>>4965 They're probably either first-party knock-offs or a couple of seasons old. You got a good deal if they're old - after all, Levi's are Levi's whatever the weather. OTOH if they're down-grade product manufactured specifically for the price point then you might as well have bought own brand at Tesco and got the same build quality.
However, fair warning - if you have large quads and glutes be it from being fat or like myself do a ton of cycling - they are a tight fit. Your arse might also be tight in them and you might feel self concious. But they do stretch with time and mold into your shape, making them ultra comfy.
In addition they get SICK FADEZ showing how much of a unique a cool person you are.
I don't know, but for some fucking reason I got a 34W 32L when I'm really a 34L - so when you cuff 'em (as you should), they are a tad shorter than I want. Silly gripe, but that me being careless when shopping.
>>4967 It wouldn't surprise me if they're doing what Tesco used to do 15 years ago when they sold 501s for £28 a pop, getting them wholesale from the rest of Europe.
Anyone who pays the RRP for Levi's in Britain is a mug.
>>4969 >Tesco used to do 15 years ago when they sold 501s for £28 a pop, getting them wholesale from the rest of Europe
Possibly, though I imagine TK Maxx would prefer something better than Tesco's usual margin of 0.2%.
>>4964 >is raw that much better? Is selvedge worth it?
That's entirely subjective and hard to answer. It's a better quality denim, it feel better and will look better for a longer time. If that's worth £100 to you, then yes, it's worth it.
Naked and famous are one of the best brands around that price point.
>>4964 £100+ for a pair of jeans? Fuck I thought that anything north of £50 was expensive. Fair enough spend decent money on lounge suits and dinner jackets but jeans are jeans, why spend a ridiculous amount on what have always been work clothes?
Having said that I did once manage to get a pair of Jack and Jones jeans reduced from fuck-off to £30 or something and they're easily my favourite pair so maybe I'm just drunk and talking out the side of my neck.
>>4968 >Cuff em
Eh? I've never seen anyone do this who isn't under 5 foot 6. If you're significantly over 6 foot it's hard finding jeans that aren't ankle swingers let alone having extra for folding.
>>4975 Nah, like I say I've only ever seen short people do it and it's always been more of a case of "n'aww he has to roll up his jeans bless" rather than a fashion thing.
I'm wearing some 32" leg jeans now and they only just come to my ankles as it is, if they were rolled up they'd look silly.
>>4979 The only guy I know who does this is a short guy who benches 100kgs but pussies out at the first sign of a fight... take from that what you will.
It just looks silly to me, it draws unnecessary attention to your ankles and interrupts the flow of the jeans down to your shoes. Just get jeans that are the right size, if you're short then look for a 28" leg or whatever it is you need.
>>4981 I've never thought much of Super Dry really, they seem to be worn by the same dopey prats who buy Hollister clothing. Also every time I walk past one of their shops they have a really strange 'aroma', I'm not sure if it's meant to entice customers but it has the opposite effect to be honest.
>>4986 There are other Farnboroughlads on here? Wow, never imagined that. I'd suggest a pint down the Swan but I'm too afraid of being forcibly fed beefy loadz.
>>4986 And it's too late for the tumbly m8, already boarded up to become another Maccies whilst the council illegally destroys half the greenery for hotels that nobody needs or wants /rant.