This month marks the final, definitive closure of the Garland Shirt Factory. If you're interested in American manufacturing, I want tell you its story. 🧵
There's a teeny, tiny town in North Carolina called Garland, which for the last 100 years or so, has had a population hovering around 500. In the 1950s, a development company erected an industrial building here with the intention of creating manufacturing jobs.
The first tenant was Fleetline Indusries, later known as the Garland Shirt Factory. As the name implies, they made button-up shirts. With time, the small workforce here became so good at making shirts that Brooks Brothers acquired the factory in 1982.
It was here where Brooks Brothers made its famous button-down shirts, which debuted at the turn of the century. Inspired by the secured collars worn by British polo players, this style was an overnight hit and became an American icon, up there with five-pocket jeans and t-shirts.
Since Brooks Brothers dressed that upwardly mobile class of Americans that saw their fortunes rise with industrial capitalism, their button-down collar was popular among their sons and daughters, including those who went to private schools that fed into the Ivy League system.
For much of the 20th century, the button-down collar was a symbol of all that is good: casualness, youth, education, trustworthiness, dependability, sport, and professionalism. Mary Mccarthy’s 1942 short story “The Man in the Brooks Brothers Shirt” is partly about its allure.
Up until about the 1990s, Brooks Brothers' button-down shirts were hardly ever discounted. They didn't need to—they were a popular perennial. Plus, their customers wore their oxford shirts until the collars frayed. Ppl paid full price for clothes they knew they'd wear forever.
If the shirts went on sale, it was just once a year—and only after Christmas.
But over time, Brooks Brothers fell into a common problem: the burden of expansion. In 1971, they had just 11 locations; in 2001, there were 155 stores and outlets in the US and Japan
During this expansion, their real estate costs grew and they became locked into long-term lease agreements. To turn a profit, they offshored more of its production, introduced trendier items, and started to hold more promotions to draw in deal-hungry customers.
By 2010 or so, it was pretty easy to get Brooks Brothers' shirts at a discount. They held mid-season sales, end-of-season sales, Christmas sales, "wardrobe event" sales, "4 for $249" sales, "3 for $109" sales, "select shirts for just $39" sales, etc.
During the time that Retail Brand Alliance owned Brooks Brothers (2001-2020), CEO Claudio del Vecchio was under a lot of pressure to offshore more of the company's manufacturing. However, he felt that styles key to Brooks Brothers' identity should be made in the US
That meant that Brooks Brothers' natural shouldered suits were made at the company's Southwick plant in Haverhill, Massachusetts; the rep striped silk ties were made at their tie-making facility in Long Island City, New York; and the button-down shirts at Garland, North Carolina
The Garland shirt factory was not without its problems. Along with making Brooks Brothers' shirts, they also made for some other clients. One told me that his orders were often riddled with quality control problems. Brooks brought consultants from TAL to help solve these issues.
When Brooks Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2020, it shuttered its US factories, unable to commit to continuing to producing in the US. For a time, it seemed like 150 in a town of 600 would now be without work. But a year later, a bit of hope emerged.
The Garland Apparel Group acquired the company in 2021 and brought back about 100 of its former 150 workers. Garland's mayor said: "After the pandemic and the many gloomy challenges that the town has faced, we finally feel a ray of sunshine and see a beautiful rainbow."
The Garland Shirt Factory plugged along for a few years, making again for Brooks Brothers, Raleigh Denim, and customers in Korea and Japan. They even made hall-of-fame coats for Ultimate Fighting Championships and opened a new facility to produce uniforms for US Navy
But after not getting enough orders to even sustain daily operations, the company put the whole factory on furlough. There was a lot of speculation on what would happen next.
Kenneth Ragland, the managing partner for Garland Apparel Group, told a newspaper bluntly: “Lots of people talk about Made in the USA as being so necessary, but when the rubber meets the road, most Americans want cheap goods, which do not make it easy for US firms to survive.”
This month marks the finale: the Garland Shirt Factory went up for auction. I'm told the building and all of its contents have been sold: machinery, buttons, trims, and an estimated 450,000 yards of fabric, including high-end Thomas Mason oxford originally used for button-downs
When Brooks Brothers filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, I interviewed a number of their executives. One told me that there were discussions within the company about how to compete with labels such as UNTUCKit and J. Crew.
I asked: "How is it possible that the company that invented the oxford cloth button-down, one of the most iconic American designs, is not be able to charge a premium over stuff found on Amazon?"
The person agreed and said "that's the million dollar question."
The final chapter of the Garland Shirt Factory proved one thing: even without the Brooks Brothers behind it (a company that had its own problems), it could not find enough orders to sustain operations. The simple reason is because at $10-14/ hour wages, a shirt is expensive.
At such prices, a company might buy a shirt from Garland at $40, sell it to a store for $80, and then the store sells it you for about $150. This distribution model is necessary for scale (and scale is important for jobs). But people don't want to pay $150 for a shirt.
Ultimately, consumers want cheap clothes.
I'm sad to see yet another American clothing factory shutter. The Garland Shirt Factory lasted for about 70 years, much of that time producing one of America's most iconic styles.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Let's first establish good vs bad ways to think about style. The first pic is correct — style is a kind of social language and you have to figure out what type of person you are. The second pic is stupid bc it takes style as disconnected objects ("this is in" vs "this is out").
I should also note here that I'm only talking about style. I'm not here to argue with you about ergonomics, water bottle holders, or whether something accommodates your Dell laptop. I'm am talking about aesthetics.
Watch these two videos. Then answer these two questions:
— Which of the two men is better dressed?
— How does each come off?
I think Carney is better dressed, partly because his clothes fit better. Notice that his jacket collar always hugs his neck, while Pierre Poilievre's jacket collar never touches him.
The level of craftsmanship that goes into a lot of Japanese menswear simply doesn't exist in the United States. You can do this for many categories — suits, jeans, hats, etc.
In this thread, I will show you just one category: men's shoes 🧵
For this comparison, I will focus on Japanese bespoke shoemaking vs. US ready-to-wear. The level of bespoke craftsmanship shown here simply doesn't exist in the US, so a Japanese bespoke vs. US bespoke comparison would be unfair. US bespoke is mostly about orthopedic work.
So instead, I will focus on the best that the US has to offer: ready-to-wear Alden.
On a basic level, top-end Japanese shoes are better because they are handwelted, whereas Alden shoes are Goodyear welted. The first involves more handwork and can be resoled more often.
In 1999, a group of Haitians were tired of political disorder and dreamed of a better life in the United States. So they built a small, 23-foot boat by hand using pine trees, scrap wood, and used nails. They called the boat "Believe in God." 🧵
In a boat powered by nothing but a sail, they somehow made it from Tortuga Island to the Bahamas (about a 90 mile distance). Then from the Bahamas, they set sail again. But a few days and some hundred miles later, their makeshift boat began to sink.
The men on the boat were so dehydrated this point, one slipped in and out of consciousness, unable to stand. They were all resigned to their death.
Luckily, they were rescued at the last minute by the US Coast Guard.
After this post went viral, I called Caroline Groves, a world-class bespoke shoemaker, to discuss how women's shoes are made. I normally don't talk about womenswear, but I found the information interesting, so I thought I would share what I learned here. 🧵
Footwear is broadly broken into two categories: bespoke and ready-to-wear. In London, bespoke makers, including those for women, are largely focused on traditional styles, such as wingtip derbies and loafers. Emiko Matsuda is great for this.
In Paris, there's Massaro, a historic firm that has been operating since 1894, now owned by Chanel. Their designs are less about creating the women's equivalent of traditional men's footwear and more about things such as heels or creative styles. Aesthetic is still "traditional."
Earlier today, Roger Stone announced his partnership with a menswear company, where together they've released a collection of tailored clothing items.
Here is my review of those pieces. 🧵
The line is mostly comprised of suits and sport coats, supplemented with dress shirts and one pair of odd trousers (tailor-speak for a pair of pants made without a matching jacket). Suits start at $1,540; sport coats are $1,150. One suit is $5,400 bc it's made from Scabal fabric
Let's start with the good points. These are fully canvassed jackets, meaning a free floating canvas has been tacked onto the face fabric to give it some weight and structure. This is better than a half-canvas and fully fused construction, but requires more time and labor.