Ive been buying these for work pants. The oldest ones still look good and haven't shrunk at all. I buy a size smaller as the fit is loose. It's like losing 2 inches on my waistline without having to diet 🙃

Jeans look nice, fit is good, quality is poor. The jeans split not at the seam but right next to seam down the inner thigh. These jeans are not made to work in. For the money they are fine but not to do manual labor.

These stand up better than other pants I have bought that cost more. My job is alot of work on pants. These are by far best overall. I got them in black and wash them every week (I have 5 pair) they don't fade fast like others.

Length is shorter than stated. I’ve always gotten the same size jeans. These seemed like the were one size shorter than stated. I returned them. You might have a different experience.

The jeans look phenomenal. They look like high price name brand jeans. The fading is perfect. The stretchy jean material is very comfortable. The waist and length was spot on. I would highly recommend these to my friends and family.

The previous style of Members Mark jeans were thick and durable. But this new style with the stretch is not durable. I can no longer spend money on jeans that won't last more than a few weeks.

I bought two pair one black and one denim blue. The black pair was not fit to size. It was too small. The blue pair fit well so I had to bring the black pair back because there’s no way of trying the pants on before you buy them.

Sizing changed, bought the 34" waist size last year for my husband. They didn't stretch too much and they wore well, so I decided to order more. Ordered same size last month and the waist was too big.

This is probably the fourth or fifth time I have purchased Member's Mark denim jeans. That in it's self should tell you what I think of these jeans and the price you can not beet.

These are missing two belt loops, this allows a belt to ride up. I noticed on the LAST pair of these I bought, and have checked at my local store repeatedly to see if this has been corrected, it has not.