Tuesday 15 March 2011

Clarks got it so wrong - in my opinion


I have just discovered pram shoes - new baby shoes - from Clarks, and without seeing them, my first impression is that they've got it so so wrong.

On their website they say:

We still believe barefoot is best. But sometimes, perhaps when baby’s out and about in their pram or pushchair, it’s good to know that those tiny feet are safe, snug and sound.

So it would appear they are just a pram shoe which is what they're calling them BUT, there are so many mixed messages within the website, as there are shoes pictured when you click on crawling.

For example:


Features the Lucy Lou which has a buckle...

Four shoes are pictured when you are here: http://www.clarks.co.uk/first-shoes/crawling

And the pram shoe which should/could be soft enough to crawl, has a toggle on the front, which wouldn't be nice to dig into little feet when crawling, hence why they define it as a pram shoe maybe....?

I prefer the current equivalent, (pre shoes) which are cheaper, do not have a toggle, and which we received Saturday and blogged about here

I don't know if I am wrong, because crawling and babies and shoes are new to me, being a first time mum, but I personally find the Clarks' website very confusing...

Oh, and I have just noticed the "handle" on the back of these new pram shoes - that would just help Aaron get them off, and what I love about the pre shoes is that they stay on (even without a toggle).

And one more thing:
Here: http://www.clarks.co.uk/features/pram-shoes
they show a beautiful box that they will arrive in, and on the box it says "first shoes" yet they are calling them pram shoes.  Maybe I am a bit of a geek but I like things to have one name...!

Something tells me this product's been launched in too much of a hurry or something?

Back for an additional comment.  Just found 3 mummy bloggers who've reviewed the Clarks pram shoes... 2 of them got someone else to do it........? and the 3rd, the baby hasn't been born yet, so the review is based on her current opinion till they try them on....

Clarks, why can't you send your shoes to bloggers with babies that they will fit...?

Liska x

On 30th March this post was entered into:
ShowOff Showcase


  1. I still don't really get the whole pram shoe/ pre shoe/ first shoe thing. Maybe I will when the baby's here but my cousin's wife gave me a pair and it just looks pointless.

  2. We're still quite fussy about the shoes we put on our little girl, even at nearly three. My cousin buys her daughters shoes from Soft Star as they're into the whole barefoot movement, but I live in an area where we probably wouldn't have go to too far to tread on a hypodermic needle, so soft soled shoes are out for us! We just try to make sure we always put her in shoes that dont rub, have good arch support and give her planty of room for her toes.

  3. Mine never had pram shoes, firstly because I am a big bare foot believer and their feet are so tiny and not formed properly yet and secondly because of cost. It was only when they got up on their feet that I got first shoes. I have to say we did get ours from clarks and we though the service was very good. They had a proper fitting, time was spent on them and then they got their photo taken with them on. I would recommend going in. x

  4. I'm a big barefoot believer too, mine don't even have slippers in the house.

    I do get their proper shoes from clarks though, as I think shoes should be measured to fit and clarks have been very good when I have had problems.

    Those shoes are cute though :-)

  5. Burton didn't wear anything on his feet when he was a baby - just socks or bare feet. I didn't see the point when they are growing so fast and i think when they a so small it is best to leave them free to grow. Since Burton started to walk he was given a pair of shoes and I do use Clarks because I believe they make good Childrens shoes (and charge enough forthe privilege!). At home evenmnw he has bare feet instead of slippers.

  6. You make really good points that I completely agree with. I have a bug-bear about the design of children's shoes, shoes in general actually. I hate it when they don't cut a little notch out of the back of the ankle to allow your ankle to bed and straighten without having a chunk of leather digging in your achilles' tendon.

    The Boy didn't wear any shoes until he was about 13-14 months; he went bare or wearing socks. I think I once put him in a pair of soft furry ugg style (M&S knock-off) boots that a friend gave him, when it was really cold. His first pair of shoes were a pair of cheapy Doodles-style shoes which he started wearing in July last year. He didn't have a pair of proper leather shoes until September or October.

    Thanks for linking up to ShowOff ShowCase :-)

    (Please can you see if you can get the name/url option in your comments?)

  7. I don't see the need for shoes for babies, mine either had bare feet or socks wherever possible but as they were late walkers (15,16 & 17mths) shoes were a necessity in the colder months just to keep their socks on & feet warm. My daughter had Clarks crawler shoes & they had the toggle on but they were re-called for some reason so wonder why they have chosen to go with the toggles again. I do buy the Clarks school shoes for my 2 school age children as they are very good quality and do last a long while, even with daily battering from a football.

  8. My two boys both got soft shoes, similar to Clarks but from Jo Jo Mama Bebe, when they were I guess around 7or8 monhts or so, the point where they were interested in pulling themselves up and standing holding on to the sofa etc.
    They wore them when we were out in the park to keep feet warm and a bit more comfy if they were out of the pram and playing on the ground.


Drop me a line, and I will visit you right back - as soon as I get chance. Thanks for your comment.