Black Infrared VI's returning in 2014. NO GM TALK!

[noblekane]

"It better have NA on the back". LOL If I had a $ for everytime I've read this when everyone knows full well it's never going to happen...

Never?

They just did it for the white cement 3 and all of the og 1's colorways

 

[j0e musashi]

Never?

They just did it for the white cement 3 and all of the og 1's colorways

The Retro '88's and the OG 1's were anniversary models. The III-VI's are GR. Never gonna happen. Anyone with any brains would realise this, and stop saying it.

 

[noblekane]

You just said never.

You were wrong

Do you understand what never means?

Nike can decide to slap nike air on their shoes whenever they want.

So i would never say never

 

[trueprada]

need them 88s in my get up smh slept

 

[j0e musashi]

You just said never.

You were wrong

Do you understand what never means?

Nike can decide to slap nike air on their shoes whenever they want.

So i would never say never

I said never gonna happen on the VI's.

You read it wrong, tried to be smart and still ended up wrong. Then edited your post, and you're still wrong.

Nike can put NA on the back, but JB cannot.

Black/Infrared VI's will never have NA on the back. Neither will Carmine's, Sport Blue's or Maroon's (providing they get Retro'd).

 

[noblekane]

I said never gonna happen on the VI's.

You read it wrong, tried to be smart and still ended up wrong. Then edited your post, and you're still wrong.

Nike can put NA on the back, but JB cannot.

Lol done with you

I didnt edit ****. Just added more to your complaining

You are one of them dudes who think jordan brand is its own company

 

[noblekane]

"It better have NA on the back". LOL If I had a $ for everytime I've read this when everyone knows full well it's never going to happen...

Oh wait..... You said the VI?

Lol nice try

 

[j0e musashi]

Oh wait..... You said the VI?

Lol nice try

Erm, this is the Black/Infrared VI thread. It'd be kinda odd of me to say that they'll never put NA on a pair of IV's in a thread about VI's.

You do actually know why they put Jumpman logos on the back of Jordan's nowadays right?

You'll be telling me PlayStation is the same as Sony next. Sprite is the same as Coca-Cola too I suppose?

You're a funny guy.

 

[airthompson]

You just said never.

You were wrong

Do you understand what never means?

Nike can decide to slap nike air on their shoes whenever they want.

So i would never say never

I said never gonna happen on the VI's.

You read it wrong, tried to be smart and still ended up wrong. Then edited your post, and you're still wrong.

Nike can put NA on the back, but JB cannot.

Black/Infrared VI's will never have NA on the back. Neither will Carmine's, Sport Blue's or Maroon's (providing they get Retro'd).

Will they put NA on any VI this year? Very unlikely. Can they put NA on a VI to commemorate the 25yr Anniversary of Jordans first NBA title, like the did with the III's & the slam dunk anni? Only time will tell.

It's already been proven since the Banneds, and even more so on the 88's JB can throw Nike Air on whatever they want.

 

[airthompson]

Oh wait..... You said the VI?

Lol nice try

Erm, this is the Black/Infrared VI thread. It'd be kinda odd of me to say that they'll never put NA on a pair of IV's in a thread about VI's.

You do actually know why they put Jumpman logos on the back of Jordan's nowadays right?

You'll be telling me PlayStation is the same as Sony next. Sprite is the same as Coca-Cola too I suppose?

You're a funny guy.

They started using the Jumpman on retros to separate Jordan as his own brand, but still under the Nike umbrella. However they share the same heads at the very top of the company, and same facilities, and resources. Unlike the other companies you mentioned. JB is very capable of putting NA on anything without paying royalties like people think. They're one in the same, even tho they try to act like they're not.

 

[fresh out dabox]

so why dont they place nike air on the shoes that deserve that treatment

 

[AIR J XIII]

^because will buy them without it, then buy them again with it.

 

[jjs]

^because will buy them without it, then buy them again with it.

this

i don't think they will release any 6 this year with NA.

but they can do it if they want.

And i'm sure they will in the upcoming years.

 

[hisairless]

Are these confirmed to be released this year?

 

[greatabyss43]

airthompson droppin knowledge on ppl

 

[agzie]

"The Jordan Brand, a division of Nike, is responsible for the vast majority of MJ’s earnings. Jordan partnered with Nike after being drafted by the Bulls out of North Carolina in 1984. The original five-year deal was worth $500,000 annually, plus royalties. The terms of Jordan’s current deal with Nike are a closely guarded secret, but royalties now generate more than $60 million annually for MJ, according to sources."

An excerpt from forbes- http://www.forbes.com/sites/kurtbad...michael-jordan-still-earns-80-million-a-year/

Why would Jordan need a "deal" with NIKE and receive "royalties" if it was now its own entity? There's no doubt Jordan owns a share of JB. But ultimately Nike will always be the parent company to JB. Nike doesn't need approval to stamp their own products with their name.
http://nikeinc.com/pages/our-portfolio-of-brands

The example mentioned makes no sense, it wasn't a question of whether Nike and Jordan are the same product. It was a matter of whether or not the Nike name could be used on a "Jordan Brand" product. Does Playstation have "Sony" labeled on the devices/ boxes? Does Sprite have "Coca-Cola" printed on the back of the can/ box? Does a Jordan Retro have Nike printed on the box? Of course, it's still owned by a larger company who offers a variety of products to corner the market.

Why don't they slap Nike Air back on every Jordan.. It's their ace in the hole. If sales started to decline, they can pull it back out and sell the same products all over again. At a higher profit margin.. "Limited" creates hype, business marketing.

 

[javyLSU]

There's a lot of people on here that weren't born yet when us older guys were buying the original releases of these shoes in the 80s and 90s - nothing wrong with that, but it's also up to us to share our knowledge of history with the new breed. For those of you that think Jordan and Nike are two separate companies:

I've said this before and I'll say it again... Do a little research, and actually read Nike's annual report and financial statements... I'll even give you the link:

http://investors.nikeinc.com/Invest...tails/2013/2013-Investor-Meeting/default.aspx

If you read through the presentations, you'll learn that Jordan is a BRAND that is wholly owned by Nike - it's not a separate company, nor has it ever been.  Nike created Jordan Brand as a wholly owned subsidiary, and thereby has and has always had complete control and ownership.  There are no "copyright" or "licensing" issues between the two.  Nike owns the Jordan brand (just as it owns Converse, Hurley, Umbro and some other brands) - it is NOT, nor has it ever been a separate company. The whole "Nike Air" thing is all about creating hype - Nike's core business.

Javy

 

[javyLSU]

Great post above mine, agzie

 

[j0e musashi]

I was born in 1979, and owned OG III-VI models as a kid. I'm also fully aware of where Jordan Brand lies in the Nike umbrella. It's quite different to Converse and Umbro though. Nike bought those companies, whereas Jordan Brand is just a subsidiary. Regardless, NA will never be on the back of the VI's for the simple reason that JB exists. It's pure stupidity to have a Jordan Brand shoe with NA on the back, unless it's under a very special circumstance as with the Retro '88's. It negates the entire point of having Jordan Brand in the first place, and that's why it simply won't happen.

 

[jays25]

^because will buy them without it, then buy them again with it.

This. Rep'd for a little common sense. Their shoes will sell out one way or the other too, so I doubt they even care at this point. Nike makes the money either way.

 

[noblekane]

^because will buy them without it, then buy them again with it.

Bingo

 

[unclerukus]

 

[j0e musashi]

Retro '88's were still a Jordan Brand shoe. It may well have NA on the back, but it still has Jordan on the sole, and Jordan on the box. JB shoes are separate to Nike shoes. There'll be no NA on the VI's (or probably any other model, unless it's a special) just like I said.

 

[agzie]

I was born in 1979, and owned OG III-VI models as a kid. I'm also fully aware of where Jordan Brand lies in the Nike umbrella. It's quite different to Converse and Umbro though. Nike bought those companies, whereas Jordan Brand is just a subsidiary. Regardless, NA will never be on the back of the VI's for the simple reason that JB exists. It's pure stupidity to have a Jordan Brand shoe with NA on the back, unless it's under a very special circumstance as with the Retro '88's. It negates the entire point of having Jordan Brand in the first place, and that's why it simply won't happen.

It specifically states that JB is a 'Division' of Nike, not a subsidiary.. 2 different things.
http://nikeinc.com/pages/our-portfolio-of-brands
http://smallbusiness.chron.com/differences-between-wholly-owned-subsidiaries-divisions-32631.html

Whether certain models will ever see NA again is yet to be seen. I would agree that they would most likely be a special release though.

 

[pharaohrache]

Who cares if it's NA or the jumpman? Let's be happy we still get chances at iconic shoes like this, it would take every brand to not retro sneakers for the majority of people buying them to appreciate what they're doing. Let's ask Michael if it matters since most of the people talk about the memories of NA and Mike in them.

View media item 853019
Yup, NA or not, still dope sneakers.