Leaderboard

Freddy: 1. Your revised comments on the '1969' brand are interesting, if understandably inconclusive - for now. It may be that the town in which these sellers are located is a centre of shoe-making, and/or that skilled artisans either flit between rival and neighbouring businesses or set up in opposition to them. Equally, as you suggest, there may be some sort of a business or family relationship between the businesses, past or present. Italy has clamped down on tax evasion in recent years (albeit mostly at a petty level - insisting in theory that an invoice is given for e.g. the purchase of an ice cream cornet!), but possibly a fragmented or divided business has (or had) some merit in avoiding or evading taxes or reducing financial exposure. The main thing is that the '1969' shoes (wherever obtained) appear to be well thought of by some recent purchasers, regardless of cost. One US customer (male and bearded) seems to have bought the 5.25" courts in a whole range of colours - and wears them outside in the company of his wife. Good luck to him! 2. If you think about it, an imaginary plumbline suspended from one's centre-of-gravity will not pass through the ankle(s) (or any other part of the legs/feet), however close together they are, but will lie on a vertical plane that passes through them. And the 'plumbline' will shift a little in relation to ankles/feet whenever one's (a) c-o-g changes slightly because one gains or loses weight (diet or becoming pregnant); or (b) 'upright stance' varies slightly, as no-one stands erect in a perfect and unchanging manner. But none of this really matters; we know when falling-over is likely and that shoe heels in different positions and/or of different heights will influence this.

It took me an age to find the relevant post on HHp. Right...... Regarding Sky-Scrapers, please read ALL of this >> clicky << Written almost 3 years ago, so things have changed a little. Now looks like Burlesque Blue has moved away from London too, at least the sales point has. Shame, as Southgate wasn't that far away, in fact it's closer than Islington. (And what was LSB many years ago.) I'm wondering who is actually making the shoes. The fellas I saw 30+ years ago were not young men then? "1969" .... Like the two (or more) who owned LSB, I think this might be one half of a broken partnership. A few years ago, I bought some boots from a reputable shoe/boot company in Italy. I knew them as "Renzi". Like some of those currently being sold on the '1969' label, these were a "buy a pair and we will ship the size you want" purchase. Their sales M.O. was to have the fixed price shoes and boots in the £300/£600 price range respectively, but to auction each type with starting money of (say) 99p. Of course these boots seldom went through the auction at less than £100, but they did sell at well below the fixed price boots on offer. I can't remember exactly what I paid, but with carriage it was a tad over £100. It all went through smoothly, with me even having a telephone conversation with a very helpful Italian lady. We agreed that since Italian sizing usually came up small, I should order an EU42. Sadly on my feet, they fitted more like an EU43. See back up the thread >> here <<. Plus, they were too high to wear anywhere but a bedroom. (And I don't wear my heels in the house at all.) And of course, they flapped around my skinny legs. As they are hand-made, I suppose I could have ordered a pair that were a bit more fitted, but I still wouldn't have been able to walk in them! I did think about just swapping them for a smaller size that might fit, but it seemed pointless as I couldn't wear them out. They were sold on. The buyer was pleased with them, especially as they had red soles. At the time there were two similar Italian made/sold companies, but with distinctly different styles. At the time, the heel shape of the other brand; "1969" wasn't as attractive as the Renzi heel. I don't remember them doing any low start auctions, but they may have. The Renzi's stopped being auctioned off, and for the most part (that I know of) their sales went to fixed priced only, at the prices I have indicated above. They changed their heel shape too, which to me, looked very unattractive. The heel is long and thin, making the wearers heel look bulbous. As discussed elsewhere, the purpose of the thinner heel maybe to give the illusion of a higher heel? It might work, but it dramatically changes the flow of the line apparent in silhouette. More wearable too, but not a style for me. At the time (3 years ago) the 1969 brand was of no interest, because of price and style. Having looked at both, I thought they shared the same address. They don't, but it's close. Same town, putting forward the idea of a broken partnership? Had it not been for reading the info about their courts and pricing on HHp, I wouldn't be aware of the style and price changes at 1969. So thanks for that. It looks like some of the new business expansion ideas toward 'glamour' clothing I used to see at "Renzi", has been included into the 1969 range. It also looks like 1969 brand is now using what was the redundant Renzi M.O. for achieving sales using the low start auction prices. Who knows? Certainly must be the case with these two businesses, that some sharing must be going on, even if it's only at staff level. But it's an easy (if wrong) conclusion, that these two outfits started life as a partnership - assuming they aren't still? I notice on the main auction site, the same UK business often has two or three trading names, with the same or close to, business address. In my mind, it's a way on convincing the buyer they are making a choice of supplier, when in fact there isn't one. Not that the two Italian makers seem to share exactly the same styles. I shall have to give both makers a good look, to see if there's anything there I might want. At money I can afford. P.S. After sourcing information for the post, and I thought completing it, I find there is a THIRD seller of high heels in the same town! This can't be a coincidence surely? The first and third company's must be almost neighbours? And the third company sells boots in the original Renzi style, but in colours other than black. More "innovation", from a son or daughter perhaps? Photo styles, background etc etc - all the same. Hard not to draw a conclusion they are a related business. Regarding the centre of gravity comment, it has me a little lost. The centring of gravity involves the Tibia and Fibula lining up with the ankle, and in a heel, will likely pass just behind the ball of the foot. The higher the heel, the closer to the ball this might occur. If the heel was at the centre of gravity, it would be all too easy to topple backwards surely? Though the further inboard (forward) the heel tip is, the shorter the "footprint", the easier a rolling motion for the foot and ankle while walking? This is likely important because unlike our natural flat-footed state, a heeled foot can't achieve the same rolling motion as it's effectively locked in the rear position. (Shape your foot would be in as it trailed you after the other leg made a forward stride.) This is entirely in keeping with a heel mechanically limiting rotation of the ankle and toe joints, that are usually used in walking 'naturally'. Of course if the heel tip was moved too far forward to support a centre of gravity position, as indicated in the last picture, the wearer would likely fall backwards - as has also been mentioned by Puffer.