Magnoli Shoes? Recommended?

I am looking for cheaper versions of the following:

Lobb Luffield
Lobb Romsey

Anybody recommend Magnloli? The pics of the leather quality seem rather er.. dull.

If not anybody have some nice alternatives?
Instagram - bondclothes007

Comments

  • 00 Aussie00 Aussie Posts: 50MI6 Agent
    Cant help you on the Magnoli, but Charles Tyrwhitt has a passible alternative to the John Lobb Luffield for a reasonable price: http://www.ctshirts.co.uk/men's-shoes/Black-Label-fraser-two-eyelet-derby-shoes?q=gbpdefault||ML129BLK|||||||||||||
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 10,320MI6 Agent
    00 Aussie wrote:
    Cant help you on the Magnoli, but Charles Tyrwhitt has a passible alternative to the John Lobb Luffield for a reasonable price: http://www.ctshirts.co.uk/men's-shoes/Black-Label-fraser-two-eyelet-derby-shoes?q=gbpdefault||ML129BLK|||||||||||||


    Great price, also does a wide version for my size.

    Have you tried his shoes before?
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • 00 Aussie00 Aussie Posts: 50MI6 Agent
    I don’t have that particular one, but will buy them when I have a few $$ to spare. I was looking for a Bondian cap toe oxfords a while back and bought: http://www.ctshirts.co.uk/men's-shoes/Black-Oxford-shoes?q=gbpdefault||ML060BLK|||||||||||||

    Obviously for the money, these are not Church or Lobb quality, but I think at the (permanently) discounted price, Tyrwhitt shoes are reasonable value, though wouldn’t pay the (supposed) full price for them.
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 10,320MI6 Agent
    I have ordered the "Luffield" lookalike derby shoe. I even managed to get VAT off hence only £80 ish delivered! Will post review on arrival :)
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • billybobbillybob Posts: 42MI6 Agent
    I have some black tom ford captoes that would work great for you. :D
  • welshboy78welshboy78 Posts: 10,320MI6 Agent
    Tom Ford = me bankrupt :)
    Instagram - bondclothes007
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    The CT shoes look awful, but if you only wanted to spend £79, full steam ahead.

    Just please don't ever wear them with a dinner suit. :#
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    Herring make some beautiful shoes, at great prices. -{
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    Wilde wrote:
    Herring make some beautiful shoes, at great prices. -{

    +1!

    I recently picked up the Herring Jekyll as a summer shoe. :D
  • toutbruntoutbrun Washington, USAPosts: 1,501MI6 Agent
    I would NEVER buy shoes from a brand that does not have a well known expertise in shoes (Magnoli), because it's very hard to make very good shoes. I would save my money to buy Church's. They are more expensive but they will last you way more longer and you'll actually love them.
    If you can't trust a Swiss banker, what's the world come to?
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    For the price, Church's are terrible quality…
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    Mac wrote:
    For the price, Church's are terrible quality…

    A rather bold statement, Mr Mac. As an owner of various pairs of high end shoes I believe that my Church's (of which I own two pairs) are by far the most comfortable, durable and aesthetically pleasing. Didn't feel guilty as the price was justifiable on both occasions.

    Regards,
    Wilde
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    They sell "polished binder" shoes at £350+, many are not fully leather lined and many of their shoe designs are boxy and seem stuck in the eighties. The relative value has declined.

    For the price try: Crockett and Jones, Alfred Sargent's new line, Carmina, etc. They are infinitely better shoes, on (much of the time) sleeker lasts, using better quality leather and construction processes. Church's would be the first company I would avoid if spending £300+ on shoes.

    Many of people on this forum will jump on me for saying this, just because Bond wore them. He also wore John Lobb derbys with black tie—hardly an authority on shoes.
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    I don't own Crockett & Jones, but they do look good. Your opinion sounds solid enough, I might just buy a pair to compare.

    Regards,
    Wilde
  • David SchofieldDavid Schofield EnglandPosts: 1,528MI6 Agent
    Mac wrote:
    They sell "polished binder" shoes at £350+, many are not fully leather lined and many of their shoe designs are boxy and seem stuck in the eighties. The relative value has declined.

    For the price try: Crockett and Jones, Alfred Sargent's new line, Carmina, etc. They are infinitely better shoes, on (much of the time) sleeker lasts, using better quality leather and construction processes. Church's would be the first company I would avoid if spending £300+ on shoes.

    Many of people on this forum will jump on me for saying this, just because Bond wore them. He also wore John Lobb derbys with black tie—hardly an authority on shoes.

    I presume then you have had a bad personal experience with Church's and that you are comparing them with your first hand experience of many other shoes?

    Or is your expertise on lasts, leather quality, etc based upon a number of years experience in the shoe retail or manufacturing industry?

    I'm curious.
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    Crockett and Jones are great shoes and definitely above Church's in terms of quality and styling, IMO.

    I've never owned a pair of Church's. I was going to buy a pair; I tried on several pairs, all seemed boxy and not at all sleek, the leather seemed of a poorer quality than that of Crockett and Jones. I then went online and read about the post-Prada takeover decline in their shoes that many loyal customers had experienced: prices went up and quality went down.

    I certainly don't know everything about shoes, but I recognise that Church's are a huge shoe brand that seem to now trade more on their name than of the overall quality of their products. Like I said, for the price buy C&J.

    Although, the Church's Phillip model does look very nice. Much nicer than the Consul, for example.
  • TomSawyerTomSawyer Posts: 53MI6 Agent
    Never heard anything bad about church's (quality) until now... On the contrary, the praise just doesn't seem to end.
    Anyone would stand out wearing a pair of church's, that's how 'posh' they are.

    About the price, I would just say that you don't buy a pair of church's if you don't care about your style. You would have to be aware of and care about what you are wearing, when you buy shoes that cost the same as a full set of regular-to-expensive clothes(shoes included) put together.

    They are there to 'complete' the look. You don't buy a Tom Ford suit, Omega Planet Ocean, and go with white sneakers..Church's are an expression of excuisite taste and style.
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    Yes, they're one of the big brands of English formal footwear. However, try on the Consul or the Chetwynd, nothing stands out about them—they're clumpy and unrefined. Just because something's expensive doesn't make it quality. Like I said, the relative value has diminished.

    People who buy Church's obviously have money to spend, and are looking for a good shoe. However, the people that actually know about shoes know that brands such as Crockett and Jones, Edward Green, Carmina, Gaziano and Girling, John Lobb, Berluti, Cleverley and Vass are a cut above Church's and they know that you truly get what you pay for with those brands.

    Just like people who buy Omega and Rolex, many won't have even heard of Jaeger LeCoultre or Patek Philippe.

    Just like people who buy Tom Ford suits or dream of buying them, how many knew they were made by Ermenegildo Zegna? I absolutely love Tom Ford suits though and admit that they are of an astonishing quality. Not just because they say Tom Ford on them, but because I understand the finer details—they're not just rebranded Zegna Couture: the Milanese lapel buttonholes done by hand, the polished chest from the way the canvas is worked, etc.

    The QoS Tom Ford suits weren't really signature Tom Ford. His signature is the wide sweeping peak lapels, the oversized pockets/ticket pocket and the 2" turn ups—all of which were missing from Bond's TF suits.

    -{
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    edited April 2011
    Church's:

    Church-Church%20Consul-Black%20calf-1118-4-1.jpg

    Or, Gaziano & Girling?:

    gng-stjamesii-34-16.jpg
  • David SchofieldDavid Schofield EnglandPosts: 1,528MI6 Agent
    You wouldn't actually own any off these high end shoes and Tom Ford suits you appear to have so much about expertise about would you by any chance?
  • ExpatJBExpatJB HoustonPosts: 752MI6 Agent
    You wouldn't actually own any off these high end shoes and Tom Ford suits you appear to have so much about expertise about would you by any chance?
    Read styleforum.net. It makes everyone an expert. The same expert.
    Dont wait for your ship to come in. Swim out and meet the bloody thing.
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    ExpatJB wrote:
    You wouldn't actually own any off these high end shoes and Tom Ford suits you appear to have so much about expertise about would you by any chance?
    Read styleforum.net. It makes everyone an expert. The same expert.

    Oblivious to the paradox of their uniform individuality?
  • ExpatJBExpatJB HoustonPosts: 752MI6 Agent
    Wilde wrote:
    ExpatJB wrote:
    You wouldn't actually own any off these high end shoes and Tom Ford suits you appear to have so much about expertise about would you by any chance?
    Read styleforum.net. It makes everyone an expert. The same expert.

    Oblivious to the paradox of their uniform individuality?
    And their 357th hand information.

    Don't get me wrong, there is some good information on there, but like all things I listen to it all and make my own mind up. I wouldn't normally quote someone elses opinion/knowledge as my own fact though. The internet is the internet and there are very few absolutes.
    Dont wait for your ship to come in. Swim out and meet the bloody thing.
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    Well, as the saying goes; 'I'm not young enough to know everything'. :D

    I'm in the market for another pair of shoes so at the very least Mac (styleforum.net by proxy) did make a few nice suggestions.

    Regards,
    Wilde -{
  • MacMac Glasgow, ScotlandPosts: 143MI6 Agent
    edited April 2011
    You can make your own minds up, definitely. But there's a lot better shoes than Church's for money, and I'm just trying to make people realise that. Style Forum think—generally speaking—is a lot more informed than the average person. It's about recognising quality brands for real value rather than pandering to every large brand that's worn by celebrities with a widely inflated price tag.

    Look at the Church's shoe, then look at the Gaziano & Girling shoe. Make your own mind up. {[]
    Wilde wrote:
    Oblivious to the paradox of their uniform individuality?

    As opposed to everyone on AJB who wants the same Tom Ford ties, the same Tom Ford overcoat, the same cufflinks and the same Church's Phillip shoes? It seems you too, sir, are oblivious to the paradox of your uniform individuality. ;)
  • TomSawyerTomSawyer Posts: 53MI6 Agent
    Not quite.. that wardrobe was designed by the Q-branch of clothing.

    For Bond himself, I might add.

    Made him best dressed man of the year, something we should take notice of.
  • WildeWilde Oxford, UKPosts: 621MI6 Agent
    Mac wrote:
    As opposed to everyone on AJB who wants the same Tom Ford ties, the same Tom Ford overcoat, the same cufflinks and the same Church's Phillip shoes? It seems you too, sir, are oblivious to the paradox of your uniform individuality. ;)

    I don't own a Tom Ford suit or tie, and I have no interest in those dodgy knock off cuff-links that seem to be floating around these places. ;)
Sign In or Register to comment.