Brand Name/History Shouldn’t Dictate Price
Yim Shoemaker
I have been posting a lot of the shoes from the new (relatively) brands coming out of China specifically Yim Shoemaker, Acme Shoemaker and the house line of Yeossal, as I have been thoroughly impressed with their work and have noticed a theme among some commenters that I wanted to address. I believe that the idea of their train of thought is ultimately a concept that hurts the shoe industry as a whole and actually is also a trick that is used by long-standing shoemakers to continue selling at higher prices while quality deteriorates. The comment is this: “The prices for these ‘Chinese shoemakers’ are too high when comparing against Saint Crispins as their brands are new and do not have enough time in the industry to be competing against brands like StC.” This is not exactly verbatim but is the gist of their train of thought. Now allow me to explain why this is not accurate and should not be thought by the customers, as ultimately this idea hurts new shoemakers trying to get into market and helps to rip people off at the same time by existing shoemakers who use their ‘history’ to basically fool none-the-wiser clients.
Acme Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Quality is quality
No matter if the brand is 1 day old or 100 years old, the quality of your shoes, your making, your skill determines your price (as well as materials used). A new brand, making the finest shoes should not have to charge less just because they are new and do not have a brand history. That is a misconception full stop. And if you launch your brand with the ultimate quality you should be able to charge a respective price to that quality and not lower your value because of a lack of history.
The myth that good shoes only come from certain European countries is dead
Saint Crispsins actually proved that theory as I remember the amount of bad publicity they got when coming out for being made in Romania as many people had bad (and may I say false) connotations about the country as a whole. The absurd fact that some sect of Gypsy comes from Romania, puts this bad light on that country which to correlate to shoemaking is the height of ignorance. But through time and building their brand with hard work done by owner Phillip Car, they were able to dispel that myth and rise to become one of the industry’s top shoemakers. And they didn’t come out cheap. No, they came out with their high prices, justify and explaining why they deserved to be at that price.
So this means that no matter where you come from, if your shoes are made with the best materials and the best craftsmanship, then you deserve to charge accordingly.
Yim Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Yim Shoemaker
Acme Shoemaker
Acme Shoemaker
Acme Shoemaker
Brand History is actually used to fool you
The reality is that once a company has built a super loyal customer base through the brand presence and history, it is almost always correlated to the same point in time in which they start to screw over all of their wholesalers, raise their pricing and lower their quality (note that most high-end shoe brands are not even close to this level). This has been done time and time again. Just look at all of the designer brands, as well as some of other household names that we buy and trust today blindly when we can buy the same thing (if not better) at a more reasonable price. Think Church’s and Allen Edmonds to name a couple. And this has actually escalated in the last 10 years with the rise of ‘online buying’.
The simple fact is that once you hit a certain level of volume that your factory can no longer maintain, unless you find another factory of equal quality or make a new one, 9 times out of 10, the brand goes to places like India or the likes, where they source cheaper materials and labor. They then up the marketing budget to sell this high volume, claiming ‘handmade this and that, best quality etc’ while having lowered cost and raising price at the same time. So of course, this is not about the Carmina’s, C&J’s, Saint Crispins of the world, as they are all still making in their own controlled factories. This is larger-scale makers, to clarify this post for those of you misinterpreting it. And the fact of the matter, this is simply business 101 for nearly every industry. That’s why boutique brands are usually always more expensive out of the gate, offering superb quality but then never really grow into a Ralph Lauren. And Ralph Lauren is actually the perfect example of this entire post. You are buying a name. For what you pay for purple label, you could find a million more tailors producing better stuff and a lower price. You buying a name, a history and idea.
Therefore, I would, in fact, more trust a brand new company than I would many existing ones. Most new brands are inevitably more hungry, more ready to prove themselves and more eager to start to build their name through exceptional work. It’s after they become popular that you should start to become wary of them. That’s when the corners inevitably start to get cut.
————————————————————-
So the point of this post is for one not to judge incorrectly. Don’t judge the country of origin. Don’t judge the length of the brand presence. Don’t judge against other brands. Judge the quality of the making through visual and physical stimuli. Judge the comments made in review of the product by others, but at the same time make sure that these people are not judging biasedly on the factors above. And lastly, judge the character of the brand itself. If people are kind and nice, that usually correlates to dedication, perseverance and caring about their product. Because when you care, you take price, and when you take pride, you exuberate that across all facets of your business!
Acme Shoemaker
Acme Shoemaker
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Yeossal Shoes
Dear Justin,
I´ve been follwing you about 1.5 years and by far one of your best articles yet!
By the way, don´t hesitate to mention brand names either for praise or blame.
You being the shoe snob poeple rely on your experience and inside knowledge of the market.
Great work and all the best for your company/business.
Thank you for your kind words and support, I do appreciate it!
It’s easier to invest in a new brand when the price is lower then the. Traditional players . When a new brand especially from places like China ( no judgement on their quality) charges as much as St crispin , the buyer would naturally ask around amongst shoe aficionados about this brand and if they don’t have much experience with the brand then it very difficult to take the plunge . Also these new brands are mostly inaccessible to view in person .its just the word and specifications provided by the seller .
I get all that you said for sure but the point was the idea that a new maker “cant, read “shouldnt” charge what Saint Crispins does just because they are new. Which is a false ideology. I get that barrier to entry will be more challenging sure but not that a new maker shouldnt charge their price just because they are new or out of China
Your blogs are always useful to understand various aspects of the industry. But if a British brand start taking shoes from India or other Asian countries and you have tried it and find poor quality then who is responsible, the inspection team who imports. China make products according to grading A, B, C. A grade for USA, Europe and B grade for lower European countries and C grade to Asian countries. As per the price and quality relation and purchasing power of the people.
The currency plays vital role in pricing too.
It remind me something that will help in understanding what I want to say. I am a mechanical engineer. A company in India supplied a component for metro trains and find almost same component with some changes in material and design is used in bullet train of France. The chief engineer words were like this… It costs 8£ to us and we sell it for 80£. They(French) inspect every single component, of course for the safety demands are very high in bullet train.
Why the French would come to India for it. The obvious reason is pricing. I think they would get same component in 160£ minimum if the get from Europe.
The other aspect I think is that the European tanneries are famous in high end shoemaking and as you know Sir the Japanese have started dominating in shoemaking craftsmanship. In future, We will start hear japenese tanneries like Du puy, Randenbach. Good tanneries are already their but the high end shoemaking wasn’t there beforehand. We can’t question Japanese R&D, quality and technology. They can make high quality leather.
I think we should not relate quality in only aspect of pricing and origin of product.
I would never go with brand name, origin and history. Would choose always yuhoifukuda, Bespoke Shoemaker main d or , Stefano bemer over berluti.
So you agree with what I said then, at least it sounds like it as that was my argument. Quality is quality. No matter where it comes from.
Dear Justin, agree with the underlying idea — however you assume that everyone buys nice shoes for their quality only. It’s obviously not the case. Many people buy for the values associated to a brand, for the style, for the convenience of special experience and in some occasions for owning a “piece of history”. Some other people do not care much about price. Does it mean that value for money is not important? Of course not. It’s just not the only thing that matters.
Even though you purely optimize for performance like an engineer, quality is hard to assess accurately. Shoes are sealed products. Quality may reveal itself only after years of usage. Since most of us cannot observe how shoes are made in factories, we need to rely on other factors such as reputation and customer feedback, which young makers have naturally less of.
Finally, the ability to charge a high price in a market is not deserved. It must be earned instead. Having desirable attributes is not enough. You need to demonstrate them.
Hey Adrien, I agree with your first point. Of course often we support brands we like, based on an emotional attachment, rather than price. As per your last point, please confirm for me. Are you saying that a new brand that is of equal if not higher quality than an existing brand that has been around for 10 years, should come in charging less than that brand simply because they are new?
It depends. What is certain is that these new brands need to somehow compensate customers from the risk of buying from someone they’ve never heard of. We can debate the value for money of, say, Ferragamo, but the fact that they’ve been in business for decades says that enough people were happy with their products for them to stay in business.
If not with a lower price, risk compensation could take the form of some additional guarantee. Of course, you will always find a few early supporters ready to “invest” in your brand, but they may not be enough to run a business sustainably.
An opposite strategy would be to price artificially high to signal quality – but then you need to deliver on customer’s expectations.
You can also reverse the question and ask: why do small, new brands usually have a hard time charging a premium like the established brands do? It’s the entire strategy of luxury brands: investing a lot in branding to price higher than others. For example, Hermès bags are probably overpriced for the quality, but still, thousands of people fight to buy them. If you own Hermès, is it bad? Happy customers, giant margins: clearly no!
Well put Adrien , makes perfect sense to me
Shoemakers from Asia can ask anything they want for their products, but the reason I am not going to pay EG or StC prices for Asian shoes is because they are copies of European brands. I pay for originality, for authentic design.
Can Asian craftsman make a bag as beautiful as Valextra or Hermes? Of course they can. Would anyone in the right mind pay them Valcxtra or Hermes prices? I doubt it. The reason being they lack their own style or originality that would command higher prices. No one is going to pay top price for a copy.
That is why EG Galway boots are still cost 1900 and Carmina copies of EG boots cost 550.
Sorry for some reason I thought you commented on a different post. Well, we can agree to disagree. For example, ACME shoes, who have some copies and some their own style, the prices of their RTW at $1200 is better BY FAR better than those at $1200 that are factory made, and even those that are handwelted. Not even a comparison. Someone will pay what they want for what they want no matter country, history, originality or the like. For me, people are crazy to pay Hermes prices for an idea, for a name. For me, it is the height of madness to turn your nose up to ACME because its the same price as an StC. StC came out with their same prices and built their reputation through selling, believing in their product and then customers being happy with their shoes and sharing that happiness. Thats how they built their reputation. Thry didnt come out selling for less to build their name when they were no one. They came out justifying their product and price because that is what they felt they deserved. And I backed them too when everyone talked crap because they were Romanian made. In all honesty, you simply appear to have an issue with Chinese craftsman. Sure some lack originality. But not all. Some make original things. Even if they were just copying it still doesnt take away the subject of the post, which in reality has nothing to do with where something is made but rather the idea that if someone brand new on the scene comes out making top quality, they have the right to charge top prices. People will either buy it or they wont. I will never agree that someone HAS to charge less because they lack brand history. That is just absurd. You think Hermes started by selling cheap? No, they came out saying we are new and we are the best and charged according. Back when they were nobody. Thats how you become the best, by coming making the best and charging accordingly.
I couldn’t agree more! In the case of St Crispins, I started buying them in 2003 when they were not a brand name yet. What made the difference was the quality, the craftmanship, and the service delivery. I just received my first pair of Acme shoes, and quite frankly the craftmanship, the quality of the leather and the construction are second to none. Over the last 30 years, I have accumulated quite a few pairs of JL Paris, EG, F&S, SC, G&G, GC and AC, Berluti to name a few. As a matter of facts I have a 100 pairs of shoes in my collection, and I can say without a doubt that in the case of ACME, they can compete with the best. All I want to see now is whether or not their shoes can last for s long as the other brands. To me that’s what matter most…..
Thank you for sharing Bernard. I think the people who comment against these Chinese brands not being able to price accordingly is because they have never actually owned all of the brands and truly judged between them and thus are jot able to comprehend the actual difference between a heritage brand a hungry shoemaker striving to make a name through quality
I think this depends on what kind of person you are, and I think everyone knows what I mean.
Do you buy nice things to show people you have money or do you buy nice things for yourself because of the craftsmanship. I drive a BMW M car. Some people think it’s because I want to show off. I say no, this thing drives like a monster, I couldn’t care less what the badge says. No Honda will ever drive like an M car, period. So I think comparing Edward Green, John Lobb, G&G, Stefano Bemer, etc. to Yoessal, Yim, and ACME isn’t fair, or the point of the article. If you buy those storied brands you are already a person buying for yourself, as no one else really cares. Good luck finding a guy or girl on the street to point out to your fully handmade, bespoke, 12 psi, beveled waist, adelaides…..they don’t care. But tell them you are wearing Gucci or RLPL, and they think you’ve made it. I don’t think a single person on this forum buys shoes for other people, because we are too deep in it. I think in buying the Asian makers you are simply exploring all the craft has to offer. You don’t charge less for a beautiful product, regardless of where its made. You should never sell yourself short for you services. Heritage and history does matter, and anyone who says it doesn’t is a fool, but there’s no reason one cant appreciate the old and the new.
I am in the process of ordering a pair of ACME shoes, and I can’t be more excited. I have a nice collection of G&G, Stefano Bemer, George Cleverley, and C&J, and I see them as a compliment to my lineup, not competition. If they suck, and don’t compare, I won’t order them again, but I don’t anticipate that being a problem.
Very well said. Thanks for that comment. I cant always make every point possible and you helped to say things that I did not. Enjoy your new ACME shoes.
Thank you CD for this nuanced perspective.
One of my professors used to say that there are three reasons why a man would buy a copy of the New York Times. The first reason is to read the news; the second reason is to show other people that he reads the NYT; the third reason is to tell himself that he is the kind of person who reads the NYT.
People buy things for different reasons. For people who only care about crasftmanship (and I would assume that most readers of this site fall into this category), I agree that it makes sense to price in consequence.
Newsletter
Supporters
ARCHIVE FAVORITES
SEARCH
Facebook Fanpage
Instagram
theshoesnob_official
All images are copyright of the respective of their owners. We credit images whenever possible. Please Contact Us if you have an issue with an image being used.