Louboutins, Manolos......etc.

Emilie

Member
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Messages
127
Reaction score
0
Lately I’ve heard so many different opinions from people on what brand of shoe they feel wears the best. I'd like to start investing in good quality shoes (I can’t stand wearing anything with non-leather soles), and I hate the fact that some only last a year or two. What does everyone out there think? So far, from what I’ve heard, the general census has been this:
-Louboutins are the best; they last the longest and are made the best (i.e. best quality and craftsmanship)
-Manolos are over hyped and they are not made as well. They don't give as much mileage as the above.
-Shoes at lower price points, mainly Nine West, are cute but poor investments because they don't last very long.

I would love to hear what everyone thinks, especially those of you who have worn these brands extensively and know how they wear and tear over the years.
 
i absolutely agree and have always chose louboutins over blahniks. like you have mentioned. the quality and craftmanship is so much better. personally louboutins have this amazing fit and the leather is so soft.

i'm also a fan of JP tod's and bally. the leather is incrediably soft and oh-so-comfortable.

as for lower price shoes.hmmm.. when it comes to shoes. you really get what you pay for. i've bought brands such as nine west, steve madden, bcbg shoes before. etc etc , most of them are uncomfortable and doesn't seem to last. but for a good price, hype shoes are pretty decent.
 
hi emilie...
welcome to tfs...

about your question...i find that louboutins are sort of tougher in the way they are designed...a bit more rock n roll...so they are built a bit stronger...

manolos tend to be more feminine and delicate and girly...which is beautiful...but means they might not take wear and tear very well...

it is possible to select certain styles that will not wear out as quickly...
and most people who wear these shoes will have a thin rubber half-sole put on by a shoemaker...this makes them easier to walk in and last longer...

cheap shoes are great if you want a funky colour or trendy style and don't want to make a major investment...i got a great pair of fuschia suede sandals at banana republic this season...they absolutely look like YSL or jimmy choo...but they were only $125...

i find zara sometimes has great cheap shoes...and because they only get a limited quantity...you don't see yourself coming and going...

hope this helps... :flower:
 
Thanks so much Softgrey, I'll take your advice into consideration next time I go shopping for shoes. Much appreciated!
Emilie :rolleyes:
 
I love Zara shoes, I agree with Softie, they don't bring a lot of merchandise into their stores, so you wont see a lot of people walking around in the same shoes...and I think they're preety good quality... well, I had this hot pink silk pumps from Zara, and they got destroyed after I went and partied my butt off, and got stuff spilled in them.. :lol:

But they have the cutest pair of brown faux croc pumps, with a chunky heel, rounded toe and the gold horsebit on the front, sooo Gucci :crush:
 
you're very welcome emilie...what's with the eyeroll?... :ermm: :unsure:
 
Originally posted by softgrey@Nov 7 2004, 02:05 PM
you're very welcome emilie...what's with the eyeroll?... :ermm: :unsure:
[snapback]421999[/snapback]​


sorry! I ment something more like this... :flower:
 
Was it Manolos or Choos that Princess Diana wore? I think she was one of the first REALLY REALLY major clients for one of the two, but I cannot remember which, for the life of me.
 
don't know anything about princess di...but my guess would be manolo...i don't think louboutin has been around that long...

but don't quote me on that... :wink: :flower:


and thx for the clarification emilie... :P
 
Louboutins are beautiful, just amazing shoes, some styles are just WOW and I could get the same style in different colors :P Louboutin is my favorite I guess :heart:
Choo kinda plays safe, and they are more elegant, also pretty and chic.
I'm not too fond of some Manolo's "funky" styles, but his basic simple pumps are sooooooo comfy and lasts well!
 
Originally posted by Misako@Nov 7 2004, 06:05 PM
Was it Manolos or Choos that Princess Diana wore? I think she was one of the first REALLY REALLY major clients for one of the two, but I cannot remember which, for the life of me.
[snapback]422419[/snapback]​
i wanna say it was Manolos.
 
Originally posted by Emilie@Nov 7 2004, 12:20 AM
(I can’t stand wearing anything with non-leather soles)

why leather soles? they wear out in a day... :blink:
 
Originally posted by kealoha@Nov 8 2004, 04:32 AM
i wanna say it was Manolos.
[snapback]422657[/snapback]​

I read that it was Choo, which got its start in England. But Princess Di prob. has worn shoes from all famous brands.

It is tricky to answer shoe questions w/r/t durability because you need to have worn the brand's closed-toe pumps to make an informed opinion. IMO, pumps really put a designer's attempt at practicality to test. I am more of a high-heeled sandals and boots person, and naturally they last longer and make you feel more comfortable.

The best medium-price shoes are Coach, speaking from my own experience. They strike a perfect balance between quality and design. I love their strappy heels and boots as well.

Via Spiga and Charles David are trendy and look good enough to be worn to "important" functions. Plus, they have their own aesthetics, so you do not feel you are wearing blatant knock-offs from Manolo/Choo/Loubutin/Sergio Rossi and can skip the danger of inviting ladies-who-lunch who wear the real deal to scrutinize your shoes.

Ralph Lauren is good, too. And I am glad to hear that Hype is recommended--I just saw a pair of very nice black pumps with oriental embroderies from Lucky for $100.

Now, some warnings...

Kate Spade looks nice but is not exactly what you will call "a work of art" once you examine the shoes. That won't stop me from getting their strappy heels & flats, but I don't know about pumps.

Banana Republic has horrible leather goods so I can't imagine paying more than USD $100 for their pumps or boots (or belts or bags, for that matter). However, their sandals are pretty nice and most sizes are still available til sales time.

I actually have never worn anything Nine West/Steve Madden/Aldo/Naturalizer/Victoria's Secret, and that is because they don't look too appealing. :ninja: Bebe and Guess however are quite worth a look if you are looking for things under $100.
 
How about the sizing of Louboutins? I bought a pair from online without trying them on at all and they turned out to be too small and narrow. I normally wear size 7.5 US. These were mareked 7.5 underneath the sole; however, they did not fit my feet :( They were sandals also. So I bet I couldnt even slip my foot into it if they were pumps. Now I have my eyes on a pair of pumps (the infamous patent round toe ones). But I want to get some info on the sizing. Will 8.5 be more realistic size for me? Let me know ASAP :smile:
 
What about Choos? :(

I must say: Nine West has never done me wrong. I find their shoes VERY good quality for the price that is payed. Victoria's Secret/Colin Stuart, however... horrible!!! Same with Kenneth Cole and Rampage....
 
Shoes that I find have worn well are Ralph Lauren Collection shoes... however, these shoes run $450 and up, and for that price, there are very, very few of their styles I would spring for.

I agree with the other poster who stated that Coach is a great shoe for a reasonable price. Also, I find that BCBG (*not* BCBG Girls, totally different line) shoes are sooooo comfortable it's ridiculous.

I find Blahniks to be very comfortable, and I think they wear relatively well... however, I'm a bad judge, since none of my shoes, no matter the price or brand, ever lasts for long since I refuse to take care of them.
 
Comfortable AND good-looking shoes are also kurt geiger, chloe, marc jacobs, miu miu and prada, fendi, and dior.

otherwise gucci, dior, sigerson morrison and alain tondowski LOOK incredibly good, but are not always made for longer walking sessions (like shopping!)

as for mixed experiences i can only list alexandra neel (expensive!, but good looking), and dolce&gabbana. i think you have to really wear them to be comfortabel in them!
 
I found that Vera Wang shoes are also surprisingly comfortable, as are Nine West shoes (good deal!)...in fact, I just bought another pair of Nine West boots...
 
Originally posted by Chanel_Aficionada@Nov 28 2004, 07:44 AM
I agree with the other poster who stated that Coach is a great shoe for a reasonable price. Also, I find that BCBG (*not* BCBG Girls, totally different line) shoes are sooooo comfortable it's ridiculous.
[snapback]442071[/snapback]​


I agree... BOTH lines are dreamy comfy... I could walk for hours in the 4" :shock:
 
Coach IS really comfy. They put a lot of padding in their shoes, as is evident as I have feet marks in my coach heels - you can see where my toes have been, and it's not cause of dirt, but you can actually see where your foot has pressed into the padding that they have. LOL.

What's the comfort level of Louboutins? Can you walk all day in them, or are they really a sort of dinner shoe - mostly sitting with a bit of walking...?

What about Choo sandals? I've been looking into a pair or two, and I'm always hesitant before buying heels as I'd like to know how long I can wear them for before I have to hobble back like a girl I saw on campus not a month ago in cute pumps...but she was quite obviously in pain.

I heard that Charles David shoes in general are quite comfortable.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

New Posts

Forum Statistics

Threads
210,544
Messages
15,118,622
Members
84,209
Latest member
hugsrat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "058526dd2635cb6818386bfd373b82a4"