Ralph Lauren Service Part 2: The Alterations

My after-sales experience at Ralph Lauren didn’t end with the description in the previous post. It got better, again through a mixture of good service and luck.

As with the previous suit, this one would need altering in one or two places. In the waist of the jacket, as I am slim compared to my chest breadth, and in the length of the sleeves, as jacket sleeves are always an inch too long for me (again, see recent post).

RL does all these alterations very reasonably in-house, and I would recommend anyone who buys a suit there to have it altered in one or two places (indeed, do this anywhere if it is economical enough).

As this was a Black Label suit, I was recommended to go for a 42-inch chest rather than a 40 – the Black Label suits are cut slimmer generally and therefore the size above is recommended. This would mean that the trousers would also need taking in a little (Black Label suits have a seven-inch drop rather than the standard six, but they would still be too big).

I was resigned to paying for one more alteration than previously. But as I was going to be measured, Gregor (the aforementioned senior assistant) said RL would “swallow the costs of the alterations” as I had already paid for alterations on the first suit. So that £50 earned through finding a suit at a greater discount was all mine.

But as with the first episode, there was one more kick of good luck. Rather than a sales assistant measure me for the alterations, as had happened previously, it would be done this time by the in-house tailor, Jaan. Just because he happened to be there.

Jaan insisted in taking half an inch off each shoulder. That would mean taking the sleeves off, adjusting the width of the wool and its padding, and reattaching the sleeves. A better fit, more expensive, but then Ralph was paying. So now I need a second fitting, once the shoulders have been done, to adjust the sleeves, waist and trousers. It’s a week more of suit-related excitement and anticipation, in total, all for the princely sum of minus £50.

Unfortunate footnote: The jacket of my old suit will be destroyed as part of the exchange. Apparently they “put a knife right through the back of it”. This is a real shame, given there is nothing wrong with the jacket, and it has been altered to my specifications. No one else will want it, but I do.

But it seems it is unavoidable. The store needs something to put against the cost of the new suit. Yet I can’t help feeling that if this were a local tailor rather than a worldwide conglomerate, I would be able to buy the jacket back for some small sum. With this policy, everybody loses.  It’s a waste to stab the thing in the back.

Good After-Sales Service at Ralph Lauren

The crotch on these trousers seems to be wearing through. That’s not good – I’ve only had them for nine months and worn them 15 times or so.

Grey flannel, too. You wouldn’t expect thicker material like that to wear through so fast. Indeed, I remember the Ralph Lauren salesperson telling me that the thickness of the material meant they should last, and consequently the trousers could be worn on their own occasionally. I’ve got to be in the West End anyway tomorrow; I’ll take them in to the store and see what they say.

I was pleasantly surprised. The after-sales service I received in the Ralph Lauren flagship store on Bond Street was impressive. So impressive, indeed, that I thought it was worth writing about. After all, if anything is going to distinguish a designer boutique from RL, which consciously tries to emulate the best traditions of British menswear, it should be its service.

The first sales assistant directed me to the manager, Adam. That entailed a five-minute wait while Adam was located, but then I’ve never objected to five minutes browsing in RL on Bond Street – did you know they now make that cable-knit cashmere into throws and cushions? Lovely stuff.

Adam was considerate, understanding, and said I had two choices. Either I could try and have it repaired by a tailor (mine own or theirs) or I could have a credit note for the whole suit. As the suit was sold as one item, it would have to be returned as a whole.

The problem with a credit note was that it would be for the price I paid in the sales (around £600), whereas the full-priced suit would be more like £900. But a new suit in January is better than a holey suit now, so I took the credit note. Adam was conciliatory, friendly and helpful again, suggesting I should ask the menswear sales assistants what they could do.

Which was where it got exciting. Upstairs, there were still some of the summer suits on sale – on one rack, at the back on the left, rather less prominent than the new stock. The ever-helpful assistant Gregor proceeded to dig around in this rack and produced a better suit for less money. Now that’s service. It was a Black Label suit that had been reduced from £1100 to £550 by this point in the sale. Given that the suit being replaced was Polo, this was an upgrade. Fortune smiles on the blogger.

The £50 saved will probably go on alterations, but the result was still very satisfactory. Good after-sales service and a little luck produced a great day of shopping, for free.

The Rules and How to Break Them. No.2

Rule 2. Do not wear brown in town

It’s worth repeating my maxim from the first instalment in this series: “Rules are there for a reason, but there is nothing wrong with breaking them. These statements are not contradictory. Once you understand the rules, you can work out how to break them effectively.”

So, why does the rule ‘no brown in town’ exist? Because brown was the colour that a gentleman working in the city wore when he returned home, or on the weekend. During the week he wore black, blue or grey, all in suitably dark tones. Brown was the colour of the country, of tweed and felt hats; of shoes more than anything.

The colours of hats and shoes demonstrate this rule most effectively.

Shoes show how English the rule is. For decades other countries have worn shoes other than black for business without any implied lack of decency or formality. The Italians wore little other than brown, the French (though fairly conservative themselves) strayed into other colours, and the Americans developed a fondness for oxblood – as well as a love of brown in some areas.

But for the English, business meant black. They were therefore free to characterise anyone in brown shoes as off-duty, casual, and come up with a rhyming code like ‘no brown in town’ to remind anyone who was tempted to stray.

Hats show how practical the rule still is. Even today, most lovers of hats would say they do not wear a brown hat for business, sticking to blue and grey. In this slightly antiquated item of dress, therefore, the rule continues to be relevant, reminding people that they should treat business with the dignity it deserves (as the Austin Reed maxim goes).

However, the most important thing to realise about this rule is that it is out of date. Brown shoes, suits or jackets are no longer forbidden for business in England, or anywhere else. It is the spirit of the rule that is still relevant – wear business attire for business. In any office there will be items that would be considered unprofessional to wear. For some, that would be trainers, or jeans. In my office, unfortunately, the only thing that would probably be unacceptable would be shorts.

That is what the rule means, and understanding it allows you to break it intelligently. Wear brown, but make sure your attire is always and everywhere appropriate to the work you are doing.

I Want to Browse Your Brand

One wise old editor at my company is sceptical about websites. Whenever he gets into a discussion about redesigning, upgrading or reformulating a magazine’s site, he always asks “do you really want a website?” This is, of course, a rhetorical question; it does not expect a response. It is therefore quickly followed by a similar question: “Why do you want a website?”

If the first question befuddles the colleague he is addressing, the second stops them dead. For the first answer seems obvious; the second has never really occurred to them.

Few magazine editors ask themselves why they want or need a website. And this leads to muddled approach when they put their magazine online. Fashion brands are no different.

Most brands’ websites will tell you where their shops are, how to contact them and give you a flavour of the collections. But often the collections are merely represented through advertising campaigns – which can be obscure to say the least. Kilgour is a good example: beautiful, shadowy images, but little clue as to what the clothes look like. An online shopping element has been added recently, but this is just accessories.

Some brands happily display their wares, attractively photographer, but stop there. Many of the classic shoemakers do this. Edward Green, for example, will take you through a small number of shoe models. But there is little beyond a short biography to give you a sense of what Edward Green is or what it stands for.

You may argue that this suits Edward Green – simple, modest. But even a display of the major lasts, or of the elements of shoe quality, would help (both of which you have been able to get at various times as leaflets in the shop). And luxury brands suffer from the same problem – Dunhill.com is dull, pedestrian, communicating nothing of its rich history and philosophy to those shoppers who are not within easy reach of a store.

The fact is, a modern brand’s website needs both these things – stock and philosophy. Just like in a store, I need to be able to see the merchandise easily, attractively, and get a sense of the brand. The designers of luxury goods stores spend a lot of money making sure the décor, the staff, the mannequins and everything else in a shop tells the customer what this brand is, what it stands for.

Because they are just brands. More and more today these companies are simply brands that one associates with a package of images, ideas and aspirations. To make them unique, to make sure people know the difference between Canali and Corneliani, to make sure they know why John Lobb shoes cost so much more than Gucci, to make sure no one thinks Sartoriani is a Savile Row tailor, each one has to differentiate in every way they can. And websites are one of the most important ways to do this – particularly today, when brands want to reach out to consumers scattered across the world.

You need to be able to browse a website, like you do a shop. Gucci is quite good, with videos and runway shows. But Hermes is the best in my opinion. Go to Hermes.com and click on the on-line boutique to brose products, or travel the world of Hermes to browse the brand. It makes Hermes seem unique, playful, luxurious. All brands need a site like this you can browse.

Problem Solved: Sweaters with Ties

Ok, here’s the problem. I like ties. Such is their ability to add an exciting dash of colour to an outfit, I prefer to wear one whenever possible. Yet sweaters have their advantages as well, and the two are hard to wear together.

Let me explain. If you wear a V-neck sweater with a shirt and tie, the back of the shirt’s collar is pulled forward, hugging the neck as its top button is fastened. The collar is at least an inch higher and probably half an inch closer to the neck that when that button is undone.

No V-neck sweater can cope adequately with both situations. Either it is bunched when your collar is undone, or (as is nearly always the case today) the sweater stands away from the collar when it is done up. So when you wear a sweater, shirt and tie, there is likely to be a gap, however slight, however variable, between your shirt collar and sweater at the back.

Some sweaters attempt to deal with this problem by adding a strip of felt to the inside of the back at the neck. Reiss often does this, even taking the effort to add a felt strip in a complementary colour. Unfortunately, it doesn’t really keep the sweater in place – rather like the rubber tabs that some tailors include in the inside of a trouser waistband.

Of course, a waistcoat wouldn’t have this problem, being both stiffer and tailored to fit a fastened collar. But that’s a different bias and a different argument.

If it’s sweaters you want, the key is a sweater with a collar. There are broadly three options (as illustrated by the three Ralph Lauren pictures opposite): the folded, shirt collar; the shawl collar; and the zip collar. I personally prefer the shirt collar, followed by the shawl. But this is largely a personal antipathy towards zipped sweaters born of some shoddy Gap varieties worn in my youth.

These collars solve the shirt/tie problem because they all have a greater rise at the back of the neck, avoiding any chance of a disconnection with the shirt.

I advocate the Ralph Lauren merino wool collared sweaters, which have only just been reintroduced for the fall/winter line this year. I bought one in a dark grey last year and found it so versatile and such good value that I looked for more. Unfortunately, they are not considered spring/summer items and so were put away until this month.

The other, secondary advantage of this look is that you can get away with some bold short/tie combinations, given that they only have a narrow triangle of wool to play in.

I quite liked the combination of a pink gingham shirt under a bright green tie (with red crests). It fizzed around the neck without any danger of overwhelming the outfit, thanks to the sombre grey surrounding it. A Paul Smith shirt decorated with small blue flowers also benefited from this limited exposure. Equally, one noticeable thing about Etro catwalk outfits is that many shirt/tie combinations look great under a sweater, but would look ridiculous worn on their own.