Early Releases are High Quality Fakes

[Bert.]

this makes me want to take a pair of retros beat them up and send them to nike for a voucher and see what happens.

if you guys want paypal me money for it and ill do it. if they are fake they would send them back with a letter, correct? and if they send me a voucher they are A OK?

 

[sneakerfan1]

I've explained it a million freaking times. It's just not that simple!!
But, I'll ask you a reverse oversimplified question - if the products are authentic Jordans, then why is their production a criminal offense?

Again, only the distribution channel is fake. The shoe itself isnt. If it is made to the exact specifications that Nike would normally have it made with, and made with same materials and everything, I bet you could buy a "real" Jordan and return the "fake" straight to Nike and someone else will buy it and NEVER once be called out on it and even Nike wouldnt know.

As for the Dell example then according to your logic if I buy a Dell and replace the CPU with something a lot more powerful, I no longer have a dell, since I got the computer and replaced a part with another part that I didnt buy from Dell.

Wanted to stay out of this thread, but his point went over your head.  If you buy a Dell and change something it's still a Dell.

Consider this the equivalent of buying a pair of J's and lace swapping or customizing it in some way, shape or form.  It's still a pair of Jordans.

Must resist the urge to get too wrapped up into this topic...

 

[sunshineblotters]

Okay fine I get that^ but you can wear Jordans with no laces, you can not run a computer without a CPU

But putting it in perspective. I WOULD grab an unauthorized A-grade/grey market shoe, I would get a real Jordan with the Nike seal of approval, I WOULD NOT get a B-grade dont care if it is sold at a Nike outlet or not. I dont care for the seal of approval. But to say that these shoes that Nike did put out on the market are "real" Jordans yet unauthorized A-grades are not is foolishness. (pictures taken from jordan blunders/mistakes thread):

These all passed Jordan quality control and was sold at places like Champs and Footlocker.
How the hell are these authentic Jordans but unauthorized A-grades are fakes?
The bottom two pics are worse than unauthorized B-grades

 

[koolchris95]

What's the point of even copping early? To be the first with them? Smh @ hype beast these day.

 

[Bert.]

What's the point of even copping early? To be the first with them? Smh @ hype beast these day.

but but but all the celebrities are doing it!!!!

 

[soleyz]

Okay fine I get that^ but you can wear Jordans with no laces, you can not run a computer without a CPU
But putting it in perspective. I WOULD grab an unauthorized A-grade/grey market shoe, I would get a real Jordan with the Nike seal of approval, I WOULD NOT get a B-grade dont care if it is sold at a Nike outlet or not. I dont care for the seal of approval. But to say that these shoes that Nike did put out on the market are "real" Jordans yet unauthorized A-grades are not is foolishness. (pictures taken from jordan blunders/mistakes thread):

These all passed Jordan quality control and was sold at places like Champs and Footlocker.
How the hell are these authentic Jordans but unauthorized A-grades are fakes?

The bottom two pics are worse than unauthorized B-grades

It's crazy to believe those were passed through quality control. I honestly don't think those could possibly be factory approved by nike? What sources are you getting this info from?

 

[theprinceofde]

It's crazy to believe those were passed through quality control. I honestly don't think those could possibly be factory approved by nike? What sources are you getting this info from?

he doesn't need sources these are real live situations where people have received their sneakers and they have defects, they then share them on sites like this and we all can see how poor JB quality control is.

you need a source for everything now days huh

 

[soleyz]

WTH do you mean - the pairs in question aren't produced by Nike so they never pass inspection - they never undergo Nike inspection... by definition.

Very true. Just put yourself in Nikes shoes. You're the one who created Nike; you're the founder. All of a sudden you have people using some of your material making your shoes who do not have your permission or have any authority to sell your products. Then people claim they're "authentic"? That's a slap in the face, wouldn't you think? I know the high quality fakes being produced now are almost identical to authentic pairs but I've seen some videos that show the high quality products cutting corners that a person would not be able to see. Like the comfort of the shoes and etc...(although, the authentic retro pairs are so great either comfort wise but at least better than the high quality fakes) Honestly, people should just buy shoes on release date and from creditable sources like footlocker, footaction, finishline if they don't know whether to trust a certain site or shop... Then there wouldn't be any arguments of authenticity. However, for those who don't care, its up to them about what they buy. It's just important for people who want a genuine authentic product to be aware of this.

 

[soleyz]

he doesn't need sources these are real live situations where people have received their sneakers and they have defects, they then share them on sites like this and we all can see how poor JB quality control is.
you need a source for everything now days huh

 haha It helps back up what you say is all and makes it looks more credible. Still crazy though

 

[sunshineblotters]

It's crazy to believe those were passed through quality control. I honestly don't think those could possibly be factory approved by nike? What sources are you getting this info from?

LOL how long have you been collecting?
If you have been doing this for a while it should not be a surprise. i bought two pairs factory approved by Nike that were terrible since last year alone! FR IVs this year were a disaster, just look at the thread starting from page 40 or so. The average unauthorized B-Grade was a higher quality than that shoe. My BM Vs had more glue than the Cavs pictured above had mold. It took forever to clean it. Look at the Oly VI thread, soles are browning right out of the box. Again we all know that kicks crease, stain, and their soles brown, but it shouldn't look years old after the first wear.

If **** like that can pass Nike inspections, then the seal of approval does not mean ****. Have you ever seen faulty Coca Colas cans/bottles pass inspection at Coca Cola bottling company? No, they have an image to uphold. As a result you won't buy the equivalent of B-grade coke bottles. If on the other hand Coke cans frequently had Fantas or Sprite in them or some harmful substance, or cans frequently weren't vacuum sealed enough, causing you to buy flat sodas, then you wouldnt give a **** about the Coca Cola seal of approval now would you?

 

[airmax3]

once again ill just end this thread. i dont support or care about early release shoes, those who buy them, good for you.
if they are made in the same factory, same materials, same time as production, same everything, same detail as every single shoe made then how are they fake? someone explain that.

EXACTLY!!!

 

[sunshineblotters]

^Not a single person has answered that. Id even go as far as to say if it is made by materials purchased at the same time as other material but produced at a different time they are still real.

 

[sunshineblotters]

Hell to add to my dell example. If i paid a laborer who works the machines at dell to manufacture a dell for me, off the books, and i would pay him reasonably, are you telling me i have a fake dell? In what way would that dell be fake?

 

[eltouha]

^indeed. we're all jb fans, but the extent to which many of these blind fanatics defend the beloved brand is completely irrational.

 

[jakes]

Real/Fake is a very subjective matter in many of the factories in China.

I like purchasing through large retailers, adds to the quality of the product for me. It's hard to explain, it's a feeling of reassurance and officialness ?

Either way, as I said in the other thread about early sellers I believe they are B-grade and not the same product, from manufacturing to distribution. 

But cats will still cop and good for them, allows me to cop official releases more easily.

 

[airmax3]

Its funny because what if these "early releasers" decided to sell their jordans the day they released, now everyone assumes theyre real because they arent being sold early, orcourse if they look pretty much the same.  Jordans still go way over retail after the release date any way, so whats the difference.  I think many of us can tell the difference between real FAKES, and a B-grade.  The differences are pretty obvious.  I dont know why everyone is acting like this is all new stuff.  Just because Nike never authorized the pair, def doesnt make it fake.  Its the same exact thing.  And no I never bought an early release pair so I really dont care.  People need to stop re assuring themselves and saying people bought fakes just because they decided to wait till release date.  who cares.

 

[airmax3]

Besides, the OP's reasoning as to why some of these are "fake" because of the prices they are bein sold at, what makes you think these guys are getting them for the suggested retail price???   Come on man....

 

[250caddy]

But, that's my point. Authentic is an absolute term - there's no mitigation possible. It's a yes or no question - not a good enough for me question.
If high quality replicas are good enough for you, that's okay. But, that doesn't mean you call them "authentic" as if they meet that definition. Some people use the term "authentic replica," even though that's the an oxymoron. But, if if you must use that term, then there you have it - authentic replicas are good enough for you. That's your decision, and it's no sweat of my back - I don't care how you spend your money. This is an issue of principle to me, that's all.
Mainly, i was "lucky" because I've been doing this for a long time. I don't have to deal with this madness and have no desire to. I haven't even tried to purchase an XI at retail since 2001, for example. It's harder nowadays. Back in the day, you didn't have to be a detective to buy sneakers.

I get where you're coming from. For the record, I've never bought a early release pair, nor do I intend to, mainly because the whole thing seems too shady to me.

Here's a question for you. Would you call any Jordan's that don't have a receipt "Authentic Replicas"? Because at the end of the day, that's really the only PHYSICAL difference between a grey market shoe and a shoe copped at a store, if they're made the same, from the same materials, from the same factory. For example, most shoes in the Buy/Sell Forum DON'T come with receipts. On this site, it's against the board rules to sell fakes on here, right? And, according to your definition, if you cannot definitively prove the shoe came from a retail store (ex. a receipt), then the shoe can only be called an Authentic Replica right? So, then 80-90% of the shoes currently for sale here, would then be deemed "Authentic Replicas" because they don't have a receipt, yes?

I have a couple pairs of J's that I bought off this site, and eBay, that have no receipts. They're 100% Authentic in terms of stitching, colors, shape, quality, blah blah blah. I'm sure 99% of people would consider them "Authentic" based on the box, inner tag, shape, colors, stitching etc, even without a receipt. I'm sure TONS of people on this site also own pairs with no receipts. I know, me personally, that I consider them legit, and I'm sure everyone else that owns J's with no receipts considers them legit, and not authentic replicas. For me, the line between grey market and authentic shoes is less definitive then you think.

Some food for thought anyways, very good discussion!

 

[soleyz]

LOL how long have you been collecting?

If you have been doing this for a while it should not be a surprise. i bought two pairs factory approved by Nike that were terrible since last year alone! FR IVs this year were a disaster, just look at the thread starting from page 40 or so. The average unauthorized B-Grade was a higher quality than that shoe. My BM Vs had more glue than the Cavs pictured above had mold. It took forever to clean it. Look at the Oly VI thread, soles are browning right out of the box. Again we all know that kicks crease, stain, and their soles brown, but it shouldn't look years old after the first wear.
If **** like that can pass Nike inspections, then the seal of approval does not mean ****. Have you ever seen faulty Coca Colas cans/bottles pass inspection at Coca Cola bottling company? No, they have an image to uphold. As a result you won't buy the equivalent of B-grade coke bottles. If on the other hand Coke cans frequently had Fantas or Sprite in them or some harmful substance, or cans frequently weren't vacuum sealed enough, causing you to buy flat sodas, then you wouldnt give a **** about the Coca Cola seal of approval now would you?

I guess I haven't been collecting enough..:X Lol but I have been buying Jordans for awhile now. I never experienced anything like that. I could be lucky. Again, I was surprised to read about what passes through quality control but I didn't say it's not impossible. I'm sure Coca Cola has some faulty cans/bottles as well that managed to get through inspection. These are huge companies we are talking about and perfection would be pretty difficult to achieve. Thanks for your insight btw.

 

[digital022]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Not sure why you're getting so caught up in the legality of it.

There seems to be a grey area in the law that allows this to happen, otherwise the grey market wouldn't exist. 

Can't knock the hustle, they're supplying a demand. Either partake, or don't.

 

[airmax3]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Not sure why you're getting so caught up in the legality of it.

There seems to be a grey area in the law that allows this to happen, otherwise the grey market wouldn't exist. 

Can't knock the hustle, they're supplying a demand. Either partake, or don't.

x10000

 

[sunshineblotters]

Meh, it is luck of the draw I guess.

Yah it is impossible to achieve perfection, but you should at least adhere to a standard

Well back in the day, and not TOO long ago coke bottles used to explode all the time. Back then the rule was if you apply by a certain standard, you could get away with products malfunctioning as long as the product itself was not dangerous and you did your job so good that there is just "no possible way" to prevent it. You better believe the Coca Cola bottling co was THE standard in bottling soft drinks. Then courts made a law called strict liability. The law states that if you put a product on the market, and you later found out it is dangerous, then you are at fault whether or not you knew about it and it didnt matter how much R&D you put into it. So in order for Coke not to get sued left and right, they had to change their bottling process so people didnt get hurt from exploding bottles. So off course they switched materials and made the bottling damn near perfect. Yah im sure that there are some faulty cans out there. But never in my life have I had one and you can survey the entire population and you will not find many who have experienced a faulty bottle/can since. If they did I can almost guarantee it was not Coca Cola's fault, but someone else's in the distribution channel.

Now compare that Nike. Survey people about their Jordan experiences and see that a ridiculous amount of people have gotten faulty pairs that passed inspection. Like I said before check the Jordan Blunders and Mistakes thread, the Fire Red IV release thread, the Olympic VI thread and look at how many people had pears that had what Coca Cola would consider a major defect, im sure, if they were in the business of selling shoes.

When you think about it in those lines, your seal of approval is worth whatever you make it out to be. Nike's just happens to be trash in my eyes. FFS they have released pairs worse than unauthorized B-Grades. It is almost to the point where complete fakes and Nike approved pairs can have the same quality depending on your luck

 

[dtb00201]

once again ill just end this thread. i dont support or care about early release shoes, those who buy them, good for you.
if they are made in the same factory, same materials, same time as production, same everything, same detail as every single shoe made then how are they fake? someone explain that.

I actually agree with you on that part. If the shoe meets all of that criteria, I would call that an authentic shoe. If it's from the same production run that was scheduled by Nike, I'm cool with them making extra pairs and flipping them.

Now explain to me why Space Jams are still in production. We don't have a single clue where these shoes are being made and who's actually making them. For all we know a former factory employee decided to make the Michael Scott Paper Company of shoe production and went on his own.

 

[sunshineblotters]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, it's a duck.

Not sure why you're getting so caught up in the legality of it.

There seems to be a grey area in the law that allows this to happen, otherwise the grey market wouldn't exist. 

Can't knock the hustle, they're supplying a demand. Either partake, or don't.

There must be a grey area in Chicago law that allows murders to happen then, since about half of murders here go unsolved. Or a grey area in the law that allows rape, or all rapist would be behind bars.

See what I did there?

 

[soleyz]

Meh, it is luck of the draw I guess.
Yah it is impossible to achieve perfection, but you should at least adhere to a standard
Well back in the day, and not TOO long ago coke bottles used to explode all the time. Back then the rule was if you apply by a certain standard, you could get away with products malfunctioning as long as the product itself was not dangerous and you did your job so good that there is just "no possible way" to prevent it. You better believe the Coca Cola bottling co was THE standard in bottling soft drinks. Then courts made a law called strict liability. The law states that if you put a product on the market, and you later found out it is dangerous, then you are at fault whether or not you knew about it and it didnt matter how much R&D you put into it. So in order for Coke not to get sued left and right, they had to change their bottling process so people didnt get hurt from exploding bottles. So off course they switched materials and made the bottling damn near perfect. Yah im sure that there are some faulty cans out there. But never in my life have I had one and you can survey the entire population and you will not find many who have experienced a faulty bottle/can since. If they did I can almost guarantee it was not Coca Cola's fault, but someone else's in the distribution channel.
Now compare that Nike. Survey people about their Jordan experiences and see that a ridiculous amount of people have gotten faulty pairs that passed inspection. Like I said before check the Jordan Blunders and Mistakes thread, the Fire Red IV release thread, the Olympic VI thread and look at how many people had pears that had what Coca Cola would consider a major defect, im sure, if they were in the business of selling shoes.
When you think about it in those lines, your seal of approval is worth whatever you make it out to be. Nike's just happens to be trash in my eyes. FFS they have released pairs worse than unauthorized B-Grades. It is almost to the point where complete fakes and Nike approved pairs can have the same quality depending on your luck

Thanks for the response! This topic is definitely controversial.. but really good discussion going on

I see the reason why Coca Cola was so strict on their standards. It looks to me like Coke pushing for stricter quality control was fueled by the thought of being sued from producing products that could be potentially dangerous.

That's probably a good reason why Jordan Brand isn't as strict as Coca Cola on quality control because they're products don't automatically pose as potentially being dangerous.

And also, we're talking about a coke bottle/can compared to a shoe. It seems to me standards would be more difficult for Nike.

I wish Nike would just add something to each of their shoes that would guarantee the shoe was 100% authentic. Some sort of mark or something... (ex. 2012 Cement 4s.. they added the twenty twelve I believe in the middle of the tongue.) So there wouldn't be any arguing or come out with some statement.