Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I wanted some good-quality, British-made boots for the winter. Morlands, the sheepskin boots that used to warm the feet of fighter pilots, are now apparently made in China - not that their website, which talks a lot about their heritage and use of traditional methods, tells you this. I'm told Doc Martens are now made in Indonesia, which may explain why the last few pairs I tried felt skimpier.


There used to be a world-class shoe industry in this country. If you want good-quality boots that are made in Britain and you can't afford bespoke, where do you go? Are traditional brands now just selling the idea of what they used to produce?


In the 80s shops like Church's, McAfee and Wildsmith sold similar shoes for both sexes. I suspect there are now more options for men than for women. Very disgruntled.

ARM only design the chips and license the designs, they don't manufacture anything. (IP is nothing to be sniffed at, but if you want something physically made here, you'll have to look elsewhere).


All the things I can think of that are still made in UK have an image of "Britishness" which is key to the brand.


Cars - Bentley, Mini, Aston Martin, Rolls Royce, Jaguar, Land Rover (of course all foreign owned)

Guitar amps - Marshall, Orange

Bikes - Brompton, Pashley

Having been through all the shoe sites, it looks like hardly anyone's making decent quality shoes for women in this country, just for men. How are women supposed to break through the glass ceiling when they're wearing cr@p shoes all day? Has no one any idea how exhausting it is wearing shoes that are hard on your feet with no protection but a pair of tights, which probably haven't been made here either? Never mind ten years of stripper heels that you can't wear without causing actual damage to your feet and your achilles tendon. Really cross now.
Can I just say this is a great/timely thread. Having snapped the heel off a much loved work/court shoe yesterday, I was wondering where best to replace it with something that doesn't have a stripper heel (as put above) but isn't a boring plain black shoe and Van Dal looks like a pretty good option for me. Will report back.

I think Hotter has a shop in Kingston. I dismissed them because they seemed cheap quality - which makes me wonder whether this is part of the problem, that other countries make things not only more cheaply but better. Perhaps I'll revisit it now I know they're made in this country.


As someone said earlier, it does seem like our thriving brands have a cast of 'British heritage' to them, which may be what the export market wants now that this country seems to be little more than a theme park for rich tourists. (Oh dear, make her a nice cup of tea, someone.)


I've emailed Solovair to ask if they might be thinking of adding any female styles or colours to their range as at the moment it's the basic Doc Martens styles and mostly men's sizes.


For warm boots I think Drapers (www.draper-of-glastonbury.com) and Celtic (www.celticandco.co.uk/footwear/womens-footwear/sheepskin-boots) may have some possibilities. I shall investigate further. I feel a crusade coming on.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Because they have been awful - scoring own-goal after own-goal. You cannot be an apologist for their diabolical first 100 days on the basis that the previous lot were worse - in the same way the whole of the 14 years of Tory rule was tarred with the brush of despair about their very worst behaviour in the latter years Labour run the risk of their government being tarred with the same brush on the basis of their first 100 days. It has probably been some of the worst 100 days of any new government and Starmer's approval ratings aren't as low as they are without reason. You know they are in trouble when MPs start posting the good bits from their first 100 days - it's a sure sign they know they have a problem. And when this government have a problem the frontbenchers disappear from media interviews and they roll-out the likes of Pat McFadden to provide some air cover. Yesterday it was farmers. Today it is the pensioners being pushed into poverty by Winter Fuel payments. It's a perceptual disaster and has been since day 1 - they have to get a grip on it else this leadership team is doomed. You highlight the very problem here. Farmers are not being gifted money. They are being gifted assets. Assets that they don't realise as they continue to work those assets to provide food for the country. Most inheritance is cash or an asset (a house) that people sell to generate cash. Passing a farm to younger family members is very different. On the news they interviewed a farmer whose family had owned the farm since 1822 and he broke down in tears when he spoke about his 13 year old son who was working in the farm to continue it - no doubt in the realisation that his son would be hit by a tax bill when he took it over. Given farmers are not cash rich then the decision would likely be that they would need to sell some of the land that generations had worked hard to build to fund the tax bill - and so many farms are on a knife's edge that it might be enough to send them over the edge.   There are many valid reasons why the government are doing what they are doing but those reasons are not cutting through and they are losing control of the narrative. That is a massive issue for them.  
    • Another great job by Simmonds Plastering. This time he decorated the newly plastered living room and added a pantry cupboard in kitchen.  He is reliable and works really hard.  Highly recommend 07949 180 533
    • Because land has been exempt from inheritance tax wealthy individuals (like Clarkson and Dyson) have used it as a tax avoidance measure. Clarkson is on the record stating that he bought land for precisely this purpose. It is people like him who farmers should be angry with, if anyone, because they have exploited a loophole, which is now being (partially) closed. Yes, I do grasp the concept of inheritance - it's were one is given money, or valuable assets by chance of birth (having done nothing to earn it). As money you have earned, is taxed, it seems odd that money you have not, shouldn't be. I assume you don't disapprove of income tax? Why do you think people coming into a massive, unearned windfall shouldn't pay tax, but a nurse who works hard for everything they earn, should? Everyone has to pay inheritance tax over a certain threshold. In my opinion, if you are fortunate enough to be gifted any amount of money (whether cash, or a valuable asset), to quibble about paying some tax on some of it, seems rather entitled. Most farms worth under £3m will still end up being passed on tax free. Those that do have to a pay inheritance tax will do so at just 20% on that part of it that is over the threshold (rather than the standard 40%), and they'll have 10 years to do so (usually it is payable immediately). So it is still preferential terms for those being gifted a multimillion pound estate. 
    • Ah yes, good spot! Thanks for the link. It sounds like they are planning a licensed restaurant with a small bar from reading through the application. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...