Lex2

A "bespoke" store.

http://www.levistrauss.com/levi-s-brand-opens-bespoke-two-story-store-amsterdam-s-busiest-shopping-street

Anyone had a chance to visit yet? Church benches and old steel pipes and bikes. No mention of vintage clothing, though.

Considering that Levi's has even got their patches wrong in some past reissues it would be somewhat of a stretch to expect that they would get the fit right going from one season to the next.

i recently picked up a Levi's oxford type shirt, with "native' type colored stitching throughout the shirt, and was made in Portugal, seems consistent with other company's made in Portugal shirts, any information?

Probably the same contractor/source. At last count Levi's procured inventory from over 30 different countries. But being prudent operaters none of these countries accounts for more than 20% of their supply. But as far as I know they don't own or lease any manufacturing facilities in Portugal, so probably third party.

When I posted the information on fabric weight of Levi's, I meant to include the source which is 501: The Evolution of the Jean by Lynn Downey, published by Levi Strauss (2008) pp. 16-21. (The previous post has been edited.) I certainly have no first hand knowledge of fabric weight from handling vintage jeans. The information in the book could be wrong, but unless someone has very extensive experience with vintage jeans from the World War II era, I would tend to trust this source.

Good book, incidentally out of print, though I did see one "Like New " on Ebay a couple of days ago retailing for 30 bucks.

it's used in skull's - s5010xx 6x6 @ $289.

It also probably depends on exactly how much pima fill they used. Their webpage mentions a blend of some sort, but are not very specific about it.

Marbling seems to be characteristic of older denim, and gives them a lot of their character. I guess it's a matter of personal taste, considering some companies even go out of their way to marble denim. Not sure if "fabrics made in the old way" were "woven gently on the slower looms", though. Sounds like a bit of marketing-speak there. If I wanted low tension I'd get some jeans in broken twill selvage.

Yearly revenue for Nudies is probably somewhere above 50 million US dollars at the moment (if not more). As a whole Levi's makes about 4 billion a year in revenue, of which 80% comes from the Levi's Global Brand (i.e. excluding Dockers and Signature/Denizen). That's 3.2 billion just from sales of Levi's apparel alone (Walmart, Kohls, JC Penney, specialty stores, you name it). Assuming Levi's Premium makes about a fifth of what Nudies makes a year (being very optimistic here) that's still less than a percent of their overall business revenue. In short, Levi's Vintage/M&C are probably of little consequence to their financial performance. As a matter of fact I am actually impressed that they're still bothering to market such a line of clothing.

Well, since it is perfectly true, I don't think it can be correct to say that it's 90% marketing. And I don't understand the logic of saying "Never mind that raw/dry jeans have been around for over a hundred years,…" Yes they have and people have adopted some exotic strategies to make them look how they want. Waiting six months before washing would have been a difficult path to take in 1955 -- 1972 since Levis came with so much starch that they would have been impossible to wear. Don't put all that starch in and suddenly not washing for 6 months becomes feasible. This is not some marketing conspiracy — it is a way to get the kind of jeans that many people want. Not all, but many.

You're correct, but I was actually referring to a more recent timeframe, i.e. 1999, when Nudies first came out, people were already customising their sanforized/dry denim before the aggressive Nudies marketing, albeit in a low key manner. I was probably overstating the marketing, but I hope not my much. Although they make a good pair of jeans, I would rate their products as average relative to similar competition, except for maybe the greycast and veggie indigo Ralfs that came out a couple of years ago. Nudies is privately owned, so it'd be difficult to estimate exactly how much they've spent on marketing in the early years, but I would assume that it would have been quite significant, and this I attribute to the fact that they've reached a global audience in quite a short period of time.

i hope this perspective isn't lost on levi's. sometimes I think it is when i see selvedge products like low-buck stf's (sup j crew) and "global blues" in their stores. while lvc is self-limited to repros of basically the early eras of mass production, they do have an extremely devoted and interested customer base in our niche. it would be wise of them to address their issues within our market. i could see xx, in terms of denim, successfully broadening out into heavy ounce plays on the vintage to reach more of us. like, really nice shit in the post-revival vein.

I totally agree they could never compete with shit like lucky or serfontaine. that "premium" denim market is founded on a very aggressive status symbol mentality, rooted in visual recognition of how much money a person paid for their clothes. even the very use of "premium" selvedge fabric by these companies is a marketed and "synergized" visual cue. the levi's workwear history and ethos just doesn't jive with it. it's too deep in people's perceptions.

I think a company like Nudies has shown that the entire workwear/rockwear ethos can jibe with the status-defined premium market, though it's probably more the former than the latter. It was a stroke of genius to be able to get people to buy a pair of Regular Ralfs, and then insist that they not be washed for 6 months. Never mind that raw/dry jeans have been around for over a hundred years, but it took some adroit marketing to be able to sell that "jeans can bleed" mindset. It's 90% innovative marketing, but if it contributes to the bottom line it cannot be all that bad. Other startups have not been as successful, even with some great products. A great example is 5ep - so much potential, but too little, and too late. Their low down bootcut jeans are still some of the best I've ever purchased, bar none. Ditto Rag and Bone, though they're still in the premium streetwear business. UNIQLO has shown that selvage offerings can have mass market appeal, without the aesthetics of higher end designs. Coupled with their extensive distributorships in Asia, they've also been partly responsible for declining Levi's sales in Japan and most of the region. It's a cut throat business to be in at the moment, judging from the independent companies that have come and gone since about the year 2000. It would be interesting to see how Denizen fares in Asia, since they've put in a lot of capital in this new brand to reach out to an expanding Asian middle class.

lex--interesting observation. i only care about lvc and a little bit about m&c. if they want to create another "premium" line that focuses on women to close the gap in that billion dollar market, fine, whatever. they could have done that without doing a 180 on the levis xx tip. as far as i know levis xx was their premium (or "elevated") line, for both men and women. from the looks of things, they basically said, "hey thanks for your time but this little experiment/soiree is over" before they even had enough time to develop/market/generate interest. it's the fast money, aggressive approach to business. to the nerds like us (pocket change to them) and the levis xx folk (expendable), it comes across as a "f*ck you very much-- this isn't going to bring us money now". this approach sometimes works, but for a brand that touts its heritage and tradition, it looks like floundering incompetence and impatience. i'm not sure what dissolving the "independent, creative, entity" accomplished except to save some short term cash. i'll reserve total condemnation of levis until more info about the future of lvc trickles out.

It's probably still too early to tell as you said, but my guess is that we'll see more LVC being sold in their mainstream stores over the next year or so, but not necessarily all the models in the current line up. Notice that I used the word "mainstream" since even Levi's thinks that the market for premium selvage products has matured. It is an irony that they made the last selvage 501s around the early eighties but it took a whole slew of independent manufacturers (including Japanese ones) to revive old shuttle loom denim and made it "premium." Talk about a real 180. But who could have foreseen this? Not even Levi's. I don't have any statistics for the global premium selvage market (almost exclusively all menswear) but I would think that it would be quite sizeable. Again it boils down to what one defines as premium - selvage is just a subset of that category. There's a whole slew of other categories and womenswear would be a large chunk of that. Unfortunately Levi's missed the boat on that one, busy as they are contemplating competition from vertical integrated companies like Gap and the rest.

But look at the bright side. If they were publicly listed on Wall Street that would probably be the death knell for LVC.

thanks no-svg and groove...

it's simply because of the antifit. 47 is slimmer than 44 or 55. my friend picked it up for me at lvc sample sale, he thought that 47 is the most flattering fit for women though i also wanted 201 (i always wanna try suspenders ). oh well, i was not there but i was lucky enough that my friend still got a pair for me.

Good choice of jeans, kayodic. It does look very good on you. I would certainly recommend the 201 as well (if you can find a pair that is). But if you want to try suspenders there are also some (non Levi's) selvage options which you may want to check out.

the issues definitely start at the top-- with leadership. the way i see it, they could have attempted to tackle the competition/market issues either way: 1) they could have left things the way they were and still tried to incorporate the premium products into their main line or 2) do what they just did. it's fair to argue that levis xx should never have been a "separate" (i.e. based in europe) entity in the first place, but by choosing the latter road, levis just looks like f*cking morons by wasting a lot of people's time and resources over the course of a few years. to me, it just appears to be like a lack of cohesive vision from the leadership, which is nothing new for large companies, esp. levis.

With regards to management one major issue is that they've had a pretty high turnover of senior level executives in the past three to four years. The last time I checked three in the senior management team were relatively new (appointed late 2010), and they were responsible for global Levi's, Dockers, and Denizen brands. I think two or three of the board members were relatively recent additions as well. If they cannot even retain good staff at the senior executive levels then it doesn't bode well for the long term, particularly in terms of trying to grow the business and implementing long term goals. And I don't believe they've even figured out who they are trying to compete with, and are trying to be all things to all the people. That fact, coupled with a debt of about 2 billion dollars as of last year, adds a lot of pressure to add more revenue to service that debt. And these days with the economic downturn access to capital is getting more and more difficult, so I can understand why they're trying to consolidate in order to service that debt at the expense of lower income. Unfortunately the apparel industry has a low barrier of entry and you see a lot more efficient players in the market who are turning out great products at a much lower cost, without the associated historical baggage that Levi's has (for better or for worse).

If we're talking premium, they've got a long way to go. Menswear account for about 70% of their sales, which means a small percentage of the remaining 30% would be "premium" womenswear. I remember reading that this niche market accounts for about two billion dollars in sales in North America, which really means that Levi's is way behind in this segment, considering that they only make about four billion a year in revenue (Dockers, Red Tab, Denizen, and Premium combined). A market lead squandered since about the mid eighties, when they made over 7 billion a year in revenue. Again, what's in a name? Most girls I've asked wouldn't be caught dead wearing Levi's, be it premium or otherwise. Best thing to do is perhaps spin off another line under a totally different name, or focus on their core market and ignore premium altogether.

I don't believe it would dilute anything. They've got far bigger issues to think about, like grow the Denizen business; leverage their full distributorship (including marketing the vintage line); and try to catch up with the competition. I doubt premium selvage reissues would really impact the bottom line very much compared to the more mainstream pants (both Dockers and Red Tab). When Levi's thinks premium they're probably trying to compete with the likes of 7 for all mankind and other similar brands who seem to have gained a foothold in the two billion plus "premium" market.

If they can't keep up with demand, then that is a "good" problem to try and solve. Premium jeans are a pretty well defined market, as compared to their standard offerings which is more mainstream. Any surge in demand will probably come from the Asia Pacific region, which traditionally has not been a "big" premium market for Levi's and where local (Japanese, etc) brands have a much bigger foothold. Even a country like Indonesia, for instance, has started to market quality locally made premium/selvage products through brands like Old Blue.

Fact of the matter is, though it inspires a lot of brand loyalty, their very name is an Achilles heel, i.e. forever associated with (working class) blue jeans. They made many attempts to diversify primarily in the 80s but at the expense of core products. Also women's wear has never historically been a strong focus and not a market they've been traditionally identified with, coupled with competition from the likes of 7 For All Mankind and their ilk. Now that is one huge market.

This is Levis moving with the times, but in the end it's all about the bottom line, but the next year or so will tell if this was short sighted or the right decision. To have a separate division to develop and market their "premium" line probably doesn't make sense now that they've built the foundation for -- if you ignore the history and pedigree of the brand for a minute -- a line of jeans that competes with other selvage offerings in the mostly indie market. I think this move will bring more market penetration, if what they are saying is true, i.e. market premium products in their more ubiquitous LVC stores. (Which I've found in small cities as remote as southwest Borneo).

Christ, these jeans are thick. The first couple of days would be like recovering from botox surgery.

Hi Maynard — I'm looking for a 36" waist raw that will shrink down to a 34-ish.

These guys have some deadstock but unfortunately only 34" before shrinkage.

http://www.aeroleatherclothing.com/product-detail.php?id=139

I'd wear them and sit in a bathtub for an hour or two.

WPL stands for the Wool Products Labeling registration number issued as far back as 1939 based on the Wool Products Labeling act.. Nowadays it has been superseeded by an RN number. Every textile company manufacturing US made goods is issued an RN or WPL number, and for Levi Strauss it is WPL 423. The moniker "wool" is just historical, I doubt Levis makes a lot of wool products anymore.

Another one from the Dept. of Useless Information.

Offset belt loops are not really a characteristic feature. Some jeans from the Fifties to mid 60s had offsets while some didn't. Most pre-War jeans had left offsets while it was the other way round for post-War jeans. Generally speaking, that is. Some post War jeans had left offsets as well. It's generally hit or miss. If they had machines that could sew through the thick fabric at the back, they would centre the belt loop. If it meant too may broken needles, they would offset.

The closest thing I've seen to that Lot no is 501-0117 on a '66 Levis.

Interesting (Clapton being a fan). A 1960s arcuate on a 201 seems a bit extreme. Do you know if they used a single prong or two prong buckle back on the reissue?

Edited by Lex2 on Dec 12, 2005 at 03:11 PM

Quote:

I think you might have seen that mentioned in a book called Denim. The 502 replica was a Japan-only reissue, using denim from Kurabo - at the time, Cone's looms were still down in the basement. Somewhere I have the names of the guys who oversaw the reissue.

The '201 reissue' was apparently fairly close to a 1937 501. The real thing would have had a linen patch, and different (I would say nicer) denim - very slubby... it's what they used as the insipration for the look of the Red range that inspired Type 1.

--- Original message by Paul T on Dec 12, 2005 02:37 PM

I have always been perplexed about the 201 re-issue, the fact that it was so close to a '37 501 but was given a 201 XX Lot no. Being the budget version, the real 201 probably would have had a 9 oz weight, but by 1915 the Amoskeag Mill had ceased production for Levis, so synthetic indigo Cone Mill fabrics must have been used as well. I am not sure if the denim is actually all that different to a 501, though. When you say "nice", "very slubby" denim are you generally referring to the stuff Cone Mills (or Amoskeag, natural indigo) was supplying to Levis during the time?

Edited by Lex2 on Dec 12, 2005 at 02:55 PM

Actually that was a 501 re-issued as a Lot 201xx. Classic cinchback, with suspender buttons removed, and hidden back pockets, i.e. the '37 501. And yes, a leather patch instead of a cloth patch.

Subsequent (not all) '47 repros had double sided tabs as well.

I checked my references this afternoon and it is mentioned of a 502 replica issued by Levis Strauss in Japan in 1987, predating even the Capital E issue in 1992. I have never seen such jeans, though, nor was I able to get more information on it. I believe that was the first re-issue of a pair of jeans in the Levis stable.

Edited by Lex2 on Dec 12, 2005 at 02:30 PM

Just to chip in. There seems to be a belief that shuttle loom denim is "superior" in quality to wide loom denim, certainly among many (usually self-assured) cognoscenti of high end jeans. There are examples of poorer quality shuttle loom fabric as well, from the likes of manufacturers like Kurabo, for instance. Most of these big suppliers sell at different price points, from barely "passable" selvage denim to top of the range wide loom fabric. The skills and resources required to produce shuttle loom denim can be significant, but that does not by itself guarantee that the finished product will be superior in all respects to the wide loom equivalent selling at the same price point. Rest assured the adage that you get what you pay for applies to denim as well.

As for the comment about Martelli, I believe Adriano Goldschmied spearheaded the whole pre-washed/pre-distressed movement, in conjunction with Martelli. In fact AG was so successful that his team went on to design Gap's 1969 range as well.

Edited by Lex2 on Dec 12, 2005 at 12:39 PM