Jump to content

Sign in to follow this  
KneeBooted

Jeffrey Campbell has lit a fuse... <3

Recommended Posts

In case you all have not yet seen this, the shoe brand Jeffrey Campbell has updated their website and instagram with an advertisement for an ankle boot that’s available in US women’s sizes 12-14.

That in and of itself is wonderful news, but I just looooove the way they chose to  advertise it!

15C44F4F-1D87-4D10-B340-0FE798E5487E.jpeg

  • Like 5

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That’s quite interesting and the guy wearing it looks like a normal guy. It will be interesting to see how the new boots sell - and to whom

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The comments are overwhelmingly positive.  The comments create social proof which helps drive sales.  If one treats the comments as a future signal for sales, sales will be healthy.

 

Edited by kneehighs
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For our friends in the USA they are in stock and the price isn't outrageous at $130: https://jeffreycampbellshoes.com/collections/ankle/products/alarm?variant=29550383464513

I wonder why they have put all their larger sizes as a separate entries in the online catalogue. Rather than just including them in the main listings for those styles.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well now, that's sure interesting! Certainly a positive looking image.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In my honest opinion, this means nothing or almost nothing. To me this is just a clever way of saying "we're making larger sizes... so large than men can fit in them".
A woman in the picture wouldn't grab much attention. A man, completely different. Would be like "A man wearing women's boots? Let me click, let me check this one. Oh... larger sizes. Great!".
It's still good, don't take me wrong but if we go through Jeffrey Campbell's Instagram feed, we'll see pictures of different body shapes and at least another man besides this one from the post. All in all, to me, it's just another one, another picture, another pair of boots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I've generally liked JC's heels - mostly a chunky look, but not too way out. Would be interesting to see where this goes. Are these being sold as MEN's heels, or "standard" women's? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're being modelled by a man in that photo. Which is much more eye catching than the photo of a woman next to it. But they are being sold in US women's sizes.

https://jeffreycampbellshoes.com/

3 versions: https://jeffreycampbellshoes.com/collections/extended-sizes

Many of JC's other styles go up to USW11 (approx EU43, UK9) and a few to USW12. There are lots of photos of JC Lita platform boots being worn by men if you look around the net. Including some here at HHP.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Exactly @at9. Exactly what I meant on my previous post.

I couldn't find any reference to "women's shoes" in their website, which is great. They don't make shoes for women. They make them for people. From their mission statement (
https://jeffreycampbellshoes.com/pages/about-us): J.C. strives to reflect the beauty in all body types, ages, ethnicities and genders. (They don't mention "sex" but that's another story).
Here in Europe (I've never seen it) we don't have sizes for man or for women. It goes from 34 to 46, for instance. Now, in US, it kind of makes sense to advertise them with women's sizes. Most of their customers are women anyway.

They will not advertise heels for men. That would go against their mission statement.

I own a pair of J.C. Legion 1 btw. And they are great. I've been to Paris a couple of weeks ago together with my gf. We were both rocking those boots. First day, 5km. 2nd day, 8km :)

 

 

Edited by Biostim
  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Biostim said:

J.C. strives to reflect the beauty in all body types, ages, ethnicities and genders. (They don't mention "sex" but that's another story).

Great find.  I wonder how long it's been phrased with those exact words.   

It's in tandem with the current trend towards non-binary inclusivity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using High Heel Place, you agree to our Terms of Use.