I went through a phase of buying Made in US and Canada footwear such as Alden and Viberg, and to be honest, I don't think I could ever buy a cheap pair of shoes again. I recognize I'm paying for the inefficient process, but the construction and quality is amazing. Even when it comes to buying sneakers, I prefer Made IN US New Balance over a pair of Nikes.
I have a pair of custom hiking boots, hand made in the US to fit my feet, that I bought 45 years ago for $300. Last time I checked, the price was $700. They are still in great condition. (I know how to care for them.)
I fully expect they will last me the rest of my life. That’s very expensive, you may say - but consider how many pairs of $150 boots I would have gone through in that time.
I also have several pairs of high quality English dress shoes that are decades old. They look better than ever. They don’t crack and the stitching doesn’t fall apart. The biggest problem is finding a cobbler who can do a full high quality resole without damaging the uppers. They are all rapidly dying off.
Modern cloth and rubber shoes don’t last. The rubber deteriorates, the stitching and glues fail, and the cloth frays. They can’t be repaired. It’s not worth trying to make long-lasting, custom shoes from materials like that. Thus, the throwaway culture.
“The reason that the rich were so rich, Vimes reasoned, was because they managed to spend less money.
Take boots, for example. He earned thirty-eight dollars a month plus allowances. A really good pair of leather boots cost fifty dollars. But an affordable pair of boots, which were sort of OK for a season or two and then leaked like hell when the cardboard gave out, cost about ten dollars. Those were the kind of boots Vimes always bought, and wore until the soles were so thin that he could tell where he was in Ankh-Morpork on a foggy night by the feel of the cobbles.
But the thing was that good boots lasted for years and years. A man who could afford fifty dollars had a pair of boots that'd still be keeping his feet dry in ten years' time, while the poor man who could only afford cheap boots would have spent a hundred dollars on boots in the same time and would still have wet feet.
This was the Captain Samuel Vimes 'Boots' theory of socioeconomic unfairness.”
If you adjust for inflation, 300 1976 dollars correspond to 1442 current dollars. I'm not saying they're not worth it but it's something that people always forget it.
Yes, but this ends up being misleading because it fails to account for advances in manufacturing technology. It's far cheaper to make shoes today than it was in 1976 because manufacturing is far more automated and vastly more outsourced. You should see a price well below the inflation rate because the costs of manufacturing are decreasing over time.
I think the argument was that the old boots are better because of the manufacturing methods and materials used back in the day. Yes, stuff is cheaper today but especially for clothes quality has dropped too. As a second anecdote in the same direction, I have a winter coat my father bought in the 70s and a couple of shirts made in 80s. They are much thicker and stronger material than the same brands use today.
That's survivorship bias. There was lots of junk made in the 70s-80s, it's just not around any longer because it wore out and was discarded. Average quality isn't any worse than it was 40 years ago; most mass manufactured goods are better made today than before.
You can still buy clothes that will last decades, they're just more expensive than the average person is willing to pay. Especially considering the length of time that something stays fashionable.
ETA: I just looked in my closet because I have a Sears dress shirt from the 70s. It is thin enough I can easily see my hand through it.
I've only worn Doc Martens since the early 90's. For a long time, even after they moved manufacturing to China, they were fine. About 5-7 years ago, though, I noticed the quality took an absolute nosedive.
Since then, I found out about Solovair, which manufactured shoes under the DM name in the UK for decades. I bought a pair about 8 months ago. What an incredible difference in quality. This pair still look great, and unlike Docs, I didn't immediately need to put insoles in them. I definitely will not buy Doc Martens again.
Doc Martens went through a rough patch of business about 20 years ago and then sold itself to private equity. Whatever remains of the company probably contains little of the 1990s company you remember.
No college, but a great resume, and a natural seller.
The guys running the business didn't realize the fashion potential of their shoes.
They told her whatever you sell; we will give you a healthy percentage.
All the salesmen were guys in their 50's.
By year three, she was making $600,000/yr.
When they realized their utilitarian product was now a fashion statement, they let her go. She went on to make more money though doing her own line of shoes in America.
Stuff can still be made here, but the profits won't be as high.
Even within a brand. The difference of quality and durability between my regular Keens and my made in America Keens is astounding. The Vietnam made ones got returned after failing after 50 or so miles, while my American made ones have only lost a pair of laces in 500 miles.
Honestly, the higher quality pair is now significantly cheaper per use than the cheaper ones (if we disregard REIs return policy at least).
Same here. Rancourt is another great one - they make their shoes in Maine and even offer custom shoes. I have a pair and they are amazing. Not as expensive as you’d think, either.
SB Foot! I've been to Minneapolis a few times, but I never managed to make it to Red Wing unfortunately. I've heard good deals can be found during their annual sale.
