# Thom Browne for Brooks Brothers in the NYT Magazine: Pseudo-Trad?



## AsherNM (Apr 3, 2006)

The whole set is bizarre in comparison to a BB or LE catalogue, but cliched and common next to a fashion shoot. The models ooze that ubiquitious and arrogant 'I am oh-so-cool' air, and the implied family is rather 'untraditional.' The second and last shots are suggestive of gay marriage/adoption. And for all the 'updating,' it all seems pretty bland, not to mention contrived. Stubble in suits?

Even if BB succeeded with this new approach, the newcomers would demand clothing increasingly 'modern' and updated, to the point where BB wouldn't be much different from the usual fare that fills the men's fashion pages. I can't see mature men wearing this clothing, or at least in the way the models do. Maybe middle-aged men are more adolescent than I think.










Deadbeat dad comes to pick up Randy as part of the custody deal. 


> On Bart, left: Brooks Brothers brown leather driving jacket, $698, and brown Prince of Wales cashmere vest, $298. At select Brooks Brothers stores. Levi's Original 501 Jean black jeans, $58. At www.levisstore.com. Maison Martin Margiela Line 22 motorcycle boots. On Caleb, right: Brooks Brothers Boys' white short-sleeved dress shirt, $36. At select Brooks Brothers stores. A.P.C. jeans, $94. At A.P.C., 131 Mercer Street. Converse high tops.












Daddy is now happily married.

You can't see it from the picture, but the stripes of the tennis sweater 'V' have white stitching in them that detracts from its elegance. The ties of each man tediously echoes another part of his ensemble. 


> From left: Bart Freundlich wears a Black Fleece by Brooks Brothers cricket sweater, $1,200, Oxford button-down shirt, $150, pants, sold as part of a suit for $2,900, and tie. Caleb Freundlich wears a Brooks Brothers Boys' pima cotton vest, $49.50, Oxford button-down shirt, $45, chino pants, $49.50, and bow tie. Oliver Freundlich wears a Black Fleece by Brooks Brothers reversible split raglan coat, $3,500, Oxford button-down shirt, $150, pants, sold as part of suit for $2,700, and tie. All at Brooks Brothers, 346 Madison Avenue; vest at select locations only.












Good to see the Chesterfield returning.



> On Bart, left: Patch-pocket jacket, $2,100, Oxford button-down shirt, $150, pants, sold as part of a suit for $2,900, tie, pocket square and shoes. On Oliver, right: Chesterfield coat, $2,900, classic suit, $2,700, button-down shirt, $150, tie and shoes. All clothing Black Fleece by Brooks Brothers. All at Brooks Brothers.














> Oliver wears a Junya Watanabe Man Comme des Garcons X Brooks Brothers double logo cotton oxford shirt, $585. At Comme des Garcons, 520 West 22nd Street.












P-R-O-L-E?


> Bart wears a Junya Watanabe Man Comme des Garçons X Brooks Brothers double logo cotton Oxford shirt, $585. At Comme des Garçons, 520 West 22nd Street.














> From left: Oliver wears a Brooks Brothers gray plaid three-piece wool suit, $998 (with jacket, not photographed), blue striped shirt with white collar and french cuffs, $128, and tie. At www.brooksbrothers.com. Caleb is in a Brooks Brothers Boys' Brooksease gray suit jacket, starting at $198, pants, starting at $88, and tie. Bart wears a Brooks Brothers gray flannel double-breasted suit, $898, blue dress shirt, $79.50, tie and pocket square. all at Brooks Brothers.


Impressions?


----------



## rsmeyer (May 14, 2006)

AsherNM said:


> The whole set is bizarre in comparison to a BB or LE catalogue, but cliched and common next to a fashion shoot. The models ooze that ubiquitious and arrogant 'I am oh-so-cool' air, and the implied family is rather 'untraditional.' The second and last shots are suggestive of gay marriage/adoption. And for all the 'updating,' it all seems pretty bland, not to mention contrived. Stubble in suits?
> 
> Even if BB succeeded with this new approach, the newcomers would demand clothing increasingly 'modern' and updated, to the point where BB wouldn't be much different from the usual fare that fills the men's fashion pages. I can't see mature men wearing this clothing, or at least in the way the models do. Maybe middle-aged men are more adolescent than I think.
> 
> ...


I wouldn't blame BB too much-their catalogues speak for themselves. This is typical of the "hipness" that the Times displays in their fashion and style items for both men and women-yuck!


----------



## GMC (Nov 8, 2006)

*Please ...*

This is not happening. This is not happening.


----------



## Topsider (Jul 9, 2005)

For some reason, this one makes me think of Tiny Tim..."God bless us, everyone!"

Regardless, it doesn't make me want to buy any of the clothes.


----------



## Untilted (Mar 30, 2006)

The blue vest looks good. I need to get one.

overall, what the hell.


----------



## AldenPyle (Oct 8, 2006)

Except for the cricket sweater (and the beards), I would be happy to wear any of that {If it were discounted 90%)

From the captions, it appears these guys are brothers. I don't get the gay reference.


----------



## tsweetland (Oct 2, 2006)

Notice the rather chunky cuffs on the trousers? I gotta say I like this sort of "updated-trad" look. It's a step in the right direction and away from some of the crap they sell nowadays.


----------



## abc123 (Jun 4, 2006)

I like most of the individual pieces, but as with most runway shows, they are presented in ridiculous ways. Put it on normal looking people, as part of normal outfits, and I think it would look good.


----------



## tripreed (Dec 8, 2005)

I'm curious about the $150 "oxford shirt." That's more than Brooks' MTM program, correct?


----------



## cgc (Jan 27, 2007)

*Sticker shock*

Those Black Fleece prices are higher than the original estimates by a few hundred bucks. Also, it looks like 1818 are going to be a grand form now on. I do like the sound of double breasted gray flannel suits though.

Also, the guys are brothers. One is Julianne Moore's husband and that is their son.


----------



## Harris (Jan 30, 2006)

tsweetland said:


> Notice the rather chunky cuffs on the trousers? I gotta say I like this sort of "updated-trad" look. It's a step in the right direction and away from some of the crap they sell nowadays.


"Chunky" indeed. At least 2". Probably more.

I'm wondering about the Black Label ties. The few I've seen (in photos) look pretty good.


----------



## abc123 (Jun 4, 2006)

cgc said:


> Those Black Fleece prices are higher than the original estimates by a few hundred bucks. Also, it looks like 1818 are going to be a grand form now on. I do like the sound of double breasted gray flannel suits though.
> 
> Also, the guys are brothers. One is Julianne Moore's husband and that is their son.


I believe the BF models start at $4,000, correct? For a non-bespoke suit, the label should be properly termed "BS". Brooks MTM is clearly a far, far better value.

I'll appreciate some of the stylistic elements, but certainly won't ever be wearing any of it, regardless of how much $ I make in the future.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits. Sure, modern male models typically give most guys a negative reaction, especially the way in which clothing is worn and paired. It is also important to remember this was a NY Times piece, not BB's own material. Overall, however, this will put Brooks Brothers out away from Banana Republic where it has been trending lately.

Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money. Look in the mirror well, I think Gap/mall mentality has taken hold more than you might imagine. You can't get grade A level merchandise at Lands End prices. As well, the cheap prices you demand require production in faraway Asian lands. Adjusted for inflation, I would imagine BB is comparatively cheaper today than it was in the past.

Not everyone may want to buy a $3,000 suit, and that is fine. Be glad, though, Brooks still has the wherewithall and ability to offer a suit of such quality. Would you really want the top suit offering from BB to be the half-canvas 1818 that tops out at $898? Sounds like Banana Republic to me.


----------



## GMC (Nov 8, 2006)

*Point taken, but ...*



I_Should_Be_Working said:


> This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits. Sure, modern male models typically give most guys a negative reaction, especially the way in which clothing is worn and paired. It is also important to remember this was a NY Times piece, not BB's own material. Overall, however, this will put Brooks Brothers out away from Banana Republic where it has been trending lately.
> 
> Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money. Look in the mirror well, I think Gap/mall mentality has taken hold more than you might imagine. You can't get grade A level merchandise at Lands End prices. As well, the cheap prices you demand require production in faraway Asian lands. Adjusted for inflation, I would imagine BB is comparatively cheaper today than it was in the past.
> 
> Not everyone may want to buy a $3,000 suit, and that is fine. Be glad, though, Brooks still has the wherewithall and ability to offer a suit of such quality. Would you really want the top suit offering from BB to be the half-canvas 1818 that tops out at $898? Sounds like Banana Republic to me.


Wouldn't mind them keeping up a steady supply of the well-made separates where you could get a sack jacket and either flat or pleated trousers. The Brooks of old was also known for some basics, maybe not as affordable as the dept. stores, but still within budgets. If it's only going to be fashionable stuff priced at fashion prices, I can't say that I'll be happy.


----------



## kforton (Oct 26, 2005)

GMC said:


> This is not happening. This is not happening.


It IS happening. And J. Press is next. Any corporate owned trad shop is ultimately doomed. Maybe not right now, but in ten years they will be dead.


----------



## Untilted (Mar 30, 2006)

kforton said:


> It IS happening. And J. Press is next. Any corporate owned trad shop is ultimately doomed. Maybe not right now, but in ten years they will be dead.


and that is when my trad store, Untilted Clothing, comes in. No darts, no pleats. Be ready to spend some cash!


----------



## Untilted (Mar 30, 2006)

BTW, does anyone know where I can find the blue vest worn by the boy? 









Anyone seen it @ the store? it aint online yet.


----------



## abc123 (Jun 4, 2006)

I_Should_Be_Working said:


> This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits. Sure, modern male models typically give most guys a negative reaction, especially the way in which clothing is worn and paired. It is also important to remember this was a NY Times piece, not BB's own material. Overall, however, this will put Brooks Brothers out away from Banana Republic where it has been trending lately.
> 
> Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money. Look in the mirror well, I think Gap/mall mentality has taken hold more than you might imagine. You can't get grade A level merchandise at Lands End prices. As well, the cheap prices you demand require production in faraway Asian lands. Adjusted for inflation, I would imagine BB is comparatively cheaper today than it was in the past.
> 
> Not everyone may want to buy a $3,000 suit, and that is fine. Be glad, though, Brooks still has the wherewithall and ability to offer a suit of such quality. Would you really want the top suit offering from BB to be the half-canvas 1818 that tops out at $898? Sounds like Banana Republic to me.


Brooks currently offers suits that are much nicer than the 1818 line in their Golden Fleece and MTM lines. These are very high quality suits, and I bet that for most men, this is all one could possibly desire in terms of quality.

My point is that if I am paying 4k for a suit, I'd rather have it mtm or bespoke than something off the rack. I guess fit and more styling options trumps fashion for me. Its not the amount of money this line costs (albeit out of my range now), but the fact that the same amount of money can get me a much better fit, and (I assume) the same level of quality, in the same store. Others prefer the fashionable option, and thats fine - I just won't be buying into it.


----------



## 3 Button Bob (Nov 28, 2004)

I_Should_Be_Working said:


> This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits. Sure, modern male models typically give most guys a negative reaction, especially the way in which clothing is worn and paired. It is also important to remember this was a NY Times piece, not BB's own material. Overall, however, this will put Brooks Brothers out away from Banana Republic where it has been trending lately.
> 
> Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money. Look in the mirror well, I think Gap/mall mentality has taken hold more than you might imagine. You can't get grade A level merchandise at Lands End prices. As well, the cheap prices you demand require production in faraway Asian lands. Adjusted for inflation, I would imagine BB is comparatively cheaper today than it was in the past.
> 
> Not everyone may want to buy a $3,000 suit, and that is fine. Be glad, though, Brooks still has the wherewithall and ability to offer a suit of such quality. Would you really want the top suit offering from BB to be the half-canvas 1818 that tops out at $898? Sounds like Banana Republic to me.


VERY WELL SAID...................


----------



## AsherNM (Apr 3, 2006)

I_Should_Be_Working said:


> This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits...
> Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money.


A trad friend of mine in his late 40's told me a while back he used to shop at Brooks, but now they're too pricey for him, so he's moved on to JAB. Did Brooks get pricier or cheaper over the years?

A bit off topic, but I've always wondered why the fashion forum members spend so much more (eg, Lobbs, Kiton, etc.) than the trads. Are the trads poorer or tighter with their money?


----------



## Untilted (Mar 30, 2006)

poorer AND tighter with money.


----------



## a.dickens (May 10, 2006)

I like the new look. It's not "Trad" as defined by this website, but is it bad, I say no. I think that if many of the pieces were put in a different context, there would be fawning. Three piece gray flannel suits? Raglan sleeved trenches? Cricket sweaters? OCBD's? Bow ties? Patch Pockets? The Black Fleece line has the elements that many on this board lambast other makers for ignoring or neglecting, but because Browne doesn't fit the unobtainable "tradness" of members lofty ideals, he, and his pieces are trashed.


----------



## GMC (Nov 8, 2006)

*I'll play ball*

And grant you that the stuff isn't horrible. Of course not (except for those ugly jeans). But seriously, jackets that short and a suit that tight? I'd just feel ridiculous.

Thom Browne himself doesn't wear his suiting that close. One wrong move and you're up on indecency charges.

I get reinterpretation and advancement of the species. But modesty in next to Tradliness.


----------



## TradTeacher (Aug 25, 2006)

The models look like models, so I just discount them all together. As for the clothes, I really like the dressier pieces. Say what you want about Browne and his mod cohorts, but they certainly do their homework in terms of materials and details. Sure, he puts a modern "twist" on some (or most) of the items, but I think that's to be expected. The BB of old just doesn't exist anymore. Yeah, that sucks but it's reality. Isn't this better than suits with spandex and other non-natural materials woven in? 

That being said, I won't be buying any of the items simply because it's out of my ballpark money-wise. It has nothing to do with the items themselves. To me, it's not a bad look...

TT:teacha:


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

I well agree with GMC's comment regarding good, quality basics. This has long been my complaint with Brooks. To get something good, one must often go up on the brand tier. The baseline gab trousers, for instance, are really lacking, but are this way because of volume considerations. One must go up to the Country Club version or Golden Fleece to get the pants with real tailoring.

My preference would be for Brooks to kill the notion of selling low quality pants for $60 to $75 (after sale, multi discount), and just sell a good basic pair for $100. Mall retail, though, does not work this way.

Regarding the suits, yes, BB does have the various MTM and GF lines above 1818. Many here complain about those as well. When Golden Fleece was made in Italy, you would have thought they came standard with Gucci loafers. Never mind the full canvas, hand stitching, etc for (then) $1250. Again, I don't believe Brooks was comparatively this affordable during its most esteemed times (especially going far into history). 

I'm not saying, though, we should all line up and buy 3. Higher prices cut into most everyone's ability to get items we want. But do look around. Good suits cost real money. $3k is not uncommon for a well made suit of high quality fabric. Let's hope Brooks is successful in raising quality, and improvements are felt throughout the line.


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

I can't see the clothes. One look at the models and all I can think is, "Give them a shave and a haircut."


----------



## rsmeyer (May 14, 2006)

rojo said:


> I can't see the clothes. One look at the models and all I can think is, "Give them a shave and a haircut."


And don't forget a good bath.


----------



## egadfly (Nov 10, 2006)

*Thom Thypo*



a.dickens said:


> [...] but because Browne doesn't fit the unobtainable "tradness" of members lofty ideals, he, and his pieces are trashed.


You meant "trash", I'm sure.

EGF


----------



## AsherNM (Apr 3, 2006)

rojo said:


> I can't see the clothes. One look at the models and all I can think is, "Give them a shave and a haircut."


That was my reaction, times five, from posting late at night.

Untilted, that sweater is sold in the boys section, as a "tennis vest", but only in white XS. Considering you're a 36, you could probably fit into a L or XL Boys size (even if you won't look as cute  ).


----------



## a.dickens (May 10, 2006)

GMC said:


> And grant you that the stuff isn't horrible. Of course not (except for those ugly jeans). But seriously, jackets that short and a suit that tight? I'd just feel ridiculous.


The jeans are Levi's 501s

As for the jackets and suits, thats the Browne style. It's not for everyone, its not for trads, its not for the "amjacks", its for publicity. It is to get people into Brooks Brothers.


----------



## rojo (Apr 29, 2004)

a.dickens said:


> its for publicity. It is to get people into Brooks Brothers.


It's having quite the opposite effect on this person.


----------



## GMC (Nov 8, 2006)

*Ah, sorry*



a.dickens said:


> The jeans are Levi's 501s
> 
> As for the jackets and suits, thats the Browne style. It's not for everyone, its not for trads, its not for the "amjacks", its for publicity. It is to get people into Brooks Brothers.


Didn't realize those were 501s. They still suck.

The suits obviously have quite a flair. And having seen Thom Browne himself in NYC I can say he cuts quite the figure. And this layout still sucks.

But, clearly you are right: It's all about creating buzz/foot traffic.


----------



## Andy Roo (Jan 25, 2007)

I like it all very much, actually. I would wear this stuff.

In fact, this is somewhat similar to what I've been trying to put together on my own.


:devil:


----------



## mendozar (Dec 13, 2005)

I_Should_Be_Working said:


> This line might appear to represent a long overdue injection of quality. Where the Brooks Brothers suit of 40 years ago ranked amongst its competition was a far different place than today. It is about time they restake their claim to offering one of the better made suits. Sure, modern male models typically give most guys a negative reaction, especially the way in which clothing is worn and paired. It is also important to remember this was a NY Times piece, not BB's own material. Overall, however, this will put Brooks Brothers out away from Banana Republic where it has been trending lately.
> 
> Some of you I don't understand. Most complain in unison about the decline of BB, especially the quality. You claim to want first tier merchandise, but ***** like old folks at the early bird when the quality costs money. Look in the mirror well, I think Gap/mall mentality has taken hold more than you might imagine. You can't get grade A level merchandise at Lands End prices. As well, the cheap prices you demand require production in faraway Asian lands. Adjusted for inflation, I would imagine BB is comparatively cheaper today than it was in the past.
> 
> Not everyone may want to buy a $3,000 suit, and that is fine. Be glad, though, Brooks still has the wherewithall and ability to offer a suit of such quality. Would you really want the top suit offering from BB to be the half-canvas 1818 that tops out at $898? Sounds like Banana Republic to me.


October 2003, _Forbes Magazine_ put out a survey of the best men's suits. For American tailors, they chose Hickey-Freeman, Ralph Lauren, and J. Press, explaining that Brooks Brothers did not make the list due to the declining quality caused by the Marks & Spencer era. At the time, the off the peg suits from Hickey-Freeman were $1,100, Ralph Lauren offered $900, and J. Press offered $500. Based off of June 2007 website prices, that's annualized price inflation of 10.7% at Hickey Freeman, 8.03% using the Polo Ralph Lauren line (I don't believe Purple Label existed until very recently), 19.1% using Pressidential, 10.7% using Presstige, and -4.33% inflation (ie, deflation) using Pressclusive. Just eyeing those numbers, it looks like they really outpace CPI. It even outpaces luxury goods indices, not as much, but the fact remains. Note British and Italian suits have probably increased even more, with the declining dollar.


----------



## I_Should_Be_Working (Jun 23, 2005)

mendozar said:


> October 2003, _Forbes Magazine_ put out a survey of the best men's suits. For American tailors, they chose Hickey-Freeman, Ralph Lauren, and J. Press, explaining that Brooks Brothers did not make the list due to the declining quality caused by the Marks & Spencer era. At the time, the off the peg suits from Hickey-Freeman were $1,100, Ralph Lauren offered $900, and J. Press offered $500. Based off of June 2007 website prices, that's annualized price inflation of 10.7% at Hickey Freeman, 8.03% using the Polo Ralph Lauren line (I don't believe Purple Label existed until very recently), 19.1% using Pressidential, 10.7% using Presstige, and -4.33% inflation (ie, deflation) using Pressclusive. Just eyeing those numbers, it looks like they really outpace CPI. It even outpaces luxury goods indices, not as much, but the fact remains. Note British and Italian suits have probably increased even more, with the declining dollar.


Interesting. Currency valuation is going against those makes utilizing European subs. This would certainly hurt Polo, whose Blue Label is made in Italy and now runs $1150 I believe. As for Press and Hickey Freeman, one might questions what line these reference.

What I would really be curious to know is where Brooks pricing and quality put the brand in the market over time. For instance, where was the brand 75 years ago, 50 years ago, 30, etc. I would imagine there are issues both of inflation and industry specific cost and quality factors which will drive pricing. Inflation alone would likely be half the story. Most of us have experience within the last 20, and have felt the roller coaster.

All said, my instinct tells me BB is cheaper today in the market than where the brand resided long ago. I could be wrong.


----------



## Benjamin E. (Mar 2, 2007)

I really can't believe this whole situation. First, Brooks Brothers lets this sartorial radical design a collection for them. Then, they let it pass inspection. The pictures before look like something out of an Abercrombie & Fitch ad. I hope B^2 isn't taking A&F's path toward high-fashion junk.


----------



## AsherNM (Apr 3, 2006)

*On the Other Hand...*

I went into the Rodeo Drive Brooks today, a very nice store. In addition to having some discontinued University (3" width) ties for sale, it had a beautiful charcoal flannel sack, under the Madison line (which the salesman directed me to), for $600 (originally $900). The fabric has a nice range of greys, and was a winterweight, so there was a tasteful drape to it. Is this a Thom Browne offering?

The salesman said it was one of the new, trimmer, 1818 lines, though not as trim as the Fitzgerald. This flannel is not offered on the website either. I'd have bought it if I had a steady income (taking classes instead), and may still buy it regardless. I'm pretty sure no amount of JAB suits are as good as this one suit.

(I also went to the RL store right next door. I was inclined to ignore or disbelieve people when they talked about how excessive the store furnishings are. They weren't - the store is filled far beyond capacity with props, far beyond good taste. There's a staircase with a landing half-way up. The wall there is almost entirely covered with portraits of horsies. And, who the hell hangs a horse saddle on the wall? The whole place feels at once tiny and labryinthine, even with the 10' high ceilings. The Brooks, on the other hand, was very pleasant and pretty, and was at least plausible as a California house - i.e., it's not trying to transport you to a Victorian country manor, but rather offer you appropiate clothing. Loads of beautiful shoes and sweaters, esp. cashmere, and great individual items at RL though, like a surcingle buckle madras belt.)

Edit: Would you say a charcoal flannel is appropiate for interviews? Winter fabrics drape so much more gracefully, IMO.


----------



## comrade (May 26, 2005)

*Another False Start?*

I think that is another false start for them. Even their
choice of models, which I think is an attempt to sell
suits to a demographic, which hardly ever buys suits,
will alienate the younger suit buyers. Brooks Bros.
has been flailing about for 20 plus years with one
departure or another. Remember "Brooks English"?
For some reason Paul Stuart and Ralph Lauren have
been able to hew fairly closely to their US/British "Trad"
origins while updating and adding new style accents
to their clothes. At both stores one can purchase fairly
pure "Ivy League" clothing that would not have looked out
of place forty years ago. At the same, they offer
options that are more informed by contemporary
Saville Row, or even Naples.


----------



## JRR (Feb 11, 2006)

This just reaffirms my decision to ignore Brooks.


----------



## mack11211 (Oct 14, 2004)

comrade said:


> I think that is another false start for them. Even their
> choice of models,


Brooks didn't choose the models. The pictures are from a fashion spread in the NYT magazine.

Even if the Black Fleece line is just a tiny % of BB sales, it can draw younger buyers to the store, where they may in the end purchase the same old stuff after all. They'll just perceive it differently.


----------



## ChicagoTrad (Feb 19, 2007)

The models and settings are typical "photo shoot" stuff, but the clothes themselves don't bother me that much. A few of the things are items that I might consider wearing myself like the Chesterfield or the last suit - except that the prices are out of line for what you are getting.

Was it Esquire of one of the other magazines that went to using successful people from industry and politics as their models for a while? I also find most male models to just be irritating and stupid when looking at clothes for men.


----------



## andy35 (Jun 3, 2007)

i am a die-hard BB fan and always have been. based on these pics and what i've heard about and seen with thom browne, i am sure this line will be a little too, "odd" for most people like me. i think this line will probably be way overpriced. 

BB is actually very reasonably priced especially if you shop during one of their very frequent sales. BB is quality and while i agree bespoke is better than 1818, but i think 1818 at $898 is pretty damn good especially when it's like $650 or less on sale. the newer fitzgerald and regent look great with beautiful fabric. i will be sticking to suits and clothing from BB that is quality, fairly priced, and looks sharp.


----------

