- 2,920
- 759
- Joined
- Mar 18, 2012
because it's only elite upper without back heel carbon fiber and no kevlar laces also and no icy translucent sole , anyway i just know they release those kind elite hybrid nice info
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: this_feature_currently_requires_accessing_site_using_safari
No other company has that kind of leverage in the basketball market, but every other company will be able to follow the trend once the standard is set. Think of it outside of the realm of sneakers for a moment. The vast majority of people know absolutely nothing about what high quality wine and liquor is supposed to be. It's been tested again and again that how people actually judge alcohol is by the price of the bottle. Similarly the vast majority of people (even the vast majority of people calling themselves sneakerheads) have no idea what actually goes into the production costs of a shoe, or how to empirically tell what the quality of a sneaker is. Once the standard is set that a high quality basketball sneaker (or bottle of wine, etc.) is supposed to cost X dollars then everything below that dollar amount is deemed low quality and "cheap." They become the new Payless sneakers that kids remember being disappointed getting instead of the new Jordans, Lebrons, [insert generational basketball star here]. Nike's been doing it for over a decade now with the Lebron line, slowly and steadily raising prices to the $180 base price we're at now. Their newest experiment is the huge price jump for the "technologically advanced" sneakers. The elite line this year and the new + line next year might flop harder than New Coke, but I doubt it. Especially if Nike manages to tap into the workout/diet craze in this country with these.
If Nike is successful with the Elite and + lines, then Adidas, Li Ning, Ball'n, UA, and every other manufacturer won't be far behind with their version. There's been a bit of talk about Adidas making the DRose III $160. Would that be possible if $160 hadn't become the baseline for retros and Lebrons over the last couple of years?
Speaking of jacked up prices, now apparently for no reason, can someone please explain this?
The Kobe VII Elite was priced at 200 dollars, correct?
So why is this shoe featuring the so called Elite upper, is now 139?
http://www.eastbay.com/product/mode...text-_-nike-zoom-kobe-vii-team-bank-colorways
The Bullets Chris Webber has "severed ties" with Nikebecause he says the company "refuses" to lower the price of itsbasketball shoe named after him, according to Frank Hughes of theWASHINGTON TIMES. Webber's three-year deal with Nike recentlyran out, and his agent, Fallasha Erwin, said that they would notnegotiate a new deal because Nike "insisted" they continue tocharge $140 for the CWebb shoe, more than any other sneaker onthe market. Erwin said he and Webber disagree with Nike's ideato target inner-city youths in an attempt to begin buying trendsthat move to the suburbs. Erwin said they also didn't like theidea that the shoe could create violence between kids who had theshoe, and those who couldn't afford it. Webber: "How can Icharge that [price] for my shoe when I speak to all those inner-city kids and preach to them? How can my shoe cost more thanMichael Jordan's?" Nike had no comment. Erwin said with nocontract, Nike cannot manufacture or sell the CWebb. Since thedeal ran out, Webber has been wore Converse's All-Star 2000.Erwin has called Converse about an endorsement, but Converse hasnot called back. For now, Webber blackens out the logo(WASHINGTON TIMES, 11/5).
Are you this angry in real life?Speaking of jacked up prices, now apparently for no reason, can someone please explain this?
The Kobe VII Elite was priced at 200 dollars, correct?
So why is this shoe featuring the so called Elite upper, is now 139?
http://www.eastbay.com/product/mode...text-_-nike-zoom-kobe-vii-team-bank-colorways
Michael Jordan will present Nike’s Phil Knight at the Basketball Hall of Fame
http://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/nba-b...il-knight-basketball-hall-153529349--nba.html
Bernard King isn't in the Hall, yet this guy gets in there?!
I did hear a story about someone I cant remember from what Category being found out and later fired for selling tech packages to another small company... but not one of the bigger one's.So people come here to complain, instead of asking a question themselves? That sounds productive...
To employees (either current or former): Were there ever any attempts that you knew of where "corporate espionage", so to speak, occurred where somehow people were approached by other companies/3rd parties/etc. to basically leak information or steal design concepts for unreleased products for another rival company? Just curious to see if this occurs and if anyone could shed light on such... Thanks in advance!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andre_AgassiAgassi finished 2005 ranked world no. 7, his 16th time in the year-end top-10 rankings, which tied Connors for the most times ranked in the top 10 at year's end. In 2005, Agassi left Nike after 17 years and signed an endorsement deal with Adidas.[sup][46][/sup] A major reason for Agassi leaving Nike was because Nike refused to donate to Agassi's charities, and Adidas was more than happy to do so.
http://chiefmarketer.com/eventmarketing/marketing_sackedNike declines to discuss what standards it applies to its athlete endorsements. “We really don't discuss how we determine which athletes we work with,” says Nike spokesman Brian Facchini.
Nope, it wasn't well documented. As was said earlier, supposedly I was exaggerating, lying, when I even brought this up, with someone even posting up how Nike is one of the most charitable businesses around.I think the Agassi situation is well documented and he spoke very strongly on Nike not contributing to his charities. It shocked me to say the least.
The name of this thread is Ask a former Nike employee, not only ask about Nike positive Nike stuff. Many ex employee's now work at other companies now, then are more than willing to share their experiences, both pro and con.So what exactly is the point- specifically your point? I look at the title of the thread and I wonder, how does this contribute to what the original intent of the thread was. I don't necessarily disagree with many of your points, but I wonder why you don't start your own thread entitled something like, "Everything that is wrong about Nike" or "Examples I can point to or reference that prove Nike is manipulative". I get that Nike clearly has some "integrity" issues and that they don't do things the way you or even I might like them to in many cases. I would say the same holds true for many majorly successful businesses throughout the world in many different categories. Doesn't make it right- doesn't make it ok- but that is reality.
Don't get me wrong- I am not telling you not to express your opinions and further back them with actual evidence, but I am just not sure this is the place. If I am completely out of line, someone feel free to correct me.
Proceed
The name of this thread is Ask a former Nike employee, not only ask about Nike positive Nike stuff. Many ex employee's now work at other companies now, then are more than willing to share their experiences, both pro and con.
My tone is only bitter to those who are on the side of Nike does everything right. For others, especially on this thread where many have applauded what I've stated, the honesty is appreciated.All I'm saying man, is that I think we get the point now, post after post, the direction you are going in. What's the point. "De-glamorize" Nike and make people "see the TRUTH behind the facade?" People always have and always will have their opinions, biases, and feelings regardless of what you might throw at them.
I don't mind that you or someone else may have had less than ideal experiences working for any company, whether it be Nike or company XYZ, and certainly don't mind you expressing that. I don't mind that you may be jaded by it and feel the need to express that to others, but at this point, your point of view seems pretty clear and I don't really get what you get out of continuing to share it. Maybe it's just that. You wanna share. Free country - free speech- have at it, just not sure what the bigger purpose is here. Start a new thread, maybe start a new forum, but the bitter/cynical tone has gotta be better served doing something else maybe??
We are adults having a discussion, a disagreement in a public forum. There isn't anything disrespectful about it, and we've both respectfully presented our positions, possibly to your dismay.Well now it's turned into a pissing match between you two so either stay on topic or PM each other how y'all feel about one another
This thread has heavily diverged from the original intent of "ask a former Nike basketball employee," in no small part because there weren't very many actual questions being asked. I haven't seen the original thread starter in here responding since the switch from yuku. It really has evolved into a general discussion of Nike's business and marketing practices as well as a q&a when a question does arise. Personally I like it as a change of pace from the lebron, kd, every other thread that's mainly just rehashing release dates, sizing, etc. with the occasional uptick of genuinely pertinent info around an actual release date.
Ultimately what I'm saying is that yes, this thread is not fulfilling its original intent, but there has been a lot of salient points made about Nike both pro and con and a relatively decent back and forth. Also, yes AKA/Longstroke's tone is... adversarial, especially on a forum where you can't hear him speak. I think we can all agree that his tone isn't adding much to the debate, but he does provide some pretty good info if you can manage to get past that. It's like reading a factually accurate political attack ad.
You seem to think that I am trying to convince you to support another brand, correct?i agree with u then i suggest longstroke to make new thread about that, that kind of response I WOULD APPRECIATE IT MUCH BETTER! than ruining somebody's thread and this way out of context already
i got your point longstroke!! i also feel about that especially years after years Nike dominate the whole sneaker game situation but i still prefer choose best of the best and never have any biased toward any brands. i can choose adidas, nike, reebok or maybe lining or any other shoes company depending what i want and of course my pocket .
but c'mon this thread about ask former employee of nike not pro-cons about nike running the business so better you make your presence somewhere else