- 10,646
- 9,738
- Joined
- May 19, 2004
Originally Posted by BIP Roberts
I wear my stuff too. Not trying to be condescending, but if you don't understand what is so superior about '99 Vs vs. CDPs, then I'm not really sure what I can tell you. I understand your point if the prior releases aren't rockable... like the IVs for example, which are notorious for crumbling.Originally Posted by 1C3M4M
Originally Posted by BIP Roberts
Don't really know why people went in on the CDPs. They were a gimmick, IMO, and about half of the shoes would have been dead weight at OUTLETS had they released individually. What the CDP was useful for was a quick and dirty way for noobs to get a complete 1-23 set. But, if you're going to spend 3 Gs for Jordans, you would have been better off buying half as many quality older releases. 310 for a 5/18 pack, when you could get a pair of '99 Vs for less than that? Really, is a crappy pair of XVIIIs, ones that many tried to sell like $100, worth the difference between a 99 V and the CDP V?
As long as those who bought them were/are happy, that's all that matters, but I think the whole CDP madness was basically a foolish way for somebody to spend 3K on Jordans in a year. I don't support the idea of bundling a "hot" shoe with an "outlet" shoe, to compel customers to pay retail for something they otherwise wouldn't in order to get the piece they really want. So, I didn't buy a single pack. I was tempted to buy the Carmine pack, but I had no desire for the XVII, so I didn't buy it on principle.
Why buy a pair of 99 v's to rock tho when you can get a cdp pair? Never understood the reason to cop a og shoe when the same shoe just retroed, im not a collector I wear my stuff so i want my shoes to be wearable, i could give 2 feces abt a nike air logo
ijapino, i hate you fam
Are you old enough to remember OG Vs? At that time, Nike was still making lots of shoes that weren't "Air." "Nike Air" on the back of the Vs was like the biggest inscription of "Nike Air" on any shoe out at the time. It's shallow, but it was a big deal. And, that huge "Nike Air" on the back was as defining a characteristic of the shoe as any. Just like the netting, or the reflective tongue. So, without it, the retro loses luster, IMO. Every change from the original is a demerit. And, this "Nike Air" to Jumpman is a huge change; it's ostensibly a rebranding of the shoe. Retros are about nostalgia and memories, so therefore accuracy to the original is important. It's about looking back to a different era, when there's a major change, it doesn't reflect the past - completely to the contrary, it just serves to emphasize that things aren't the same anymore.
And, of course, you have the issues relating to the quality of the product, which is a whole other discussion unto itself.
BIP, you are 100% dead on. I actually caved in bought a few of these packs as I needed one shoe to complete my I-XXIII set. The quality of the shoes in this package is atrocious and the worst offender has to be the CDP XIs. Till this day I kick myself for lining up at 4AM to buy the pack only to be disappointed at the brick/cast like feel of the XIs when I tried 'em on at home.
I feel you on the 'Nike Air' issue, but quality and comfort are far more important in my books and only a few CDP shoes delivered on the latter while all lacked on the former. As you stated most of the paired shoes were outlet fodder and there was an overall lack of creativity with the non-OG colourways.
Finally those talking about resale value seriously need to do some more research. I had to literally give away the ashy suede XXs for $50 and on top of that the buyer had the nerve to ask me if they were authentic. There's just a handful of shoes in the CDP that will command $200+ from buyers but that will last only until JB decides to re-retro those colourways again.