Well, here they are: my first – but definitely not my last – order from the Shoeaholics site I told you about on Friday: Kurt Geiger’s ‘Jasmine’ court shoes:
I’d had my eye on these ever since they were released last year, but felt that the original, £100 price tag was a little too high for shoes I’d probably get a limited amount of wear out of, so I waited patiently for the sale. When the sale came, however, I continued to resist the lure of the Dorothy shoes, and I resisted valiantly… right up until the moment they sold out in my size, which was, of course, the exact same moment that I decided I really wanted to buy them.
When I saw them on Shoeaholics for just £29, then, I knew it was now or never, so I hit the “order” button and sat back to wait.
I didn’t have to wait very long, as it happens: I got a dispatch notification within an hour of placing my order, and, having made the purchase on Friday morning, the shoes arrived at 8am the following Monday – so far, so good for Shoeaholics.
But what did they look like?
Well, as I mentioned on Friday, many of the shoes on this site are ex-display, and the product description on the Jasmine courts stated that I should expect some cosmetic damage. I should probably note here that glitter-covered shoes aren’t really the fairest test for this site, because I would imagine they’d be more prone to damage than most other fabrics. Realising this, I’d been prepared for the worst. Here’s what I got.
There’s some noticeable damage to the edges of the bow on both shoes: you can see from the photos below that the glitter has come off at the seam, leaving the white fabric visible underneath. Having examined the shoes closely, though, this is the only issue I can find: there’s absolutely no sign of wear on the soles, and the glitter coating is thick and even over the rest of the shoe. Only one shoe has damage to the bow, and from the perfect condition of both the sole and insole, I’d guess it’s probably come from the shoe lying on its side in the box, rather than from people trying it on.
As far as the glitter loss goes, well, it’s noticeable when you take the shoes out of the box and hold them in your hands, but you do have to be fairly close to see it: I don’t think anyone would notice it when they’re actually being worn, for instance. I also suspect it would be easily repaired with a purchase of some red glitter and a glue gun – or I could simply use red ink to colour the white line where the glitter has come off, making it less noticeable.
Overall, I think the shoes were fairly priced given their condition. If I’d paid £100 for them, I’d obviously have been disappointed, but they were marked down to £29, what little damage there is will be easily repairable, and the cosmetic damage was clearly stated in the product description, so I think I got a good deal, all things considered.
Will I be keeping them? The jury’s still out on that one at the moment. I love the shoes, and I’m not at all put off by the missing glitter, but as fabulous as they are, I’m still wondering when I’ll ever get an opportunity to wear them, and if the black version might be a better option. One thing I do know, however, is that I’ll definitely be using Shoeaholics again: probably far too often for my own good!
P.S. I put some extra photos of these over on my Facebook page, if you want to take a look!