A2 Jacket Advice

[Fonzie]

So this may be an inappropriate place to ask this, if so I'll ask in the classifieds. Is anyone willing to part with an A2 from Goodwear or Eastman that has a NOS zipper?

I have an Eastman “Pearl Harbour” model in their American walnut “time worn” horsehide in size 40 that I’m willing to let go.
PM me if interested, cheers.

 

[bn1966]

Five Eastman jackets here too to cover all the UK seasons and temperatures. I've recently purchased a Monarch A-2 in HH, lovely hide with great character, can highly recommend. No NOS zipper like I had on my Roughwear contract, but hey, I can live with that or try & source one myself. I am finding it increasingly difficult to justify further purchases given the way pricing has gone...but can't promise I won't buy another. Lovely company, fantastic customer service (thanks Rob) super products

 

[Juanito]

I'd buy a Platon made Dubow.

 

[srahimian24]

Is that BK or a separate thing?

 

[Kennyz]

Juanito I was going to suggest that as an option as well. I don't have their Dubow, but the images of it are impressive.

Ken

I'd buy a Platon made Dubow.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Is that BK or a separate thing?

Platon was once partners with Andy and developed BK. Platon was a member of the Vintage Leather Jacket forum. He was deceiving about who he was and represented. Finally he was banned from the VLJ. At that time he lived in Chicago. It seems he moved to Greece and now claims to have his own jacket company making A2s.
HD

 

[beckster]

Andy / BK sent me a second e-mail again threatening to sue me. This time, they added several insults. They also set forth the amount of damages that they intend to seek against me: GBP 1,569,260. I'm shivering in my boots Andy.

Will they ever learn? I think not. Instead, Andy and Bill Kelso will continue to pursue their despicable practices, including disparaging former customers who do not favor the company and threats of litigation simply because someone shares an adverse opinion.

Andy, your village contacted me . . . they want their idiot back.



Nothing to apologize about. You did nothing wrong. Rather, it was Andy's and Bill Kelso's threat to sue @Carlos840 that initiated the melee. All you did was ask a perfectly appropriate question, and all Carlos did was share a perfectly appropriate opinion responsive to your inquiry. Had Andy / Bill Kelso not responded with threats of litigation, the dialogue would have continued. Unfortunately, Andy / BK cannot control themselves.

.
Isn’t defamation saying something that is not true. As I read the thread the gist is BK is unresponsive re communications. Nobody has said the quality of the product is bad. What’s all the commotion about. .

 

[El Marro]

As I read the thread the gist is BK is unresponsive re communications.

Actually I think the gist of the thread is that BK is quite responsive re communications. They respond with threatening and malicious emails.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

No, the gist is that BK is very responsive sometimes in a hateful threatening way. They had displayed an overly braggadocios weird attitude of even cutting on other jacket company offerings compared to their superior renditions. If a customer complains too much about any problems with their new BK jacket they may be subject to BK's wrath, even publicly unless the company is forum banned and then must resort to emails. I do understand that their jackets are well made but you never know if you can obtain a certain advertised hide or not. Seems they continually run out and then a customer must wait weeks for a new batch or choose something else.

 

[srahimian24]

So wait, is Andy the owner of BK? And Planton was co owner but now has his own thing?

 

[srahimian24]

Also on another note, how much have Aeros patterns improved regarding their A2, I heard that the used to be not so great and then I heard someone else took over and now their A2 contracts are much better. Anyone know the deal? (Sorry for all the questions)

 

[HoosierDaddy]

So wait, is Andy the owner of BK? And Planton was co owner but now has his own thing?

It was finally revealed on the VLJ forum that Platon and Andy formed BK. However they were so evasive that it was sometimes hard to tell who was who and what was going on. Platon joined the VLJ claiming he had nothing to do with BK yet overly promoted their jackets at every chance. He finally admitted that he was a Chicago BK rep then in the end a BK founder. Often Platon and Andy came across as the same person that alerted VLJ members to possibly even more deception. It got so confusing and weird that Platon and Andy were banned on the VLJ forum and here. Recently Platon has been selling A2s in Greece with BK nearby. I still can't completely figure out who's who or which company is which.

 

[Seb Lucas]

Many years ago, before BK, Platon was a Greek based member of COW. Back then he was talking about setting up a business to sell accurate Indy jackets and stated A2's were a passion. He had very strong views. I always assumed Andy was Platon as they communicated almost identically. But who would know. The BK designs do look very good.

 

[Juanito]

Juanito I was going to suggest that as an option as well. I don't have their Dubow, but the images of it are impressive.

Ken

I do and it is a superb jacket surpassing just about anything up to a Good Wear. It can't be beaten for twice the price. I had no issues ordering or receiving the jacket.

 

[Superfluous]

I woke up this morning to yet another childish e-mail from Andy / Bill Kelso rife with inane drivel. The thrust of Andy’s latest tirade is as follows:

1. Bill Kelso does not threaten to sue TFL members simply because they share negative opinions about the company. Rather, Bill Kelso only threatens to sue people who make false, defamatory statements about the company.

2. I personally have never had a bad experience with Bill Kelso for which I could have a legitimate negative opinion about the company and, therefore, I have no right to speak out regarding the company.

Andy, your arguments are belied by the facts and easily rebutted.

A defamatory statement is a provably false statement of fact. Opinions do not constitute defamatory statements. Thus, people are allowed to freely share negative opinions.

In the second post of this thread, Carlos shared the following opinion regarding Bill Kelso:

Bill Kelso i would not recommend or give money to, they have a decent product but the way they do business is disgusting. Some people care, some don't, only you can decide. A quick search about them on this forum should give you everything you need to know before spending your money.

“I would not recommend or give money to them”

There is nothing false about this statement. Rather, it is nothing more than his opinion.

“They do have a decent product”

A favorable opinion

“the way they do business is disgusting”

Pure opinion. Moreover, an opinion that I and others share. Repeatedly disparaging and threating to sue customers is a “disgusting” way to do business. Stating on your Facebook page that your customers “aren’t faggots” is “disgusting.” Repeatedly denigrating other respected jacket manufacturers with childish comments is “disgusting.” I could continue ad nauseam. Thus, I fully agree with Carlos’ opinion that “the way they do business is disgusting.” More importantly, Carlos’ statement is an opinion, rather than a defamatory statement of fact.

“Some people care, some don't, only you can decide.”

Nothing wrongful with this accurate observation.

“A quick search about them on this forum should give you everything you need to know before spending your money.”

Again, an opinion devoid of factual content.

Thus, Carlos’ statement was pure opinion. Nothing that Carlos said was even remotely defamatory.

How did Bill Kelso respond to Carlos’ opinion? Andy / BK immediately threatened to sue Carlos. To be more accurate, Andy / BK told Carlos that “we are now preparing litigation against you.”

"The days of Bill Kelso showing compassion and being tolerant are over.

You can tell that chicken Big J who hides behind a nickname online, if he doesn't like the fact that we contacted you to keep his opinion to himself instead of telling others that we are creepy.

You have been warned before and ignored us so we are now preparing litigation against you. You can tell that guy, if he is a man, to let us know his name real name so we can include him in the proceedings too, otherwise to shut up and crawl back to his hole. You guys do not understand otherwise. The time has come to pay the price."

Thus, Bill Kelso threatened to sue Carlos for nothing more than sharing his opinion in this thread. Carlos did not make any defamatory statements. To the contrary, Carlos shared his personal opinions, and nothing more. Nevertheless, Bill Kelso stated that it is commencing litigation against Carlos. That is “disgusting.”

Andy, stop claiming that you don’t threaten to sue people who share negative opinions about Bill Kelso. The foregoing flatly disproves your nonsensical defense to your plainly abhorrent conduct. Ps: This too is an opinion.

Next, the notion that I personally have never had a negative experience with Bill Kelso, and I therefore have no basis to share negative opinions, is equally wrong and meritless. Unfortunately, I personally have had several negative experiences with Bill Kelso.

First, I purchased two Bill Kelso jackets. I returned both jackets because, in my opinion, the leather had the texture of vinyl. Moreover, the jackets were not made as I ordered them. Thus, I have personal experience with Bill Kelso’s products and a negative opinion regarding the character of the leather used.

Second, Bill Kelso had the audacity to take one of my photos from TFL and post it on Bill Kelso’s Facebook page. Thereafter, when I repeatedly requested that Bill Kelso remove my photo, BK flatly refused. This is yet another very personal experience that reinforced my negative opinion of Bill Kelso.

Third, Bill Kelso has repeatedly disparaged me and threatened to sue me. This is yet anther very personal experience that magnified my well founded negative opinions about Bill Kelso.

Fourth, Bill Kelso has repeatedly harassed me with unsolicited e-mails, including this morning.

Once again, Bill Kelso’s position, and corresponding attempt to silence me, is meritless. I have ample personal experience with Bill Kelso and, therefore, I have every right to share my negative opinions about the company.

Additionally, one does not need to have personal experiences with a company before they are permitted to criticize the company. Rather, if one observes a company engage in distasteful conduct, one has every right to speak up and share their contempt, even if the conduct was not directed at them and does not directly impact them. This is particularly true when the conduct is directed at and impacts one’s friends or acquaintances, such as other members of TFL.

Andy, your strawman defenses are pathetic. Grow up. If you want to change the tide and endeavor to rebuild Bill Kelso’s reputation, take ownership of your past reprehensible conduct, make amends, and pursue a better course going forward. I suspect many here would give BK a second chance if the company exhibited a modicum of humility and requested forgiveness. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that all of the foregoing has fallen on deaf ears and, consistent with Bill Kelso’s long-standing methods, you will respond with yet another infantile e-mail and threat of litigation.

Godspeed Andy. Godspeed.

 

[Carlos840]

I woke up this morning to yet another childish e-mail from Andy / Bill Kelso rife with inane drivel. The thrust of Andy’s latest tirade is as follows:

1. Bill Kelso does not threaten to sue TFL members simply because they share negative opinions about the company. Rather, Bill Kelso only threatens to sue people who make false, defamatory statements about the company.

2. I personally have never had a bad experience with Bill Kelso for which I could have a legitimate negative opinion about the company and, therefore, I have no right to speak out regarding the company.

Andy, your arguments are belied by the facts and easily rebutted.

A defamatory statement is a provably false statement of fact. Opinions do not constitute defamatory statements. Thus, people are allowed to freely share negative opinions.

In the second post of this thread, Carlos shared the following opinion regarding Bill Kelso:



“I would not recommend or give money to them”

There is nothing false about this statement. Rather, it is nothing more than his opinion.

“They do have a decent product”

A favorable opinion

“the way they do business is disgusting”

Pure opinion. Moreover, an opinion that I and others share. Repeatedly disparaging and threating to sue customers is a “disgusting” way to do business. Stating on your Facebook page that your customers “aren’t faggots” is “disgusting.” Repeatedly denigrating other respected jacket manufacturers with childish comments is “disgusting.” I could continue ad nauseam. Thus, I fully agree with Carlos’ opinion that “the way they do business is disgusting.” More importantly, Carlos’ statement is an opinion, rather than a defamatory statement of fact.

“Some people care, some don't, only you can decide.”

Nothing wrongful with this accurate observation.

“A quick search about them on this forum should give you everything you need to know before spending your money.”

Again, an opinion devoid of factual content.

Thus, Carlos’ statement was pure opinion. Nothing that Carlos said was even remotely defamatory.

How did Bill Kelso respond to Carlos’ opinion? Andy / BK immediately threatened to sue Carlos. To be more accurate, Andy / BK told Carlos that “we are now preparing litigation against you.”



Thus, Bill Kelso threatened to sue Carlos for nothing more than sharing his opinion in this thread. Carlos did not make any defamatory statements. To the contrary, Carlos shared his personal opinions, and nothing more. Nevertheless, Bill Kelso stated that it is commencing litigation against Carlos. That is “disgusting.”

Andy, stop claiming that you don’t threaten to sue people who share negative opinions about Bill Kelso. The foregoing flatly disproves your nonsensical defense to your plainly abhorrent conduct. Ps: This too is an opinion.

Next, the notion that I personally have never had an adverse experience with Bill Kelso, and I therefore have no basis to share negative opinions, is equally wrong and meritless. Unfortunately, I have had several personal adverse experiences with Bill Kelso.

First, I purchased two Bill Kelso jackets. I returned both jackets because, in my opinion, the leather had the texture of vinyl. Moreover, the jackets were not made as I ordered them. Thus, I have a personal experience with Bill Kelso’s products and a negative opinion regarding the character of the leather used.

Second, Bill Kelso had the audacity to take one of my photos from TFL and post it on Bill Kelso’s Facebook page. Thereafter, when I requested that Bill Kelso remove my photo, BK flatly refused. This is yet another very personal experience that reinforced my negative opinion of Bill Kelso.

Third, Bill Kelso has repeatedly disparaged me and threatened to sue me. This is yet anther very personal experience that magnified my well founded negative opinions about Bill Kelso.

Fourth, Bill Kelso has repeatedly harassed me with unsolicited e-mails, including this morning.

Once again, Bill Kelso’s position, and corresponding attempt to silence me, is meritless. I have ample personal experience with Bill Kelso and, therefore, I have every right to share my negative opinions about the company.

Additionally, one does not need to have personal experiences with a company before they are permitted to criticize the company. Rather, if one observes a company engage in distasteful conduct, one has every right to speak up and share their contempt, even if the conduct was not directed at them and does not directly impact them. This is particularly true when the conduct is directed at and impacts one’s friends or acquaintances, such as other members of TFL.

Andy, your strawman defenses are pathetic. Grow up. If you want to change the tide and endeavor to rebuild Bill Kelso’s reputation, take ownership of your past reprehensible conduct, make amends, and pursue a better course going forward. I suspect many here would give BK a second chance if the company exhibited a modicum of humility and requested forgiveness. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that all of the foregoing has fallen on deaf ears and, consistent with Bill Kelso’s long-standing methods, you will respond with yet another infantile e-mail and threat of litigation.

Godspeed Andy. Godspeed.

If they are indeed "commencing litigation against me" i am flying you over to London to defend me!

 

[nick123]

I really hope things can be rectified. Like Superfluous said, many will give a second chance. I had quite good experiences w Andy ordering jackets in the good old days. The jackets I liked immensely (the short-lived pre-victory horsehide in a 23380 that did'nt fit but looked the business) as well as an early goat M-422a that people either loved or hated).

 

[Monitor]

I woke up this morning to yet another childish e-mail from Andy / Bill Kelso rife with inane drivel. The thrust of Andy’s latest tirade is as follows:

1. Bill Kelso does not threaten to sue TFL members simply because they share negative opinions about the company. Rather, Bill Kelso only threatens to sue people who make false, defamatory statements about the company.

2. I personally have never had a bad experience with Bill Kelso for which I could have a legitimate negative opinion about the company and, therefore, I have no right to speak out regarding the company.

Andy, your arguments are belied by the facts and easily rebutted.

A defamatory statement is a provably false statement of fact. Opinions do not constitute defamatory statements. Thus, people are allowed to freely share negative opinions.

In the second post of this thread, Carlos shared the following opinion regarding Bill Kelso:



“I would not recommend or give money to them”

There is nothing false about this statement. Rather, it is nothing more than his opinion.

“They do have a decent product”

A favorable opinion

“the way they do business is disgusting”

Pure opinion. Moreover, an opinion that I and others share. Repeatedly disparaging and threating to sue customers is a “disgusting” way to do business. Stating on your Facebook page that your customers “aren’t faggots” is “disgusting.” Repeatedly denigrating other respected jacket manufacturers with childish comments is “disgusting.” I could continue ad nauseam. Thus, I fully agree with Carlos’ opinion that “the way they do business is disgusting.” More importantly, Carlos’ statement is an opinion, rather than a defamatory statement of fact.

“Some people care, some don't, only you can decide.”

Nothing wrongful with this accurate observation.

“A quick search about them on this forum should give you everything you need to know before spending your money.”

Again, an opinion devoid of factual content.

Thus, Carlos’ statement was pure opinion. Nothing that Carlos said was even remotely defamatory.

How did Bill Kelso respond to Carlos’ opinion? Andy / BK immediately threatened to sue Carlos. To be more accurate, Andy / BK told Carlos that “we are now preparing litigation against you.”



Thus, Bill Kelso threatened to sue Carlos for nothing more than sharing his opinion in this thread. Carlos did not make any defamatory statements. To the contrary, Carlos shared his personal opinions, and nothing more. Nevertheless, Bill Kelso stated that it is commencing litigation against Carlos. That is “disgusting.”

Andy, stop claiming that you don’t threaten to sue people who share negative opinions about Bill Kelso. The foregoing flatly disproves your nonsensical defense to your plainly abhorrent conduct. Ps: This too is an opinion.

Next, the notion that I personally have never had a negative experience with Bill Kelso, and I therefore have no basis to share negative opinions, is equally wrong and meritless. Unfortunately, I personally have had several negative experiences with Bill Kelso.

First, I purchased two Bill Kelso jackets. I returned both jackets because, in my opinion, the leather had the texture of vinyl. Moreover, the jackets were not made as I ordered them. Thus, I have personal experience with Bill Kelso’s products and a negative opinion regarding the character of the leather used.

Second, Bill Kelso had the audacity to take one of my photos from TFL and post it on Bill Kelso’s Facebook page. Thereafter, when I repeatedly requested that Bill Kelso remove my photo, BK flatly refused. This is yet another very personal experience that reinforced my negative opinion of Bill Kelso.

Third, Bill Kelso has repeatedly disparaged me and threatened to sue me. This is yet anther very personal experience that magnified my well founded negative opinions about Bill Kelso.

Fourth, Bill Kelso has repeatedly harassed me with unsolicited e-mails, including this morning.

Once again, Bill Kelso’s position, and corresponding attempt to silence me, is meritless. I have ample personal experience with Bill Kelso and, therefore, I have every right to share my negative opinions about the company.

Additionally, one does not need to have personal experiences with a company before they are permitted to criticize the company. Rather, if one observes a company engage in distasteful conduct, one has every right to speak up and share their contempt, even if the conduct was not directed at them and does not directly impact them. This is particularly true when the conduct is directed at and impacts one’s friends or acquaintances, such as other members of TFL.

Andy, your strawman defenses are pathetic. Grow up. If you want to change the tide and endeavor to rebuild Bill Kelso’s reputation, take ownership of your past reprehensible conduct, make amends, and pursue a better course going forward. I suspect many here would give BK a second chance if the company exhibited a modicum of humility and requested forgiveness. Unfortunately, I strongly suspect that all of the foregoing has fallen on deaf ears and, consistent with Bill Kelso’s long-standing methods, you will respond with yet another infantile e-mail and threat of litigation.

Godspeed Andy. Godspeed.

 

[Gav]

I woke up this morning to yet another childish e-mail from Andy / Bill Kelso rife with inane drivel.

To be honest, in essense this has all been said by you before in various forms in various threads at various times. You could just reply to his email if you feel the need, or ignore it - after all, you know he is full of shit and you will never 'win'.

This place has turned into an ever repeating cycle of the same old boring arguments with the same characters.

 

[HoosierDaddy]

Well then Gav, no one is forcing you to read these pages or interact with these ' characters '. Perhaps finding a more interesting forum would better serve you.
HD