Hacker News Reader

Yes. The build quality of women's shoes is astoundingly bad. Sometimes I look at them and they literally feel like glued on piece of leather, pretty on the outside, and nothing more.

It's interesting how two different markets have developed (men's shoes and women's shoes) that have such different parameters. Men's shoes have outstanding build quality --- to the point where a good pair of quality shoes gets resoled multiple times. Do women ever resole shoes?

This isn't just true for women's shoes, but women's clothing in general. I don't understand the reasons, but men's clothing tends to be made with less design and more durability.

A fashioner designer once told me he made the men's clothing first, then crafted the women's clothing out of its leftovers + some embellishments.

Christina Binkley in the WSJ had a great column on this topic titled "To Dress Well, a Woman Should Shop Like a Man": http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405274870440570457606...

This is so true. My SO purchases clothes that are made from terrible materials, with stitching that falls apart.

Womens shoes exclusively seem capable on only lasting 6 months of regular wear. Everything from straps, buckles, soles and innersoles seem to fall apart.

The ultimate insult in all this is that they always cost more than the equivalent male version. The only exceptions to this are where the two items are equivalent (ie mens/womens levis, mens/womens running shoes).

I don't like buying clothes unless they're made from natural fibres/materials. It's cotton, wool + leather for me. For a woman, it's virtually impossible to stick to a rule like this.

I guess it's all about the fashion and style, and they aren't expected to last due to the built-in obsolescence of womens fashion.

Women go for fashion more than men, Fashion doesn't last, so there is no real point in the clothing lasting.

Women's clothing is also cheaper at the lower end, and much more expensive at the higher end for the same reason.

.. so women tell me anyway, I can (surprise surprise) male.

For an easy anecdote, just walk into any Forever 21. The clothes are extremely thin, with bad stitching, and made from materials that aren't durable at all.

Women's fashion changes quickly, so if she keeps up she may only be wearing whatever it is for a single season. It doesn't make sense to make something durable if it's only going to be worn a handful of times.

Men's fashions change much more slowly, and within much narrower parameters. It actually makes sense to spend a few grand on a suit that you're going to wear to work every week for a couple years, and it has to be pretty well made to last that long.

The hipster doofus stuff is as shoddy as women's wear and for the same reasons.

Stereotypically, because men tend to care less about clothing, fashion and the like, and so want clothes they can wear for a long time, while women worry more about changing fashion trends and wear clothes for relatively shorter periods of time.

Yes. The good ones get resoled, just as with men's shoes.

Well from my own personal experience. When I go out to buy shoes, I look at things like durability, ruggedness, comfort. The shoes must be long lasting and one must be able to wear them for long hours without feeling uncomfortable.

Most girls I know don't have that criteria. The first and foremost criteria for them is they must fashionable, good looking, must match with their dress etc. Given this use case, there is only so much you can do for things like durability and ruggedness. Because you need to make them colorful, with some deigns etc.

Ultimately you get what you ask for.

I wouldn't say it was "bad". Women's shoes are designed with fashion and daintiness in mind. They seem flimsy because they are flimsy, and they are flimsy because well crafted, long lasting shoes are big and burly with lots of material and stitching. This goes counter to the point of the shoes: to look trim and to make the woman's foot look small and pretty.

This maybe a bit impractical by todays social norms but I don't think anyone has ever thought of carbon-fibre footwear combined with leather cushions. I'm reasonably sure that this will be light and strong.

We only need comfort testing, but I think the flip-side would be that womens shoes would cost upward of $200-$300 equivalent. I don't know if there's a market for that.

I walked through Nordstrom's the other day, randomly picked up a shoe and the price tag was $750.

WOW! I am so out of touch with these high end shoe prices. Suddenly, my idea doesn't seem that far-fetched after all. Except, I know of not many women who'd like the carbon fibre look. I guess, designer labels...

$750 isn't particularly expensive on the upper end.

This doesn't apply just to shoes, btw. There is a broad luxury market for almost anything. Don't believe me? Visit a western wear store sometime.

That's the thing with Veblen goods. At some point, they go from being the means to an end to being an end themselves.

I would think when you are spending ++$ to look fashionable, you really don't want the shoes to last. Wearing three year old 'fashionable' shoes would sort miss the point, no?

I think you've unknowingly nailed the problem. Unlike men, womens' fashion moves at a very rapid pace. So for long term, it'd be more prudent to buy something timeless rather than the current trend.

There are plenty of poor quality men's shoes. Go to H&M or any similar "fashionable" retailer and pick up some low cost shoes. They'll have terrible thin rubber soles and fall apart within weeks.

Similarly, there are plenty of high quality women's shoes.

I'd probably agree that more men buy high quality shoes. In my experience men on average tend to put less emphasis on style over function, and so that does inevitably lead to functional (well made) shoes.

Though the shoes at H&M (in particular) are at least really cheap.

Men usually have fewer shoes than women. Some men can get away with 2 pairs: dress shoes and daily wear. --I used to be that way, until I started working out and then was cajoled into diversifying a bit. But even today I have one pair that gets used probably 75%+ of the time, and they're definitely of higher quality than a lot of shoes I see people wearing.

I see multiple comments from men here about how women they know buy impractical clothing and shoes that are poorly made and don't last well. I'm happy to report that whatever the general pattern is, there are happy exceptions. Some women I know (for example my wife) and some girls I know (for example my daughter) seek out clothing and shoes that are well made and hold up to heavy use in outdoor exercise. Just the other day, my wife asked for advice among a Facebook private group of mutual friends about good garments to wear while bicycling that are also suitable business wear for teaching piano lessons (her occupation). She loves to bike to the homes of clients (her preferred location for delivering lessons) whenever she can, year-round. She invented her own outfit built out of clothing items she already had after receiving advice from friends to "buy [Brand X]" or "buy [Brand Y]." She takes a hacker's approach to clothing and fashion, and tests the boundaries of what is possible with the resources and constraints that she likes.

We both like taking walks or bicycle rides together. I ask her for advice about shoes for both purposes.

P.S. When I lived in Seattle in the very early 1990s, I was told that Nordstrom's was known as "Rent-a-Shoe," because the generous return policy at that department store meant that a woman could buy a pair of shoes to attend a fashionable party, wear the shoes just once, and then return them without hassle to the store. I don't know what current policies are at Nordstrom's, but it does seem that fashionable shoes for occasional use have long been a mainstay of the store's business.

It's also worth pointing out that many men make their decisions on factors other than comfort. I'm currently wearing some Cons that are falling apart only a year after I bought them, and I've probably only worn them 1/3 of the time I've had them. I get blisters if I walk too far, they're a pain to take on and off, but they look awesome and I'll probably be getting another pair.

>I get blisters if I walk too far, they're a pain to take on and off, but they look awesome and I'll probably be getting another pair.

To each is his own, but the runner in me can't help but think "Those poor feet..." :(

Well, part of the reason I got them and part of the reason they're hurting my feet is that they are completely flat soled, with almost no cushioning. I'm transitioning quite well to a mid-step gait when walking, and eventually I want to be running mid-step or on the ball, rather than toe to heel.

If those are the Chuck Taylor model Converse, then I'm not surprised that your feet hurt. I don't know how hoops players wore those back in the day.

I scanned the thread and surprised no one mentioned the reason I use Zappos so much:

Free returns.

When buying a new model of shoe, I order at least 2, sometimes up to 4 different sizes. Try them all on, then sent back the ones that didn't fit. This has a few downsides: slight hassle of printing shipping labels and dropping off at UPS, as well as the capital outlay of paying for all those shoes. But to me, this is so vastly preferable to dragging myself to a mall or a department store that it's not even a contest.

I wouldn't recommend this for higher end shoes however, anything above $150. Both because then the capital requirements start getting onerous, and because fitting (at least for men's shoes) becomes such a crucial component you may go through more pairs before you decide than a single credit card can likely afford on Zappos :>

Used to love the 993, but now I've switched to the Pearl Izumi for running, which I discovered through Zappos and their awesome return policy. Watching my wife goes through the Zappos process, and being an overall internet hermit, made me want to try it out.

I bought four pairs of shoes in what seemed like the best size and width for me (there is good information about brand size trends on their site), got them the next day and tried them on, decided on the Izumis and sent the others back with the UPS shipping tag they gave me.

I understand things are different now, but that was an excellent buying experience. I've never bought running shoes from a local store since.

I really prefer the NB 856.

I've never found Zappos to have particularly good selection of the shoes I buy (men's dress shoes, boots of various kinds, etc). They're particularly bad for boots. Their main focus seems low to mid range female shoes.

A good pair of men's dress shoes or boots should last for several years. Hell, a good pair of boots should last decades for most people. Low to mid range female shoes won't last more than a few months. It definitely makes good sense to focus on selling low to mid range female shoes when your primary concern is volume.

They do have a sub-website that caters to the high-end market. It might fill your requirements better?

http://couture.zappos.com/

Wow, that is better (I didn't know about it, thanks).

Makes a certain amount of sense; boots are heavy and thus expensive to ship. Since they offer free shipping both outbound and return, that would eat directly into their bottom line. Particularly if the average customer buys and returns multiple pairs before finally settling on one.

I wouldn't be surprised if there are certain types or models of footwear that are completely off-limits due to their business model.

The best running shoes are the ones that suit your gait, it is definitely worth going to a reputable store (e.g. Runner's Need here in the UK) and having gait analysis done. It's free, but because I'm a decent bloke I would never get their recommendation then buy it online, I buy it in the store.

I would buy the shoes in the store then. But if I liked the shoes, a year later I might buy an identical replacement pair off Zappos instead of returning to the store.

Then I'm definetly a exception for a man. I buy most of my clothes because they look good. And if they aren't really comfortable or break down after a year than be it. Exceptions are sports and outdoor equipment, but again if the don't look good for me, no way I will ever wear them.

I still have to try them on so in order to judge all that.

As far as Amazon's same-day delivery is concerned, i guess it is as much warehouse / picking speed and efficiency as it is to have the right transportation partner. In germany they are aoing with DHL, now a post susidiery. And the german postal service always had over-night next day delivery for letters within germany.

But if they can really pull it off, it would be amazing!

30 years ago, I used to buy running shoes by mail order. Asics had outstanding quality control--I at least once bought a pair of Excalibur GTs the night before a marathon, and ran it in them with no discomfort (attributable to the shoes, that is). So a couple of times, I sent my check off to a place in Cumberland, MD, and got back a package with running shoes. I'm not sure why I quit doing this, unless it was that Asics discontinued the model.

That's why their super easy returns policy is essential. You order shoes, you try them on, you return them. It's not quite as easy as a trip to the store, but it's pretty simple.

Cruel Shoes (http://www.aj.cz/celeb/sm3/sm3.htm)