# Mainline AE Not Fully Produced in the USA?



## Spex (Nov 25, 2012)

I knew that certain casual models are made in the Dominican Republic, and those are easy to spot, however this post on Die Workwear (quoted below) states that some AE shoes labelled "Made in the USA" begin their life in the DR. Does anyone have information that supports this case? Having seen those factory tour videos of their Wisconsin location I just assumed that the Made in the USA models were fully made there.

https://dieworkwear.com/post/94541478849/vintage-allen-edmonds

"When Allen Edmonds was sold in 2006, for example, and ownership passed from John Stollenwerk to the Minnesota-based equity firm Goldner Hawn Johnson & Morrison, the company shut down their Lewiston, Maine factory and opened a new one in the Dominican Republic. There, some shoes are half produced and then sent back to the company's main plant in Port Washington, Wisconsin, where they're "finished" and stamped with a "Made in the USA" label, while others are fully produced in the Dominican Republic and correctly labeled as such."


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

"Made in the USA of imported materials" is what I will see in the shoes. This has been labelled as such for years.

As for the start of the process and then the finishing, I'm not sure. I know the laws governing what can be labelled as domestically manufactured are quite explicit. Still, AE makes a quality product which at the discounts at which they are available are a good bargain.


----------



## JLibourel (Jun 13, 2004)

I thought most of the leather used in A-E shoes was imported.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

This is from AE's website. Make what you want of it, but implicit in the reading is that the shoes are manufactured here. Of course, if something is stamped as being made in the DR then I suppose that speaks for itself.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

I want to say that Ron Rider strongly insinuated the same thing about major components being made overseas, but the site is down for the moment. 
At some point, it will hopefully be back up and we'll see.


----------



## Oldsarge (Feb 20, 2011)

Of course, an insinuation is not an established fact. It is, on the other hand, a way to downplay one's competition without lying. More concrete documentation would be required before I place much credence on it. In any event, as SG pointed out, the shoes are well made of quality materials and affordable. Anyone who requires more than that is welcome to pay the premium and wait a couple of years for delivery.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Oldsarge said:


> Of course, an insinuation is not an established fact.


Well if we knew the facts, this thread would not exist. 
Does anyone know for a fact that nothing but raw materials are entering the AE factory?


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ I believe that's a valid question. As stated, shoes stamped as being made elsewhere are obviously as such and should not be considered. 

However, are shoes stamped "Made in the USA of imported materials" truly that? The AE website certainly suggests that. Perhaps the CEO could chime in?


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

Straight from Paul: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...s-quot-of-English-Shoes&p=1585266#post1585266

"However, we do source different colors from different tanneries, based on their strengths. So if you notice that our seems different than our walnut or bourbon calfskin, it's because they're from different European tanneries working with slightly different raw hide stock (due to different grazing altitudes/geographies of the calves before they become veal) and slightly different tanning methods. We pick the best mix of color, feel and durability for the look and quality we're going after."

"Different European tanneries" would qualify as "Made in the USA of imported materials."


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

The most reasonable likelihood is that the shoes stamped made in USA are made in USA. Most people don't know this, but there is a magical entity called the Federal Trade Commission which regulates the use of the made in USA label. They require that "virtually all" of the manufacturing be performed in the USA in order to use the label. For example, if a fabricated lamp base were imported and then a USA made lampshade were added, it could not be called made in USA. This would be fairly analogous to importing a fully fabricated upper and then welting it to the sole. The shoe could be called "assembled in USA" but they are not.

I know that there is some small chance that AE is doing this and the FTC hasn't caught on. If anyone has anyone thinks this is the case, I would highly encourage you to contact the FTC and let them know about your concerns. It's getting close to the end of the fiscal year and the FTC could use the revenues it would derive from fining the crap out of the largest shoe manufacturer in the country.

Otherwise, we can probably put this one to rest.

Feel free to read more: https://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus03-complying-made-usa-standard

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

I would certainly hope that much of AE's calf is and has been imported, as that is where the best calf has traditionally come from. France, to be specific. Recently, Justin Fitzpatrick, a maker and self-designated Shoe Snob went to some length about the difficulties of procuring quality leather, and from where it may be obtained. Thought I posted his information, but can't find it quickly.

I also have read previously that a significant portion AE's actual making is now off-shore. The cynic in me envisions a guy with a gold stamp sitting on a production line and stamping, "Made in the U.S.A." as AE's total domestic contribution. Oh! But I forgot the guy who adds the shoelaces!

Frankly, while I wish all production was U.S. based, and hand out extra points for products that are, my main concern as a consumer is that it be a quality product at a reasonable price. And while not the greatest fan of AE, I think I must argue that it still fits that description.

I also find Derek's timeline of the demise of the American shoe manufacturer rather off. While the period through the '50's might have been its zenith, it was still a significant industry throughout the 60's, and even into the 70's, producing quality traditional footwear made in America. I know, because I wore them. As late as the 70's I was still purchasing high-quality Tennessee made Johnston and Murphy shoes that were very fine shoes indeed.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

https://www.business.ftc.gov/documents/bus03-complying-made-usa-standard


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Flanderian said:


> The cynic in me envisions a guy with a gold stamp sitting on a production line and stamping, "Made in the U.S.A." as AE's total domestic contribution. Oh! But I forgot the guy who adds the shoelaces!


The cynic in me envisions some grumpy bureaucrat just drooling at the chance to catch a big fish like Allen Edmonds, especially one with a CEO who posts openly on forums all the details of his company's wrongdoings. Especially with the possibility of substantial sanctions in a year when the agency is really feeling the strains of tea party budget cuts.

If this was going on, the FTC would be on it like flies on cow patties.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Like many here, I dug up the FTC requirements almost immediately. Needless to say, they are vague.
Where along the 212 step process does this magical point where "virtually all" of the labor or value is not foreign?
My suspicion is that AE, in some cases, is not getting tanned hides, but stacks of pieces cut to at least a rough shape. Maybe rough blanks, maybe fully cut and punched and edged pieces. That would save gobs of time and space and labor, but one can make the argument that this is beginning steps and low value-added work.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tempest said:


> Like many here, I dug up the FTC requirements almost immediately. Needless to say, they are vague.
> Where along the 212 step process does this magical point where "virtually all" of the labor or value is not foreign?
> My suspicion is that AE, in some cases, is not getting tanned hides, but stacks of pieces cut to at least a rough shape. Maybe rough blanks, maybe fully cut and punched and edged pieces. That would save gobs of time and space and labor, but one can make the argument that this is beginning steps and low value-added work.


The FTC uses two tests. The first is based on the manufacturing process. The second is based on manufacturing costs. If cutting and punching the hides in the DR saves a substantial amount in labor costs, this would qualify as counting for a substantial portion of the manufacturing costs and, thus, the AE shoes would not meet the virtually all test.

If cutting and punching the hides isn't a substantial portion of the labor costs, there would be no rational reason to have it done in the DR as opposed to the US, and waste the extra time and money on transporting from the DR to Wisconsin.

The reasonable conclusion is that the DR factory exists for the purposes of cheaper labor so that AE can have it's lower priced diffusion lines.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

To put everyone at ease, here is a great example. The FTC smacked New Balance for using the made in USA label on shoes where the uppers were made in the US, soles were made in China, and they were assembled in the US. Seems fairly analogous precedent to what people are alleging with AE fabricating uppers in the Adar and then welting them in the US.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Piqué (Apr 10, 2014)

The last time this issue came up, I recall reading somewhere from Paul that the uppers are cut here as well as in the DR. Where an upper gets cut has nothing to do with the leather quality or shoe in question and only to do with the current schedule and workload. IIRC, that was the only production point of mainline shoes taking place in the DR at that time.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

L-feld said:


> To put everyone at ease, here is a great example. The FTC smacked New Balance for using the made in USA label on shoes where the uppers were made in the US, soles were made in China, and they were assembled in the US. Seems fairly analogous precedent to what people are alleging with AE fabricating uppers in the Adar and then welting them in the US.
> 
> Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


My running shoes have been NB for the last 7 years. They will say "Assembled in the USA" which I believe is an attempt at compliance with the regulation.


----------



## Tempest (Aug 16, 2012)

Per this May, 2014 posting,


> In fact, according to New Balance's company policy, shoes labeled "Made in America" are those "where domestic value is at least 70%." Not 100%. Not truly, entirely, made in America. Furthermore, to make matters even more complicated, the Company also has a line of products that are "Assembled in America" and these shoes are "assembled by U.S. workers using both imported and domestic material with domestic content of less than 70%."


https://www.wolfvsgoat.com/blogs/blog/14131489-coming-home

The Berry Amendment mention at the end is of interest, but maybe not for this thread.



Piqué said:


> The last time this issue came up, I recall reading somewhere from Paul that the uppers are cut here as well as in the DR. Where an upper gets cut has nothing to do with the leather quality or shoe in question and only to do with the current schedule and workload. IIRC, that was the only production point of mainline shoes taking place in the DR at that time.


Sounds right, and I think Rider particularly assailed the Neumok or maybe the Strand, the hot sellers. It makes sense to maintain flexibility but one does worry that it is a precedent.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

If shoes have their uppers cut and stitched in another country, then putting "Made in the USA" on them is misleading regardless of statutory compliance, IMO.

Whether that is happening at AE I don't pretend to know.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Tempest said:


> Per this May, 2014 posting,
> 
> https://www.wolfvsgoat.com/blogs/blog/14131489-coming-home


That was the exact issue. New Balance claimed the fact that 70% of the cost was from American sources and it was sufficient to continue using the Made In USA label. The FTC disagreed and said that 70% wasn't sufficient for an unqualified "made in usa" label. It didn't matter how much of the cost was domestic, the actual manufacturing had to be domestic as well. The issue was over whether New Balance could continue fabricating their soles in China and the FTC said they could not. The rubber used for the soles is still probably imported from China, so the 70% of the cost is probably the same, but the soles now have to be fabricated here. The FTC said anything less required at least a qualified country of origin label.

Look at the AE website for the Park Ave: https://www.allenedmonds.com/aeonline/producti_SF270_1_40000000001_-1_

"Proudly made in the USA at our Port Washington, Wisconsin factory"

It's an unqualified statement. If there is any manufacturing being performed in the DR, it would be illegal for them to make such an unqualified statement. If anyone has a reason to believe this is true, you should report AE to the FTC. Otherwise, let it go.

Here is where you can file a complaint: https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/#crnt&panel1-1


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

There seems to be a somewhat divergence between what some feel is the ethical and moral implication of stating something is "made in the USA" and the legal/statutory requirement.

I believe if any manufacturer of any product states this and adheres to the statutory requirement there shouldn't be a problem. Here is an excerpt from the FTC guidelines:

"What does "all or virtually all" mean?"All or virtually all" means that all significant parts and processing that go into the product must be of U.S. origin. That is, the product should contain no - or negligible - foreign content."

On the domestic manufacturing of goods made of imported materials:

"Are raw materials included in the evaluation of whether a product is "all or virtually all" made in the U.S.?It depends on how much of the product's cost the raw materials make up and how far removed from the finished product they are."

I suppose the honest regarding the above statement is whether the cost of the raw material applies to the retail cost vs. the manufacturers cost. Let's say the leather used to make an AE shoe costs $50 and the shoe retails for $350, that's 1/7 of the cost.

Any manufacturer I'm sure walks a fine line between using "made in the USA" as a marketing effort and staying compliant with the law. My feeling on this is that as long as the company is being factual according to the statute then that's good enough for me. An argument could be made that the materials necessary for producing a certain good are either not available domestically in the quantities needed or are produced to a superior degree non-domestically.


----------



## AllenEdmondsCEO (Mar 17, 2009)

Greetings Again, AAAC Friends -

Thanks for your strong interest and support of AllenEdmonds. And thanks to "drlivingston" for bringing my attention to this thread.

We do indeed cut leather patterns and sew the first stage of welt upper production in both our Port Washington and our DR plants. The double capacity gives us efficiencies in production workflow, and of course also in labor cost, that enable us to sell finest calfskin Goodyear welted shoes below $400 MSRP -- which we know is important to our customers, particularly those earlier in their careers or otherwise price/value conscious. All of the uppers arrive in our Port Washington plant still requiring additional forming, toebox and heel-counter componentry, and also additional lining work in preparation for being joined with last, insole, welt, cork layer, sole, heel base, toplift, and polish and cream recipes, then hand finished. That first-stage upper looks almost like a golf visor without any material in it to hold the brim up -- i.e. a very far cry from a shoe. From a different type of leather, we cutout our leather insoles (specifically to each size and width combination) only in the Port Washington plant; and, also, the soles, heel bases and toplifts all come to us from our suppliers with significant excess leather that needs to be trimmed to the exact sizing. Thus, there's still a whole lot of cutting, sewing, skiving and all manner of leatherwork going on in Wisconsin. As we say, there are 212+ steps in making an Allen Edmonds Goodyear-welted shoe, and the vast majority are done in Port Washington, quite often all of them.

Our MTO, Independence Collection and cordovan shoes are made only on the PW upper line. In fact, Skip Horween has been needling me (in a friendly way -- he, his family and their company are great partners) because we haven't been using a different stamp on our cordovan shoes that says "Made in USA". Period. We're going to fix that, but it requires some software programming and deployment, so it's not as quick a fix as you might expect or I would like. But if you want to be sure that your shoe began its entire life (post-tannery) in Wisconsin, those three avenues are there for you. Despite doing upperwork in the DR, many of our American-tanned cowhide shoes would also qualify for "Made in USA" [full-stop], but we use the "of Fine Imported Leathers" stamp anyway due to inertia and the software issue.

Btw, this topic isn't new news. Our dual-track upper production plan pre-dates either of our private equity owners, and there was quite a discussion about it in 2012 (or winter 2013 -- time runs together) on StyleForum. We've also had a challenge from the "Made in USA Association" about it and then parted friends. The leader of that movement seemed impressed by our strict delineation between "Allen Edmonds"branded Port Washington products, and the sub-brand "ae by Allen Edmonds" logo that we use prominantly for our Made in the DR driving moccs, boat shoes, and other casual shoes that just don't effectively carry American labor costs against the Chinese-made competition. We're proud of our people in the DR and their great work. I go there in November each year to help serve a Holiday Dinner to them, and it's always a highlight of the year. That democratic nation needs a vibrant economy and we're doing our part. It's good for America - the Monroe Doctrine and all - to have healthy economies/nations in the Caribbean, and not flimsy rafts overloaded with people tragically bound for Florida. One of our largest and most sophisticated wholesale customers, doing workplace conditions due diligence, said that our DR plant was the best on the island by far.

Finally, please know that we're highly dedicated to growing USA employment, which is at the heart of this question. Our headcount inthe U.S. is now the highest in AE's 92-year history -- by at least a hundred people -- and growing. We also work with partners to make our belts, small leather goods, business and travel bags, ties, pocket squares, socks, vests, sport coats, woven shirts, and other gift items --- in the USA. We estimate that your demand for our non-shoe products has resulted in at least another 200 U.S. jobs created. One of our suppliers brought production capacity back onshore to meet our needs, and another re-opened mothballed production capacity in Massachusetts for us. Our sock supplier bought new looms from Italy, in order to make the finely woven AE dress socks. Preserving and growing American jobs remains a huge part of what unites, incites and excites our leadership team. It's why most of us came here in the first place, especially those of us who started in the dark days of 2008 and 2009, when the risk was existential.

Thanks again.

Best wishes,
Paul


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

I stand corrected. I suppose prefab soles and prefab uppers are not as analogous as I presumed.

Thank you for the clarification and the transparency.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

I also applaud the candor, but I must confess to being a little disappointed as to the content.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

RogerP said:


> I also applaud the candor, but I must confess to being a little disappointed as to the content.


I also applaud his candor, but feel the practices Paul describes sound fair within the context of general American business practice. And more concerned with broader American economic interests than many other American business, and certainly more than most other American branded footwear.

Of course I would love to see an American shoe at a reasonable price that is always top-quality and made entirely in the U.S.A. But until there's a re-think of general American business practice, that seems unlikely. Can it be done? As an absolute, it probably can. But it's harder, takes more effort, more creativity and management that is dedicated to that goal as a primary objective. And it also would likely require a substantial change in government policy. I base my opinion on the fact that at least some Northamptonshire firms have been able to maintain entirely English production and thrive.

I'm sad that if it were to happen, it almost certainly wont be in my lifetime. 

Things are going to have to get worse, before they can get better.


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

I too feel a slight bit disappointed.

But, I am thankful for Mr. Grangaard's honesty.

Alden are indeed 100% American made, but, as many of you already know, they are less available and more expensive.

Its a sad state of affairs in the US manufacturing industry....

My Dad is the VP of a multimillion dollar construction outfit in St. Louis and his number one enemy of growth is EPA regulations, which, according to him cost tens of thousands per year out of pocket.

I suspect shoe making is the same on many levels...uncle Sam choking the life out of the entrepreneurial spirit...


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Watchman said:


> I too feel a slight bit disappointed.
> 
> But, I am thankful for Mr. Grangaard's honesty.
> 
> ...


Alden are indeed 100% US made and more expensive, but they're also Union and probably pay a decent wage to their workers. In addition, I don't know if their scarcity is by design or overwhelming demand. This could also be another factor that makes them slightly out of reach for some.

As for the EPA, a necessity IMO. We wouldn't want companies, big or small, getting away with polluting our environment in the name of profits, would we? Look at the mining industry and the devastation they've reaped upon states like Montana. I don't know about you but it would be nice to leave something behind for future generations.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

Watchman said:


> one enemy of growth is EPA regulations . . . . . uncle Sam choking the life out of the entrepreneurial spirit...


Yup!

Darn EPA!


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Next stop the Interchange......


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

You see... this is why we can't have nice threads... :biggrin:


----------



## sleepyinsanfran (Oct 24, 2013)

gaseousclay said:


> Alden are indeed 100% US made and more expensive, but they're also Union and probably pay a decent wage to their workers. In addition, I don't know if their scarcity is by design or overwhelming demand. This could also be another factor that makes them slightly out of reach for some.


Isn't insinuating that Allen Edmonds doesnt pay its workers decent wages while Alden does, pure speculation on your part? Or do you know that for a fact?



gaseousclay said:


> As for the EPA, a necessity IMO. We wouldn't want companies, big or small, getting away with polluting our environment in the name of profits, would we? Look at the mining industry and the devastation they've reaped upon states like Montana. I don't know about you but it would be nice to leave something behind for future generations.


Agree on this. You only have to look at the two-headed fish in the Utah lakes to realize where a lax EPA can take us.


----------



## blue suede shoes (Mar 22, 2010)

Many may be disappointed, but what AE is doing is no different than what other companies have been doing. Here is an interesting article on Swiss watches and what qualifies as made in Switzerland.



So as it stands now, only 50% of the watch movements need to be made in Switzerland.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

blue suede shoes said:


> Many may be disappointed, but what AE is doing is no different than what other companies have been doing. Here is an interesting article on Swiss watches and what qualifies as made in Switzerland.
> 
> So as it stands now, only 50% of the watch movements need to be made in Switzerland.


Ah. The old children's arguement. "Timmy was doing it too" or "Timmy did it first". While "no diiferent than what other companies have been doing", it can (and has been) a reason for the consumer to avoid a brand. Last time I checked, there was a rather large grassroots campaign as to "America first" and "Made in america". Would it not be reasonable for these folks to no longer buy A.E.? There are also those that have every right to feel a bit decieved by A.E., its marketing practices, and the way that the "Made in the U.S.A. label is used. Then there are also the folks like me. When I buy a good from a particular country, I would like that good to be produced there. While I wouldn't mind buying a quality pair of shoes from a chinese company, I'm not sure why I should pay premium prices to American, English, and Italian companies for products coming out of China. I would no more buy a half Swiss made Swiss watch than I would buy half American made American shoes. But that's just me. I have a bigger problem with companies that buy finished products and then try to pass them off as their own. These are all reasons I don't do much business with Brooks Brothers. BB would love for their clients to think that Peal & Company is an actual shoe manufacturer that works exclusively with BB. While marketing the "Imported from Itlay" or "Imported from England" tags, they take a less forward tack with their goods made in China and label them "Imported from overseas". In the end, I'm never sure if I'm getting something of BB's manufacture or if BB is acting as a "reseller" of others goods. While other companies may be using the same tactics, they have little interest to me when it comes to the buyer/seller relationship I have with BB.


----------



## Spex (Nov 25, 2012)

I have now received the answer to my original question, straight from the horse's mouth as they say. Will I continue to purchase AE's shoes? I probably will. Although I completely understand the idea of not wanting to pay a premium for shoes basically not made in a "First World" country, even with the recent price increase AE is in a unique position as being a "mostly" US made goodyear welted shoe under $400. As stated in another recent thread, we're aware that we can pay a bit more for a certain increase in quality. Also, those of us in North American can take a chance purchasing certain English brands online with the risk of not receiving a perfectly fitting shoe and being hit with import duties, but at a price somewhat below AE's current retail price. 

We are not part of the silent majority that is not aware of these options, therefore AE will continue to exist in their unique space in the North American market and the market will dictate how successful they are at their current prices. I very much appreciate the information Mr. Grangaard has provided and his transparency adds value, for me, to their product. Thank you.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

This certainly is not going to stop me from buying AE. 

I will not, and have never paid, full retail though. At clearance prices they are still a bargain. For me, AE are a quality product and a good entry level dress shoe and as long as the relative value is there, I will remain a customer. 

On a side note, the OP featured a link and that link had with it images of old catalogues with older model shoes. Is it just me or are some of those more attractive than the models offered today? 

From the pictures they seem sleeker, like English shoes. Wouldn't it be nice if once or twice a year they went into the archive and introduced a vintage model? AE has a great heritage and they should take advantage of it.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

SG_67 said:


> Wouldn't it be nice if once or twice a year they went into the archive and introduced a vintage model?


That would be a very interesting idea for a web gem. Presuming they still have the patterns and technology on file from the previous design.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Flanderian said:


> I also applaud his candor, but feel the practices Paul describes* sound fair within the context of general American business practice*. And more concerned with broader American economic interests than many other American business, and certainly more than most other American branded footwear.


I hadn't really addressed fairness, per se. But since you raise it, I would point out that the indisputably commendable candor displayed here - to a group of highly engaged and generally well-informed shoe / clothing / style enthusiasts - doesn't necessarily translate to the breadth and depth of the AE customer base who see the big "Proudly Made in the U S of A" banner, but would have to search, _if it ever occurred to them to do so_, to find the "Well, for the most part, anyway" qualifier. AE may not be hiding that fact, but they certainly aren't trumpeting it.

It's not an issue that would impact a purchase decision for me. I don't doubt that the shoes that are partially made in the DR (and I count cutting and stitching of uppers as rather important steps in the making of a shoe) are up to AE mainline quality standards. And I'm not American - so the nationalistic chest-thumping doesn't inspire me to buy their shoes in the first place. And I understand the business case for their production methods. But like so many other companies that outsource manufacturing in whole or in part, I am coming to regard AE more as American branded than American made. My disappointment rests upon the fact that as a long time AE fan, I would rather see them as more Carmina than Meermin, if you follow me.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

sleepyinsanfran said:


> Isn't insinuating that Allen Edmonds doesnt pay its workers decent wages while Alden does, pure speculation on your part? Or do you know that for a fact?


i'm not insinuating anything with regard to what AE pays its employees. Guess I should've worded my response differently. I do know that Union workers typically make higher wages and that this probably figures in to the increased cost of Alden's shoes. you have to figure labor costs into the manufacturing of any product. I will say that AE is one of the few companies offering 'Made in the USA' goods at competitive prices.

AE and Alden both have different business models that seem to work for them. AE is about selling to as many people as possible, as evidenced by the many styles, widths & price points offered on their goods. Alden doesn't reach as many people but they seem to have a loyal following of shoe afficianados that will buy their product regardless. Their shoes are also almost twice as expensive as your average AE mainline offering.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Stay Classy Watchman.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

RogerP said:


> I also applaud the candor, but I must confess to being a little disappointed as to the content.


Quite. Interesting use of business speak; "*Preserving and growing American jobs remains a huge part of what unites, incites and excites our leadership team.*" Unless their workers and factories in the Dominican Republic can do stuff cheaper.


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

mrkleen said:


> Stay Classy Watchman.


I will try. 

I think what I was trying to communicate was the terrible nature of the overreaching green movement.

For whatever reason, there are many small business owners around me and I consistently hear their plights.

My comments above were an expression of that.

Anyway, I definitely do not want to be offensive.

Thanks!


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

RogerP said:


> I hadn't really addressed fairness, per se. But since you raise it, I would point out that the indisputably commendable candor displayed here - to a group of highly engaged and generally well-informed shoe / clothing / style enthusiasts - doesn't necessarily translate to the breadth and depth of the AE customer base who see the big "Proudly Made in the U S of A" banner, but would have to search, _if it ever occurred to them to do so_, to find the "WELL, FOR THE MOST PART, ANYWAY" qualifier. AE may not be hiding that fact, but they certainly aren't trumpeting it.


 I am never known to quail 
At the furry of a gale, 
And I'm never, never sick at sea! 
ALL. What, never? 
CAPT. No, never! 
ALL. What, never? 
CAPT. Hardly ever! 
ALL. He's hardly ever sick at sea! 
Then give three cheers, and one cheer more, 
For the hardy Captain of the Pinafore!

W.S.Gilbert


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Watchman said:


> I will try.
> 
> I think what I was trying to communicate was the terrible nature of the overreaching green movement.
> 
> ...


My region's entire water supply was shut down last week because of algae toxins in Lake Erie caused by phosphorous run offs. Runs offs permitted due to lobbyist success in persuading legislative restrictions on the EPA.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

There is something dark, something dishonest and deceitful about creating and fostering an impression that something is what it isn't. There are a couple of shoe manufacturers in Britain, or at least with old British names, who trade on their Englishness, but which aren't produced in Britain. However, they aren't labelled "*Made in England"*, nor even "*Made in England (well mostly, although some of the work is done in India, not much mind, in fact hardly any. Apart from the uppers. And the soles.)*"


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

Watchman said:


> My Dad is the VP of a multimillion dollar construction outfit in St. Louis and his number one enemy of growth is EPA regulations, which, according to him cost tens of thousands per year out of pocket.
> 
> I suspect shoe making is the same on many levels...uncle Sam choking the life out of the entrepreneurial spirit...


Yes, I'm sure that dreadful things like decent wages, proper safety regulations that are adhered to, protecting the environment from pollution, that kind of thing, cut into profit margins dreadfully. I'm sure that nineteenth century mine owners and shipowners thought that preventing children from working below ground and the Plimsoll Line were "choking the life out of the entrepreneurial spirit" as well.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

I'm not the boss of anyone here, but could I *ask* those who wish to debate the merits of marrying a tree or dumping poison into rivers to have that discussion elsewhere?


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

To my mind a little tangential discussion is spice, and need be moved only if it gets heated and personal.


----------



## B_Wong (Aug 10, 2014)

Thanks for clearing that up Paul. Great to see the CEO actually have a presence on AAAC.


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

arkirshner said:


> To my mind a little tangential discussion is spice, and need be moved only if it gets heated and personal.


I'm with you if we're talking about things that might vaguely impact clothing production, like union wages of handsewers, or even regulation of chemicals used by leather tanneries.

But debating the merits of the a government agency or a particular political movement is really out of place.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

RogerP said:


> I hadn't really addressed fairness, per se. But since you raise it, I would point out that the indisputably commendable candor displayed here - to a group of highly engaged and generally well-informed shoe / clothing / style enthusiasts - doesn't necessarily translate to the breadth and depth of the AE customer base who see the big "Proudly Made in the U S of A" banner, but would have to search, _if it ever occurred to them to do so_, to find the "Well, for the most part, anyway" qualifier. AE may not be hiding that fact, but they certainly aren't trumpeting it.
> 
> It's not an issue that would impact a purchase decision for me. I don't doubt that the shoes that are partially made in the DR (and I count cutting and stitching of uppers as rather important steps in the making of a shoe) are up to AE mainline quality standards. And I'm not American - so the nationalistic chest-thumping doesn't inspire me to buy their shoes in the first place. And I understand the business case for their production methods. *But like so many other companies that outsource manufacturing in whole or in part, I am coming to regard AE more as American branded than American made. *My disappointment rests upon the fact that as a long time AE fan, I would rather see them as more Carmina than Meermin, if you follow me.


I am entirely empathetic. But viewed from a business perspective, there's little else among larger businesses, and America led the way to off-shoring. As a side note, if you're familiar with the typical tactics of private equity owned businesses, it's virtually *astounding* that AE is manufacturing at all, much less still making much/most of their shoes in the U.S.A.

As the companies who only brand and don't make become ever larger and fewer in number, it will open room for smaller companies to make the kind of products we prefer within the context of traditional business practices. When we speak of businesses like Carmina or some of the surviving Northamptonshire makers, these are some examples of what we eventually may see more of. And you'll note, that another general characteristic is that such businesses are typically sole-proprietorships or family owned.


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

Flanderian said:


> I am entirely empathetic. But viewed from a business perspective, there's little else among larger businesses, and America led the way to off-shoring. As a side note, if you're familiar with the typical tactics of private equity owned businesses, it's virtually *astounding* that AE is manufacturing at all, much less still making much/most of their shoes in the U.S.A.
> 
> As the companies who only brand and don't make become ever larger and fewer in number, it will open room for smaller companies to make the kind of products we prefer within the context of traditional business practices. When we speak of businesses like Carmina or some of the surviving Northamptonshire makers, these are some examples of what we eventually may see more of. And you'll note, that another general characteristic is that such businesses are typically sole-proprietorships or family owned.


Excellent Synopsis.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

arkirshner said:


> My region's entire water supply was shut down last week because of algae toxins in Lake Erie caused by phosphorous run offs. Runs offs permitted due to lobbyist success in persuading legislative restrictions on the EPA.


Time heals all things. (And teaches all men!) 

But, Alan, I see a marvelous business opportunity here! Bottle that stuff with a fancy label saying something like, *"Genuine Toledo Tap" *and a skull and crossbones and the warning, _"Not for human consumption." and_ sell it as a curiosity to those in need of enlightenment.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Flanderian said:


> Time heals all things. (And teaches all men!)
> 
> But, Alan, I see a marvelous business opportunity here! Bottle that stuff with a fancy label saying something like, *"Genuine Toledo Tap" *and a skull and crossbones and the warning, _"Not for human consumption." and_ sell it to as a curiosity to those in need of enlightenment.


Post of the year. Printed it and showed it to everyone I saw today. My 17 year old almost laughed, and that's a rare event.


----------



## Flanderian (Apr 30, 2008)

arkirshner said:


> Post of the year. Printed it and showed it to everyone I saw today. My 17 year old almost laughed, and that's a rare event.


I'm beyond flattered. Virtually nothing offered by an adult to a 17 year old would garner a smile!


----------



## pcunite (Nov 20, 2006)

AllenEdmondsCEO said:


> Greetings Again, AAAC Friends


Paul,

Thank you taking part in this thread. I found AE sometime in 2006 after searching online for an American made shoe. What I thought I wanted and what I truly value have matured over the years.

TL;DR
* Want a quality product - not a veblen good.
* Want all the people involved to have a satisfying career.
* Want the company to make a reasonable profit.
* I don't care where it is made.
* Don't care about "hand-made" if a machine is better.

I went searching for an American shoe because I was so disgusted with shoes I was buying from dept. stores. $150 shoes from "higher-end" stores did not seem much better. I had an old pair of Bostonian's (American made) and was determined to find something similar. I just assumed that "American made" meant quality. I know now that this is not necessarily true.

"Surely", I thought, "there is a company out there that cares more about their product and their people than the soul-crushing cost race-to-the-bottom metric?"

I was so grateful to discover your brand. I really appreciate how you're able to make a great product that passes the six inches away test. I can see some quick machine work here and there but I know that I'm getting a great value. Perfection is very very expensive!

I think we also have to be careful about being too arrogant with "American" made. The ideals of America are more important to me than the dirt upon which a person stands. It warms my heart to know that people in DR are able to be a part of a great process. Thanks for not using them to create junk products.


----------



## zyxwvutsr (Sep 20, 2013)

pcunite said:


> I think we also have to be careful about being too arrogant with "American" made. The ideals of America are more important to me than the dirt upon which a person stands. It warms my heart to know that people in DR are able to be a part of a great process. Thanks for not using them to create junk products.


Well said. Reading several of the earlier comments about American wages, unions, etc., I kept thinking, "What have these guys got against Dominicans?"


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

Ron Rider is a good guy. I will continue to do business with him when my desires arise. But Ron is also a businessman with interests of his own as well as a lifetime of experiences, and dare I say bias, to go along with those experiences.

I think it's fair to say that Ron and his family have history with Allen Edmonds company. While he has a right to express his opinion I believe it's also fair to say that his opinion, where Allen Edmonds is concerned, may be colored by his family's experiences.

To Tempest: Sanum scepticismo.



Tempest said:


> I want to say that Ron Rider strongly insinuated the same thing about major components being made overseas, but the site is down for the moment.
> At some point, it will hopefully be back up and we'll see.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

zyxwvutsr said:


> Well said. Reading several of the earlier comments about American wages, unions, etc., I kept thinking, "What have these guys got against Dominicans?"


Nothing to do with people from the Dominican Republic, it's to do with honesty. It is dishonest to create and cultivate an impression that something is something that it isn't. This company seems to be seeking to create or maintain an impression that it's shoes are made in America when they're clearly not. They're also trying to create and maintain an impression that the management of the company has a key goal of employing Americans, when it clearly hasn't. Trying to create or maintain an impression when it is patently false is dishonesty, no matter who is doing it.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ We're in agreement in that it has to do with honesty. I have not counted the number of USA made Allen Edmonds verses the Dominican Republic but I'd guess 95% of Allen Edmonds are made in the USA. Since the vast majority of their products are in fact made in the USA, by citizens of the USA, I think it's more than fair for Allen Edmonds to give the impression that the company has made a commitment to employ Americans. (Simple fact, please dispute if you disagree) 

After a quick scan of the most recent catalog they've sent me as well as their web site Allen Edmonds clearly states which of the few shoes they sell that are made outside the USA.

I think it's a stretch to insinuate Allen Edmonds is being dishonest. 

Since they clearly state where each and every product they sell is manufactured I can't use the word dishonest in the same sentence as the name Allen Edmonds.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ We're in agreement in that it has to do with honesty. I have not counted the number of USA made Allen Edmonds verses the Dominican Republic but I'd guess *95% of Allen Edmonds are made in the USA.* Since the *vast majority of their products are in fact made in the USA*, by citizens of the USA, I think it's more than fair for Allen Edmonds to give the impression that the company has made a commitment to employ Americans. (Simple fact, please dispute if you disagree)
> .


Where are you getting your facts and figures? And does your 95% include shoes that have their uppers both cut and sticthed in the DR? Because to me, such shoes are not "Made in America" - at least not without a significant qualifier to that phrase. Significant steps in the making of these shoes take place outside of America. While it's true that the cut and stitched uppers are not themselves completed shoes, it is also true that you can't have completed shoes without cut and stitched uppers. And you certainly can't have quality completed shoes if the uppers aren't cut and stitched properly. It isn't simply a matter of sourcing raw materials from outside the country. It's sourcing workmanship on essential steps in the manufacturing process from outside the country.

That said, I think it is a bit of a stretch to brand AE as dishonest when the CEO is right here on the forum telling us all about their prodution methods. And it's a bit naive to expect literal truth in advertising.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

It's like a tie that you buy... It will have, "Fabric woven in England". THEN, it will have, "Made in the USA". Perhaps there needs to be a disclaimer on the shoes. Or, maybe just change the stamp to read, "Finished in the USA".


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

RogerP said:


> Where are you getting your facts and figures? And does your 95% include shoes that have their uppers both cut and sticthed in the DR? Because to me, such shoes are not "Made in America" - at least not without a significant qualifier to that phrase. Significant steps in the making of these shoes take place outside of America. While it's true that the cut and stitched uppers are not themselves completed shoes, it is also true that you can't have completed shoes without cut and stitched uppers. And you certainly can't have quality completed shoes if the uppers aren't cut and stitched properly. It isn't simply a matter of sourcing raw materials from outside the country. It's sourcing workmanship on essential steps in the manufacturing process from outside the country.
> 
> That said, I think it is a bit of a stretch to brand AE as dishonest when the CEO is right here on the forum telling us all about their prodution methods. And it's a bit naive to expect literal truth in advertising.


Yes, but as was mentioned earlier in the thread, the CEO told us, our membership, that shoes are made in the DR. I'm under the impression, given the tone of the thread, that most Americans won't know that the shoe stamped "Made in America" only means that 70% of the process of making the shoe was carried out in the US by American workers. They, as I, would assume that "Made in America" would mean just that. It doesn't, and that is dishonest to the normal American buying public.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

As I said in my response:* " I have not counted the number of USA made Allen Edmonds verses the Dominican Republic but I'd guess 95% of Allen Edmonds are made in the USA."

*This means that my facts and figures are empirical, my experience, qualitative not quantitative, okay? When I look in the bottom of the shoe and it says; "Made in USA of imported materials" I take it to mean that the shoe is assembled in the USA of materials that are from somewhere else. That's it, nothing more.

Here's a AAAC thread that discusses it: https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...Materials-in-a-Made-in-USA-Allen-Edmonds-Shoe

I have not mentioned anything about expecting literal truth in advertizing. Perhaps this is what Chouan is trying to point out. I know he has replied to this thread again and said that he does indeed feel that there's some dishonesty involved, I disagree.

I don't think it's been clarified that all the stitching is done outside the USA, then the stitched being pieces sent back for assembly in the USA. Since it's been brought up I would like to know.

*And for Chouan:* *I would like to know where you got your information when you said:* *"70% of the process of making the shoe was carried out in the US by American workers." * I don't know where that has been established, perhaps I've overlooked it,...

I have a pair of entirely Dominican made Allen Edmonds deck type shoes and they say that they were made in the Dominican Republic.

If anyone is making the claim that a significant portion of Allen Edmonds are stitched up outside the USA and sent back for assembly I'd like them to present evidence to back it up.



RogerP said:


> Where are you getting your facts and figures? And does your 95% include shoes that have their uppers both cut and sticthed in the DR? Because to me, such shoes are not "Made in America" - at least not without a significant qualifier to that phrase. Significant steps in the making of these shoes take place outside of America. While it's true that the cut and stitched uppers are not themselves completed shoes, it is also true that you can't have completed shoes without cut and stitched uppers. And you certainly can't have quality completed shoes if the uppers aren't cut and stitched properly. It isn't simply a matter of sourcing raw materials from outside the country. It's sourcing workmanship on essential steps in the manufacturing process from outside the country.
> 
> That said, I think it is a bit of a stretch to brand AE as dishonest when the CEO is right here on the forum telling us all about their prodution methods. And it's a bit naive to expect literal truth in advertising.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

127.72 MHz said:


> As I said in my response:* " I have not counted the number of USA made Allen Edmonds verses the Dominican Republic but I'd guess 95% of Allen Edmonds are made in the USA."
> 
> *This means that my facts and figures are empirical, my experience, qualitative not quantitative, okay? When I look in the bottom of the shoe and it says; "Made in USA of imported materials" I take it to mean that the shoe is assembled in the USA of materials that are from somewhere else. That's it, nothing more.
> 
> ...


Post number 19.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

127.72 MHz said:


> As I said in my response:* " I have not counted the number of USA made Allen Edmonds verses the Dominican Republic but I'd guess 95% of Allen Edmonds are made in the USA."
> 
> *This means that my facts and figures are empirical, my experience, qualitative not quantitative, okay? When I look in the bottom of the shoe and it says; "Made in USA of imported materials" I take it to mean that the shoe is assembled in the USA of materials that are from somewhere else. That's it, nothing more.
> 
> ...


1. Please calm down.

2. Nobody has suggested that ALL the stitching is done outside the USA. The question was whether ANY of the AE mainline shoes were stitched in the DR. Some had believed that ALL AE mainline shoes were stitched in the US. That appears not to be the case. At least, that is what I clearly take from Mr. Grangard's comment on the first page of this thread:

_"We do indeed cut leather patterns and sew the first stage of welt upper production in both our Port Washington and our DR . The double capacity gives us efficiencies in production workflow, and of course also in labor cost, that enable us to sell finest calfskin Goodyear welted shoes below $400 MSRP..." (emphasis added)

_Is that sufficient "evidence" for you? I recommend that you read his entire post for content and context. Obviously you have not yet done so.

For the reasons I stated above, I do not believe that shoes whose uppers are cut and stitched in a foreign country can be fairly described as "American made." And adding "...from imported materials." is by no means sufficent clarification. As I stated before, this is not merely sourcing foreign materials (i.e. leather), but sourcing foreign workmanship in the execution of critical steps in the _making_ of the shoes.

As for the percentages of mainline shoes cut and stitched in the US versus the DR - I have no idea. Unlike you, I am disinclined to guess. But the business case for having as many as possible stiched in the DR is very clear. The case for having as few as possible stitched there is decidedly more murky.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

The way I understood Mr. Grangard's comment was that they will not tell us how much of, or which shoes specifically begun their life in the Dominican Republic, and that if you want to be sure that your shoes were done 100% in the USA you should buy either Shell Cordovan, or the Independence line.

I would feel much better about this if AE would stamp each shoe that has begun it's life in the DR, with something that indicates just that.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Dmontez said:


> They way I understood Mr. Grangard's comment was that they will not tell us how much of, or which shoes specifically begun their life in the Dominican Republic, and that if you want to be sure that your shoes were done 100% in the USA you should buy either Shell Cordovan, or the Independence line.
> 
> *I would feel much better about this if AE would stamp each shoe that has begun it's life in the DR, with something that indicates just that*.


I agree.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ 
1.) To say calm down implies that I'm not calm. By the tone and tenor of your remarks perhaps I could say the same thing to you. But I won't because it would imply that I know you, which I don't, and that might indicate a bit of passive aggressiveness. I find this thread interesting, nothing more.

2.) I too have read Mr. Grangaard's response but it doesn't seem to indicate any kind of percentages. Turns out after re-scanning post number 19, as Chouan has suggested, it seems to reference New balance shoes. (Which is puzzling.)

As far as Paul Grangaard's post that you've quoted: _We do indeed cut leather patterns and sew the first stage of welt upper production in both our Port Washington and our DR . The double capacity gives us efficiencies in production workflow, and of course also in labor cost, that enable us to sell finest calfskin Goodyear welted shoes below $400 MSRP..." (emphasis added)_

Then you've asked: "Is that sufficient "evidence" for you?"

My reply is: No, it's not sufficient evidence because my original assertion was: *"I don't think it's been clarified that all the stitching is done outside the USA, then the stitched being pieces sent back for assembly in the USA. Since it's been brought up I would like to know."

*Notice the aspect of my post that says "All" the stitching was done outside the USA then shipped back. (I guess I could recommend that you read my entire post, but that would be petty and childlike not allowing someone the latitude to have thoroughly absorbed the details of a rather specific topic,...After all we're all here to share and learn right?)

The reason I find this aspect interesting is because when gman-17 followed his shoes through the production process the images did indeed show the welt uppers already having the lining sewn into them when the images in the thread started. Here's the thread, although the images seem to have expired. 
https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...p-to-Allen-Edmonds-a-k-a-The-CEO-Factory-Tour

I, like you, also have no idea the percentages of the Allen Edmonds mainline shoe, leather pieces, that are stitched and then sent to the USA for assembly. But I am interested and find it interesting.


----------



## indigent (May 25, 2014)

I am unsure what the fuss is about, because it is quite apparent that AE operates they way they do to maintain operations. The idea that they could/would shutter offshore operations and move to purely domestic production smacks of myopic jingoism. It would be great if a company would abandon significant fixed assets and dramatically increase their direct labor costs to either raise prices outside of their competitive niche or to reduce their margins to the point that they cannot fund their operations. Oops, nevermind, that sounds entirely horrible.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

An entire thread full of assumptions from people with zero inside knowledge passing judgement on one of the few remaining American shoe manufacturers - and a company that is run with class in integrity. File under the "some people are never satisfied" category. SMH


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

127.72 MHz;1588459Then you've asked: "Is that sufficient "evidence" for you?"
My reply is: No said:


> "I don't think it's been clarified that all the stitching is done outside the USA, then the stitched being pieces sent back for assembly in the USA. Since it's been brought up I would like to know."
> [/B]


I rather suspected as much. I think I understand what Mr. Grangard has said quite well. I have no inclination to attempt to convince you of something which you steadfastly refuse to see. Some mainline shoes are cut and stitched in the DR. Believe what you will. I am neither trying to sell you a pair of AE shoes nor stop you from buying them. Have a nice day.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

mrkleen said:


> An entire thread full of assumptions from people with zero inside knowledge passing judgement on one of the few remaining American shoe manufacturers - and a company that is run with class in integrity. File under the "some people are never satisfied" category. SMH


I have no inside knowledge. I assume that the CEO does. I am prepared to take him at his word.



indigent said:


> I am unsure what the fuss is about, because it is quite apparent that AE operates they way they do to maintain operations.* The idea that they could/would shutter offshore operations and move to purely domestic production smacks of myopic jingoism.* It would be great if a company would abandon significant fixed assets and dramatically increase their direct labor costs to either raise prices outside of their competitive niche or to reduce their margins to the point that they cannot fund their operations. Oops, nevermind, that sounds entirely horrible.


It's been an active thread and I may well have missed where the proposition was advanced that they should shutter offshore operations. Would you be so kind as to point it out?


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

mrkleen said:


> An entire thread full of assumptions from people with zero inside knowledge passing judgement on one of the few remaining American shoe manufacturers - and a company that is run with class in integrity. File under the "some people are never satisfied" category. SMH


:thumbs-up: Amen brother!

But it's lot's more fun to: :deadhorse-a:


----------



## indigent (May 25, 2014)

RogerP said:


> It's been an active thread and I may well have missed where the proposition was advanced that they should shutter offshore operations. Would you be so kind as to point it out?


It's a tacit implication couched in all comments about grassroots movements to buy US made, that higher quality products of domestic origin are available for higher prices, that it is no longer clear for some whether or not they will purchase AE with this information. If people have said they are disappointed in use of Dominican resources, which you specifically did, then the logical course to take is that the disappointment and the aversion to purchase would be remedied with use of only US labor for US branded shoes. Calling AE an American brand manager instead of an American manufacturer is in and of itself a ridiculous notion, so I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to respond to you. I won't make the same mistake again.


----------



## musicmax (Mar 13, 2012)

L-feld said:


> Especially with the possibility of substantial sanctions in a year when the agency is really feeling the strains of tea party budget cuts.
> 
> If this was going on, the FTC would be on it like flies on cow patties.


1. It is the FTC itself that reduced its budget request by $10M from FY 2013 to FY 2014.
2. The FTC only filed about 100 actions (31) & complaints (67) in FY 2012.

https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/f...ngressional-budget-justification/2014_cbj.pdf


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

mrkleen said:


> An entire thread full of assumptions from people with zero inside knowledge passing judgement on one of the few remaining American shoe manufacturers - and a company that is run with class and integrity. File under the "some people are never satisfied" category. SMH


Nailed it.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

indigent said:


> *It's a tacit implication couched in all comments about grassroots movements to buy US made*, that higher quality products of domestic origin are available for higher prices, that it is no longer clear for some whether or not they will purchase AE with this information. If people have said they are disappointed in use of Dominican resources, which you specifically did, then the logical course to take is that the disappointment and the aversion to purchase would be remedied with use of only US labor for US branded shoes. Calling AE an American brand manager instead of an American manufacturer is in and of itself a ridiculous notion, so I'm not even sure why I'm bothering to respond to you. I won't make the same mistake again.


Translation: nobody remotely suggested anything of the kind, but rather, it was a straw man of your sole invention. In other words, standard operating procedure for a fanboy throwing a hissy fit.

Here's an alternative to scrapping offshore production: clearly labeling goods which are manufactured in part in the DR in such a way that consumers who are not participants on web forums might be informed of that fact.


----------



## Spex (Nov 25, 2012)

Well that was all fun and exciting. I think everyone managed to get their points across. I started this thread so now I just need to figure out where the Close button is.


----------



## Chouan (Nov 11, 2009)

RogerP said:


> Translation: nobody remotely suggested anything of the kind, but rather, it was a straw man of your sole invention. In other words, standard operating procedure for a fanboy throwing a hissy fit.
> 
> Here's an alternative to scrapping offshore production: clearly labeling goods which are manufactured in part in the DR in such a way that consumers who are not participants on web forums might be informed of that fact.



Exactly. Very well put. The CEO said that their shoes are partly made outside of the USA; then they should label their shoes as such, as well as stop pretending that _"_* Preserving and growing American jobs remains a huge part of what unites, incites and excites our leadership team."*. If it was, they wouldn't be running a factory in the Dominican Republic.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Sort of reminds me of an old philosophical puzzle. 

You have a wooden boat named the Betty Sue.

One by one you replace the wooden planks until they have all been changed. Is the boat still the Betty Sue?

You take the old planks (one by one) from the Betty Sue and build a new boat with the exact same specifications as the Betty Sue. Is this new boat now the Betty Sue? What about the original that has been outfitted with new planks? 

The major difference however is that this is a shoe company and the average consumer has very little to do with Metaphysics and Naming Theory. The topic of the OP should not be a question with no actual answer to ponder late into the mornng hours with a 70 year old single malt. 

While politicians will pander to business with such définitions of "american made", we are not politicians (on this site) versus clothing fans. To each his own but the fact that AE is not 100% American made does not impresss me favourably. While I appreciate the CEO "spilling the beans", the fact that a group of dedicated clothing enthusiasts thought that AE were 100% American doesn't show too much transparency on the part of AE (and their marketing). While this thread has had less than 3'000 views, I would guess that AEs tarket market (potential customers) would number 10s of millions (if not 100s). A

A quick look at their website gives no indication that there is any overseas involvement (other than "searching the globe for the finest leathers") but their tagline seems to be "An American Original" and there's plenty on the good ole "American Heritage" of AE. I see plenty mentioned on the website as to Wisconsin as well...


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

After 30 minutes or so of browsing the AE website, I still find nothing that mentions DR manufacturing....

A few gems coming from the AE website:

"If you come from Wisconsin, you learn pretty quickly about the sanctity of a handshake, the weight of keeping your word and the importance of being a reliable neighbor". 
Do these "values" not apply elsewhere in the U.S. (and the globe)?

"From the iconic Park Avenue and the sophisticated Williams to the more rugged Lubbock and edgier Ashbury, every one of our shoes tells a distinctly American story all its own." 
Did all of these shoe styles really come out of the U.S.? If not, what exactly is the "distinct American story" pertaining to them?

"We credit our strong values and work ethics as the reasons our footwear is consistently chosen by corporate, political, entertainment and community leaders. Whether it is receiving a glowing endorsement from the Prime Minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, or Presidents Ronald Reagan, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton and George W. Bush all choosing to wear Park Avenues for their inaugurations"...
hmmm. That so many American politicians have chosen AE is another reason for me to weary of the brand. lol.

"In this day and age, with so many companies turning over their customer service operations to automated computers or overseas call centers, why do we continue go to such lengths to care for our clientele? Because as manufacturers of premium mens footwear, accessories and cedar products, our number one priority is to deliver exceptional value to our customers every day. When all is said and done, we know our customers are the reason we've been around for so long." 
Umm. I find it a bit odd that they decry others using overseas call centers. It not only shines "America first" but is quite hypocritical in light of the DR manufacturing.

"Once we do begin the manufacturing process, we rely on our skilled craftspeople, our time-tested construction methods and an unmatched attention to detail to ensure that nothing leaves our factory unless we deem it to be of the highest quality." 
If this is truly the case then why do we see so many threads pertaining to defects on AE as well as the ever famous AE "seconds"?

"Whether you're talking about the Ford Mustang, Wrigley Field or Frank Lloyd Wright's Prairie Houses, classic American styling has always been the epitome of elegant form meets practical function, and the same can be said of all Allen Edmonds products."
This line will serve any weasel wishing to promote Americana at its finest. While not actually stating that they are "Made in America", everything would lead the average consumer to assume so

"The genesis of great American shoes as crafted by Allen Edmonds starts with timeless designs-elegant brogues, burnished plain toes, plain or perforated captoes, bluchers, balmorals, Venetian slip-ons, chukka boots-that bring to bear an All-American sensibility inspired by great men, great cities and sometimes, the great outdoors."

"Our lineage not only highlights our Wisconsin roots and Midwestern values, but underscores how being an Allen Edmonds Man is passed down from one generation to the next."

"In 1922, Allen Edmonds founder Elbert W. Allen launched his new shoe company (originally called the Allen-Spiegel Shoe Company) in Belgium, Wisconsin, less than 10 miles from our current headquarters. A family man at heart, Allen knew, as did his future partner and salesman extraordinaire, Bill "Pops" Edmonds, that to be a success they needed to stay close to their roots, knowing that the Midwestern values of hard work, honesty, humility and trust would be the cornerstones of a new kind of shoe company."


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Speaking of honesty in advertising... Is it just me or does anyone else here not consider these to be dress boots? I don't want to start another gripe, but if AE wants to be the premier "American" shoe manufacturere, should they not promote their products as to what they actually are? Is there anyone here that would not call this a casual boot? If we wouldn't, why would a major shoe manufacturer? Do they not know the difference? Are they just seeking profit from the uniformed? Are they assuming their clients don't know the difference and don't care?

https://imageshack.com/i/idV68icYj
Shaker Heights - Plain-toe Blucher Lace-up Men's *Dress Boots* by Allen Edmonds


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

Made in America is as much a marketing ploy for many companies as it is a requirement under law to list the place of production.

True, as pointed out by J1M, that there is nothing referencing the Dominican Republic on the AE website, but a good bit of the manufacturing is still done domestically. I don't buy the gobblygook about doing it to keep prices low, or to meet demand. Domestic manufacturing can be expanded in order to do that. Plain and simple, it makes good business sense and expands the profit margin.

Allen Edmonds still makes a quality product but I still won't pay full retail. I wonder what % of their sales are at full retail and how much at a discount. I'm sure some of this goes into the calculus of the marginal cost of manufacturing. For myself, I've never paid full retail for their shoes or belts.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

I once raised the issue on the other forum of whether AE's widespread discounting was diminishing the perception of the brand. The response was a lot of hysterical shrieking by the fanboys. $400 was mentioned by the CEO. Outside of shell, I find I more think of AE as a $200 shoe. That wasn't always the case.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

i imagine it depends on ones definition of "Dress". RogerP has certainly shown us what proper dress boots look like, and how they can be appropriatly paired with suits for buisness use. These are not in that category.

At the same time, I have purchased them in anticipation of the upcoming seasons. My initial thought was to pair them with my tweed jackets for casual use. Before it becomes brutally cold, I will use tweed jackets as an outercoat on the weekends and for social evenings during the week. 

I expect to wear them with chinos, cords, moleskins etc. sans jacket, or with tweed/ flannel pants with or without jacket. There will be times for example, when going out for dinner when I would be wearing a tie with my sports coat. Now you and I would consider this casual, however in this day and age, many would think that as "Dressy". Probably the marketing folks at AE fit into this latter mentality.

I would not wear them to buisness functions. In my office, when wearing a sportscoat and odd trousers, I could see them as appropriate. However the fact of their containing permeable cloth, makes them impracticable for use in "hazardous liquids" environments.


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

I think think the term "dress" applies pretty much to anything not resembling a work boot or that has a leather sole. Also distinct from a hiking boot. I know people that consider anything other than athletic shoes to be dress shoes.

Back to AE, I agree with RogerP, I don't consider AE to be a $350 shoe, certainly not when they can be had in such volume at ~$200 price point. All of this wouldn't be so bad either if, for God's sake, they made an attractive shoe every once in a while. They have a few good looking designs but some just have no identity nor are they admirable.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> Back to AE, I agree with RogerP, I don't consider AE to be a $350 shoe, certainly not when they can be had in such volume at ~$200 price point. All of this wouldn't be so bad either if, for God's sake, they made an attractive shoe every once in a while. They have a few good looking designs but some just have no identity nor are they admirable.


+1. Although I admit to having availability issues with AE here, none of the models I have seen struck me as being overly impressive. Add into that that the local retailer has them priced starting at the equivalent of $400. Heck, I've gotten Alden shell for less than AEs retail here.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

RogerP said:


> I once raised the issue on the other forum of whether AE's widespread discounting was diminishing the perception of the brand. The response was a lot of hysterical shrieking by the fanboys. $400 was mentioned by the CEO. Outside of shell, I find I more think of AE as a $200 shoe. That wasn't always the case.





SG_67 said:


> Back to AE, I agree with RogerP, I don't consider AE to be a $350 shoe, certainly not when they can be had in such volume at ~$200 price point. All of this wouldn't be so bad either if, for God's sake, they made an attractive shoe every once in a while. They have a few good looking designs but some just have no identity nor are they admirable.


agreed on all counts. this is one of the main reasons why I have never bought into the AE hype. I'm sure AE has provided a great product for many people, but I could never get past their aesthetics nor could I justify spending premium prices for their shoes when I could buy a pair of Aldens which are 100% US made, or any other handful of shoes from companies abroad. As someone pointed out in another thread, there seems to be a big difference in quality between family owned companies versus corporate entities looking to divide and conquer. I would probably consider AE if I ever found something that appealed to me AND if it was cheap enough, but I would never pay full price for their shoes.

but back on topic, I agree with a lot of the statements being made here with regard to the country of manufacture. I do find it deceptive to label your goods 'Made in the USA' if not ALL components are in fact sourced and manufactured here. It kinda reminds me of the outrage about the manufacturing of the American flag - once upon a time they were made overseas, probably in China, that is until people made a stink about an American flag that said Made in China.

What consumers have to understand is that domestic manufacturing comes at a cost. Most of us here are willing to part with our hard earned dollars and pay premium prices with some companies because we know what we're getting, but the average consumer doesn't care (or know) about Goodyear welted shoes or calf leather uppers, they only care about price and aesthetics. this seems to be who AE is trying to cater to IMHO


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

I am not rushing to AE's defense here....but when I had a factory tour back in May, it was incredible to see that operation first hand.

It was, by far, the busiest factory I have ever seen....and in my younger days I worked in MANY.

But, as I have thought about it I remember at the beginning of the tour when we walked past the long lines of Singer sewing machines...that just so happened to not be nearly as busy as everywhere else.

The solution for us who are sartorially minded is to do MTO, Independence line, or cordovan to ensure that they are indeed 100% American made.

It is interesting because I may be moving to the Milwaukee area and was sort of offered a job with AE when I inquired about it. I may need some part time work to supplement my change in vocation and location.

Anyhow, the point is I believe the good outweighs the bad BY FAR when it comes to AE.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Watchman said:


> The solution for us who are sartorially minded is to do MTO, Independence line, or cordovan to ensure that they are indeed 100% American made.


isn't this what Alden does, sort of? there are a lot of retailers like TSM, unionmade, Leffot, epaulet, etc., that do special make-ups specifically for their stores, so they are MTO. It's also no secret that shell cordovan is highly prized in the Alden community, especially with the so-called scarcity of colors like Ravello & whiskey. this is why I believe Alden is successful at what they do. there's the perception of scarcity that keeps their customers coming back for more. AE's can be found practically everywhere and at a discount, whereas, the only discounted Alden shoes you'll ever find are either as irregulars through TSM or on fleabay.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

gaseousclay said:


> he only discounted Alden shoes you'll ever find are either as irregulars through TSM or on fleabay.


This isn't really true. Sure, the discounts aren't as prevalent as AE, and you're not going to find Alden whisky shell discounted, but I currently have three pairs of Aldens and they were all bought new with at least a 25% discount from J Crew, Unionmade, and Haberdash. The discounts are out there, you just have to be patient and ready to pounce when deals do come up.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

RogerP said:


> I once raised the issue on the other forum of whether AE's widespread discounting was diminishing the perception of the brand. The response was a lot of hysterical shrieking by the fanboys. $400 was mentioned by the CEO. Outside of shell, I find I more think of AE as a $200 shoe. That wasn't always the case.


Yep, this is how Americans think. An item sold for $200 cannot be as good as the competitor's product sold for $400. People use price as a proxy for actual due diligence on quality, which is understandable since few people have the time and the expertise to conduct such diligence. Of course, this would work in perfect markets where all participants had perfect information and exhibited perfect rational behavior, but that is only true in econ text books. In reality, prices are often set to inform and reflect brand impressions and have little to do with quality. It may be that AE has hurt itself by not holding fast to high retail prices, I don't know. But its approach has been terrific for consumers, and I for one am grateful for it.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Fred G. Unn said:


> This isn't really true. Sure, the discounts aren't as prevalent as AE, and you're not going to find Alden whisky shell discounted, but I currently have three pairs of Aldens and they were all bought new with at least a 25% discount from J Crew, Unionmade, and Haberdash. The discounts are out there, you just have to be patient and ready to pounce when deals do come up.


I was speaking more about how prevalent AE's discounts are compared to Alden as you've stated. AE seems to have perpetual sales on their stuff, not to mention the shoebank offerings, so something is always on discount. and yes, some retailers do offer sales on Alden but they don't strike me as steep or as frequent as AE. I'm probably wrong but this is what I've seen so far


----------



## SG_67 (Mar 22, 2014)

^ Alden probably manufactures far less than AE does. Limited availability is probably one reason; I know of only one place in Chicago that sells Alden and that's at Hanig's. Even with that, they have a very limited selection on hand.


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

I think AE represents a great product for what they are. I view them as being the "Gateway Shoe" that is to say for men who are becoming more and more aware as to the importance of dressing properly.

Young guys who are coming out of buying your average fashion forward and/or mainline department store brands such as Florsheim, Bostonian and J&M etc...they get turned onto AE and it is a whole new world of traditional men's dress standards.

So, then they come to AAAC like they do every week and either brag or complain about their first AE's. Then, if they stick around, we introduce them to the better brands.

In this respect, AE is a great place to start!


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

musicmax said:


> 1. It is the FTC itself that reduced its budget request by $10M from FY 2013 to FY 2014.
> 2. The FTC only filed about 100 actions (31) & complaints (67) in FY 2012.
> 
> https://www.ftc.gov/sites/default/f...ngressional-budget-justification/2014_cbj.pdf


That's mind blowing that the FTC would voluntarily reduce it's own budget. But then again, I probably have a different perspective, since I work SSA.

Also, if the FTC is winding down to that level, that's really unfortunate. And people complain about how the Obama administration is going off the deep end of regulatory enforcement...

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

SG_67 said:


> ^ Alden probably manufactures far less than AE does. Limited availability is probably one reason; I know of only one place in Chicago that sells Alden and that's at Hanig's. Even with that, they have a very limited selection on hand.


I believe you are correct. I only know of 2 retailers in Minneapolis that sell Alden. both have a limited selection


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Watchman said:


> I think AE represents a great product for what they are. I view them as being the "Gateway Shoe" that is to say for men who are becoming more and more aware as to the importance of dressing properly.
> 
> So, then they come to AAAC like they do every week and either brag or complain about their first AE's. Then, if they stick around, we introduce them to the better brands.
> 
> In this respect, AE is a great place to start!


Yeah, Thanks a lot. (add sarcasm emoticon).


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

^^^No problem Doc! I'm right there with you! :thumbs-up:

We can say whatever we want about AE and some of it may be true, other things may be exaggerated....

For instance, right now, you can get the "Grayson" which is their classic tassel loafer, in burgundy shell cordovan (100% US made, seconds of course) for $199:


That is a steal for real IMHO :cool2:

I have no clue why I have not ordered them yet..........


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

Watchman said:


> That is a steal for real IMHO :cool2:


Jeez, that is a great deal! I'm tempted to grab a pair, but I don't think they would get a lot of wear. I'm not really a loafer fan.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Watchman said:


> ^^^No problem Doc! I'm right there with you! :thumbs-up:
> 
> We can say whatever we want about AE and some of it may be true, other things may be exaggerated....
> 
> ...


Oh, great, a gateway shell.:aportnoy:

Thank god I have that style and color in calf..


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

Dang, I'm seriously considering these. Tassel loafer fans, what do you wear 'em with? I'm just not sure what I'd wear them with since for virtually any situation, I think I already have stuff I'd rather wear.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

momsdoc said:


> Oh, great, a gateway shell.:aportnoy:


Don't do it, Doc! It may start innocently enough with an AE Grayson shell... Pretty soon, though, they won't be enough and you start buying other AE shell offerings. Before you know it, you are strung out on Alden PTBs and LHSs huffing Saphir until you can get your next Horween fix.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

That Grayson is a heck of a deal! The Grayson was the first Tassle Loafer I owned, but I had to sell them. The last just did not fit my foot well. That's really too bad 199 for brand new shell is a GREAT deal.


I wanted to clear this up, In a previous post I stated that I would feel better about this if AE would just tell us which shoes started their life in the DR. That does not mean that I will stop shopping AE, I will still buy AE shoes when the need arises. When I first started buying AE shoes it was a big plus to me that they are American made shoes, and honestly finding out that the uppers may be stitched together in the DR is really disheartening. I understand the need to do it to save on costs, but I do believe AE NEEDS to tell its consumers this particular shoe started it's life in the DR, and was finished in the US, and the consumer can decide if they want to make the purchase or not. It's a simple stamp that just needs two letters "D" and "R" and just have the workers in the DR use that stamp every time they stitch together an upper. That way when I am buying AE shoes I can see that DR and ask for another in the same size until I get one that did not start it's life in the DR. If AE ONLY makes the Independence line, and their Shell Cordovan's in the US then that really limits me on what I am willing to purchase from them.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

So why didi I already check the shoebank to find out that they do indeed have my size available in 2 stores?

 Walk away, walk away, walk away.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

momsdoc said:


> So why didi I already check the shoebank to find out that they do indeed have my size available in 2 stores?


Me too. Over on SF, it sounds like the price is in error, so if you want 'em jump on them quick before they change the price in the system.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Me too. Over on SF, it sounds like the price is in error, so if you want 'em jump on them quick before they change the price in the system.


No, I will be rational. That $200 is towards Vass.

AAAC logic at work.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

I'm weak. I just ordered. The woman at the Jeffersonville store said the price is in error and they are only honoring it today. Tomorrow it goes back up to $400 something. I'm not sure how to wear tassels but I assume it would be fairly easy to recoup the $ on eBay.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

I was about to, in a wider size and hope that it would work better than the "d" width fortunately for me they are all out but my wallet, and my wife will thank me. Although the Macadam balmoral boot and the Patriot in suede for 127.00 each are calling my name.



Fred G. Unn said:


> I'm weak. I just ordered. The woman at the Jeffersonville store said the price is in error and they are only honoring it today. Tomorrow it goes back up to $400 something. I'm not sure how to wear tassels but I assume it would be fairly easy to recoup the $ on eBay.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Jeez, that is a great deal! I'm tempted to grab a pair, but I don't think they would get a lot of wear. I'm not really a loafer fan.


i'm not a loafer fan either. BUT, i've seen a few by EG that could persuade me.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

momsdoc said:


> No, I will be rational. That $200 is towards Vass.
> 
> AAAC logic at work.


Good job Doc....In a moment of weakness (caused by AAAC groupthink), I too actually gave thought to the purchase. I even went so far as to going to the shoebank website (first time I ever browsed it) before realizing that there were many other shoes I would prefer to have versus adding another tassel loafer to my collection. I have 4 of the things. 2 Alden's in shell (1 black, 1 #8), 2 C&Js in calf (1 black,1 tan).


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

I think it would be cool if AE and other companies followed a similar business model as Gustin. The Gustin crowd-sourcing model eliminates waste and if a product idea isn't 100% backed then it doesn't get made. pretty simple idea. AE could then cut their losses and stop churning out heaps of garbage that no one wants


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Killer deal. But loafers and I do not get along. Not to mention that with recent EG and Vass arrivals, I cannot come close to justifying an impromptu shoe purchase.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

@gaseousclay, check out Meermin's "MTO Groups."

Is that sort of what you mean by the crowd sourcing model?


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

The addled shoe addict and his conversation with the brain....

Brain: Hey hero.. SHELL at $199.
Addict: So what? I have plenty of Shell.
B: Not for $199. Besides, you've never tried Allen Edmonds.
A: Alden and C&J are better anyways
B: How do you REALLY know if you've never tried AE? Everyone on AAAC says AEs are great.
A. Ah well. I have 4 tassel loafers anyways. Why get another pair.
B. What better way to directly compare AE to C&J/Alden. Same type of shoe, better comparison.
A: Yeah...But....
B: Did I say they're shell?
A: Yeah. Yeah. We already covered that.
B: Just look at them again. It can't hurt anything.
A. Sure. Why not? I'm not going to order them or anything.
B: Man. $199. Why not? That's nothing. They have your size. Look there's a button to make an enquiry.
A: I suppose I can write them and see if they're really offering such a deal. I mean what's the harm? I'm not buying them or anything.
B: That's it Buddy. All they want is your name, email, and phone number. Easy as pie.
A: Well that usually depends on the pie you’re trying to make
B: Shut up and fill in the form


One Hour Later....

B: Look man, they already wrote you back. It's true. $199 for shell. They can only hold them for 24 hours because it's such a great deal. Write them back NOW. Do it and do it right away.
A: Dear AE, Thank you for holding the shoes for me. I will call you tomorrow with payment and shipping information.


I have 24 hours to to talk myself out of this and so far it's been a losing battle. Perhaps I'll feel better in the morning.

.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

Fred G. Unn said:


> @gaseousclay, check out Meermin's "MTO Groups."
> 
> Is that sort of what you mean by the crowd sourcing model?


yeah, the Gustin site and Meermin's site look similar. Gustin basically creates a campaign for a product for X amount. once their funding goal is met the campaign is closed and the product is made. the cost to the customer is usually at wholesale or thereabouts. it then takes about 2 months for the product to be manufactured and delivered. I really dig Gustin's waxed trucker jackets. they're selling for $139 and if you compare that with a company like Filson which easily charges between $200-300 you know you're getting a high quality product for a steal.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

justonemore said:


> The addled shoe addict and his conversation with the brain....
> 
> Brain: Hey hero.. SHELL at $199.
> Addict: So what? I have plenty of Shell.
> ...


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

justonemore said:


> I have 24 hours to to talk myself out of this and so far it's been a losing battle. Perhaps I'll feel better in the morning.


LOL! I lost the battle in just under 45 minutes. At 1:30 I was posting "I'm not really a loafer fan." By 2:14 I had already completed the order! I only have one pair of shell (RL Marlows), so I'd kinda been wanting some more for a while now.


----------



## bobelmore (Jan 26, 2014)

justonemore said:


> After 30 minutes or so of browsing the AE website, I still find nothing that mentions DR manufacturing....
> 
> A few gems coming from the AE website:
> 
> ...


After about one minute I found this (emphasis is mine), which Paul mentioned in his post. Their lower cost shoes are made in the DR.

*INTERSTATE 90 - HANDSEWN VENETIAN SLIP-ON MEN'S CASUAL SHOES BY ALLEN EDMONDS*


Rubber sole men's slip-on casual shoes
Handsewn Venetian slip-on drivers
Lined premium leather upper
Dario rubber driving sole
Handsewn construction _(learn about our )_
Manufactured on the Handsewn 2592 Last _(learn )_
*Made in the Dominican Republic*

They also plainly state that their shoes are handmade from fine imported quality leathers. I think that statement is entirely consistent with what Paul said in his post.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

bobelmore said:


> They also plainly state that their shoes are handmade from fine imported quality leathers. * I think that statement is entirely consistent with what Paul said in his post*.


I disagree with that completely. In fact, that statement is quite misleading in that it suggests that mainline shoes are made from imported leathers, but makes no mention of foreign workmanship in the making of the shoes. Big difference between that and importing foreign leather which is then crafted into a shoe entirely within the US. There's a reason why they make you swear to tell "whole truth" in court. Because it is easier to mislead with a partial truth than with a complete fabrication.

Such misinformation is what lead to the misunderstanding - even among reasonably well informed enthusiasts on this forum - that ONLY the lower priced shoes were made in the DR (and branded as such) while the mainline shoes were made wholly within the US.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

justonemore said:


> The addled shoe addict and his conversation with the brain....
> 
> Brain: Hey hero.. SHELL at $199.
> Addict: So what? I have plenty of Shell.
> ...


You already have 4 tassels in shell. How often do you wear them. I wore one of my tassels today, probably the 1st time in over a month that I put a pair on ( i'll have to do a head count but I can think of at least 4 that I already have not to mention kiltie tassels). So I think if you waste your money on the Graysons, I'll have acquired 2 pair of Vass by the time you break those in.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

After scanning the entire thread all over again I have yet to see what standard there is for saying a product is made in the USA. ^^ I can see that RogerP feels that if a product is not 100% made entirely, (at the risk of sounding redundant) in the USA it shouldn't say that it is made in the USA. For my 2 centavos I disagree with that position.

I know there exists federal law on how much of an automobile can be outsourced so to speak and still say "Made in the USA." Of the over fifty pairs of Allen Edmonds I own the Dominican made shoes clearly say they are Dominican. (Actually it's only two pair)

I have been to the factory and I do recall leather pieces with leather lining sitting in piles waiting to be assembled. (I believe it's these pieces, if not all certainly some, that are Dominican assembled) While I can't quantify the rest of the assembly process I can say empirically speaking that the entire shoe is assembled/sewn from raw or semi-raw pieces into a finished shoe. 

In the absence of anyone who has better information I'd venture a guess that 80%-90% of the shoe is made in Port Washington, WI.

Whatever the percentage I know in my heart it's the vast majority and that is indeed good enough for me. I believe it's more than fair for Allen Edmonds to say that they are "Made in the USA of imported materials."


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

127.72 MHz said:


> After scanning the entire thread all over again I have yet to see what standard there is for saying a product is made in the USA. ^^ I can see that RogerP feels that if a product is not 100% made entirely, (at the risk of sounding redundant) in the USA it shouldn't say that it is made in the USA. For my 2 centavos I disagree with that position.
> 
> I know there exists federal law on how much of an automobile can be outsourced so to speak and still say "Made in the USA." Of the over fifty pairs of Allen Edmonds I own the Dominican made shoes clearly say they are Dominican. (Actually it's only two pair)
> 
> ...


I dunno. For me there's a fine line that's being crossed. I agree with RogerP, if a product says Made in the USA, that better mean 100% of it. It's called truth in advertising. I've noticed that Filsons labels some of their jackets this way - made in the USA of imported materials. If I'm paying $300 for a Filson jacket claiming made in the USA, shouldn't I get what I'm paying for? The 'of imported materials' part tells me they sourced material from some third world nation at a steep discount, put it together in the US, slapped their label on it and jacked the price to an unreasonable amount. Why would I pay $200-300 for a Filson jacket labeled this way when I can get a Gustin jacket at roughly half the cost made entirely in the US?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## L-feld (Dec 3, 2011)

Dmontez said:


> That Grayson is a heck of a deal! The Grayson was the first Tassle Loafer I owned, but I had to sell them. The last just did not fit my foot well. That's really too bad 199 for brand new shell is a GREAT deal.
> 
> I wanted to clear this up, In a previous post I stated that I would feel better about this if AE would just tell us which shoes started their life in the DR. That does not mean that I will stop shopping AE, I will still buy AE shoes when the need arises. When I first started buying AE shoes it was a big plus to me that they are American made shoes, and honestly finding out that the uppers may be stitched together in the DR is really disheartening. I understand the need to do it to save on costs, but I do believe AE NEEDS to tell its consumers this particular shoe started it's life in the DR, and was finished in the US, and the consumer can decide if they want to make the purchase or not. It's a simple stamp that just needs two letters "D" and "R" and just have the workers in the DR use that stamp every time they stitch together an upper. That way when I am buying AE shoes I can see that DR and ask for another in the same size until I get one that did not start it's life in the DR. If AE ONLY makes the Independence line, and their Shell Cordovan's in the US then that really limits me on what I am willing to purchase from them.


There is especially no excuse for the website not to mention it.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Justonemore,
I was out with my wife when I wrote my response. She is a bad influence. The shoebank is now closed, so I have missed the great deal. Now, away from her evil influence, and no longer lured by the lost $200 price, I see the error of my ways. 

Send AE your money, you can never have enough shoes, you're hopelessly addicted to shell, and you'll never forgive yourself for passing up that deal.:devil:


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

gaseousclay said:


> I dunno. For me there's a fine line that's being crossed. I agree with RogerP, if a product says Made in the USA, that better mean 100% of it. It's called truth in advertising. I've noticed that Filsons labels some of their jackets this way - made in the USA of imported materials. If I'm paying $300 for a Filson jacket claiming made in the USA, shouldn't I get what I'm paying for? The 'of imported materials' part tells me they sourced material from some third world nation at a steep discount, put it together in the US, slapped their label on it and jacked the price to an unreasonable amount. Why would I pay $200-300 for a Filson jacket labeled this way when I can get a Gustin jacket at roughly half the cost made entirely in the US?
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


I'm just wondering what that would look like where the rubber hits the road. I'll take a stab at it. (Example)

Allen Edmonds, The Great American Shoe Company. (90%, Made in USA and 10% sewn in the Dominican Republic)

Or perhaps they could continue stamping in the shoes: Made in USA of Imported materials. And somewhere else on the web site state that a small minority of the leather is sewn to lining in the Dominican Republic and shipped back to the USA for final assembly. (???)

Or like another post in this thread suggested that they stamp "DR" on each part that is sewn in the DR. (But then one would be unable to read it when it's on the inside of the shoe where no one could read it except perhaps if you got a dental mirror and put it in the shoe to see the reflection.) If they did this they would be better off stamping "DR" regularly as well as a mirror image so it could be read by an inquiring customer,...

Or, Paul Grangaard could hold a poll here at AAAC and see to it that a majority of members agreed that there was no deception and it was done fairly.

Perhaps a note somewhere on their we site stating that some small percentage of the materials are sewn in the Dominican Republic.

P.S. I gave up on Filson years ago because after many trips to their Seattle store I found out that it's not a small percentage that is manufactured outside the USA, it's a majority. (As told to me by a Filson employee in Seattle.)


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

127.72 MHz said:


> I'm just wondering what that would look like where the rubber hits the road. I'll take a stab at it. (Example)
> 
> Allen Edmonds, The Great American Shoe Company. (90%, Made in USA and 10% sewn in the Dominican Republic)
> 
> ...


I don't purport to have the answers to the Made in the USA dillema. I feel that if a company builds its business on the American Dream and subsequently, customer loyalty, then they should back up what they say. I do not own any AE shoes, so I have no skin in this game. But, if I were a customer I would at the very least expect full transparency as to where their goods are sourced and manufactured. I believe Mr. Grangaard did relay this information to us, but there are plenty of customers who are oblivious to these things


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

gaseousclay said:


> I don't purport to have the answers to the Made in the USA dillema. I feel that if a company builds its business on the American Dream and subsequently, customer loyalty, then they should back up what they say. I do not own any AE shoes, so I have no skin in this game. But, if I were a customer I would at the very least expect full transparency as to where their goods are sourced and manufactured. I believe Mr. Grangaard did relay this information to us, but there are plenty of customers who are oblivious to these things


Spot on my man. I'll add that I do own AE shoes and have been a customer of theirs since 1989. I expect I will continue to be a customer going forward. But when I see trends and practices with the brand that I don't like, I say so. That is what separates the fans from the fanboys.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

127.72 MHz said:


> I'm just wondering what that would look like where the rubber hits the road. I'll take a stab at it. (Example)
> 
> Allen Edmonds, The Great American Shoe Company. (90%, Made in USA and 10% sewn in the Dominican Republic)
> 
> ...


What I meant was just a general stamp on the shoe, not each part that was put together in the DR, just something next to the size info that is already stamped or maybe even the insole under the name of the shoe.

That stamp will just let us know that the shoe started it's life in the DR.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

Dmontez said:


> What I meant was just a general stamp on the shoe, not each part that was put together in the DR, just something next to the size info that is already stamped or maybe even the insole under the name of the shoe.
> 
> That stamp will just let us know that the shoe started it's life in the DR.


No company in its right mind will do something like that unless every other company in the US does the same thing. And that will never happen unless the Gov. requires it.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

I think part of the "Made in USA" dilemma is the poor website design as well. It seems like they are trying to offer something for everyone, and when you first click on Shoes the default display is by "Best Selling" so all the different product lines are just jumbled together. You have baseball boat shoes next to balmorals and golf shoes. It's quite frankly a mess. You can sort by Collection, but even then there's no description of the line. By contrast look at Loake, one of their competitors at the same price point: https://www.loake.co.uk/

All the product lines are clearly listed at the top, and when you click on a line there's a brief description of that line. It doesn't tell you much, but at least it's something. If you look at Herring's site for their own brand (https://www.herringshoes.co.uk/herring) as you scroll down there's a bit of info about the different lines. Again, nothing terribly useful but at least you know a little bit. Nowhere on AE's site is there a simple breakdown of the different product lines so the user can evaluate them. They could easily adapt the web site so the different lines are clear and clarify what is made where.

Also, maybe this came up before, but I noticed they changed their slogan from "The Great American Shoe Company" to "An American Original" in the past year. I wonder if that was just a marketing decision, or if they were afraid of a false advertising issue with the previous slogan if in fact many shoes are assembled or partially assembled in the DR.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

RogerP said:


> Spot on my man. I'll add that I do own AE shoes and have been a customer of theirs since 1989. I expect I will continue to be a customer going forward. But when I see trends and practices with the brand that I don't like, I say so. That is what separates the fans from the fanboys.


I have no idea what a "Fanboy" is but from the context you've used it in I'm guessing it's not a complement.

I think I might be a "Fanboy." (No to be confused with a "fancy boy" but knowing that most of us are Dandys, in the early 20 century definition, I guess I can live with both!)

I think most of us are closer to being on the same page than not. I mean, most everyone in this thread is interested USA made goods wherever possible. T he disagreement comes in at how much USA made,...


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

Fred G. Unn said:


> I noticed they changed their slogan from "The Great American Shoe Company" to "An American Original" in the past year. I wonder if that was just a marketing decision, or if they were afraid of a false advertising issue with the previous slogan if in fact many shoes are assembled or partially assembled in the DR.


I was going to edit my above post, but since there was already another post after, I'll just post again. It looks like this was first in the Fall 2013 catalog. They completely changed their brand design then, so the slogan likely just went along with that. They also were trying to expand into clothing then too IIRC, so I bet the wanted to remove "shoe" from the slogan.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

127.72 MHz said:


> I have no idea what a "Fanboy" is but from the contact you've used it in I'm guessing it's not a complement.
> 
> I think I might be a "Fanboy." (No to be confused with a "fancy boy" but knowing that most of us are Dandys, in the early 20 century definition, I guess I can live with both!)
> 
> I think most of us are closer to being on the same page than not. I mean, most everyone in this thread is interested USA made goods wherever possible. he disagreement comes in at how much USA made,...


A fanboy is one who is blindly devoted to a given brand, defends it relentlessly against any and all criticism, and believes anyone who dares offer such criticism is either completely misinformed; motivated by some evil agenda, or else just wholly and completely wrong. The first line of defense is generally the rapid manufacture and equally rapid destruction of a straw man, followed by personal attacks, followed by sulking.

I'm a fan of AE and a great many other brands. I'm not a fanboy of anything.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

RogerP said:


> A fanboy is one who is blindly devoted to a given brand


Or, how about a given material... like, say... ancient reindeer leather?


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

drlivingston said:


> Or, how about a given material... like, say... ancient reindeer leather?


that's just being persistent


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

RogerP said:


> A fanboy is one who is blindly devoted to a given brand, defends it relentlessly against any and all criticism, and believes anyone who dares offer such criticism is either completely misinformed; motivated by some evil agenda, or else just wholly and completely wrong. The first line of defense is generally the rapid manufacture and equally rapid destruction of a straw man, followed by personal attacks, followed by sulking.
> 
> I'm a fan of AE and a great many other brands. I'm not a fanboy of anything.


Well, since I've sent back more Allen Edmonds than I can remember I guess I'm not blindly following them so I can't be a "Fanboy." Buy I like the way "Fanboy" sounds and I was hoping that I might qualify,....Oh well. I also like some of the more sinister aspects of your definition of "Fanboy" like the part about being motivated by some evil agenda. (perhaps voodoo or the like)

As for the "Strawman" reference you've outdistanced me. A Wizard of Oz reference?


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

I do not think that AE's advertising or descriptions are deceptive. I think the company offers the best value on the market at several price points, and applaud it for its willingness to craft a wide range of shoes with a wide range or sizes. I think that Paul's willingness to post here to answer questions is unusual and admirable, and I'm disappointed that many of the responses have been less than gracious. I doubt Paul has been edified as to what "made in America" means, but I suspect he now has a better understanding of what it means to be an American -- which is to express strong and passionate opinions unencumbered by reason, measure, knowledge, or information.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

127.72 MHz said:


> As for the "Strawman" reference you've outdistanced me. A Wizard of Oz reference?


https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ Thanks for the reference. It would not let me magnify the image to see exact what Strawman said.

In the context of this thread, I almost feel like you've got to draw me a picture. Don't put yourself out, but to be right honest I don't understand.

Anyway, thanks.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Fred G. Unn said:


> https://yourlogicalfallacyis.com/
> Misrepresenting someone's argument to make it easier to attack.


Yes, this exactly.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

post deleted


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

momsdoc said:


> Justonemore,
> I was out with my wife when I wrote my response. She is a bad influence. The shoebank is now closed, so I have missed the great deal. Now, away from her evil influence, and no longer lured by the lost $200 price, I see the error of my ways.
> 
> Send AE your money, you can never have enough shoes, you're hopelessly addicted to shell, and you'll never forgive yourself for passing up that deal.:devil:


 Egged on by the good doc. I went ahead with the purchase. :rolleyes2:. What's a paltry $199 in the scheme of things. Sure I might wear them once a month or every other month, but that's no different than quite a few of my shoes anyways. Numbers sooner or later will state that after accumulation x amount of of shoes, the majority aren't being worn each month anyways. These will probably see more service than a couple of my "seasonal" shoes.



Watchman said:


> ^^^No problem Doc! I'm right there with you! :thumbs-up:
> 
> We can say whatever we want about AE and some of it may be true, other things may be exaggerated....
> 
> ...


And a big thumbs up to Watchman for looking out for his AAAC buddies. :thumbs-up: I've never been big into AE (these will be my first) but even I couldn't resist this action. lol

I checked on the shoebank website today after completing my order and they now want $425. Happily they honored the $199 price that was mentioned when I contacted them twice yesterday. For this I give them kudos.

I do have to wonder how you just happened upon these at the same moment the mistake was made. Fess up. Are you an AE mole? :eek2:


----------



## Watchman (Jun 11, 2013)

justonemore said:


> Egged on by the good doc. I went ahead with the purchase. :rolleyes2:. What's a paltry $199 in the scheme of things. Sure I might wear them once a month or every other month, but that's no different than quite a few of my shoes anyways. Numbers sooner or later will state that after accumulation x amount of of shoes, the majority aren't being worn each month anyways. These will probably see more service than a couple of my "seasonal" shoes.
> 
> And a big thumbs up to Watchman for looking out for his AAAC buddies. :thumbs-up: I've never been big into AE (these will be my first) but even I couldn't resist this action. lol
> 
> ...


^^^Not Yet....but I'm working hard at it....

Actually, I check the site often due to my looking for a specific model in a specific size. So, with all the AE controversy lately, I figured they could use the plug. Besides, I know you guys are like me.....always looking for a good deal.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

This was originally going to be another gripe on my part of AE but it turned into a Plus from me on their customer service.

I received an email today stating that "ALL" (AE used the word all in all caps) factory second shoes would be 15-35% off. I emailed the store that had the brogue suede patriot in 11D two hours later no response I decided to call the store. They no longer have the shoe I was looking for. I ask for the bitter chocolate suede and they have an 11.5D which is what I was looking for in the brogue but that was already sold out. So I asked about the extra 15-35% off and they told me that is only applicable to "current" styles, and that closeout styles did not get the extra percentage off, but the advertisement that I received specifically said that it was ALL factory second shoes. 

I spoke with Tracy at the Customer Service line, and she honored the 15% off.

$107.00 for the patriots! how could I not?


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

They may not be entirely made in the USA,...:eek2:

I love patriots. I have pairs in burgundy and football leather. (as well as one of each on standby in the closet for when I have to send back the current pairs for re-crafting.)

I wish they made them in Walnut.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

This will be my first pair of AE loafers, I realized recently I have absolutely no suede shoes, so this is something that I was looking to remedy. I am very impatiently waiting for the Alden LHS in Whiskey shell, but if the Patriot works out well, I may be looking into MTO with exotic shells, atleast that way I will know that they are 100% US Made, and I as I said in previous posts this whole not 100% made in the US will not keep me from buying AE when the need arises, as it did. I just wish they would be willing to give us more than "if you want to be sure that your shoe is 100% US made purchase MTO, Shell, or Independence line. I wish they would tell us which shoes have started their life in the DR regardless of how little work was done to them in the DR.



127.72 MHz said:


> They may not be entirely made in the USA,...:eek2:
> 
> I love patriots. I have pairs in burgundy and football leather. (as well as one of each on standby in the closet for when I have to send back the current pairs for re-crafting.)
> 
> I wish they made them in Walnut.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

That's a heck of a deal and a nice pair of shoes - congrats!


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

Dmontez said:


> This will be my first pair of AE loafers, I realized recently I have absolutely no suede shoes, so this is something that I was looking to remedy. I am very impatiently waiting for the Alden LHS in Whiskey shell, but if the Patriot works out well, I may be looking into MTO with exotic shells, atleast that way I will know that they are 100% US Made, and I as I said in previous posts this whole not 100% made in the US will not keep me from buying AE when the need arises, as it did. I just wish they would be willing to give us more than "if you want to be sure that your shoe is 100% US made purchase MTO, Shell, or Independence line. I wish they would tell us which shoes have started their life in the DR regardless of how little work was done to them in the DR.


I also own several pairs of Alden loafers for comparison. LHS-975, (those are shell) LHS-981, (black and #8) Full strap, 681, and tassel 563, (shell). I have a fairly narrow foot, a bit of a high arch. Allen Edmonds Patriots are a bit tight to begin with, perhaps more so than one would normally find with a new pair of shoes. Specifically, anatomically speaking, through my cubiod and my cuneiform bones which are the bones right behind your metatarsals as you're moving towards your ankle. (right through the vamp of the shoe) Painfully so.

Bottom line, I have needed to strech my Patriots slightly for every pair I own. I have read reviews from others who have stated the same thing. I imagine it might be a bit worse for an individual who has normal width feet and especially so for wide feet.

Once the Patriots are broken in I like them more than any of my Aldens, even my 20 plus year old burgundy shell 975's.

Good luck.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

It's a good thing I went up a half size! I talked it out with an SA before I made the purchase. If it doesn't work out I'll be SOL.



127.72 MHz said:


> I also own several pairs of Alden loafers for comparison. LHS-975, (those are shell) LHS-981, (black and #8) Full strap, 681, and tassel 563, (shell). I have a fairly narrow foot, a bit of a high arch. Allen Edmonds Patriots are a bit tight to begin with, perhaps more so than one would normally find with a new pair of shoes. Specifically, anatomically speaking, through my cubiod and my cuneiform bones which are the bones right behind your metatarsals as you're moving towards your ankle. (right through the vamp of the shoe) Painfully so.
> 
> Bottom line, I have needed to strech my Patriots slightly for every pair I own. I have read reviews from others who have stated the same thing. I imagine it might be a bit worse for an individual who has normal width feet and especially so for wide feet.
> 
> ...


----------



## MoosicPa (Jan 30, 2008)

drlivingston said:


> Or, how about a given material... like, say... ancient reindeer leather?


Did somebody say ancient reindeer leather..... :icon_cheers:


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

MoosicPa said:


> Did somebody say ancient reindeer leather..... :icon_cheers:


LMAO... I was hoping that you would read that. :biggrin:


----------



## Bjorn (May 2, 2010)

The very best soles are made in Europe. The best calf as well. I've herd somewhere (?) that American horses are not slaughtered for shell, that it's generally foreign stock. Glues and threads, nails etc are (again, from what I've heard) not often US made. 

If it's assembled from foreign parts, isn't it made in America then? Otherwise, aren't you almost pushing an isolationist agenda that don't really speak to quality? You can substitute made in America for made in Britain or whatever, but isn't there a line where you still have to consider it made in xxx even though you buy components elsewhere?

There's also a lot to be said for design. For me, domestic design and qc is enough, I don't mind them splitting the income with some factories in the East. Design, qc, customer service are so big value drivers that I'm thinking the domestic business is getting enough. An example is Swedish knife maker Fallkniven, usually manufactured in Japan. The design is unquestionably Swedish (as is in some cases the steel) but the Japanese make them. Still a Swedish knife, of course...

I'm wearing a pair of shell Leeds today. Unmistakably American, double JR soles and all.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Bjorn said:


> The very best soles are made in Europe. The best calf as well. I've herd somewhere (?) that American horses are not slaughtered for shell, that it's generally foreign stock. Glues and threads, nails etc are (again, from what I've heard) not often US made.
> 
> If it's assembled from foreign parts, isn't it made in America then? Otherwise, aren't you almost pushing an isolationist agenda that don't really speak to quality? You can substitute made in America for made in Britain or whatever, but isn't there a line where you still have to consider it made in xxx even though you buy components elsewhere?
> 
> ...


So a Japanese designed item, manufactured in China is sold by Swedish company Ikea & put together in Switzerland by an American expat. According to your post. The item is either:

1. Japanese due to design.
2. Swiss because final construction was completed in Switzerland.

As I'm an American perhaps we can say it was "American made" but "made in America" wouldn't be true & is misleading.

The only ones that don't have a place in the scenario are the Swedes/Ikea (other than reseller & giver of goofy names). Yet I got it from Ikea. Sooooo?

Do you see the point here? One can play with words all day long but in the end my new shelf, etc. is not swedish nor does Ikea play off of being Swedish. They don't sell claiming that Swedish heritage is sacred & that Swidish values are what made them a success. There is no big sell on Sweden as a reason to buy from Ikea. The opposite is true AE where the website pushes the American history of the company. They push the idea that their shoes are still being made in Wisconsin and don't mention anything about overseas production in their company spiel on the website. Go to the website and look Under the following sections. Plenty of America this and U.S. that but no DR anywhere.

Allen Edmonds 







According to another member, this information is listed only under the individual product desriptions (and at the very bottom at that).



bobelmore said:


> *INTERSTATE 90 - HANDSEWN VENETIAN SLIP-ON MEN'S CASUAL SHOES BY ALLEN EDMONDS*
> 
> 
> Rubber sole men's slip-on casual shoes
> ...


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

Cordovan tassel loafers arrived today! I honestly can't tell what made them seconds. Thanks Watchman for posting that deal! Pretty cool of the Shoebank to have honored the $199 price.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

Bjorn said:


> If it's assembled from foreign parts, isn't it made in America then?


For me, the issue isn't foreign parts, but foreign assembly.


----------



## ColdIron (Jun 19, 2009)

2 Christmas Eve's ago I was in a local grocery store doing some last minute shopping. I was wearing a pair of Red Wing Beckmans in Black Cherry. I was in a hurry as was everyone else and I turned a corner and bumped my cart into a lady that was wearing a Red Wing Shoes hooded sweatshirt. I apologized but she did not reply, just stared down at my boots. As she walked away she turned and said to what looked like her young teenage daughter "I made those boots". The daughter turned around and gave me a look that was priceless, pretty much made my Christmas right then and there. With all the AE shoes I own I kind of expect the same thing to happen someday while wearing AE, but it hasn't yet. I have an American foot LOL and more importantly it fits AE lasts. AE has employed more than 400 additional people over the last few years in Wi. IIRC. I have no issues with the made in America statement.



Dmontez said:


> This will be my first pair of AE loafers, I realized recently I have absolutely no suede shoes, so this is something that I was looking to remedy. I am very impatiently waiting for the Alden LHS in Whiskey shell, but if the Patriot works out well, I may be looking into MTO with exotic shells, atleast that way I will know that they are 100% US Made, and I as I said in previous posts this whole not 100% made in the US will not keep me from buying AE when the need arises, as it did. I just wish they would be willing to give us more than "if you want to be sure that your shoe is 100% US made purchase MTO, Shell, or Independence line. I wish they would tell us which shoes have started their life in the DR regardless of how little work was done to them in the DR.


The patriot is the first loafer that fits me well, hope yours do too. In the reviews for them what people complain about is what makes them work for me in a low volume foot with little to no arch and narrow heels. I have them in burgundy and brown shell and recently sent my burgundy ones to B. Nelson for an antique sole edge.









Unfortunately AE has no exotic shell left. I have 4 cappuccino









And 3 walnut but no loafers in either. If AE does source any exotic shell again the Patriot in a MTO is my first choice.



Bjorn said:


> The very best soles are made in Europe. The best calf as well. *I've herd somewhere (?) that American horses are not slaughtered for shell, that it's generally foreign stock*. Glues and threads, nails etc are (again, from what I've heard) not often US made.
> 
> If it's assembled from foreign parts, isn't it made in America then? Otherwise, aren't you almost pushing an isolationist agenda that don't really speak to quality? You can substitute made in America for made in Britain or whatever, but isn't there a line where you still have to consider it made in xxx even though you buy components elsewhere?
> 
> ...


Americans have had a love affair with horses for many years. A while back animal rights groups pushed and won for legislation against the slaughter of horses in the US. A couple of years ago that law was removed, ironically by pressure from the same animal rights groups. Turns out shipping horses to Mexico and Canada for slaughter was often more "inhuman". But no slaughter houses in the US have started doing it again for horses.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

RogerP said:


> For me, the issue isn't foreign parts, but foreign assembly.


Agreed 100%


----------



## vpkozel (May 2, 2014)

I will only buy cars that are made in America. 

That's why I drive a BMW....


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Cordovan tassel loafers arrived today! I honestly can't tell what made them seconds. Thanks Watchman for posting that deal! Pretty cool of the Shoebank to have honored the $199 price.


Happy to hear it. To steal a line from Eagle..."Wear in good health". It might take a bit to get used to wearing them but I'm sure your imagination will kick in a start pairing them with whatever strikes your fancy (though I'm not quite sure these are formal enough to pair with a suit). I'm thinking anything from jeans, to chinos, to odd trousers with a SC. I myself have found the tassels currently in my collection to be pretty versatile.

As for the pair I ordered. Well... AE shoebank doesn't ship to Europe so mine will have a short layover at my mother's house in Illionis.  I do hope that there aren't any obvious reasons as to why these are seconds. It's the first time I've bought seconds and I'm a bit weary. Either way,if there's a big problem, at $199 I'll just chalk it up as experience and not do so again.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

justonemore said:


> "Wear in good health". It might take a bit to get used to wearing them but I'm sure your imagination will kick in a start pairing them with whatever strikes your fancy (though I'm not quite sure these are formal enough to pair with a suit). I'm thinking anything from jeans, to chinos, to odd trousers with a SC.


Thanks! I would never wear them with a suit. Obviously Americans do it all the time but mix of formality levels of the whole loafers with a suit thing just seems wrong to me. (Sorry Trad guys.) I'm coming around to tassels though. I'll just wear 'em and have fun with 'em.

BTW, I did figure out the flaw that made them seconds. On the left shoe the stitching at the toe isn't quite symmetrical. Meh. For $650 I'd be bugged but nothing I can't live with for $199. It's not noticeable when they are worn unless you are really looking for the flaw.


----------



## quiller (Dec 25, 2010)

I just bought the AE Patriots in the football leather.I like the style ,but the leather seems very stiff and unyielding.Is the break-in period lengthy for this particular shoe.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

quiller said:


> I just bought the AE Patriots in the football leather.I like the style ,but the leather seems very stiff and unyielding.Is the break-in period lengthy for this particular shoe.


The football leather is not that stiff. Sure, in comparison to calf, it is a bit less pliable. However, it is still more yielding than CG. I am wearing a pair right now and have no problem with flexibility whatsoever.


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

RogerP said:


> For me, the issue isn't foreign parts, but foreign assembly.


For me the issue isn't where it's made, but how.


----------



## RogerP (Oct 31, 2012)

MaxBuck said:


> For me the issue isn't where it's made, but how.


Well yes - that is of ultimate importance. I don't much care where shoes are made, so long as they are well made. My closet is a shoe UN. When I say the "issue" I mean the fact that shoes that are loudly trumpeted as being "American Made!" are in fact partially made in the DR.


----------



## justonemore (Jul 2, 2009)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Thanks! I would never wear them with a suit. Obviously Americans do it all the time but mix of formality levels of the whole loafers with a suit thing just seems wrong to me. (Sorry Trad guys.) I'm coming around to tassels though. I'll just wear 'em and have fun with 'em.
> 
> BTW, I did figure out the flaw that made them seconds. On the left shoe the stitching at the toe isn't quite symmetrical. Meh. For $650 I'd be bugged but nothing I can't live with for $199. It's not noticeable when they are worn unless you are really looking for the flaw.


I myself wear tassel loafers with suits... but as to these particular ones... I'm just not certain they are "formal" enough to do so . Either way, I suppose we'll have plenty of time to figure it out over the next decade or so. :biggrin:

Happy to hear the flaw you found wasn't serious. As you stated, for the price and knowing in advance that they are seconds, I'm not expecting perfection. Fedex states that they have reached my mother's so I'll have her do a preliminary inspection before sending them on. While she won't be quite as discerning as I when it comes to shoes, if she doesn't notice anything wrong, I can pretty much assume the flaw is minor.


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

RogerP said:


> Well yes - that is of ultimate importance. I don't much care where shoes are made, so long as they are well made. My closet is a shoe UN. When I say the "issue" I mean the fact that shoes that are loudly trumpeted as being "American Made!" are in fact partially made in the DR.


I've never really thought AE made a huge deal about "Made in America" (certainly nothing like Brooks Brothers and their little lapel pins), but others may differ. But so long as AE's production methods comply with US Code requirements to advertise the product as "Made in America," I see little basis for complaint. Few products other than foodstuffs comprise solely components that are themselves completely made in the USA.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

If you look up the word "shoe" on Wikipedia, it gives you an in depth history of shoes. If you scroll down to the section titled "Mens", you will find this at the end of one of the paragraphs:

_"The remaining elite[SUP][clarification needed][/SUP] American companies are Allen Edmonds and Alden Shoe Company. Alden, located in New England, specializes in genuine shell cordovan leather from the only remaining horse tannery in America (Chicago)[SUP][65][/SUP] and is completely manufactured in America, whereas *Allen Edmonds, of Wisconsin, is a larger company that outsources some of its production*.[SUP][66]"

[/SUP]_


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ Although it's been discussed before I'm happy that you brought this to light once again. Beyond the fact that Allen Edmonds and Alden manufacture shoes, comparing the companies head to head, (apples to apples) is challenging. Compare their shoes head to head but not the company's business models. Allen Edmonds has overhead that would sink Alden in very short order. 

The analogy I'd use for comparison are ships: Alden is a 30 foot mom and pop fishing vessel that earns the family a decent living. Allen Edmonds is a fleet of six 400 foot factory trawlers that cannot sit in port for more than the time it takes to unload and re-fuel because they need to get back to sea.

Once Allen Edmonds brings out a new model if it does not perform in the marketplace, (sell) they have to drop the model and move on. Facing the kind of foreign competition that has driven all the other iconic names in USA manufactured shoes out of business Allen Edmonds business model cannot sit still for one moment. The business model requires a steady hand at the helm.

If Allen Edmonds didn't have a strong commitment to USA manufacturing and living wage jobs they to could have set up offshore plants just as most all the other iconic names in USA mens shoes did as they were taking on water and eventually heading to Davie Jones locker.

I'm proud of Allen Edmonds.


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ Although it's been discussed before I'm happy that you brought this to light once again. Beyond the fact that Allen Edmonds and Alden manufacture shoes, comparing the companies head to head, (apples to apples) is challenging. Compare their shoes head to head but not the company's business models. Allen Edmonds has overhead that would sink Alden in very short order.
> 
> The analogy I'd use for comparison are ships: Alden is a 30 foot mom and pop fishing vessel that earns the family a decent living. Allen Edmonds is a fleet of six 400 foot factory trawlers that cannot sit in port for more than the time it takes to unload and re-fuel because they need to get back to sea.
> 
> ...


I would argue that AE needs to update their business model to eliminate waste. As I've said before, they put out some pretty atrocious styles that I wouldn't be caught dead in, or it's like stuffing 10 lbs of sh*t into a 5 lb bag (sorry for the rude analogy).

I think they should take on a crowd sourcing model like Gustin. It would almost be like a crowd sourcing MTO program where AE initiates a campaign for a new shoe style, they charge X amount and allow 2 weeks for their funding goal to be met. If it's not met the campaign doesn't move forward, if so then they set a ship date. I realize that given the scope of the company they have to have new, untested designs every season. My problem is that they seem to have too much creative license and seem to put out more dreck than classic styles. Why can't they just look at what other companies are doing like EG, Carmina, Lobb, Vass, StC, etc, and follow suit?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

^^ In terms of the models they offer I can't disagree with you. The have the manufacturing facilities to put out models sand lasts that match the world's best. There's no reason why they can't offer models and last shapes like Vass, Lobb, Edward Green etc.

Maybe they're listening,...


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

gaseousclay said:


> My problem is that they seem to have too much creative license and seem to put out more dreck than classic styles. Why can't they just look at what other companies are doing like EG, Carmina, Lobb, Vass, StC, etc, and follow suit?


Looking at their site, they have 200 models, 77 of which are Clearance which basically equals "dreck." That's a lot of mis-steps. Even though they have 200 models, there's no suede buck, no shortwing blucher, and no basic calf or suede chukka. Yet there are 4 different kiltie tassel loafers, huh? Diversification is fine, but they've neglected some really core models.

They've also come out with a lot of "fun" models that are virtually impossible to wear, by making the Strandmok, Neumok, McTavish, etc. all balmorals instead of bluchers. Even Cole Haan, who I assume is their biggest competitor in the "fun" category, makes most of these as bluchers. (Here, here, here, here, here, and here) If you scroll though old AE catalogs on ISSUU they definitely have great models in their library, they just need to get back to a really strong core offering and then expand from there IMO. Look at the ; there's almost no "dreck" in there.


----------



## momsdoc (Sep 19, 2013)

Lets look at this a little calmly. OK AE makes shoes in the DR and marks them that way. Nobody has a complaint with that. AE must use some materials fromoverseas, as alluded to earlier, be it thread, glue, the original source of shell before Horween gets it, maybe the boxes, dyes, who knows what. Some shoes marked made in America comply wih the laws allowing them to state that, but had some work started in the DR.

Aside from shell, independence line and MTO, we don't know how many shoes are started in the DR. But all the uppers from the DR have to pass QC in America, despite whatever defficiencies in QC AE has, which we seem to believe is improving. 

It is an American owned and headquatered company, with it's major manufacturing plant in Port Washington. It cranks out some enourmous quantity of shoes, so that explains the shoebank. Even a few percent failure of quality would fill the shoebank. Alden produces a fraction of the shoes, making it unrealistic for them to have the equivilent of a shoebank.

I understand those who wish more transparency as to where the shoes started, but if they pass QC, then it is a minor point. The major point so far overlooked, is that AE has come back from a moribund state, kept the American facility working, expanded said facility, and provided hundreds (or is it thousands) of jobs to the local Wisconson economy, that if they failed would all be in China now.

Their determination to expand production and employment in Wisconson, certainly qualifies them to tout their dedication to American production, employment, and values. We are a capitalist society. If a buisness can figure out how to come back from the edge of extinction, increase American employment, and therefore tax revenues, than those are truly American values. Additionally the outsourcing they do is not to China or India, but in our own Monroe doctrine backyard. Helping the DR economy, enhances the stability of the Carribean basin. This leads to less need for humanitarian efforts and expenses on our part, less worry about social unrest in our backyard, and spreads goodwill. I would venture to say the return on AE's investment in DR employment saves American taxpayers money in the long run. It's certainly cheaper than sending in the Marines to quell social unrest caused by poverty (see Haiti). Just as money sent back to Mexico by family members here helps prop up their econonomy, allowing us to have one of the two largest undefended borders in the world. What would it cost to fully defend our southern border against Mexican social unrest? The INS budget is a spit in the ocean compared to what a complete military blockade and fortification would cost, and allows the Mexicans to be the largest purchaser of US products in the world. 

I don't see anyone complaining about the "All American" sport of baseball having players from the DR or Japan. Isn't that outsourcing to some degree? Most players are still American, and it is still "The American Pastime".

I feel bad for Paul. He went above and beyond what most CEOs would do to adress the issues here, and has just had rotten tomatoes thrown at him as a result. Did anyone stop to consider that he has stopped responding? He has a board to answer to, and a legal and market department giving him advice. Thank him for what he has done so far. If you think there is a practical way to further differentiate those shoes started in the DR, and what percent they are, then apply for a job at AE that will let you adress this with managment and preent your ideas. Otherwise stop the whining and arm chair quarterbacking. The concensous here has always been that AE is the gateway shoe to quality shoes, the minimum standard one should strive for. Has that now changed? I think not. Suck up the fact that there may be at times some DR work involved and enjoy your shoes, I never let the fact that my old Cadillac Catera had a German made engine, make me think it wasn't an American car. Hell our own defunct space shuttle was American made right? Oh, ask the Canadians who made it's robotic arm.


----------



## arkirshner (May 10, 2005)

127.72 MHz said:


> ^^ There's no reason why they can't offer models and last shapes like Vass, Lobb, Edward Green etc.
> 
> Maybe they're listening,...





gaseousclay said:


> Why can't they just look at what other companies are doing like EG, Carmina, Lobb, Vass, StC, etc, and follow suit?


You are in the throws of the false-consensus bias, the term for the tendency for humans to overestimate the extent to which their beliefs, values, or opinions are shared by others.

The US market for shoes of the designs you mention is too small to justify production by AE. The number of Americans who frequent forums like AAAC are statistically negligible. The simple fact is that allmost all North Americans like ,and buy, blobbier shoes than those you, and many others on AAAC and SF, like.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

I think the move into clothing is a bit of a mis-step as well. Obviously there's $ to be made there, but I would equate AE quality (for shoes anyway) with Brooks Brothers (with whom they already have a deal) or Hickey Freeman and looking at the AE site I just don't see any compelling reason to purchase AE clothing over those brands. I certainly have all that I intend to buy. A much more logical move would have been to greatly expand their leather offerings IMO. I have an AE passport wallet I use when I travel, and it's a nice product. Expanding into other leather goods, and into Filson, Saddleback, Billykirk and Ernest Alexander bag territory makes a lot more sense to me than $58 T-shirts. It capitalizes on their existing positive brand image of quality leather rather than starting a whole new product line.

Also, don't post product images like this:

Walnut Strands are fine shoes, but they have no business being worn here.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

momsdoc said:


> I feel bad for Paul. He went above and beyond what most CEOs would do to adress the issues here, and has just had rotten tomatoes thrown at him as a result.


I hope he doesn't think I'm just throwing rotten tomatoes. I honestly intended for anything I've said to be constructive criticism. I have no idea of what the sales numbers are so maybe the really are the 6th best selling shoe on their site (sort by Best Selling) and that's where the profit is. I'd hate to see them go in that direction and have said as much, but I understand they have to remain profitable.

That said, I'm a fan and wore my AE Boca Ratons last night. It's just that some of the recent design decisions have been puzzling, regardless of country of origin.


----------



## mrkleen (Sep 21, 2007)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Also, don't post product images like this:
> 
> Walnut Strands are fine shoes, but they have no business being worn here.


Says who?

I dont know what some of you guys do for work or where you live, but in the real world - where you are lucky if someone wears a button down shirt with his jeans, an outfit like the one pictured is far better than most. My CEO is worth about 30 million dollars and the guy wears pointy toe Kenneth Cole shoes and Jeans to work 4 out of 5 days. If I wear a blazer, slacks and a dress shirt I am in the upper 1% - add some Allen Edmonds and that is the upper .001%


----------



## smmrfld (May 22, 2007)

Fred G. Unn said:


> Walnut Strands are fine shoes, but they have no business being worn here.


I call BS. They look great with those pants.


----------



## Matt S (Jun 15, 2006)

smmrfld said:


> I call BS. They look great with those pants.


I have to take Fred G. Unn's side. The Strand is too dressy for such casual trousers, and the warmth of the walnut clashes with the much cooler brown of the trousers. Light shoes can sometimes contrast nicely with dark trousers, but I don't find that this example works.


----------



## drlivingston (Jun 21, 2012)

I can see a pair of cap toe bluchers like the AE Sanford working better. Or, if you prefer the bal, go with the Strandmok.


----------



## Dmontez (Dec 6, 2012)

Anyone else think it's time that we start a thread for AE where we can talk about the new models that have come out, the good and the bad, among other things?


----------



## Spex (Nov 25, 2012)

Dmontez said:


> Anyone else think it's time that we start a thread for AE where we can talk about the new models that have come out, the good and the bad, among other things?


Absolutely, as I have a few opinions myself. Done. Find it here: 
https://askandyaboutclothes.com/com...190389-New-AE-Offerings&p=1590287#post1590287


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

smmrfld said:


> I call BS. They look great without pants.


fixed that for ya


----------



## gaseousclay (Nov 8, 2009)

momsdoc said:


> Lets look at this a little calmly. OK AE makes shoes in the DR and marks them that way. Nobody has a complaint with that. AE must use some materials fromoverseas, as alluded to earlier, be it thread, glue, the original source of shell before Horween gets it, maybe the boxes, dyes, who knows what. Some shoes marked made in America comply wih the laws allowing them to state that, but had some work started in the DR.
> 
> Aside from shell, independence line and MTO, we don't know how many shoes are started in the DR. But all the uppers from the DR have to pass QC in America, despite whatever defficiencies in QC AE has, which we seem to believe is improving.
> 
> ...


it's about honesty for me. I don't care what laws the FTC has passed to allow use of the Made in the USA label. if something isn't 100% made in the USA then it's not deserving of that label, especially if you're using the phrase, "proudly made in the USA" to make money. I can appreciate that AE has expanded and provided jobs, but didn't companies like J&M, Cole Haan, Bostonian, etc., also do that once upon a time? The problem I see with rapid expansion is that these types of companies gradually offshore all or most of their production overseas when they become too big to handle demand. Makes sense, I suppose. Right now AE seems to be trying to position themselves as the leading men's shoe company in America. You can find AE practically anywhere at any price point. Nothing wrong with this but sometimes too much of something is never a good thing, plus it dilutes your brand. The fact that Alden is a smaller company has become an advantage. Their shoes are still in high demand and they don't sell cheap $200 shoes.



> I feel bad for Paul. He went above and beyond what most CEOs would do to adress the issues here, and has just had rotten tomatoes thrown at him as a result. Did anyone stop to consider that he has stopped responding? He has a board to answer to, and a legal and market department giving him advice. Thank him for what he has done so far. If you think there is a practical way to further differentiate those shoes started in the DR, and what percent they are, then apply for a job at AE that will let you adress this with managment and preent your ideas. Otherwise stop the whining and arm chair quarterbacking. The concensous here has always been that AE is the gateway shoe to quality shoes, the minimum standard one should strive for. Has that now changed? I think not. Suck up the fact that there may be at times some DR work involved and enjoy your shoes, I never let the fact that my old Cadillac Catera had a German made engine, make me think it wasn't an American car. Hell our own defunct space shuttle was American made right? Oh, ask the Canadians who made it's robotic arm.


I appreciate Mr. Grangaard's candor and willingness to talk about AE on a forum. Not many big company CEO's do this, so it's refreshing to see. With that said, if he can't hear about issues from actual consumers then those issues will never be addressed. I doubt he'd be any more aware than a board member who is telling him what he should or shouldn't do. when you look at the other forum there are many forum affiliates where the business owners actively engage with customers. they want your business after all.

As some have pointed out, I think AE should tap their old catalog and put out some long discontinued models from the 40's, 50's and 60's. I looked through those catalogs and they had some great offerings that would turn me into a new customer. for the life of me I can't figure out why they don't put some of these styles out again. and as someone already mentioned, there are a lot of classic styles that are curiously absent from AE's list of shoes for sale. again, look at what other companies are putting out and follow their lead. I mean, c'mon momsdoc, it wasn't too long ago that you thought J&M was the pinnacle of quality men's shoes and now you're a fan of Carmina, Vass and a bunch of other European shoe companies. You can't really blame anyone here for lambasting AE's business strategies or style of shoes when you yourself have graduated to better footwear from across the pond.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

mrkleen said:


> Says who?


Me, at least. Oh, and Flusser, Boyer, Manton, etc.



smmrfld said:


> I call BS. They look great with those pants.


I respectfully disagree. The shoes are way too formal for such casual pants. The incongruity of the look is just one reason why it fails. The walnut is a lighter shade of brown than the pants so they will unnaturally draw the eye of anyone you encounter. Almost any other color (well not black) of pants would have been better, but the only color I could actually see being successful for cotton chinos would be a very light tan or white. Something where the shoes are darker than the pants.



Matt S said:


> I have to take Fred G. Unn's side. The Strand is too dressy for such casual trousers, and the warmth of the walnut clashes with the much cooler brown of the trousers. Light shoes can sometimes contrast nicely with dark trousers, but I don't find that this example works.


+1.



drlivingston said:


> I can see a pair of cap toe bluchers like the AE Sanford working better. Or, if you prefer the bal, go with the Strandmok.


+1. I definitely would wear bluchers here. I'm not a fan of AEs casual bals, but something like the Strandmok would be a better choice than the Strand.



gaseousclay said:


> fixed that for ya


LOL!


----------



## eagle2250 (Mar 24, 2006)

momsdoc said:


> Lets look at this a little calmly. OK AE makes shoes in the DR and marks them that way. Nobody has a complaint with that. AE must use some materials fromoverseas, as alluded to earlier, be it thread, glue, the original source of shell before Horween gets it, maybe the boxes, dyes, who knows what. Some shoes marked made in America comply wih the laws allowing them to state that, but had some work started in the DR.
> 
> Aside from shell, independence line and MTO, we don't know how many shoes are started in the DR. But all the uppers from the DR have to pass QC in America, despite whatever defficiencies in QC AE has, which we seem to believe is improving.
> 
> ...


+1 and very well put if I might add. AE designs have been prominent in my shoe rotation for close to 50 years now. Their black calf AE Leeds saw me through (a combination of active and reserve) almost 31 years of military service and their Park Avenue and MacNeil designs saw me through 21 years of civilian service with the US Government. Their Chukka designs and various penny loafer designs satisfied my 'off duty' casual shoe needs throughout those same years. In retirement, AE's designs continue to dominate my shoe rotation...I guess I must really like them? In my view and LOL, from my experience, Allen Edmonds does indeed seem to be the "great American shoe company!" :thumbs-up:

Thank you Paul and the entire AE Team!


----------



## MaxBuck (Apr 4, 2013)

Matt S said:


> I have to take Fred G. Unn's side. The Strand is too dressy for such casual trousers, and the warmth of the walnut clashes with the much cooler brown of the trousers. Light shoes can sometimes contrast nicely with dark trousers, but I don't find that this example works.


Exactly this.


----------



## Fred G. Unn (Jul 12, 2011)

eagle2250 said:


> Their Chukka designs and various penny loafer designs satisfied my 'off duty' casual shoe needs throughout those same years.


Just out of curiosity, may I ask which chukka models you have owned? They currently only offer two: the Dundee and the Bellevue. The Dundee looks to be an excellent shoe, but as it is only offered in cordovan the $650 price will be out of reach for most people. The Bellevue is made of casual leather with odd perforations and a very casual sole. I'm not really interested in a shoe like that. I have the AE Malvern in brown suede, and think it's a great chukka! Unfortunately they no longer offer anything like it which is a big hole in their catalog IMO. I'm just wondering what other AE chukkas you have and if any would be good candidates to be brought back into the line-up.

EDIT: I forgot they offer the Dundee in black calf at Club Monaco (https://www.clubmonaco.ca/product/index.jsp?productId=41825776) but still, they don't have a basic calf or suede chukka on their own site.


----------



## Mike Petrik (Jul 5, 2005)

eagle2250 said:


> +1 and very well put if I might add. AE designs have been prominent in my shoe rotation for close to 50 years now. Their black calf AE Leeds saw me through (a combination of active and reserve) almost 31 years of military service and their Park Avenue and MacNeil designs saw me through 21 years of civilian service with the US Government. Their Chukka designs and various penny loafer designs satisfied my 'off duty' casual shoe needs throughout those same years. In retirement, AE's designs continue to dominate my shoe rotation...I guess I must really like them? In my view and LOL, from my experience, Allen Edmonds does indeed seem to be the "great American shoe company!" :thumbs-up:
> 
> Thank you Paul and the entire AE Team!


Hear hear!


----------



## 127.72 MHz (Feb 16, 2007)

arkirshner said:


> You are in the throws of the false-consensus bias, the term for the tendency for humans to overestimate the extent to which their beliefs, values, or opinions are shared by others.
> 
> The US market for shoes of the designs you mention is too small to justify production by AE. The number of Americans who frequent forums like AAAC are statistically negligible. The simple fact is that allmost all North Americans like ,and buy, blobbier shoes than those you, and many others on AAAC and SF, like.


A false consensus bias eh? I'm not sure if you're making this determination based on your professional credentials but maybe, just maybe, you're over thinking it.

The thread is about *shoes*.

I think it's fair to say that many of the members here at AAAC follow the mens' shoe market closer than the average consumer. It's not unreasonable to judge a company the size of Allen Edmonds with all of he resources at their disposal, marketing specifically, by a world class standard.

To improve, any organization, must objectively compare themselves to the world's best.


----------

