Splurge or Steal: Crystal Covered Sandals

Today marks the start of a new column here on Style Stories, wherein we’ll highlight absolutely beautiful fashion finds—and affordable alternatives, so you can get the look for less. The first style to catch our eye happens to be the highest priced heel on eBay right now. It’s gorgeous, of course. But as soon as we saw it, we set about hunting for similar styles drizzled in rainbow crystals with an overall golden glow. Such a pretty look for the coming summer months. Check out our high/low finds and tell us which you prefer.

The High: 4″ stilettos by Rene Caovilla with a suede vamp covered in Swarovski crystals and a signature silver glitter sole. $9,999.99

The Low: colorful rhinestone gladiator sandals with a blingy bohemian bent. $49.99

What do you think—can these two sandals compare? Which one would you wear? Or is the answer obvious.

crystal ebay fashion blog high/low miu miu rene caovilla sandals swarovski

36 Comments

Maxine Harrison • May 20, 2015 at 5:45 AM
Well the high ones are nice but really the flats are more practical unless you have more money than sense , come one would you really pay that much for a pair of shoes ?
Eva morales • May 23, 2015 at 5:57 AM
#2
Phyllis Gibson • May 23, 2015 at 2:28 PM
I love’em both! The heels are obviously exquisitely designed and I can’t see me wearing them for anything other than a formal occasion. If I were stupid wealthy, I wouldn’t be able to pass them by. The sandles are really pretty, too. I can see wearing them for several different types of occasions. Like I said earlier…. I love’em both!
Linda Faline • June 7, 2015 at 6:07 PM
I love the sandals; they are so pretty and a good price
Lisa G • June 8, 2015 at 6:31 AM
Lovely!
Amy O' • June 8, 2015 at 7:49 AM
I too love both…but cost is a deciding factor of what to purchase. I would definitely buy the flats #2 sandal. I would try to wear them every chance I got. So cute!
Jane Johnson • June 8, 2015 at 12:29 PM
The sandals are darling.! Where can I buy them sweetie?
selleratheart00 • June 8, 2015 at 2:11 PM
Both are beautiful but I’m sure those are real crystals and etc on #1 but for practical, smart woman like myself I would buy#2 and rock them like their 10k. I like this high/low ideal.
janda1 • June 8, 2015 at 5:34 PM
I sooo wish I could afford the high cuz they’re sooo much more classy than the low 🙁 I have $10 grand but think my husband might kill me.. watch for me on the news tomorrow 😛
Jill Fliehman • June 9, 2015 at 5:28 AM
The sandals are cute and definitely more affordable. HOWEVER, there is nothing more beautiful than Swarovski crystals! Maybe someone attending the Oscars next year could afford them!!!
Megan • June 9, 2015 at 11:11 AM
Apparently not, I asked two of my friends with multi-millionaire boyfriends/husbands, and they even said it was ridiculous. Which takes a lot!
Vanda • June 9, 2015 at 5:02 PM
I love the sandals. How do I get some?
Nina • June 9, 2015 at 7:59 PM
Hi Jane! You can find the sandals here: http://ebay.to/1FHWYTs
Nina • June 9, 2015 at 8:00 PM
Hi Vanda! You can find them right here on eBay: http://ebay.to/1FHWYTs
BONNIE • June 10, 2015 at 4:45 AM
LOVE THEM…HOTT…
Tara • June 10, 2015 at 9:36 AM
You can see the quality difference in the stones and the soles of the shoes. I would not buy the 1st pair for obvious reasons and I would also not buy the 2nd pair because the soles look like those hard slick kind often found on cheaper shoes. I think for $50 I could find flats with bling and a good sole.
Lisa • June 10, 2015 at 9:56 AM
Love them both! I think I prefer the look of the heels but the sandals are more practical and lord, I would never spend that kind of money on a shoe. Perhaps a luxury safari in Africa instead!
Lisa
lynsi • June 10, 2015 at 3:58 PM
The flat looks a lot better in the listing, on the model. I like the flat blue evening better than the gold! But I am a heel gal and would prefer the heels even if they where the deal! Only thing I notice is on the high, the quality of the rhinestones is much better.
Thomasina Knight • June 11, 2015 at 4:09 PM
They are both awesome BUT I would wear the high ones, even though I could never justify $10,000 for a pair of shoes I’d still love to wear them, they rock! The sandals are cute too and as long as they fit well, I’d buy them for summer.
Yvette • June 12, 2015 at 9:10 AM
I absolutely love them both but since I don’t really wear heels of course I would go with the affordable flats. Where can I purchase them? LOL 😀
Melissa B • June 12, 2015 at 8:24 PM
Beautiful. If I had 10k laying around I would buy them without remorse. As for the flats, their cute. Id get them.
Chrissy • June 13, 2015 at 2:25 PM
I ‘d pick the lovely flat sandals. Oh and if a nice 1 or 2 inch wedge was added, it would be ideal to make these shoes perfect for any occasion.
Josiah • June 14, 2015 at 4:51 AM
I think that they’re both hideous. That much glitter and shine doesn’t look good. Perhaps if the first pair were solid gold or platinum they would be worth it.
sandra • June 15, 2015 at 4:08 PM
Love them both, would love to have them in my closet
Remember • June 16, 2015 at 1:08 AM
I love the Heels. Aside from the ridiculous price tag, I’m far too old to be wearing something like that but the flats are just hideous…and ridiculous. those glass and plastic stones are a joke and what is all that mess coming out up from the heel? This look like something from a payless 1/2 price sale. Ug-A-ly.
Vernell Little • June 16, 2015 at 12:29 PM
I .purchased the flat sandals to wear on Vacation last month in Punta Cana. I attended a Black and Bling Party, and my shoes were everything. I got so many compliments for under $50 I felt like a million. They were comfortable and a great asset, especially for the price I paid for them.
karen • June 17, 2015 at 12:51 PM
This is why you need to really know your products and prices. The $9,999.00 shoes were originally sold at places like Neiman’s for $1475.00. I have 2 pair of RC heels and have loved her designs for years, but have never known her to have a pair for 10K. Swarovski does not even make custom ones that go over $4k for this style for celebrities! I think this seller is a hoot for thinking that RC shoes are worth that price. RC sandals are great, but I bought mine for formal events. They are not comfortable for standing.
justjudi1 • June 17, 2015 at 4:07 PM
Oh… decisions, decisions! The heels for dressy and the flats for everyday… both are awesome!
Claudine Wilson • June 17, 2015 at 5:26 PM
OMG… Millionaire Boyfriends! Forget the shoes, I need to get one of those men!
Virginia • June 18, 2015 at 4:33 PM
No comparison – the stones on the first shoes way nicer, although not worth the price IMO.
The second pair are very cheap looking, especially the heel. Would not pay $50 nor would I wear.
BostonApril • June 19, 2015 at 7:51 AM
The less expensive pair would be cute if they did not have the thong…I can’t tolerate anything between my toes. No flip flop style sandals for me!
Tamara • June 19, 2015 at 10:23 AM
Really Claudine! Why do you need a man to buy you shoes – geez woman, do it for yourself. I have a millionaire husband but I earn my share too. As for the shoes, expensive does not mean tasteful – both are horrible!
Paula • June 19, 2015 at 3:22 PM
The first ones are outstandingly beautiful. If I was wealthy enough to buy them, I wouldn’t. I think, in anything, there comes a limit to what you will pay for an item, no matter what.
Erin • June 20, 2015 at 3:52 PM
That’s exactly what I was thinking!! Maybe someone like Halle Berry or Charlize Theron. Not Jennifer Lawrence, knowing her, she’d trip in them, lol!
Eric • July 9, 2015 at 6:23 AM
I am a stone cutter and designer for everything from jewelery to graphics and architecture. I must say over all I like #1 more than the #2, however the price is simply ridiculous. Swarovski “crystal” is nothing more than a nice glass and is mostly worthless compared to natural crystal. if they had some pink tourmaline, opals, tanzanite, aquamarine, ruby, etc, then the shoes would be worth the ridiculous price. Shoe #2, something about plastic stones makes me ill. #2 should be reserved for children only, and cost no more than 10 dollars.
Nicole • July 10, 2015 at 3:46 PM
Really Tamara? I’m sure Claudine’s comment was meant In a funny way. I joke with my girls about that kind of stuff all the time.