Cleverley shoes

[DMacey]

Gentlemen,

I have read with considerable interest many fascinating threads over the last couple of months; I have particularly enjoyed the advice and views on the crafting of a bespoke suit, invaluable advice for someone who is in the process of researching their first commission (having spent the last few years moving into, then getting frustrated with, made-to-measure).

However, my first post is on a slightly more mundane topic: ready to wear shoes. I recently bought a pair of loafers from GJ Cleverley; I fell in love with the elegant shape, extended cross strap and famous chiseled toe. Subsequently, I have been told that the shoes are made for Cleverley by Crockett & Jones. Whilst this is not a problem per se (I own several pairs of C&J), it does raise the question of authenticity and heritage.

Can anyone shed any light on the pedigree of Cleverley RTW? Do you have any thoughts on a quality maker, like Cleverley, using a different factory to produce goods under their own name?

[manton]

Outsourcing RTW shoes is very common. Very few RTW shoe business actually maintain their own factories. All that should matter to you is whether you like the designs of the shoes you chose, that they fit, and that they are well made. I don't think every Cleverley RTW shoe is made by C&J, but all are presumably made by a reputable Northampton factory.

[RWS]

. . . . I have been told that . . . shoes are made for Cleverley by Crockett & Jones. Whilst this is not a problem per se (I own several pairs of C&J), it does raise the question of authenticity and heritage.

. . . . Do you have any thoughts on a [good-]quality maker, like Cleverley, using a different factory to produce goods under their own name?

It seems a bit deceptive to me, though I know the practice to be widespread. At its worst, such "rebadging" simply puts an authentic name on something that has no real relationship whatsoever with it: a fine outfitter is turned into a "downmarket" seller of cheap clothes (Abercrombie & Fitch), or a builder of superb motorcars becomes a mass producer for the newly rich and nearly unaware (as, I am told, the name of Bugatti is about to be used by Volkswagen). A shame; but perhaps it's only to be expected.

[manton]

RWS: except that, in the case of Cleverley (and others) more than just rebading is going on. Cleverley RTW shoes are made on unique lasts: the closest thing to a real chisel in RTW. Also, the designs come from the Cleverley guys, not the C&J catalogue. True, most of them are quite classic. But you can spot the subtle differences if you look.

[rjman]

deleted

[rjman]

. Cleverley RTW shoes are made on unique lasts: the closest thing to a real chisel in RTW. Also, the designs come from the Cleverley guys, not the C&J catalogue. .

It pains me to differ withyou but... C&J stated, and personal experience confirms, that their Cleverley shoes are made on the standard Handgrade 337 last. The Grenson Masterpieces made for the Japanese market under the name Henry Maxwell have a pronounced, angled chisel toe that's the closest I've seen in British RTW.

[manton]

The Cleverley shoes that Kempson has in the NY shop are not made on the 337. Or, not all of them. I don't think I've ever seen the Japanese market shoes you describe. Maybe that's what Kempson has. Anyway, the Cleverley guys told me a long time ago that they designed their own RTW last to mirror the signature Cleverley chisel.

[DMacey]

For what its worth, when I was in the shop the (admittedly very helpful) assistants told me the shoes where unique in terms of style and quality, (in fact, they were rather dismissive of a pair of Tricker’s I was wearing at the time) and certainly gave me the impression that they were Cleverley made. I think this is why I can’t help but feel a slight sense of disappointment about them being made by C&J. That said, Manton is right: the most important thing is the style, quality and fit and I am certainly impressed with all of those. At the same time, I can’t help agreeing with RWS, it is a bit deceptive.

Would I go back for another pair? I think the time has come to bite the bullet and go bespoke…

Regards

[manicturncoat]

What is important is not where the shoes are made but if Cleverly applies it's standards and style to the RTW shoes and the customer is not getting a more expensive and rebranded C&J that he can get elswhere. If, in fact, the shoes are unique I don't see how it is deceptive. How much does Cleverly charge for their shoes in comparison to C&J?

[DMacey]

Cleverley RTW about £350 v C&J (of similar quality) about £300. Hence I fear you may be paying somthing for the Cleverley name. However, they might have a unique last, more limited production etc.? I'm afraid I don't really know...

[rjman]

C&J did inform me that while the shoes they made for Cleverley were made with some Handgrade features, certain Cleverley shoes were made with C&J's regular-line leathers. The Cleverley models include a lot of models made specifically for Cleverley, but others have occasionally cropped up in the Paris Handgrade collection. The RTW shoes on the Cleverley website do not appear particularly chiselled, but that's probably not everything they sell in RTW. C&J appeared quite happy to discuss the Cleverley shoes if anyone wants to ask them. The Cleverley shoes really are gorgeous.

I think certain other bespoke makers will represent that their RTW is specially made, or made in their own workshops. In most cases that is not true.

[DMacey]

To confuse matters... I have just been to Kilgour in my lunch break (to pick up some chocolate brown cords in a 90% cotton, 10% cashmere mix; very nice but a different story...) and they have exactly the same shoes as I have, on display, stamped Kilgour inside! I asked if they were made by C&J and the assistant told me they weren’t... They are made on their own last, own specifications etc. I didn't have either the heart or time to argue!

[rjman]

To confuse matters... I have just been to Kilgour in my lunch break ... and they have exactly the same shoes as I have, on display, stamped Kilgour inside! I asked if they were made by C&J and the assistant told me they weren’t... They are made on their own last, own specifications etc. I didn't have either the heart or time to argue!

In PR following its recent relaunch, Kilgour touted itself as selling Cleverley shoes. My hunch is that at least some of the Kilgour shoes are rebadged Cleverleys that are made by C and J. Salesmen say a lot of things. I know of at least one style of Kilgour shoe made by Artioli, but it involves denim.

[DMacey]

I'm very fond of Kilgour, however, I don't think involving denim in a shoe at any stage sounds like a good idea!

[bengal-stripe]

When you go into Dunhill, do you ask who makes their ties? If you are given an honest answer, you will be told, Dunhill ties are made at Factory A and that the very same factory produces ties for half the designer labels around. And the Dunhill belts are made by a belt manufacturer and the socks come from a sock factory. All these manufacturers are happy to produce under whatever label they are asked; as long as the price and the minimum order is right.

Manufacturers have always operated like that. At one time it might have been the name of the retail outlet, everything was “Harrods” or “Sulka” or “Austin Reed”.

Most bespoke shoemaker offer a ready-to-wear range of shoes (Maxwell, Cleverley, New & Lingwood, Foster and in the more recent past Wildsmith and Alan McAfee). If, in the more distant past, firms like Peal & Co or Tuczsek offered off-the-peg, I don’t know. (Of course Peal sold the right to sell shoes under their name to Brooks Brothers). None of these firms produce their RTW ranges. They do not have the production capacities and it would be an enormous financial risk to build a factory from scratch. So many English shoe manufacturers have disappeared (the high point for shoe factories was before WW1, after that there has been a permanent decline, sometimes slower, sometimes faster, and since the 1970s incredibly fast. Today there are probably no more than ½ dozen of firms left, who produce shoes of a high standard.

Judge any item you buy on its own merits. If you prefer the style and the fit of the Cleverley shoes to a similar pair by C&J or Trickers, then get them. If not, leave well alone.

If Cleverley have been “economical with the actualite”, that’s business. You probably haven’t asked them outright enough. If they have lied, that’s another matter. I have here in front of me a cutting about shoes from the “Financial Times” of maybe ten years ago. There the poor journalist (Edward Lamont) writes:

The industry divide the ready-to-wear market into tiers: fabulous, very good and all the rest. Edward Green, Wildsmith & Co and John Lobb (owned by Hermès and distinct from the family-owned bespoke business in St. James’s) are the only top tier.

Wow, Mr John Wildsmith (now retired) who never had any industrial production and who in later years sold nothing but EG and C&J stock styles at vastly inflated prices, must have been telling some porkies (for non-English readers: lies).