Stetson Quality Experiment "Think Tank"

[Dinerman]

I haven't yet read all the pages on this long thread, but I wonder what hatmakers would say about the quality of different Stetsons if they held them in their hands. Myself, I can't tell much difference about quality, other than very fine beaver, which I have recently seen. Can a hatmaker tell which Stetson is better? If not, then it's another case of the "diamond ring ripoff," meaning, if a diamond ring has a flaw in it but you need one of those magnifying glasses to see it, then what does it matter? Why spend extra thousands of dollars for a more flawless diamond that no one could possibly know is flawless? In a parallel way, if people can't tell one hat's quality from the next hat, what does it matter, and why pay more on that score? But if you can tell, then it matters.

With enough experience, it's pretty easy to tell differences in quality. One of the issues is that the quality of the felt for different standard designations changed over the years. As in, a modern 3x quality is of lower quality than a c.1950 3x quality. Quality also comes out through use. Better quality hats stand up better to rain and wear. A cheap hat will taper, shrink and lose its flange through repeated abuse. A high quality one will last longer.

 

[Dinerman]

Here's a '60s nutria. Note the post 1940s design with the leaf instead of stars in the left of the crest. Black sweatband.

 

[fluteplayer07]

You're the one who got the blue campaign hat from the 'bay?

 

[Dinerman]

Yup.

 

[jimmy the lid]

Apparently not every hat had a model name. Is that an anomaly? Did most have a name? Just curious as to your thoughts.

Chinaski -- I do have some thoughts on this...

In the years following WWII, Stetson launched a large national marketing campaign whereby full-page ads were placed in prominent national magazines, featuring a particular style of lid. As time went on, many of these ads depicted scenes featuring two hats (with mention of a woman's hat thrown in for good measure). My own sense is that, in keeping with this marketing approach, Stetson hats had particular model names and these models were tied to a single quality designation. Putting Open Roads and Stratoliners to the side (which followed a hybrid approach -- something I've posted about in the OR Guild thread), I am unaware of any Stetson model (in the 1948 -- 1958 timeframe) that actually covered more than one quality designation. So, for example, a Playboy was priced at $10 and was designated a "Royal Stetson." Ditto for the Whippet, which was, by definition, a "Royal Stetson" lid. Hats like the "Stetsonian", the "Vogue", and the "St. Regis", on the other hand, were offered at the "Royal Stetson DeLuxe" level. I think that there was a certain purity to this approach from a marketing standpoint -- as the model name itself was tied to a particular price point identified in the national advertising. This made it easy for someone to walk into a retailer and ask for a hat by name -- knowing that, by definition, that particular model was also tied to a particular price.

Now, all of that being said, let's say I went into a retail store and asked for a Whippet. The salesman would show me the Whippet, but he might also try to up-sell me on a slightly nicer version, as well: "If you like that style, Mr. Lid, perhaps you might be interested in this Royal DeLuxe model that is a bit nicer and only costs an additional $2.50..." The Royal DeLuxe would not have a model name, per se, but it would be styled the same as a Whippet, and would be sold at a slightly higher price point. Of course, this dynamic would be particularly true of efforts to interest someone in a significantly higher-end hat like a 3X Beaver or Sovereign -- and explains why, commonly, these quality designations are not tied to any particular model name.

So, to answer one of your questions, Chinaski -- the Stetsons with no model designation were certainly not an anomaly. There were plenty of these around in a variety of styles and at a variety of price points. My own sense is that Stetson's national advertising was used to introduce the public to particular styles associated with particular model names (and at particular price points). The utility of the "no-name" lids was to give flexibility to retailers at the point of sale.

I think that it is also true that, as time went on and Stetson started to drop certain model names, the same style of hat might continue to be made under the more generic designations, often at the same quality/price point as the original.

So -- these are simply my own thoughts on the subject, but they may serve to foster some further discussion.

Cheers,
JtL

 

[hatophile]

Interesting and thoughtful discussion JTL. I have several Stetsons that might fit certain designations but are not labelled as such. This line of thinking makes sense, a higher level of quality hat without the label of the original, slightly lower quality. Looks the same but feels maybe a little nicer?

Thanks for that insight.

 

[Mobile Vulgus]

Great ideas on Stetson's practices, Jimmy.

This is what makes dating and identifying Stetsons so darn hard, apparently. It's almost like there is no rhyme of reason when you're on the outside looking in.

I've been a collector of other things for a long time before I started dabbling in fedoras and many of those other things are much easier to pin down as to manufacturing dates, styles, makers, etc. It makes Stetsons a bit vexing because of the confusion.

Thanks for your thoughtful analysis.

 

[Chinaski]

Chinaski -- I do have some thoughts on this...


Now, all of that being said, let's say I went into a retail store and asked for a Whippet. The salesman would show me the Whippet, but he might also try to up-sell me on a slightly nicer version, as well: "If you like that style, Mr. Lid, perhaps you might be interested in this Royal DeLuxe model that is a bit nicer and only costs an additional $2.50..." The Royal DeLuxe would not have a model name, per se, but it would be styled the same as a Whippet, and would be sold at a slightly higher price point. Of course, this dynamic would be particularly true of efforts to interest someone in a significantly higher-end hat like a 3X Beaver or Sovereign -- and explains why, commonly, these quality designations are not tied to any particular model name.

Cheers,
JtL

This intuitively makes sense when you think about the retail perspective, and I'm not surprised at your theory since you're a Motor City guy. It exactly matches the current car sales practice - you start with the base model car, and move on to increasingly luxurious, option-packed, higher quality vehicles of the same model with attendant price increases.

At the beginning of your treatise, you mention some hat models were associated with a particular quality designation, e.g. your St. Regis/Royal Stetson Deluxe association. I'd guess you've studied this a bit, so have you found this to be the case in reality? Are all St. Regis (is that St. Regi?) Royal Stetson Deluxe quality? Does this hold true for most models?

 

[Chinaski]

Stetson Avenue...

And by the way, I meant to ask this the other day: What is known about the Stetson Avenue? I hadn't heard of that model prior to your recent posting.

 

[Dinerman]

You're the one who got the blue campaign hat from the 'bay?

You know that hat never did show up?

 

[jimmy the lid]

At the beginning of your treatise, you mention some hat models were associated with a particular quality designation, e.g. your St. Regis/Royal Stetson Deluxe association. I'd guess you've studied this a bit, so have you found this to be the case in reality?

Oddly enough, yes -- otherwise I wouldn't have said it...

 

[jimmy the lid]

And by the way, I meant to ask this the other day: What is known about the Stetson Avenue? I hadn't heard of that model prior to your recent posting.

Check out this thread: Stetson "The Avenue"

 

[Chinaski]

Oddly enough, yes -- otherwise I wouldn't have said it...

Not odd, I guess I might have phrased the question differently

A better question might be, have you ever noted any exceptions?

 

[Chinaski]

Check out this thread: Stetson "The Avenue"

Thanks for posting the thread link!

What do you make of Lefty's Avenue? It seems to be a totally different style with the same name as your hat and Douglas's hat. I realize you guys may have covered this ground previously, but your insight is appreciated.

 

[jimmy the lid]

Thanks for posting the thread link!



What do you make of Lefty's Avenue? It seems to be a totally different style with the same name as your hat and Douglas's hat. I realize you guys may have covered this ground previously, but your insight is appreciated.

Just to keep things organized a bit -- I'll reply on the Stetson Avenue thread...

 

[RBH]

Jimmy, thought this ad was one you might use. From 1955 Texas.
[you may already have this piece of info]

Here is the part I noticed.

 

[gtdean48]

bumped...

 

[lo_mein_chow]

Chinaski -- I do have some thoughts on this...

In the years following WWII, Stetson launched a large national marketing campaign whereby full-page ads were placed in prominent national magazines, featuring a particular style of lid. As time went on, many of these ads depicted scenes featuring two hats (with mention of a woman's hat thrown in for good measure). My own sense is that, in keeping with this marketing approach, Stetson hats had particular model names and these models were tied to a single quality designation. Putting Open Roads and Stratoliners to the side (which followed a hybrid approach -- something I've posted about in the OR Guild thread), I am unaware of any Stetson model (in the 1948 -- 1958 timeframe) that actually covered more than one quality designation. So, for example, a Playboy was priced at $10 and was designated a "Royal Stetson." Ditto for the Whippet, which was, by definition, a "Royal Stetson" lid. Hats like the "Stetsonian", the "Vogue", and the "St. Regis", on the other hand, were offered at the "Royal Stetson DeLuxe" level. I think that there was a certain purity to this approach from a marketing standpoint -- as the model name itself was tied to a particular price point identified in the national advertising. This made it easy for someone to walk into a retailer and ask for a hat by name -- knowing that, by definition, that particular model was also tied to a particular price.

Now, all of that being said, let's say I went into a retail store and asked for a Whippet. The salesman would show me the Whippet, but he might also try to up-sell me on a slightly nicer version, as well: "If you like that style, Mr. Lid, perhaps you might be interested in this Royal DeLuxe model that is a bit nicer and only costs an additional $2.50..." The Royal DeLuxe would not have a model name, per se, but it would be styled the same as a Whippet, and would be sold at a slightly higher price point. Of course, this dynamic would be particularly true of efforts to interest someone in a significantly higher-end hat like a 3X Beaver or Sovereign -- and explains why, commonly, these quality designations are not tied to any particular model name.

So, to answer one of your questions, Chinaski -- the Stetsons with no model designation were certainly not an anomaly. There were plenty of these around in a variety of styles and at a variety of price points. My own sense is that Stetson's national advertising was used to introduce the public to particular styles associated with particular model names (and at particular price points). The utility of the "no-name" lids was to give flexibility to retailers at the point of sale.

I think that it is also true that, as time went on and Stetson started to drop certain model names, the same style of hat might continue to be made under the more generic designations, often at the same quality/price point as the original.

So -- these are simply my own thoughts on the subject, but they may serve to foster some further discussion.

Cheers,
JtL

"Ding Ding Ding" we have a winner!
This analysis rings true when looked at thru the lens of marketing. And marketing is what hats, and just about everything else is about.
I would like to thank the members of this forum for putting enough information together for this issue to clarify for me.
In the end, it is the lack of precise information that lends itself to the "hunt"

Nice site by the way

 

[Dinerman]

10X Stetson. 1970s?

 

[Dinerman]

7X (non clear beaver) Stetson. Same nice laced sweatband as the 10X, but with a black sweatband.