Eastman (ELMC) Throws Their Hat in the J-100 Ring

[HPA Rep]

But honestly, when I buy a J-100, I want one which has got the Buco J-100 logo on there, no an ELMC. Otherwise I would have bought a Schott cafe racer instead for half the price.

I can appreciate your sentiments regarding the label, though it's clearly not as if Buco is making the item, so while appreciation of your sentiments is extended, and with all due respect, I really don't see what a label has to do with it. I hear the same thing regarding Sugar Cane 1947 jeans and LVC's; LVC may have the label, but those who know denim know Sugar Cane's are closer to the vintage '47's.

As for a Schott at half the price, you can alway buy less for less: there is no fair comparison between what Schott is producing and Eastman and other premium brands.

 

[Monitor]

I can appreciate your sentiments regarding the label, though it's clearly not as if Buco is making the item, so while appreciation of your sentiments is extended, and with all due respect, I really don't see what a label has to do with it.

If this jacket is indeed intended for a more... casual customers, I would assume that a label should be very important. Justhandguns is right. It's an increasingly popular design and people going to have to be able to look for the jacket somehow, and once, after very little research, they learn that the jacket's called Buco J-100, I'm willing to bet that it's the RMC version that's going to pop up every time, before the ELC one, regardless of what you type into the search bar. RMC owning the trademark is a huge deal in this case & let's not forget they also have the OTR deal.

No hate against ELC here, I'm deeply in love with some of their designs, but I still am not convinced this was the best way to go about it.

 

[ProteinNerd]

More quality jacket makers producing the same pattern competing for a relatively small market of consumers. How can that be a bad thing for us?
The more the merrier I say.

 

[Superfluous]

^ Amen

 

[nick123]

It doesn't have a shawl collar. Thank god.

 

[Monitor]

I whine because I want more styles, not just more jackets!

 

[HPA Rep]

If this jacket is indeed intended for a more... casual customers, I would assume that a label should be very important. Justhandguns is right. It's an increasingly popular design and people going to have to be able to look for the jacket somehow, and once, after very little research, they learn that the jacket's called Buco J-100, I'm willing to bet that it's the RMC version that's going to pop up every time, before the ELC one, regardless of what you type into the search bar. RMC owning the trademark is a huge deal in this case & let's not forget they also have the OTR deal.

No hate against ELC here, I'm deeply in love with some of their designs, but I still am not convinced this was the best way to go about it.

I certainly respect your differing views, I just don't agree with them, and your logic doesn't win me over at all. If the name and an owned trademark were that significant to the sales and success of premium goods such as this, then it would follow that all the other incarnations of the J-100 offered by the likes of Himel, Good Wear, etc., would be in their death throws. Further to this point, then Eastman's RAF jackets should be dead on arrival when going up against those bearing the Irvin name on the label since a little research will reveal Irvin is the originator of the design, so surely anyone buying that style will want their jacket made by the license holder of the name so they can proudly know and tout that their jacket is made by the originator. And as I related about jeans, Sugar Cane's 1947's should have long ago been put out of their misery in light of the originator of the style still actually making the product bearing the red tab with their name on it. But none of this has happened and the goods not bearing original names and/or trademarks are selling.

I think names matter more to the low-end buyer who is more readily persuaded by hype and such things and who doesn't actually do much research or, perhaps, care. Once you get in the price stratosphere of RMC and their Buco-labeled goods, the type of buyer being targeted will indeed do research and compare and learn, and some will surely be attracted to that name, while others will buy Himel, and Good Wear, and Diamond Dave, and they will buy ELMC. This isn't mass marketing we're dealing with at these prices; any of these makers, including RMC, are selling relatively few units and, depending on which makers, are happy to sell several dozen to several hundred pieces (and RMC may well be selling the most), and it's the Asian market that is at the heart of the buyers for a premium J-100 (and bearing the name).

I can tell you that if we sold 75 or so of this style in a year, we'd be very happy, and I'll bet if Eastman sells 175 combined wholesale and retail, they'll be very happy. That's all it takes for small operations to come out and be successful when they have so many other products to offer: selling 2, 500 - 3, 000 jackets or so of all kinds plus a litany of other items is what keeps us in business. You see, from my following of your logic, you just have not made a compelling argument in defense of your point.

 

[HPA Rep]

I whine because I want more styles, not just more jackets!

I want more styles, too! Let's collaborate and get some going ...

 

[pawineguy]

I whine because I want more styles, not just more jackets!

This is the bottom line for me... no criticism of Eastman, I am sure they will sell plenty on their good name and quality. Like Ivan, I would just like to see more companies pushing the design envelope, even if that only means resurrecting some of the vintage designs that have been neglected, like the Beck jackets, Brimaco, Brooks, etc... Or, as Thedi and Himel have done, creating designs that are "inspirations" of older jackets. I actually like the ELMC jacket lineup, both the Windward and Roadstar are nice designs.

It's a good thing that we are arguing about people bringing out new jackets, there has never been a better time to be buying leather.

 

[Superfluous]

Charles,

I cannot speak for the average repro J-100 buyer. On the other hand, as an OCD leather jacket addict, I personally value the presence of both a Buco label and, equally important, a Buco embossed snap on my RMC J-100. I commend RMC for going to the trouble of licensing the right to use the Buco name (even though the license may not be legally required). These are desirable finishing details. Are these details essential? Definitely not. Himel's jackets are all repros of vintage pieces, but do not incorporate repro labels, and I don't hold that against Dave. On the other had, it would be a nice touch if Himel's jackets incorporated repro labels. Repro labels add an additional connection to the original jacket. The owner need look no further than the label to know what vintage jacket served as the inspiration. In short, all other things being equal, I prefer repro labels (with the important caveat that the use of the label does not violate any intellectual property rights -- unauthorized repro labels are undesirable).

On a related subject, I dislike that Eastman has John Lofgren make their ELMC flannels, but Eastman uses their own label, devoid of any reference to Lofgren.

 

[HPA Rep]

Charles,

I cannot speak for the average repro J-100 buyer. On the other hand, as an OCD leather jacket addict, I personally value the presence of both a Buco label and, equally important, a Buco embossed snap on my RMC J-100. I commend RMC for going to the trouble of licensing the right to use the Buco name (even though the license may not be legally required). These are desirable finishing details. Are these details essential? Definitely not. Himel's jackets are all repros of vintage pieces, but do not incorporate repro labels, and I don't hold that against Dave. On the other had, it would be a nice touch if Himel's jackets incorporated repro labels. Repro labels add an additional connection to the original jacket. The owner need look no further than the label to know what vintage jacket served as the inspiration. In short, all other things being equal, I prefer repro labels (with the important caveat that the use of the label does not violate any intellectual property rights -- unauthorized repro labels are undesirable).

On a related subject, I dislike that Eastman has John Lofgren make their ELMC flannels, but Eastman uses their own label, devoid of any reference to Lofgren.

I don't dispute anything you've said and I find myself agreeing, for the most part. And you raised a very interesting point about licensing, which I find very prevalent among the Japanese making repro items. I believe that, for a variety of reasons, not the least being that Japan's TM laws are a bit different from that of the USA and EU (example: once you own the TM in JP, it's yours, and the first to use gets ownership, but usage of the TM forms the basis in the USA and EU, thus trumping first to use), the Japanese are very much inclined to purchase what amounts to worthless, unnecessary licenses. I have personally talked Toyo Enterprises Co., Ltd. out of buying numerous licenses for this very reason, as well as explaining away why they do not need to seek out and compensate the current owner of a vintage military jacket that appears in a photo somewhere in order to copy the artwork and insignia on the jacket. And, from what I understand, those who accept licensing fees for that which they are not legally entitled, could find themselves being sued and paying back those same fees with a cherry on top.

Licensing mania among these JP repro makers has been going on for years, and it was Eastman's use of some Steve McQueen images from "The Great Escape" back in the very early '90's that instigated the former RMJP to seek licensing and use of his images and name in a huge way. It was after this that the whole McQueen brand began to soar, with attendant value in unison. Eastman had gotten the images and permission directly from Chad and Terry McQueen at the cost of a couple flying jackets, but when it came time to seek more images some years after the RMJP usage, all negotiations were through the Roger Richman Agency in L. A., and for big bucks, thus ending the use by Eastman. One could argue that part of what brought down the original RMJP was too much money spent on a host of costly, unnecessary marketing ideas, not the least being licenses. All of this JP licensing is ironic in light of how flagrantly they violate(ed) TM rights when it's denim and LS&C is the owner.

Regarding the ELMC use of Lofgren items sans any mention of Lofgren on the labels, I'd say that, firstly, it's up to Lofgren, so if he's cool, why aren't you? The product info. on the website certainly acknowledges Lofgren, but co-branding is a matter for the parties involved. I can't speak for the shirts, but the boots ELMC gets made by Lofgren are not identical to those Lofgren sells and have been modified in fit for the Western market, so they are exclusive to ELMC. Separately, I have personally performed a vast amount of work for Eastman back in the early years and shared a great deal of invaluable info., the overwhelming majority both without recognition or compensation, but that was then and it's what was agreed to predicated on the personal relationship at hand at the time; today, of course, would be different by a light year.

I'm fully with you on the unauthorized use of images and names on labels and marketing materials - definitely bad business - and it's stealing! Personally, as it relates to the Buco buttons and labels, etc., if I found two items to be essentially equal in the main areas that matter to me, the names and buttons would only matter if the cost difference was near zero. But back in 1986 when I was much younger, less knowledgable, and more naive, I bought into fallacious marketing and word of mouth that Willis & Geiger was making their repo A-2's exactly as they did when they made them in the 1940's (and I didn't know they didn't make A-2's in the 1940's), so, of course, I paid the extra bucks and got one, only to be substantially disappointed upon delivery.

Today, I know well that no one is making anything exactly as it was so many years gone: those vintage items, when new, existed in a specific time and were produced under specific circumstances that cannot be duplicated. The best we get are a few companies making superb copies, each with their plus and minuses, each doing things a bit differently, with much objectivity in assessment too often being lost to passion, ignorance, and pettiness among the buying community. But having these multiple choices and variety is good for keeping the producers in business, the secondhand market thriving, and feeding the appetite of nerds, of which I am proudly one.

Thanks for sharing your insights and opinions.

 

[Smithy]

Further to this point, then Eastman's RAF jackets should be dead on arrival when going up against those bearing the Irvin name on the label since a little research will reveal Irvin is the originator of the design, so surely anyone buying that style will want their jacket made by the license holder of the name so they can proudly know and tout that their jacket is made by the originator.

Very, very good point Charles, anyone with more than a smattering of interest in Irvins and the desire to have an authentic repro of a pre or wartime Irvin would never order an Aviation Leathercraft, even though they hold the Irvin name. Not that they're bad jackets per se but they're not a replica of an Irvin which was used in the 30s or 40s.

 

[Justhandguns]

Very, very good point Charles, anyone with more than a smattering of interest in Irvins and the desire to have an authentic repro of a pre or wartime Irvin would never order an Aviation Leathercraft, even though they hold the Irvin name. Not that they're bad jackets per se but they're not a replica of an Irvin which was used in the 30s or 40s.

In that case, can anyone explain to me why Eastman is charging 100pounds more with their original maker A-2s than their house A-2 jacket? I am sure they are of similar quality and for an untrained eye, they are essentially the same jacket. When we talk about Buco J-100, we are talking about a repro jacket, not just the pattern.

With all due respect to Charles/HPA and Eastman, most of us here are just trying to voice our opinions as consumers. But as a 'high end' marker, ELC should be setting the trend, rather than just following what is popular.

 

[pawineguy]

Perhaps another approach would be for Gary to not sell jackets by espousing theories that the U.S. government perpetrated 9/11. That might also help him sell the J-100. @HPA Rep

 

[Superfluous]

Perhaps another approach would be for Gary to not sell jackets by espousing theories that the U.S. government perpetrated 9/11. That might also help him sell the J-100. @HPA Rep

This deserves its own thread.

 

[ProteinNerd]

What's this all about? Would love to know more in a dedicated thread.

 

[Superfluous]

What's this all about? Would love to know more in a dedicated thread.

http://www.thefedoralounge.com/thre...cy-theory-to-sell-eastman-elmc-jackets.85336/

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Are you kidding me..? Perfect way to lose business.
HD

 

[Bunyip]

Wankers.

 

[Superfluous]

Over/under for an inapposite COW post: 5 hours, 37 minutes.