Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 50 of 50

Thread: Thursday Boot Company Shoe Sale

  1. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    54
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    21 Post(s)
    Returns were free if you paid $120 or more. At $81 the shoes were returnable subject to a $30 restocking fee, which is a much better deal given that you're not necessarily going to return them.

    Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

  2. #42
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    874
    Mentioned
    82 Post(s)
    Quoted
    345 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by batkins9 View Post
    Ha, Reddit. The Mos Eisley of the internet. I'm very skeptical of keyboard experts in subjective matters like quality. You can't have champagne expectations on a Sprite budget.

    Also, if you bought at $80, it was final sale and I don't know if shipping was free.
    When it comes to shoes I do think that there is an objective measure of quality, in that sense that you can evaluate shoes on a set of objective criteria, such as the leather quality, the construction method, the stitching of the uppers, etc. The challenge is that majority of people don't have the training or knowledge to be able to objectively evaluate quality, so people end up conflating quality with emotions such as how they like the shape, the design, the color, and the brand, making it subjective and often times not all that helpful.

    For example, I recently saw a comment where someone claimed that shoe brand (let's call it X) was lower quality than Allen Edmonds for the following reasons:
    -brand X shoe didn't provide as much cushioning and therefore wasn't as comfortable
    -the leather on brand X shoe showed scuffs and scratches more easily

    That probably makes sense to most people at least on first read, but the reality is that those two things are consequences of design rather than truly objective quality differences. Shoe brand X uses blake stitching rather than GYW and uses crust leather rather than aniline. Blake stitching doesn't use a midsole which is why you get less cushioning and potentially less comfort, and crust leather is dyed after the tanning process, which leads to greater patina potential but also means that the color is more prone to scuffs and scratches since it's less permanent. Neither of those two outcomes indicate anything about the quality of the construction or the quality of the leather, but that's the type of commentary that tends to pass as a review of quality.

    I do think it's possible to say that shoe A is better than shoe B from a construction and materials perspective, but whether shoe A or B is more worth it for you is a subjective question. I agree with your overall point though: for the most part people have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to objectively determining quality.

  3. #43
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    591
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Quoted
    266 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nandyn View Post
    GoodYear Welt subreddit is definitely not frugal male fashion. People spend major coin on their boots and shoes over there and tend to know their stuff. But the final sale on at cost sales would make sense.
    That's the opposite end of unreasonable internet expert spectrum. The guys that think everything under $400 is made of cardboard and falls apart after taking them out of the box. I know I'm being cynical about this topic, but it's exhausting to read post after post where people unfairly malign legitimate new business start ups for not being heritage companies. It's even worse when people, that have never handled the products they are bashing, jump on the bandwagon because of what someone else said.

  4. #44
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2014
    Posts
    591
    Mentioned
    30 Post(s)
    Quoted
    266 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Token View Post
    When it comes to shoes I do think that there is an objective measure of quality, in that sense that you can evaluate shoes on a set of objective criteria, such as the leather quality, the construction method, the stitching of the uppers, etc. The challenge is that majority of people don't have the training or knowledge to be able to objectively evaluate quality, so people end up conflating quality with emotions such as how they like the shape, the design, the color, and the brand, making it subjective and often times not all that helpful.

    For example, I recently saw a comment where someone claimed that shoe brand (let's call it X) was lower quality than Allen Edmonds for the following reasons:
    -brand X shoe didn't provide as much cushioning and therefore wasn't as comfortable
    -the leather on brand X shoe showed scuffs and scratches more easily

    That probably makes sense to most people at least on first read, but the reality is that those two things are consequences of design rather than truly objective quality differences. Shoe brand X uses blake stitching rather than GYW and uses crust leather rather than aniline. Blake stitching doesn't use a midsole which is why you get less cushioning and potentially less comfort, and crust leather is dyed after the tanning process, which leads to greater patina potential but also means that the color is more prone to scuffs and scratches since it's less permanent. Neither of those two outcomes indicate anything about the quality of the construction or the quality of the leather, but that's the type of commentary that tends to pass as a review of quality.

    I do think it's possible to say that shoe A is better than shoe B from a construction and materials perspective, but whether shoe A or B is more worth it for you is a subjective question. I agree with your overall point though: for the most part people have no idea what they're talking about when it comes to objectively determining quality.
    Thank you for that very nuanced explanation. If that were the typical shoe analysis, I would learn a lot more about products. As you say, most shoe reviews come down to emotional/subjective anecdotes about how they feel. You're right that shoes can be objectively compared under the right circumstances.

  5. #45
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    225
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    63 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nandyn View Post


    Lots of negative experiences with their quality and whatnot over on Reddit:GYW so I skipped this deal. Although for $80 and free shipping/returns, might have been worth the risk... Although I find it questionable using CXL for actual dress shoes.
    Why do you find questionable the CXL? I never owned a horween leather .

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

  6. #46
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Posts
    178
    Mentioned
    15 Post(s)
    Quoted
    40 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chiconice View Post
    Why do you find questionable the CXL? I never owned a horween leather .

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
    The nature of CXL causes it to have a good amount of pull-up, which means that the color changes when stressed. So that will show up while they’re being worn. Additionally, it scuffs pretty easily. It’s not what you think of when looking for dress shoes. It is fantastic leather and I have several pairs of boots that are CXL and I love them.

  7. #47
    Varsity Member Nandyn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2016
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    579
    Mentioned
    24 Post(s)
    Quoted
    191 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by chiconice View Post
    Why do you find questionable the CXL? I never owned a horween leather .

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk
    Yup, just as @shockfinder says. It really is a great leather for boots. So little maintenance needed and even the easily scuffed nature is mitigated by the fact that you can just rub the leather and move the oils/pigments around until the scuff/scratch disappears. My burgundy J.Crew Chippewa captoe boots, though not Horween's CXL, is a oil stuffed pull up leather and it looks better the more I wear it/beat it.

    It'll be a good option for that blutcher they offered, but probably not for any of their other shoes unless you're looking for a Frankin-dress shoe.
    Last edited by Nandyn; April 27th, 2018 at 11:27 AM.

  8. #48
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2015
    Posts
    225
    Mentioned
    5 Post(s)
    Quoted
    63 Post(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Nandyn View Post
    Yup, just as @shockfinder says. It really is a great leather for boots. So little maintenance needed and even the easily scuffed nature is mitigated by the fact that you can just rub the leather and move the oils/pigments around until the scuff/scratch disappears. My burgundy J.Crew Chippewa captoe boots, though not Horween's CXL, is a oil stuffed pull up leather and it looks better the more I wear it/beat it.

    It'll be a good option for that blutcher they offered, but probably not for any of their other shoes unless you're looking for a Frankin-dress shoe.
    I will be happy if it looks similar to a Cordovan shell #8 but more than likely it will go to the sales sections.

    Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

  9. #49
    Varsity Member
    Join Date
    May 2016
    Location
    MI
    Posts
    161
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)
    Quoted
    78 Post(s)
    So an update on the Thursday natural cxl PTBs (Statesman) that I ordered during their sale:

    The leather is typical CXL. It's going to crease and patina like crazy, and that's a good thing for this casual of a shoe. I think it's foolish of them to use this leather on a balmoral, but what do I know. The last is an odd fit. I ordered my normal dress shoe size and I could have probably gone another half size down, though I likely would have had to stretch the shoe for width. The insole is noisy. The leather is definitely hot stuffed CXL - I have no clue if it's actually Horween, but it compares to my AE Higgins Mill in creasing, marks, coloration, etc, with the exception that it is a thinner cut of hide. The welt and upper stitching is better than most of my AEs. The imitation Dainite sole is disappointing and this is where I have reservations of future purchases with Thursday. The studded rubber sole on these is very thin. I don't expect much life from this sole. The shoe may warrant a resole depending on how the upper wears and patinas, but I'm not counting on it. A resole with a proper Dainite sole is more that what I paid for the shoes. If the uppers turn into something I love, I'll resole them.

    For $81 I'd buy them again. There is no way I'd spend $200 on these. I've been eying their Chelsea boots and unless they go on sale, I'll probably look for something else.

  10. #50
    Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2018
    Posts
    54
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Quoted
    21 Post(s)
    Shife says pretty much what I feel with my PTBs, but I see no reason to doubt that they're made of genuine Horween CXL and I'm less worried about the sole. I actually like them. They're comfortable, even though there's a bit of a squeak at first, and the natural leather looks good and should age nicely. Well worth the sale price. I doubt they're a good value at full price, though.

    Sent from my MHA-L29 using Tapatalk

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •