One of the pleasures of writing this blog is meeting entrepreneurs. I’m not sure I’d ever have the courage to strike out on my own and found a company, confident that I was filling a glaring hole in the market. So I’m always impressed by those that are.
Hamilton & Hare, founded in 2011 by
Olivia Francis, certainly seems to have found a niche for luxury boxer shorts.
I don’t wear boxers (see post on my underwear here) but I’m aware that’s an
area of menswear dominated by cheap production of unimaginative product. A bit
like short, black socks.
H&H has attempted to produce an
alternative by concentrating on various aspects of the cut and construction
that could lead to a better fit. Removing the third panel on the back of the
boxer, for instance, to reduce bagginess; using elastic only around the sides
of the waistband to make the fit cleaner and more size-specific; and double
lining both parts of the fly to make it softer and more substantial. There are
many other little details, like the overlapping hemline slit on the side of the
leg that aids movement without exposing a slice of thigh.
Points for style, too. Pale blues and
greys, mother-of-pearl buttons and that clean waistband all make the boxers
look much neater than the traditional, baggy model. The overall shape owes much
to Graham Tuckett, who apprenticed at Huntsman under Richard Anderson before
going to work for high-street brands.
There are a couple of gimmicks, which
aren’t really me. Each pair comes in a washbag, which can be used for that
purpose, and a matching embroidered handkerchief. It’s nice not to have to
waste packaging, and the hank is fine as a functional rather than decorative
item, but when the boxers are £42 each I think there might be a few who would
rather do without those extras and pay a little less.
The boxers are made, in Portugal, from high-grade
cotton and I found they wore extremely well. I’m sure readers can think of
someone in their lives for whom they would be a welcome Christmas upgrade to
the wardrobe.
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
spot on about price simon, who on earth is going to pay 42 quid for a pair of boxer shorts ~£300 for a weeks supply?! .. completely uneconomical, sure people who like clothes would prefer to spend it elsewhere.
ReplyDeleteandy
Have you ever tried Burtonwode boxers? Very similar to these but made in England.. and much cheaper at £26 a pair.
ReplyDeleteFunny. I had a few pairs of boxers made by Lucy Adams a couple years back out of Alumo 170 and their cashmerello. They've worn very well, a lot simpler design than what you posted. Those look more like regular shorts than boxers.
ReplyDeletea center back seam is a recipe for an uncomfortable fit...
ReplyDeleteI love comfortable underwear, and always found I've had to pay a price for it...have you seen Hermes' at $500? (i never bought those...but did dream)...the ones I like at the moment are from a newer company (Pozzo & Grieve) in the US, I ran across them at a trunk show about a month ago...similar design, but in my opinion, more attractive and by the look of it more comfortable...same center back seam though, and it hasn't caused any discomfort for me...I'm going to check out Burtonwode as well though Alistair, thanks! Awesome boxers can really change how you feel in your suit, trust me (especially on a hot day in nyc).
ReplyDeleteCentre seem has never bothered me, not least because it reduces material under a suit. And i like the look of the thicker waistband - I will try these, thanks.
ReplyDeleteThe proof (in terms of price) is how comfortable the boxer is to wear and these are by far the most comfortable boxer short i have worn. I also think the packaging with the wash bag is novel and means you are less likely to throw away the packaging as supposed to a number of other boxer brands who use plastic or otherwise...
ReplyDeleteI agree, anyone who starts up their own company deserves great credit.