator job has held back my most critical antagonist. Moreover, you will find three or four other members who took me to task as well and where they rightfully found me erring I accepted their statements with appropriately apologetic answers.


I made it clear in my note above that I don't think it would be a good idea for you to stop participating. I've learned a lot from your contributions and, to be sure, part of the reason you are a moderator is the community's recognition of the value of your contributions.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

sheik said:


> I made it clear in my note above that I don't think it would be a good idea for you to stop participating. I've learned a lot from your contributions and, to be sure, part of the reason you are a moderator is the community's recognition of the value of your contributions.


 In light of the number of times I have chomped on my foot in this thread alone, that was very kind of you. Thank you.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I would just like to defend Alex in general. Everyone who buys a shirt from Alex knows what he is getting into and agrees to it. He enslaves no one and extorts money from no one. 

I may never be able to afford one of his shirts, but they sound like they are wonderful articles of clothing of the finest quality.

Also, if you are taking a slap at those who pay so much for them, I believe Alex, in a thread, once showed that these shirts are so durable that they actually are a similar value to less expensive shirts.

If what this thread reveals about at least one of our future attorneys is an accurate sample of what most of them are like, I fear for our society.

Your smears of Alex are so insane that I don't think anyone who really matters will take them seriously.

Go ahead and flame me now, if you want.


----------



## yachtie (May 11, 2006)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> If what this thread reveals about at least one of our future attorneys is an accurate sample of what most of them are like, I fear for our society.


Forsberg, don't paint the whole profession based on this kid. All of us recall these types showing up during law school. Have no fear, mostly they find themselves on the "I'm a 12th year Associate" track because the clients can't stand their attitude. But let them have their day in the sun- I've found the truth comes out.

Personally I'd fire a firm that would hire this type- and I have.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

I understand, Yachtie.

I did say, IF

I was just really unimpressed by the venom spewed with no apparent real provocation.

The lawyers who defend my employer's interest (we are in real estate) are great American heroes, at least to me and my employer.


----------



## RJmaiorano (Feb 12, 2007)

If I may attempt a slight ease in tensions an interesting fact has been illustrated from this thread. As it is quite obvious to everyone on AAAC, words are quite often misinterpreted, even when speaking directly with someone, in person. To merely make a point, statistically speaking only about 7% of all meaning of words/and or speech lies in the words themselves. The rest lies in facial expressions, gestures, inflections, emphases, etc... This is rather salient and judging by the education of the fora this is already known. Nonetheless, the thread has managed to degenerate sufficiently and regretably. I think if the gentleman had spoken face to face it would have been an amiably if not opinionated conversation that remained civil. Judging by Mr. Kabbaz's reluctance to comment on the thread initially, he has seen his share of such degenerated threads and is aware of this. Unfortunately some ad hominen remarks have been made by quite a few posters. I cannot say that it is worth it. 

If I may attempt to neutrally comment on a few things, being entirely devoid of prior knowledge to either makers products. From the argument about market value, it seems as though, while mafoofan's arguments are theoretically sound, it is also theoretically possible for Mr. Kabbaz's service to be devoid of market influence (to some extent) - if what he offers cannot be found anywhere else in the market then surely his prices need not be connected to another makers. This is further strenthened (IMOP) by his strong and loyal client base that sees little fluctuations, allowing his business to center around their needs - and removing outside market pressure to change prices with his competitors. Again, these comments are made with no knowledge to either maker, or the business, rather to what would be logically congruent in my eyes.


----------



## the etruscan (Mar 9, 2007)

mafoofan said:


> I have my suspicions about you and your business, but I have not voiced them. I will not at this time because they remain suspicions. However, I think this thread provides reasons why others should have suspicions of a similar sort.


This is the one of the nastiest attacks I can imagine someone making. Instead of making claims, which can be debunked, you attempt to lay some sort of veil over Mr. Kabbaz's business.

He is a shirtmaker, he makes shirts. They may be extraordinarily nice, and expensive shirts, but they are shirts. His clients see the product he makes and decide whether to buy more shirts. There's not a lot of potential for dastardly dealings here. It seems like you must have some ulterior motive to construct such a ridiculous, nasty, and outlandish claim.

What exact suspicions can you have? Does he value his time too highly? Does he, gasp, charge a lot of money? Is his work shoddy? It's not like he can be out there performing some kind of massive theft a la Enron. It would appear that his business is extraordinarily simple.

I don't understand why someone feels a need to do something like this at all.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

jcusey said:


> :icon_smile_big: Oh, boy. Do you actually believe that?
> 
> Suppose I say that I'm not going to claim that you're a spoiled brat who has the manners of a pig in slop. It would be disingenuous to claim that I never insulted you and rely on the literal meaning of my words as evidence. What you wrote was a textbook example of paralipsis. If that wasn't you intention, fine, but you shouldn't pretend that that my interpretation and Alex's interpretation of what you wrote was not reasonable. (And, incidentally, invoking a person's youth and inexperience in an argument is hardly the same thing as invoking his race. I'm surprised that you cannot see the difference.)
> 
> ...


A paralipsis is a rhetorical device that attempts to suggest a conclusion by leaving out relevant contextual information. This is not congruent with what I have been doing at all.

Please refer to my original comment referring to the use of race in argument. Did I say that Alex is a racist? In fact, I assume Alex is _not_ a racist, actually. That is precisely why I thought analogizing race with age or my status as a student would make it clear to him that it is unfair to draw inferences from either of those measures in order to refute a point I am making.

Apparently, _you_ believe that it is quite valid to draw upon my age or status as a student. In that case, perhaps I should draw inferences from Alex's lack of scholarship or _his_ age: would you consider this equitable? I could say something like: "Well, I guess I can't expect someone who hasn't been to college to understand economics," or "Unfortunately, age dulls the wits and makes for senility: someone Alex Kabbaz's age is bound to get mixed up in debate." Or would other inferences be equitable? Like, "Well, it isn't surprising that a businessman has sufficient self-interest to promote his business through irrational argument."

No, these are certainly _not_ equitable inferences. And this is not paralipsis. I am giving you examples of why inferring from my age or status as a student yields unpleasant results--much as would be the case if one were to draw an inference from my race. Simply labelling my comments as rhetorical shenanigans do not render them meritless. Shall you now accuse me of working voodoo? I have laid bare my thoughts on this matter for anyone to openly discuss. Many have chosen not to discuss what I have said, and chosen to question my person and my motivations instead--yes, this is intellectual cowardice.

Before you accuse me of doing the same: why don't you look closely at this discussion and find me where I have even _mentioned_ inferences against Alex's credibility _before_ he made inferences against mine? In fact, you will find that I readily assumed in his favor that his description of his clients' behavior was accurate.

If you can find a single example wherein I inferred fact against Alex's favor _before_ he did the same, I will quickly and graciously apologize to Alex and the forum.

But ultimately, you seem to have already conveniently discounted Alex's inferences against me, made in the first instant, because you believe they are valid. I have attempted to not make any inferences at all: though I gladly will make strong inferences against a personality that sees no issue with making inferences against others without cause.

If you are right about the validity of Alex's inferences, then why not put forth an official notice for the forum that age and other measures of life status are fair game for discounting ideas and arguments? I suspect you would not want to do such a thing as it would discourage participation from those members whom do not fit under the preferred categories.

As of the moment, at least two moderators have stated that age and status _are_ fair game on this forum for discounting ideas and comments. I find this extremely disconcerting since, as _moderators_, you have the power to regulate discourse here. Seeing how Andy is the owner of this forum and our host, it is up to him to determine if this is policy or not.

Of course, since it is Andy's forum, he also need not make any policy at all and may simply ignore this request. I will respect that. However, in that case, I will dismiss myself from this forum permanently--with no malice toward Andy--for sake of not risking any future waste of my time as a forum member who is not old enough and not far enough along in my career.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

the etruscan said:


> This is the one of the nastiest attacks I can imagine someone making. Instead of making claims, which can be debunked, you attempt to lay some sort of veil over Mr. Kabbaz's business . . .
> 
> I don't understand why someone feels a need to do something like this at all.


I understand stating the existence of suspicions can connotate negative things about a person. Yet, I did not go so far as to say that my suspicions are _substantiated_, did I?

Alex has gone further than simply stating suspicions of me. He has directly stated that my age and status as a student are to him, _substantially_ sufficient reasons to discount my participation in this discussion.


----------



## aportnoy (Sep 12, 2005)

I, for one, feel there are valid comparisons, Mercedes vs. Lexus, and those which are much less valid or meaningful.

IMHO, CEGO vs. Kabbaz falls squarely into the "less so" category. These are wildly different animals and I doubt anyone would agrue otherwise.

Carl and Alex provide services in the same product category, therein ends the similarities. Alex (or Carl) should be able to charge whatever the market will tolerate and I, like the dearly missed Milton Friedman, bless his right to do so. He owes no one an explanation for how he conducts or structures his business and to infer that he somehow is engaged in inpropriety without hard evidence is most distressing. Especially when Alex and others in his line of work depend on keeping their reputations pristine as so much work comes from referrals.

No one has ever asked Lobb, Paris or Lobb St. James (or Rubinacci for that matter) to justify a damned thing, use them, don't use them, it's just a value decision like any other.

This thread has gotten so far off base that it's hard to believe it will ever find its way home.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

aportnoy said:


> I, for one, feel there are valid comparisons, Mercedes vs. Lexus, and those which are much less valid or meaningful.
> 
> IMHO, CEGO vs. Kabbaz falls squarely into the "less so" category. These are wildly different animals and I doubt anyone would agrue otherwise.
> 
> ...


A lot has gotten lost in this mess. To clarify: I am not saying Alex or Carl should charge more or less. I think they should make as much as they can. In sum, my point was, and still is: if Alex's client base is as immune to cost considerations as he says, then the price of his shirts aren't necessarily market efficient (though they might be, nonetheless). By market efficient, I mean a price that reflects the rational weighing of costs and benefits, thereby reducing economic waste (people throwing their money away).

So in short, my point to Alex (which others have made): your clients probably aren't _that_ cost immune since you must maintain a certain quality level to justify the price you charge.

Which returns us the original problem: whether Alex and Carl's shirts can be compared. Alex's original proposition was that they can't since his (Alex's) shirts are not value-oriented. But if the above argument makes sense to you, then Alex's shirts _are_ value-oriented, though at a different price level.

That would leave us with only two variables to consider: price, and quality. Not surprising if you ask me. So, a comparison _is_ feasible, as long as the price of the shirts is clear and there is civil discussion of their quality.

Is this analysis really so offensive?


----------



## aportnoy (Sep 12, 2005)

mafoofan said:


> That would leave us with only two variables to consider: price, and quality. Not surprising if you ask me. So, a comparison _is_ feasible, as long as the price of the shirts is clear and there is civil discussion of their quality.


I'm not sure that my position is coming across.

I find it hard to believe that any person would be deciding between any two options that are as exponentially apart in price as these. And therefore, I find the comparison not necessarily baseless, but lacking of purpose or utility.

If you want to compare Jantzen vs.CEGO or Anna M. vs. AK, then we have a discussion on the particular merits of why one might be preferable to another.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

aportnoy said:


> This thread has gotten so far off base that it's hard to believe it will ever find its way home.



Here's *HOME:*​ *
A Treatise on the Art of Making Fine Custom Shirts
*by Alexander S. Kabbaz, Shirtmaker
Copyright 2003 Alexander S. Kabbaz, All Rights Reserved

​ Take a piece of fabric six feet long and three feet wide. Cut a one foot circle from the center. Place this hole over your head. Take a stapler and staple the sides together below your arms. Voila! You've made a shirt! Now that you are a qualified shirtmaker, realize that anything beyond those simple basics involves more than just a knowledge of patternmaking, cutting, and sewing. It requires a philosophy, some modicum of pride in one's work, a widely varying degree of knowledge of the art and the craft, some modicum of pride in one's work, and a philosophy. Too repetitious? Take this for fact: Do you have the basics of a high-school education? Do you want to? If the answers to those two questions are in the affirmative, then I personally guarantee the following: Allow me to teach you for one 12-hour day. At the end of that day you will leave my studio with the ability to make a custom shirt from scratch - for anyone. It ain't rocket science and as an engineer I know from whence I speak. Am I inferring that you'll be able to make a shirt as well as I do? I certainly hope not. Will your shirt fit as well as the ones I make? If so, I've wasted quite a few years educating myself. But here's the key: Will it be better than a shirt you could buy from ANY made-to-measure outfit? Absolutely! Will it be better than ANY ready-made shirt you could buy, no matter what the designer name? You've got a 95% chance. Will it equal a custom shirt by Charvet, Battistone, Monsieur Galliet, or Lanvin? Probably not. Now that you know where you stand, let's see how philosophy and pride are two of the three most important factors in making clothes. As you learned in the first paragraph, making a shirt can be extremely simple. Making a shirt that fits, not only as well as it can but especially the way the client wants it to, can be extremely difficult. I know, I know ... you want to hear about Gussets. About hand-stitching. About Split versus One-piece yokes, Fusing versus traditional interlining, etc., etc. It doesn't work that way. First, as any good teacher will tell you, the basics. Read on, MacDuff. We'll get there.  And that begins Philosophy 101. A shirtmaker can adhere to one of two goals with every new client:

Most have a simple goal which I term the *First Philosophy:* 
>>Establish a minimum order which guarantees that you will make a profit. 
>>Make a shirt pattern which does not deviate too far from the norms: stay within 'acceptable' parameters of fit, styling, quality and price. 
>>That way, if the client doesn't like the results of your work, you can claim you 'followed the traditional bespoke methods' and, especially, you haven't lost any money.

The First Philosophy is wonderful. It opens you to no accusations, leaves no possibility of grave error, and guarantees your bottom line. Seems ideal, and that is why it is the Majority Philosophy.

Others adhere to a more dangerous concept, the *Second Philosophy: * 
a]Establish a hefty minimum order to determine whether the client is serious or not. Once that is out of the way, forget about money and begin the fitting process ... and continue it until you, the shirtmaker, are satisfied with the fit.
b]Have a serious initial interview with the potential client. Are they interested in getting their shirts quickly? *Bad*. Do they "not really have time for fittings"? *Worse*. Is 'the wife in charge' of the fit and styling? *Run! Run Fast! Never look back*!

1] Why should it be you and not the client who determines if the fit is correct? Well, hell. 
a]Who knows more about shirts? You, the shirtmaker ... or the client? The client should have been satisfied at least one fitting sample before the shirtmaker. 
b]Who is being advertised when other potential clients view a shirtmakers product? 
c]A modicum of pride...

2] Isn't this idea an anathema to the concept of running a profitable business? Yes ... if you are running a New Millennium Corporation whose only measure of success is the quarterly bottom line. Yes ... if your reputation isn't good enough to keep a steady stream of potential new clients coming to your door. No ... if you are trying to live up to your reputation and realize that somewhere down the line all satisfied clients return for more ... and when they do the fitting process has already been finished. Not only do they return ... they are forced to return. You have their pattern ... and only you know how you assembled the parts.

3] Do you take the first shirt apart and alter it for the second fitting? You really shouldn't. Ripping (as shirt disassembly is called) can alter (stretch, pucker, distort) the fabric in many ways. An adjusted first sample is not nearly the same as making a new second sample ... unless all future shirts are going to be made, ripped, re-sewn, and delivered. And if that's the case, perhaps you should become a Sanitation Engineer so that your title truly relates to your product.

4] So what do you do with the first, second, third, etc. fitting samples? Every January 1, you buy a very large, empty box. Every December 1, you telephone the Salvation Army for a pickup. 

​ *In this treatise, I shall propose various conceptual themes and procedures. At times I'll interject as examples my own parameters which apply to those themes and procedures.

Here is the first of such. * As regards Philosophy, the First or the Second: I am partial to the *Second Philosophy*.

My minimum is as follows: 
1] $5000 of which half is at our initial meeting - that equates to roughly six shirts. 
2] Don't ever cause me to have to do "collections". I want my mental faculties - such as they may be - concentrating upon styling and fit, not worrying about whether I am going to get paid. 
3] Offer me at least half of the respect I'll offer you. 
4] Treat my shirts - and I - with the dignity they deserve. An example of #4: Don't, Mr. Jones, espouse that you prefer not to wear laundered shirts, wear mine once each, and then throw them away - even if you grace my pocket by purchasing 200 shirts annually. Those are my children you are murdering. That finishes Philosophy 101.

So where does the Pride enter into it? Same as it does in any other arena. Here are a few telltale signs:

A]Is the shirtmaker (or tailor, for that matter) trying to make the "process" seem too mysterious and complicated for even the most astute client to understand? Or is he willing to spend as much time as necessary to make sure that you understand as much about what he is doing as you want to?

B]Alternatively, is he being pushy in some areas ... such as insisting that you learn the difference between 100's 2x2 and 170's 2x2? The differences among broadcloths, voiles, twills, and oxfords? The advantages and disadvantages of placket vs. plain centers? ...even if you don't want to?

C]What is his definition of "custom" or "bespoke"? If he gives you two definitions, you've been had. Ask to see the "house style". If it is shown to you, then you are not in the hands of a true custom maker. *The only acceptable definition of a custom garment is that "It Is What The Client Wants It To Be"*. And the only reason there is a difference between the words custom and bespoke is because somebody, somewhere, wanted to cut corners and needed to have a name for his product.

D]Finally, how many fittings should there be? The answer is the similar to the number of buttons on the shirt front - as many as necessary until the shirt front ends. If you take me as an example, I've done it in two fittings ... with the second being perfect. I've done it in 21 - and I still wasn't totally happy. My average is three or four. If you get one fitting and then an alteration of that first fitting ... move on. You are not in a custom house.

 

​   *The Process, simplified, as I see it: The manifestation of the Second Philosophy *
_Attire speaks before you utter one word._ Your appearance is the window through which your are first viewed. The most important result of our initial consultation lies not in the extensive series of measures we place in your file, but in what we garner about your personality, your profession, your taste, and your station in life. Important is not that particular fabric which offers us the greatest profit. Important is the suitability of your wardrobe. This can be considered only if we gain a comprehensive understanding of who you are. Important lies not only in our complimenting your wiser selections and in offering you others from which to choose, but also in having the temerity to suggest that something you might want would be entirely inappropriate for you.

* The image you should portray is the responsibility we wish to accept.* 
On your first visit, we'll chat for a while in order that I might gain a proper sense of your needs. Then we'll discuss styling and fit while I take some 35 measures and notes. 
Later, I'll design, strike, and cut your individual basic pattern. This will incorporate the styling details we discussed and is the springboard from which we'll develop your wardrobe during ensuing years. 
I'll use this pattern to cut, stitch, and launder your first sample which tests my ideas and measures. We use 2x2 120's or 2x2 170's, based on our discussion of your preferences. (Others begin with muslin which is acceptable for the first try-on). 
One week later, faster if circumstances dictate, you return to try on this laundered sample. You criticize, we criticize and pin-fit. 
We alter your pattern, cut and launder a new shirt, and you return for a second fitting. 
Then we again revise your pattern and, a short while later, send you a third sample. This you wear for a day or two thusly insuring that you are completely aware of your likes and dislikes. 
_*These steps are repeated as often as necessary.

*_Once your pattern has been finalized in this manner - to my satisfaction - we cut your first order which is both a minimum and maximum of six shirts. The styles need not all be the same; every fabric may be different. After this initial order, you may order in any quantity desired. This entire process can be collapsed into two intensive days. This is accomplished by your staying in our guest cottage at our East Hampton studios for two days and one or two nights. Each day begins and ends with a fitting with beach or shopping in-between. At the end of the two day stint, your pattern is finalized and your tan is improved!

 *Shirt
Fact*_
To the right is an oyster shell, about 50 years of age when harvested in New Zealand. Its actual size is about 10" across and, at its thickest point, the shell is about 3/8" thick._​ ​ 
What will we do? As far as shirts, blouses, suits, or furnishings, virtually anything. We will design originals (our preference), copy styling details of your old favorites, or work from photos or sketches of styling preferences you might like. We can, if necessary, work initially from your measurements and conference video of you. Delivery varies seasonally and depends (the first time only) on your availability for fittings. Quality should not be rushed. Monograms, if desired, are additional. They are done by hand and require extra time. All of our work is done here on the premises. New clients must place a non-refundable deposit of $1750. Each shirt is slightly different. In a process where everything is hand-done and every shirt considered as a unique entity, this is as it must be. Our promise, therefore, is quite simple. If it is not perfect, we shall make it so ... without question. 
Our charges are set from a viewpoint which allows us to concentrate our efforts solely on the caliber of our work. Truthfully, pricing is the easy part and one we choose not to discuss. Difficult is when we sit down and carefully consider each one of the thousands of individual stitches we make in some 12 miles of Egyptian-grown, European-woven long staple cotton yarn, to which we hand-sew 14-20 New Zealand-grown Mother-of-Pearl buttons. Add eight to 12 hours of tailoring, a hefty dose of creativity, a lifetime of pride and you get...one shirt!

We could go on for pages about our complete individual pattern, an entirely hand-cut garment, the magnifying loupe through which we inspect the fabric we shrink as necessary before cutting, and the many hundreds of other techniques we use to insure the perfection of our craft. However, we consider this not only proprietary but also firmly believe that this is our responsibility. Suffice it to say, thanks to our many loyal clients, we are happy to have the ability to direct our skill and attention solely toward the quality of our shirts.

Before you place a subsequent order, I must see you in a few of the shirts you've found most pleasing. Fine woven cotton will, over time, shape and adapt itself to the wearer. It is only after that has been accomplished that I can make the final little nips and tucks to your permanent pattern. This, by the way, remains an ongoing process. Additionally, should more than four or five years pass between your actual visits to our shop, I'll most probably refuse to make any more shirts until I see you in a recent creation. After all, our only advertising is the answer you give to the question, "Where did you get that shirt?" 
Fitting new clients is our responsibility - solely our responsibility. _ *Should your measurements change*_ or should you desire any alteration in fit at a later date, _*it is solely your responsibility to so inform us*_! Otherwise, lack of this knowledge will obviously cause us to cut your order without alteration of your permanent pattern ... and cause you to pay for ill-fitting work! Should we for any reason make changes to your pattern, we shall normally cut one shirt from your order and send it for your approval. Once you approve the change, we'll then proceed with the remainder. Should you decide later on that you want further changes, such alterations will be charged at our prevailing rates. 
*That is The Process as I see it.

* *  Popular Shirtmaking Questions and Opinionated Answers.*​ *The "Correct Collar" Rules:* Here I diverge greatly from the majority of the common myths. The only hard and fast rule to which I adhere is as follows, and it is more the theory of simple optical illusion than any other. If the client in question is corpulent, a spread collar is unwise. Why? Picture an egg sitting atop a shallow peak. The egg will tend to look rounder and more squat than if you had balanced that egg atop the point of an inverted ice cream cone. Translate egg into roundish countenance, shallow peak into shoulders, and ice cream cone into close-point collar and you'll understand. The optical perception of elongation provided by the close-point collar tends to make the rounded face appear thinner. Aside from that there are no rules. Preference is the key word here. _ Note: If you are fat and wish to appear fatter, the Spread Collar is the perfect solution.

_  *Edge-stitched topstitching versus quarter-inch topstitching.* Although the quarter-inch is the more traditional, edge-stitching blends into rather than breaking up the flat surface of the collar, cuffs, and center placket. Therefore, this look tends to be "cleaner" in appearance. Personally, I prefer this clean look. There are also physical ramifications. The collar stays in a quarter topstitched collar cannot be inserted all the way to the collar point as they can with edge-stitching. Hence, if the collar point presses against your collarbone, it may tend to bend up at the end. Ugh! On the contrary side, there is 1/2" more loose cloth with the edge-stitched style. When ironing this style the tendency for the fabric to bunch up and cause a wrinkle at the edge of collar, cuffs, or center placket is greater. Finally, edge-stitching is harder to sew and therefore generally avoided by most makers.

 

​ *

Split yoke versus one-piece yoke.* There are many fitting details (such as changing the joining angle) and styling options (such as 'chevronning' of stripes) which can be accomplished with the split yoke. The split yoke requires additional sewing and matching. The one-piece yoke is easier to sew as there is no center seam to match and join. There isn't much more to say on this often hotly debated subject. One piece - easier. Split yoke - Harder. Draw your own conclusion.

*Sleeve Placket Buttons and Sleeve Placket Buttonhole Direction.* It is considered improper to show the skin of one's arms when having an audience with British Royalty. It is for this reason that the Sleeve Placket Button came into being. Only you can determine how many meetings you plan to have with the Queen and thereby determine the necessity of this feature. On the other hand, there is a practical application. If you are in the habit of rolling back your cuffs, either for working more comfortably, for washing your hands, or just as a styling option, the placket button provides the tension necessary to keep the cuff flipped up. Conversely, there is no question but that a properly placed sleeve placket will be directly below your arm when you are writing and that therefore that damn button is going to dig into your arm. Which brings me to buttonhole direction. A vertically placed buttonhole will keep the buttonhole centered upon the button. This will doubly insure that the damn button digs into your arm. A horizontally made buttonhole will allow a half inch or so of movement from side to side thereby offering you that much freedom to move the button away from the 'dig point' without actually twisting the sleeve. Additionally, when bending your elbow, the horizontal hole will allow an extra half inch of expansion for freedom of movement. However, the shirtmaker will have 1/2" less leeway to incorrectly mark the vertical placement of the sleeve placket button with the horizontal buttonhole. Draw your own conclusion.  *

Hand-attached collar, sleeves, pockets, or whatever.* This is not a construction feature mandated by a shirtmaker. It is an advertising and public relations stunt mandated by a perverse awareness of the gullibility of the high-end consumer for that which sounds either more 'authentic' or sounds like it requires more skill. Though the technical reasons for this are many, the most blatant include: a] Hand-attaching is commonly accomplished with a single thread at six to eight stitches per inch. When a single thread, passing so infrequently through the fabric, is cut, it takes virtually no time at all for the entire thread to work its way out of the seam in the laundry. When that happens, the attached part is no longer attached. Might be irritating for a brand label; somewhat more annoying when it is the sleeve. b] A sewing machine uses two threads which come together and 'lock' where they join. That, duh, is why it is known as a lockstitch. Even the most poorly sewn shirt will be sewn with at least ten lockstitches per inch. A break in one of these threads will still require dozens of launderings before it begins to unravel. The attached part will not fall out even though it might necessitate repair of the stitching. c] A skilled sewer uses the foot of the sewing machine as a third 'hand'. The setting of a collar, cuff, or sleeve literally require three hands to accomplish properly. When one holds the part to be attached and shirt body in one hand and the needle in the other hand, accuracy is greatly reduced. d] The tendency, when hand sewing as described in c] is to stretch or gather the material being sewn. Just the weight of the body dragging down on the seam where it is bias-cut, as in an arm or neck hole or sleeve cap, will stretch the fabric. Again, a reduction in accuracy.

 *Shirt 
Fact*​ _Pictured from a birds' eye view, the basic shirt pattern is a bit easier to understand. The hardest part to understand is that the pattern, any pattern, is merely a two dimensional plan for a three dimensional object. _​ *

Gussets.* This cute little "styling attribute" is used, literally, to cover up a lack of sewing skill. Notice in the rendering of the Individual Pattern how sharp the three curves are which comprise the transition from the bottom of the front hem to the bottom of the rear hem on each side of the shirt. The sewing 'foot' used to make the hem is called a "scroll foot". Its action is to roll under a small portion of fabric into a finished edge while placing a stitch designed to hold the rolled fabric in place. It is a very difficult foot to use and requires years of practice to master. Because the hem is hidden in the trousers, it is usually not considered one of the more important seams in the shirt. Therefore, in the mass-production prevalent in the majority of shirtmaking operations these days, this step is usually assigned to the lowest person on the totem pole. To eliminate this difficult curve, a different method of manufacture was designed. In the traditional method, the side seams of the shirt are sewn (closed) and then the hem is sewn. In the easier method, the hem is made and then the side seams are closed. Where they join together (side seam, front hem, and rear hem) there is something I can describe only as in incompatible, weak ... mess. Hence, the cute little "Gusset" which, when wrapped around this mess and stitched, not only does hide the mess, but also does really add strength. It is a strength which would not have been needed as it is inherent in the properly made (continuous hem thread) closure. It is a 'mess' which wouldn't need covering if it didn't exist. But, as the PR truthfully says, the Gusset really adds strength. Draw your own conclusion. *

The Fused versus Traditional Collar. 
*a] Style: A properly fused collar is always 'flat'. A traditional collar is, no matter how accomplished the ironer, always a bit 'wavy'. There are those who like to think that the 'wavy' appearance is more traditional. They are entirely correct. A cobblestone street is also more traditional than an asphalt one. Upon which would you rather drive for eight hours? In the arena of styling, therefore, neither fused or traditional methods are 'better'. Preference here is strictly in the eye of the wearer. In my case, I lean towards fused for my dress shirts and traditional for casual or sport shirts. 
b] Construction: Without boring you with hours of technical details, the fused collar is much, much more difficult to properly construct than a traditional one. However, it is easier to improperly construct a fused collar than a traditional one. The reasons for these seeming contradictions are many; understanding can be accomplished only by in-person observation. 
c] A poorly constructed traditional collar will always remain exactly as poorly constructed as it was in the first place. 
d] A poorly constructed fused collar will get worse continuously throughout its life. A few of the major pitfalls include continuous shrinkage, debonding between the shell fabric and interlining resulting in bubbles in the shell fabric, and debonding of multiple inner layers of interlining resulting in non-removable ridges. 
e] The majority of fused collars were, during the 1980's and 1990's, poorly constructed. Though the percentage of more appropriately fused collars seems to be on the increase, there is no way other than reputation to judge fusing quality prior to multiple launderings. 
f] To the skilled maker, there are a myriad of additional styling options and wonderful construction features available only through the use of a fused collar. 
g] A Footnote: Fusing other parts of the shirt is always questionable. The fused component of the collar (the 'leaf') does not touch the skin and is therefore not the part that gets a 'ring around the collar'. The 'ring' affects the non-fused collar band. This is important because soil removal from fused parts is more difficult. For this reason, fusing folding French cuffs is a terrible idea. Fusing is fine for button cuffs as the fused side does not come in contact with the skin. However, button cuffs are commonly used for casual or sport shirts which, in my opinion, are preferably made with the more wavy, loose, traditional methods. *

The Fusing Process* I have been asked to describe the fusing process. Fusing is a process involving the use of high temperature (approximately 155 degrees Centigrade) and high pressure (approximately 35 pounds per square inch) which causes the shell fabric (cotton shirting) to adhere to the interlining. The adhesion is provided by a polyamide adhesive. Polyamide adhesive is a type of plastic. In the actual process the cut collar shaped cloth, interlining, and its coating of adhesive are sandwiched together. They are then heated to the specified temperature. When the specified temperature is achieved, the high pressure is applied uniformly to the three part sandwich for a short period of time which varies from 12 to 18 seconds. The pressure is then removed and the sandwich allowed to cool. The resulting collar exterior is now flat and somewhat "hard". It then returns to the normal shirtmaking processes, is made into a collar, and attached to the shirt as any traditional construction might dictate. The polyamide bond is permanent as long as it is not again heated above 150 degrees Centigrade. In the vast majority of commercial operations, this fusing process is accomplished in a fusing machine which contains a heat tunnel through which passes a conveyor belt. The sandwich is placed on the conveyor belt, proceeds through the heat tunnel, and is then run in-between two high pressure rollers. It then continues out the far side of the machine while cooling. The problem with this process is that plastic or a plastic bond, if in motion while cooling, becomes weak.

 ​ 
A conveyor belt, due to the nature of its operation, is not a flat path but instead a series of waves caused by the underlying rollers. Thus, when the collar is cooling as it moves out of the tunnel, it is not only in forward motion but also undergoing the bending motion provided by the wave characteristics of the belt's rollers. My determination (back in 1982 as previously detailed) was that I needed a machine which would keep the collar/polyamide/interlining sandwich stationery during the cooling process. If you look carefully at the machine, you will see a large aluminum plate suspended from springs. This is the heat surface. The collar sandwich is inserted on a flat metal plate underneath the heat surface where it is then allowed to achieve the necessary temperature. At that time, the 12 ton hydraulic jack you see at the top forces the heat plate down onto the collar sandwich. After the required dwell time, the heating surface raises off of the now fused collar. The metal plate is then withdrawn and its contents allowed to rest motionless until they return to room temperature. Hence, the collar remains perfectly stationary on a stable surface while the bond is drying. This results in the strongest possible bond. Theory is wonderful; product testing reality. Prior to releasing any of the fused collars to my clients, I tested the machine and the resulting products for a period of 18 months. I have one of the original collars I fused back in 1984 on a pink broadcloth shirt. It has been laundered more than 250 times, which is completely unprovable, and I keep it here for all who might be interested in seeing it. The collar began at exactly 16.5 inches in size and is now 16.25 inches in size. *

Pre-washing/Shrinkage:* Cotton shrinks. Period. It is a characteristic of the fiber. If you're told that a fabric is "pre-washed", Pre-shrunk, or anything similar, know this: In order to accurately cut patterned fabrics, the pattern needs to be laid out straight on the cutting table. Shrinking a fabric wrinkles it. Wrinkled fabric cannot be properly cut. Therefore, prior to cutting, a washed fabric needs to be ironed. If you understand the concept of a tailor "shaping" a garment with an iron, then you understand how ironing can distort a pattern. Hence, the person doing the ironing needs to be fairly skilled at the task in order to keep the pattern straight. If you realize that the only lower person on the totem pole than the person sewing the shirt hem is the person ironing the cloth, it stands to reason that either the cloth ain't pre-washed or the stripe ain't straight if it is prewashed! Therefore, all shirt patterns need to have an allowance built in for shrinkage. Furthermore, good shirtmakers test their fabrics to learn the percentage of shrinkage (in both warp and weft) of each different cloth type. A standard must be set. Ours, for example, is 1%. Any fabric which shrinks more, must be properly and extremely carefully pre-shrunk and ironed in a manner which leaves a residual 1% shrinkage. The average shirt being approximately 48" around at the chest, a 1% error in shrinkage calculation can result in about 1/2" too large or small in the finished shirt body. A 5% miscalculation, surprisingly not uncommon in voiles, will result in more than a 2.5" error. Do you feel that your broadcloth shirts are looser than your oxfords? Probably true.

 *Marking up the Price of Cloth; Price, in General.* 
Markup: In what business does one sell their inventory for the same price they paid for it? If you wish to engage in self-deception and mark up your total cost of the garment as a whole rather than sum the total of the individually marked-up components, that is your choice. You are still arriving at the same price, i.e.: $10 fabric x 2 = $20. $10 labor x 2 = $20. Total selling price = $40. -or- $10 Fabric + $10 Labor = $20. Markup x 2= $40. Selling price is the same.

Selling Price: 
A] Ethical considerations: Thankfully, we live in a free society which operates on the capitalist system. Supply and demand are the arbiters of price, except in regulated monopoly industries such as electric power generation. If a shirtmaker offers his wares for $1000 and nobody is willing to pay the price, the shirtmaker is either going to lower his price or go out of business. The same premise applies to a computer manufacturer and the local gasoline station. "Gouging" as is sometimes referred to in the Style Forum, is being improperly used. "Gouging" is when you charge a exorbitant price for an item without which the public cannot survive, i.e. water, food, gasoline, shelter ... and you are the sole reasonable source of supply, i.e. the general store in a remote area when the roads are washed out. Price "gouging" in the custom clothing trade is impossible. Nobody is going to die or physically suffer if they cannot get custom made clothing. 
B] Qualitative considerations: Hypothetical Example #1: It requires about 5 minutes to iron a shirt leaving 10% of the surface wrinkled. It requires 25 minutes to iron a shirt leaving 1% of the surface wrinkled. Therefore, it cost 4 times as much to improve the ironing by a factor of 9%. Hypothetical Example #2. It requires 30 minutes to close and hem a shirt using the "Gusset Method" described above. It requires 60 minutes to close and hem a shirt using the more difficult traditional method also described above. There is, in point-of-fact, no difference between the strengths of the finished seaming.

 

​  Therefore it cost double for a provable qualitative improvement of Zero. These examples serve to illustrate the concept that, although a $500 shirt may cost twice as much as a $250 shirt, it may not be twice as good. It may, however, cost the maker twice as much to make the shirt 10% better.

*Swiss & Italian Fabrics versus Just About All the Rest.* Firstly, there's no secret to the fact that the Swiss and Italian weavers are more experienced and hold to higher standards than most others. That's why when Loro Piana, for example, decided to begin weaving in Connecticut during the mid 1990's, they imported their entire crew of retired weavers from Italy for a year to teach the new employees in Connecticut. The human component is quite influential in the quality of the finished product. Secondly, the yarns used in these two countries are spun locally. The same pride and work ethic are integral there as well. Finally, loom speed. "Just About All the Rest" run their looms much faster and produce much more yardage per loom hour than do the Swiss and Italian mills. Higher speed has the effect of causing microscopic breaks and weak points in the weaving yarns due to the increased tension. This does not show up in the raw finished product. These microscopic deficiencies begin to expose themselves when the resulting shirt is finally laundered. And that, quite simply is why the Swiss/Italian fabrics get better with age while the Japanese and like fabrics are lucky to survive 30 washes.

*Stitches-Per-Inch *This widely used criteria is usually misunderstood. Although it correct that a poorly made shirt will usually have a much lower stitch count, it does not follow that a well-made will have 24, 26 or more stitches-per-inch (s.p.i.) throughout the shirt. Firstly, you need to understand why. The speed of a sewing machine is measured, not in linear dimension, but in stitches-per-minute. Hence, the fewer stitches in an inch, the faster the machine sews that inch. That is the simple reason cheaper shirts have fewer stitches - the lower stitch count means the sewing goes more quickly, In the best shirts, a varying number of s.p.i. are used depending upon the part of the shirt being sewn. For example, certain of the stitches in the shirt are meant to be more-or-less easily removed. Good examples of this are the stitches which attach the collar and cuffs. If these are difficult to remove by virtue of being too close together, then the process of ripping (disassembly) in the refurbishing the shirt with new collar and cuffs would certainly cause the neckhole or sleeve-end fabric to tear under the strain. On the other hand, flat, interlined surfaces appear nicer with more stitches. Examples here include the topstitching on the collar and cuffs. Here, puckering is not an issue because the interlining overpowers any tendency of the thread to pucker. In this area, we would tend to use between 24 and 30 s.p.i. depending on the type of fabric and weight of interlining. A similar, but slightly lower, count is used for the front center placket and the yoke stitching. The side closing seams do best as a compromise between pucker and durability at about 18-20 s.p.i. In summation, a lower quality shirt will be sewn in the area or 6-10 s.p.i. At this low count, durability does become an issue. Better shirts begin at about 14 s.p.i., and the best shirts range from 14-16 up to 30 s.p.i., again depending on the particular part being sewn and the fabric/interlining combination. One hard and fast rule is that better shirts use only lockstitches, in certain areas preferable as single needle, but in one or two areas there are cases where a special double-needle lockstitch machine will perform better. This occurs only in areas where a close, parallel double row of stitches are necessary such as in a front center placket or a double-topstitched rear yoke. These double-needle lockstitch machines are extremely rare, require untoward maintenance, and can be properly utilized only by an extremely skilled operator. *

The History of Kabbaz Shirts* It has been noted that some of my responses seem to be based on the experience of making thousands of shirts weekly yet other responses cite our work to be 10-15 shirts each week. In order to understand, and to gauge my ability to answer shirt questions from a wide perspective, you need to understand my shirtmaking history.

_ I began as an apprentice during the mid-1970's at Pec & Co. learning virtually nothing from Fred Calcagno except that the concept of quality was foreign to him. Frustrated by his lack of teaching and the continual rejection of my attempts to improve the shirts, I decided to strike out on my own and bought a small company founded by Carlin Poster in 1937 on Wall Street. He had died a few years previously and his wife was failing in her attempt to continue the business. Under her stewardship, the firm had gone from 1000 to well under 200 clients. By the mid 1980's, I had rebuilt Poster Shirt to around 1200 clients. At that point, I returned to 57th Street and purchased the larger Pec & Co. I was now serving some 3000 clients. Contrary to rumor, I never did merge the companies as the Poster shirt was, by then, quite a bit better than the Pec shirt. I did, however, move Poster into Pec's building. Shortly thereafter and in rapid succession, offers were made to me and I purchased Denhof Shirts and the Rhodes Shirt Company. Denhof made a cheaper shirt, mostly for stores, and Rhodes was serving almost 25,000 customers with mail-order "custom" shirts. We now had three factories in two states and were making almost 1000 shirts weekly. I was then approached by Alexander Julian, for whose retail stores Denhof had been supplying made-to-measure shirts. He wanted us to expand even further and take over production of all of their upscale ready-to-wear shirts as well. And we did. Our production now reached its zenith in the range of 1200-1500 shirts each week. And I absolutely, positively hated it! I spent my days supervising some 70 employees - 50 in Connecticut and 20 in New York. I never got to touch a pattern, feel the fabric, or cut a shirt. After a couple of years of this, I looked at my wife and said, "Let's close it down". Knowing how I felt and aided in part by Alexander Julian's bankruptcy which stuck us for a high six-figure loss, she agreed. Within a year, we reduced ourselves back to only our baby, the top-end custom shirt business. We moved to Madison Avenue and contacted our best 300 clients with our new location. I returned to making patterns and cutting, Joelle to sewing and finishing._

Now, although the business constantly tries to grow itself, we've become very adept at kicking it back down to the size we want: 10-15 shirts each week. And, by the way, we don't consider them shirts. They are our children. Though they may leave for a while, they always come home for a bit of TLC, a nice bath, perhaps a new collar. And that is why some answers will be based on the ability to make 1000 shirts a week while others are based on our preference to make far, far fewer.

 

​  I have tried to answer many of the questions which have been posed regarding shirts on various style fora as well as many I have been asked over the years by clients. My viewpoint is naturally subjective and I am making no attempt to conceal that fact. Kabbaz-Kelly Clients and this Forum's members are hereby granted permission to use quotations from this post not exceeding 200 words solely within the Forum and to print one copy of this treatise in its entirety solely for their own personal use. Any other reproduction of the material in this post will be considered a violation of the copyrights listed herein.
I am always happy to try to answer questions regarding the making of shirts. You can e-mail or post further questions on the Forum. Thank you for slogging through.   ​


----------



## rnoldh (Apr 22, 2006)

mafoofan said:


> That would leave us with only two variables to consider: price, and quality. Not surprising if you ask me. So, a comparison _is_ feasible, as long as the price of the shirts is clear and there is civil discussion of their quality.
> 
> Is this analysis really so offensive?


Not so much offensive as is is divisive and counter-productive.



aportnoy said:


> I'm not sure that my position is coming across.
> 
> I find it hard to believe that any person would be deciding between any two options that are as exponentially apart in price as these. And therefore, I find the comparison not necessarily baseless, but lacking of purpose or utility.
> 
> If you want to compare Jantzen vs.CEGO or Anna M. vs. AK, then we have a discussion on the particular merits of why one might be preferable to another.


I agree with Andrew in that the comparison lacks purpose or utility.

Mafoofan, it seems that you are using arguments of logic and rhetoric, which are often correct, but are missing the forest for the trees.

Let's take mafoofan, AK, and CEGO out of the argument.

And let's say that we are making a comparison using the parameters of price and quality to compare a $.99 Wendy's meal to a $300.00 haute cuisine dinner (without wine of course).

Could it be done? Of course! Would it be entirely within the bounds of mafoofan's parameters? Certainly, it could be.

Would it make sense? Would it contribute anything to gastronomic knowledge? We all know the answer. It reminds me of the thrust of this thread.


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

mafoofan said:


> A lot has gotten lost in this mess. To clarify: I am not saying Alex or Carl should charge more or less. I think they should make as much as they can. In sum, my point was, and still is: if Alex's client base is as immune to cost considerations as he says, then the price of his shirts aren't necessarily market efficient (though they might be, nonetheless). By market efficient, I mean a price that reflects the rational weighing of costs and benefits, thereby reducing economic waste (people throwing their money away).
> 
> So in short, my point to Alex (which others have made): your clients probably aren't _that_ cost immune since you must maintain a certain quality level to justify the price you charge.
> 
> ...


This analysis is not offensive and has been done before. What've offensive is the "I have my suspicions" shtick. I'm not sure what you hoped to accomplish with that, but its just silly. If you have suspicions, then out with them and let folks speak up for themselves.


----------



## dragon (Jan 28, 2006)

Can't go wrong with Alex or CEGO


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

rnoldh said:


> Not so much offensive as is is divisive and counter-productive.
> 
> I agree with Andrew in that the comparison lacks purpose or utility.
> 
> ...


To at least one person, the original poster, the comparison is relevant. Of course, maybe you're right and it _shouldn't_ be relevant to him. But, in that case, the original poster deserves a good reason why.

As my argument goes, distinguishing between the two shirtmakers' shirts as value- or quality-oriented doesn't provide a good reason why the original poster's interest isn't relevant, since the distinction is flimsy at best. So, basically, the question becomes, "What extra quality do I get from buying Kabbaz shirts over CEGO shirts?" Answering this question is how you convince someone that the two shirts are 'two different animals'.

This shouldn't be divisive at all. Both Carl and Alex agree that you don't get the same quality level from Carl's $100 shirts as you do from Alex's $600+ shirts. So what's the difference? There is no divisiveness so long as value judgments are left to individual forum members to make.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

maxnharry said:


> This analysis is not offensive and has been done before. What've offensive is the "I have my suspicions" shtick. I'm not sure what you hoped to accomplish with that, but its just silly. If you have suspicions, then out with them and let folks speak up for themselves.


I did enumerate some suspicions I had--after being pushed to do so. And as I've already pointed out, my initial statement that I have suspicions followed observing Alex's behavior in this thread and his perjorative reference to me as a 'college student' that is 'steeped in theory'.


----------



## maxnharry (Dec 3, 2004)

mafoofan said:


> I did enumerate some suspicions I had--after being pushed to do so. And as I've already pointed out, my initial statement that I have suspicions followed observing Alex's behavior in this thread and his perjorative reference to me as a 'college student' that is 'steeped in theory'.


And do you still hold those same suspicions?


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

maxnharry said:


> And do you still hold those same suspicions?


Absolutely.


----------



## zjpj (Sep 19, 2006)

aportnoy said:


> I, for one, feel there are valid comparisons, Mercedes vs. Lexus, and those which are much less valid or meaningful.
> 
> IMHO, CEGO vs. Kabbaz falls squarely into the "less so" category. These are wildly different animals and I doubt anyone would agrue otherwise.
> 
> ...


Unless we're calling for a justification of the price of Vass in the United States?  :devil: Just kidding - that can of worms doesn't need to be anywhere near this thread.

Kumbaya


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

I'll see your plain, for that collar looks *terrible*, and raise you one horizontal:


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

Well, it seems this is the place to be. And to think I was off working all day. 

Clearly, the thread has moved beyond substance into insistence on being right. It's an easy trap to fall into. We've all done it at one time or another. No one is going to win at this point, and all that is going to result is more tit for tat and ill will. 

Let us affirm that Alex makes shirts that people pay a lot of money for and that mafoofan is a law student with a very cool blog. I don't think anything much else is going to be accomplished here.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

All I can say, mafoofan, is that between your searching for racism in LabelKing's comments on Chinese men buying Omega watches and taking offense at being referred to as a college student, you are one of the touchiest people I have ever encountered.


----------



## zjpj (Sep 19, 2006)

^^^ now that collar is nice


----------



## Karl89 (Feb 20, 2005)

Mafoofan,

You freely admit that your "suspicions" about AK are unsubstantiated and without evidence, yet you still harbor them. Sounds more like a superstition than a suspicion.

But no matter, MY suspicions about you have been confirmed by your behavior in this thread.


Karl


----------



## Panzeraxe (Jan 11, 2004)

I actually like the collar on the white shirt - looks very soft. I have never been a fan of horizontal stripes - a bit too jarring for my eyes.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

mafoofan said:


> [. . .]Hence I am suspicious of why so many other clients would tolerate these qualities. Do your 'clients' simply not exist? Or do you hide these qualities from them. Where are the Kabbaz shirts that some on this forum are so sure are the best in the world? Why are so few examples to be found in the hands of forum members--some of whom are clearly wealthy enough to pay the prices you charge? Why would someone so accomplished feel the need to denigrate a mere 'college student'? Why does it seem as if you have so much to prove through your attitude?
> 
> [. . .]
> 
> I honestly do not know the answers to these questions. If I pretended to, then perhaps you could rightfully accuse me of libel. However, I have made very clear that I _do not_ know the answers.


I missed this before, as I was merely skimming the thread for something constructive. As someone who prides himself on being a law student (as opposed to a lowly "college" student), I would assume you would know that these are _not_ mere questions you are innocently and honestly posing, but rather rhetorical devices meant to bring about implications. Your qualification of not knowing the answer does not negate the potentially libellous nature of the statements. It's a bit like punching someone in the face and then saying "just kidding." This is extremely serious, and you should know better.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Panzeraxe said:


> I actually like the collar on the white shirt - looks very soft. I have never been a fan of horizontal stripes - a bit too jarring for my eyes.


My objections are that the costume department did a poor ironing job and that, while the left collar point is solidly against the jacket, the right point is not. Although that's more likely the jacket construction (hey, what the heck would you expect the shirtmaker to say?!?) there is a nano-chance it might be the shirt. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

4] Which Salvation Army?


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

jamgood said:


> Which Salvation Army?


 For a while it was the one on 14th Street in Manhattan. When I moved home it became the S.A. pickup van which operates out here - don't know from where.

For a while during the 1990s we switched to Manhattan's Coalition for the Homeless which professed to be able to use the shirts for their clients to attend job interviews.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

jamgood said:


> 4] Which Salvation Army?


Jamgood, you missed the thread on how wearing used clothing is distasteful, apparently. :icon_smile_wink:


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

AlanC said:


> Jamgood, you missed the thread on how wearing used clothing is distasteful, apparently. :icon_smile_wink:


Touché, Sultan. :icon_hailthee:


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

AlanC and I are comin' up on the Greyhound Tuesday and you can put us up coupla days in the Guest Cottage while we scope out that Haute Hamptons thirifter paradise. Gucci Gucci Gucci. 

We'll bring a poke a grits and a zip-loc o' boiled p-nuts. 

Livermush, er, uh, foie gras de cochon too. 

Maybe a pecan pie and milk jug a radiator cornshine.

Alert the Mrs.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Well, I've really never mentioned this before, but seeing as how you've gotten to the Mrs. heart with the real Pecan Pie (damn thing better be *real* Southern - like decorated with boll weevuls - or the offer's off) ... the best thrift shop on the planet is located about 11 miles from the guest cottage. It's where the idle rich and local idols donate all of last season's Summer stuff each year.

Don't forget - no weevuls on the pie and you'll need a waterboard to get the location outta me.


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

Linoleum Hall Plantation's modern, 21st century, computerized "Just In Time" weevil production and delivery system provides the "Worlds Worst Weevils" for all authentic Suthun down-home baking needs, both domestic and institutional. 

Pesky provincial cotton farmin' ******* hicks won't sell the home-place so you can develop McMansions on the land, an' the County Commissioners can't be bribed or blackmailed? Call Linoleum Hall.


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

That photo may be the low point of this thread and that's saying something.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

^But at least you have to admit that the rancor has eased. :biggrin2:


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Will said:


> That photo may be the low point of this thread and that's saying something.


 Well, if they're going to be doing *that* on Joelle's pecan pie, you may be right.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

:icon_smile_kisses:Ah, weevil love.... :icon_smile_kisses:


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

Will said:


> That photo may be the low point of this thread and that's saying something.


Huh??


----------



## jamgood (Feb 8, 2006)

Teacher said:


> :icon_smile_kisses:Ah, weevil love.... :icon_smile_kisses:


One deduces that Teacher is at a big city Dakota disadvantage distinguishing twixt muskrats and weevils. Or are you callin' Silkascot (or Tenille, that sweet thang) a weevil. That's evil.


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Don't forget - no weevuls on the pie and you'll need a waterboard to get the location outta me.


What the Sam Hill are you talking about, Kabbaz? Real pecan pie has...wait for it..._*pecans*_ on top. If you would care to have such a real pecan pie (and I would wager that it is better than anything you've ever had), let me know and I'll send you one.


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

jamgood said:


> One deduces that Teacher is at a big city Dakota disadvantage distinguishing twixt muskrats and weevils. Or are you callin' Silkascot (or Tenille, that sweet thang) a weevil. That's evil.


Oh, I assure you we have weevils where I live, good sir. It's just that such a touching photo made me wish the good Cap'n Dragon and his lovely singer-companion had written a song just for these most passionate of true bugs.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

jcusey said:


> What the Sam Hill are you talking about, Kabbaz? Real pecan pie has...wait for it..._*pecans*_ on top. If you would care to have such a real pecan pie (and I would wager that it is better than anything you've ever had), let me know and I'll send you one.


I was simply seeking proof that it was a *real Southern* pecan pie. But your offer sounds good. You send the pie. I'll send you AlanC, Jamgood, and the waterboard.


----------



## AlanC (Oct 28, 2003)

Only if jcusey knows where all the good thrift stores in Texas are. We'll be looking for the Neimans and Korshak stuff.


----------



## rssmsvc777 (Jun 20, 2005)

Wow, I ordered a jantzen shirt at the start of reading this thread and buy the time I got to the last post the shirt arrived !


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

rssmsvc777 said:


> Wow, I ordered a jantzen shirt at the start of reading this thread and buy the time I got to the last post the shirt arrived !


I have dark suspicions about the validity of your post. I'm not saying I have facts, just suspicions.


----------



## rssmsvc777 (Jun 20, 2005)

DocHolliday said:


> I have dark suspicions about the validity of your post. I'm not saying I have facts, just suspicions.


You made me spit my coke in laughter. <g> You owe me one CEGO and one AK shirt for compensation.


----------



## petro (Apr 5, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> *SEE, NOW THE DAMN FIGHT HAS STARTED JUST LIKE I SAID IT WOULD.*
> 
> OK, Goldberg, what is this SCOTCH sh!t? Any respectable shirtmaker is going to be serving a fine brandy and you know it.


Brandy?

Ewww.


----------



## petro (Apr 5, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Don't forget - no weevuls on the pie and you'll need a waterboard to get the location outta me.


I bet I can do it with duct tape and a couple rubber bands.


----------



## petro (Apr 5, 2005)

DocHolliday said:


> I have dark suspicions about the validity of your post. I'm not saying I have facts, just suspicions.


The validity, or the veracity?


----------



## MrRogers (Dec 10, 2005)

DocHolliday said:


> I have dark suspicions about the validity of your post. I'm not saying I have facts, just suspicions.


Typical college kid

MrR


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

petro said:


> The validity, or the veracity?


Both. That's just how dark my suspicions are.


----------



## Mark from Plano (Jan 29, 2007)

DocHolliday said:


> Both. That's just how dark my suspicions are.


My suspicions are really more of a chartreuse...with mossy overtones.

Perhaps Andy can tell us what color tie goes with such suspicions.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

Doesn't black go with everything?

Black makes me have suspicions, though.

Is it possible that we are witnessing a weevil rape? That would certainly make for an evil weevil!


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

MrRogers said:


> Typical college kid
> 
> MrR





DocHolliday said:


> Both. That's just how dark my suspicions are.





Mark from Plano said:


> My suspicions are really more of a chartreuse...with mossy overtones.
> 
> Perhaps Andy can tell us what color tie goes with such suspicions.





forsbergacct2000 said:


> Doesn't black go with everything?
> 
> Black makes me have suspicions, though.
> 
> Is it possible that we are witnessing a weevil rape? That would certainly make for an evil weevil!





Teacher said:


> All I can say, mafoofan, is that between your searching for racism in LabelKing's comments on Chinese men buying Omega watches and taking offense at being referred to as a college student, you are one of the touchiest people I have ever encountered.


Not that anybody cares, but this sort of circle jerk does nothing but increase the acrimony from this thread. It is, in every single way, useless.


----------



## Mark from Plano (Jan 29, 2007)

iammatt said:


> Not that anybody cares, but this sort of circle jerk does nothing but increase the acrimony from this thread. It is, in every single way, useless.


Thanks for the input.


----------



## DocHolliday (Apr 11, 2005)

iammatt said:


> Not that anybody cares, but this sort of circle jerk does nothing but increase the acrimony from this thread. It is, in every single way, useless.


And this is improving the mood? Ah, the vicious cycle.


----------



## Acct2000 (Sep 24, 2005)

The acrimony happened two days ago.

I see mostly levity now.

I am suspicious of the levity, though.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

iammatt said:


> Not that anybody cares, but this sort of circle jerk does nothing but increase the acrimony from this thread. It is, in every single way, useless.


After I have a tiff with my wife and we've cooled off, I will sometimes make small talk in hopes of getting pleasant conversation going again. I won't sit there and make a list of the things she said with which I disagreed ... unless I want the fight to start all over again. And you?


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> After I have a tiff with my wife and we've cooled off, I will sometimes make small talk in hopes of getting pleasant conversation going again. I won't sit there and make a list of the things she said with which I disagreed ... unless I want the fight to start all over again. And you?


I do the same thing with mine, but notice that it is not you and mafoofan who are doing the joking around, nor did I quote either of you. We have few enough members who go out of their way to contribute in a big way and the last thing we need is for them to be pushed further away by a bunch of chatty Cathy's running what seems to be a joke to *some* of the participants into the ground.

Anyway, I don't run the place, nor do I set the rules so I am going to keep quiet now. The whole thing is no sking off my nose.


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

iammatt said:


> The whole thing is no skiing off my nose.


Slalom?

I really couldn't help myself.


----------



## iammatt (Sep 17, 2005)

Will said:


> Slalom?
> 
> I really couldn't help myself.


wasn't there a thread somewhere about whether a moderator could also be a troll?


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Why do I feel like the City by the Bay has an agenda which is headed straight downhill?

To the point, I tried communicating with Mafoofan and was ignored. If my wife did that to me when I was trying to end the spat, I would certainly let the kids joke around about how grumpy we both were.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Why do I feel like the City by the Bay has an agenda which is headed straight downhill?
> 
> To the point, I tried communicating with Mafoofan and was ignored. If my wife did that to me when I was trying to end the spat, I would certainly let the kids joke around about how grumpy we both were.


Also, I'm unaware of any communication directed toward me.

EDIT: Apparently, I have been notified that there is a joke underlying Alex's comment about an "agenda which is headed straight downhill" which I missed or did not understand. So, Alex I apologize for suggesting that you were suggesting that Iammatt had an agenda.


----------



## MrRogers (Dec 10, 2005)

iammatt said:


> Not that anybody cares, but this sort of circle jerk does nothing but increase the acrimony from this thread. It is, in every single way, useless.


True, however, this thread could be characterized as "useless" from page 3 on

MrR


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

mafoofan said:


> Alex, whatever your issues with me, it's really not fair to suggest that Iammatt has an agenda.
> 
> Also, I'm unaware of any communication directed toward me.


This may be the most tiresome thread I have ever read.

Mafoofan, your post is inappropriate, especially to an obvious joke. Kindly take it off line.

And Alex, that was baiting. You need to take it off line as well.

The next poster that is not telling a bad joke or writing about shirts begins accumulating infractions.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Will said:


> This may be the most tiresome thread I have ever read.
> 
> Mafoofan, your post is inappropriate, especially to an obvious joke. Kindly take it off line.
> 
> ...


I'm sorry--I honestly wasn't aware of a joke. And now I'm confused. What did I say that was inappropriate?


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

forsbergacct2000 said:


> The acrimony happened two days ago.
> 
> I see mostly levity now.
> 
> I am suspicious of the levity, though.


One must always be suspicious of the levity. _Aaaallwaaaays._


----------



## Will (Jun 15, 2004)

mafoofan said:


> I'm sorry--I honestly wasn't aware of a joke. And now I'm confused. What did I say that was inappropriate?


I will PM.


----------



## erasmus (Sep 26, 2004)

Will said:


> The next poster that is not telling a bad joke or writing about shirts begins accumulating infractions.


A New York shirtmaker, a second year law student, a troll and a joke walk into a bar. The shirtmaker says to the bartender, "In honor of my cost-immune clients, make me your most expensive drink". The law student rolls his eyes and says "I'll have a glass of your finest Neapolitan beer". The troll turns to the joke and asks "What are you getting?" The joke says "A really strong punch lime".


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

Mafoofan: This is the post from this morning which you ignored:


Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Mafoofan: We both made complete asses of ourselves in the referenced thread. I, for my part, am willing to acknowledge that. Can't you join me in a bit of humility and let these gentlemen carry on their discussion without beating the dead horse. Please.





Will said:


> And Alex, that was baiting. You need to take it off line as well.


 What are you talking about? What the heck was baiting who where???


----------



## manton (Jul 26, 2003)

erasmus said:


> A New York shirtmaker, a second year law student, a troll and a joke walk into a bar. The shirtmaker says to the bartender, "In honor of my cost-immune clients, make me your most expensive drink". The law student rolls his eyes and says "I'll have a glass of your finest Neapolitan beer". The troll turns to the joke and asks "What are you getting?" The joke says "A really strong punch lime".


OK, that is a _really _bad joke. You win a free Kabbaz shirt.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

manton said:


> OK, that is a _really _bad joke. You win a free Kabbaz shirt.


After so eloquently (thank you) detailing how few of my shirts you have in your wardrobe ... and how special (thank you again) you consider them to be, I am completely overwhelmed at your unparalleled philanthropy! Which one of them are you donating to Erasmus? Not the cutaway, I hope.


----------



## manton (Jul 26, 2003)

He can have either the sea foam green or the turd brown sample. Up to you.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

manton said:


> He can have either the sea foam green or the turd brown sample. Up to you.


 I have more of the turd brown so you can reorder it. Perhaps this time with a Wolfian tab? The sea foam green is, regretfully, no longer available since Cusey ordered three of them. He needed something to go with those green shoes he's touting in the dead cow parts thread.


----------



## erasmus (Sep 26, 2004)

manton said:


> OK, that is a _really _bad joke. You win a *free Kabbaz shirt*.


:aportnoy::aportnoy::aportnoy:


----------



## jcusey (Apr 19, 2003)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> IThe sea foam green is, regretfully, no longer available since Cusey ordered three of them.


Christ, Kabbaz, can't you get anything right? It was one sea foam f*&^ing green, one chartreuse, and one Mr. Ick green. And the monograms had better match the fabric!


----------



## Teacher (Mar 14, 2005)

manton said:


> He can have either the sea foam green or the *turd brown* sample. Up to you.


That's *donkey* to you, dude.


----------



## arnach (Feb 3, 2007)

A horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "why the long face?"




Can I have a free shirt in turd brown now, please?


----------



## bdam1 (Mar 14, 2006)

DocHolliday said:


> I have dark suspicions about the validity of your post. I'm not saying I have facts, just suspicions.


____

OMG!....(Spitting up beer) LMAO


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

Alexander Kabbaz said:


> Mafoofan: This is the post from this morning which you ignored:
> 
> Mafoofan: We both made complete asses of ourselves in the referenced thread. I, for my part, am willing to acknowledge that. Can't you join me in a bit of humility and let these gentlemen carry on their discussion without beating the dead horse. Please.


Not to bring undue attention back to this thread, but I feel I'd be remiss not to acknowledge this gesture. I actually had not seen the original post that you quoted, Alex. It was there, sure enough; I simply failed to see it. So, sincere apologies for that.

I do appreciate the diplomacy. However, my continued participation in this thread actually had as much to do with responding to others as it did with responding to you. After all, some of the continued discussion between gentlemen that you refer to has taken aim at _my_ words or character.

Finally, to be clear, my 'suspicions' have to do with the manner of your participation in this discussion and what one can infer from it with regards to how you may conduct your business. I may be attacked for speaking on this issue now, but I have been simultaneously taken to task for _not_ speaking on it. Thus I find myself between a rock and a hard place. Obviously, I am alone in my negative impressions of you in this discussion; thus, others believe such suspicions are ungrounded.

All I can say is that I guarantee I will not criticize you for anything but your word, now or in the future.

If you recall, I did offer to apologize to you for any insinuation against your person that I may have committed before mention of my own person. That offer still stands.


----------



## Alexander Kabbaz (Jan 9, 2003)

arnach said:


> A horse walks into a bar. The bartender says, "why the long face?"


This the horse?


----------



## Tom Bell-Drier (Mar 1, 2006)

simply unbelievable, quite right Alex, mafoofan has well and truly flogged that horse.


----------



## gnatty8 (Nov 7, 2006)

Tom Bell-Drier said:


> simply unbelievable, quite right Alex, mafoofan has well and truly flogged that horse.


OK, so let us all cut him a break, and move on with things. I must admit, mafoofan does have some very interesting points of view, and a very healthy knowledge of bespoke clothing, so it would be a pity to alienate him further and lose that perspective and knowledge. Again, I think the time has come to move on.


----------



## mafoofan (May 16, 2005)

gnatty8 said:


> OK, so let us all cut him a break, and move on with things. I must admit, mafoofan does have some very interesting points of view, and a very healthy knowledge of bespoke clothing, so it would be a pity to alienate him further and lose that perspective and knowledge. Again, I think the time has come to move on.


Thank you for the charitible point of vew, gnatty8 . As I was writing it, I realized that my last post would ignite some snickering; yet it would have been wrong of me not to acknowledge Alex's diplomatic gesture, which I carelessly overlooked in the first place. Sometimes, I guess, you just can't win.


----------



## Concordia (Sep 30, 2004)

jcusey said:


> Christ, Kabbaz, can't you get anything right? It was one sea foam f*&^ing green, one chartreuse, and one Mr. Ick green.


What-- no vomit?


----------



## TE Hesketh (Nov 19, 2003)

healinginfluence said:


> I lack both the cash and the inclination to try both.


Given the price differential, I would suggest that if you can't afford to try both, you certainly can't afford multiple shirts from Alex, so logically you should be looking to buy from CEGO.

Rob


----------

