@superfuzz:

If it doesn't affect the product, why should I care about legal wrangling?

Some people care about the character and integrity of the people they do business with.

Giles,

FWIW, I have not seen any evidence thus far that you or IH engaged in any wrongful conduct.  Will Lauder (“WL”) may not have properly accounted for IH’s dealings with Aero before his departure (I have no idea), but that is not IH’s responsibility absent complicity by IH (and I have not seen any evidence of complicity).  It appears that you/IH have cooperated with the investigation of this issue.

My primary criticism concerns your suggestion that WL’s misdeeds do not affect Alexander Leather (“AL”).

@Giles:

Whatever Will Lauder may or may not have done, has little bearing on what Alexander Leathers are doing.  The court action was against Will Lauder as an individual and nothing whatsoever to do with Alexander Leathers.

Respectfully, and based on what I have read about the three week trial, I strongly disagree.  According to the trial testimony summarized on TFL by someone who sat through the entire trial, AL was a central component of the trial.  By way of example, according to the summarized trial testimony on TFL, it appears that:

• WL attempted to broker Sandy Alexander’s purchase of Aero;
  • When Ken Calder rejected Sandy Alexander’s bid to purchase Aero, WL stole Aero’s jacket patterns (after tasking an Aero employee with replicating the patterns over a six month period); and
  • After he was caught stealing from Aero, WL founded AL (with Sandy Alexander) and employed the stolen Aero patterns at AL.

To be clear, my understanding of the above-stated claims is based solely and exclusively on the trial summaries posted on TFL, I have zero personal knowledge of any of the foregoing, and I have no idea if the foregoing is accurate.  That said, if the reports of the trial are accurate, WL’s wrongdoing – for which he was criminally convicted – is clearly and inextricably linked to AL.

Moreover, one of AL’s founders, owners and managers is now a convicted criminal and, importantly, he was convicted of stealing from one of AL’s competitors.  That cannot be ignored.  If AL allows this convicted criminal to remain with the company, that would speak volumes about AL.  IMHO, AL should employ all available remedies to disassociate itself from WL.  Anything less suggests that AL condones WL’s criminal conduct.  Of course, any ex post facto disassociation would not remedy AL’s prior involvement/wrongdoing, if any, nor absolve AL of liability/responsibility, if any.

As to IH, WL was clearly a key component of IH’s relationship with AL.  WL established the relationship with IH, was actively involved in the design and creation of the joint venture jackets, and was IH’s primary contact.  WL was IH’s guy.  Thus, IH did business with a criminal.  As stated upfront, I am not presently aware of any evidence that IH knew that WL was a criminal.  However, IH now knows that WL is a criminal.  IH also knows that AL’s founder, owner and manager is a criminal, and he was convicted of stealing from a competitor.  Assuming IH was completely unaware of WL’s criminal conduct prior to the trial and conviction, IH is guilty of nothing more than unknowingly doing business with a criminal.  This is not the first time that someone unknowingly did business with a criminal, nor will it be the last.  Now, IH must decide how to proceed in light of recent events.

CPO and Drover are outstanding!

Looks great Ben!

Outstanding Anesthetist!

^ Echoing prior comments, I think one size smaller would be a better fit.

Congrats EW – Looks great!

I have admired photos of Real McCoy’s Steinbeck since the jacket was released last year, but I have repeatedly balked at buying one because I own the Real McCoy Oklahoma and the two jackets are the identical cut/design. The only different between the jackets is the hide – the Oklahoma is deerskin and the Steinbeck is horsehide. I have two Himel Canucks, but I rationalized that duplication because one is brown and one is black. The Oklahoma and Steinbeck are both black, which made the duplicative design more concerning based solely on photos.

Two weeks ago, I had the opportunity to see the Steinbeck in person (at Inspiration). It only took a few seconds for my duplicative design concerns to fly out the window. Notwithstanding the duplicative design, the Steinbeck and the Oklahoma have a very different character and appearance. The deerskin and the Shinki HH are profoundly different in character, grain, texture and feel – they are also meaningfully different shades of black (don’t go there) – the Shinki HH is darker than the deerskin. The significant differences in the hides creates a very different look to the jackets. The Oklahoma is more relaxed/casual, where as the Steinbeck has more of a moto look/feel to it.

What really sold me on the Steinbeck is the particular Shinki HH used for this jacket. I have two other black Shinki jackets and, while both have wonderful grain and character, the black Shinki on the Steinbeck is even better. It is amazing – the best black Shinki I personally have ever seen – right up there with the brown Shinki on my Good Wear Imperial. The Steinbeck Shinki is tea core, where as my other two black Shinkis are black all the way through – I wonder if that makes a difference in terms of the character of the hide?

^ Stellar!

^ Agree with the foregoing observations re TFH shirt cuts.  I invariably have to upsize in order to get sufficient sleeve length, but then the shoulders are often too large.