- May 2, 2007
- 1,316
- 12
this.Originally Posted by trethousandgt
Actually the quality IS much better than any Jordan, or other Nike retro we've seen in YEARS.Originally Posted by allthingsjordan
"Ultra premium leather".....You guys are giving Nike too much credit calling these premium leather and justifying the wrinkling on these shoes....I understand we are all excited to see these colors release but they should not come pre-wrinkled...They shouldn't even wrinkle as easy as much as they do when worn...Nike used cheap materials again and you guys are apologizing for them instead of just admitting they could've focused more on quality as usual. I would be willing to bet this is why Nike decided to not sell them on ndc...they new too many pairs came out poorly and didn't want to have to deal with the flood of returns themselves....I'm sure they thought it was a better idea to let boutiques deal with that instead...and don't be surprised when a bunch of these show up in outlets later this year because of the wrinkling issues....I mean you have guys on hear justifying the leather quality and having to poke out their own lace holes and still swearing Nike did their job on quality control!
If I had a tear in my leather would you call it "super premium"...."wow these are so soft and super premium they tore after one wear and I love them, thank you nike!"
I bought 3 pairs and one was just like the pic above and both others had certain areas that are just un-accceptable for a pair of shoes that was never put on a foot...do you guys think that Nike came looking like this with wrinkles and shiny leather back during their original releases?
In the hundreds of people that posted maybe two people had this wrinkle issue, that doesn't sound like a flood of returns to me.
The lace hole thing happens across the board with every shoe brand, let me repeat that WITH EVERY SHOE BRAND, it happened with the originals as well.
And to compare a reaction to a tear with a reaction to wrinkles (which happens to good leather anyway) is just DUMB.
And do we think the original Nike Trainer SC II came looking like this with wrinkles during their original release? YES, look at the advertisement below you can clearly see wrinkles to the leather (And the retro's leather is NOT shiny).
You actually sound like someone thats salty they didn't show up on NDC. They didn't show up on NDC most likely because boutiques kept calling up their warehouse to ship out more. There was no original intention of carrying these on NDC. Will some of these show up at outlets? Possibly, but a flood? Keep dreaming.
We can argue all day about what constitutes "good leather". I think most of us on this thread have been around long enough and had our feet in enough shoes to know the difference. I personally consider these good leather, especially compared to what they've been using on most of their retros. Protos pair looks like they used a soft, already wrinkled piece of leather in the manufacturing process. Definitely doesn't make it bad, just not like the other pairs we've seen. I personally wouldn't trip about it, but I can understand if you did.
I think people have become so accustomed to all the garbage that Nike(and especially JB) has been using in the past 4-5 years that they can't identify actual quality materials. The idea that if it doesn't wrinkle its good has weeded its way into the thought processes of alot of "sneakerheads". All this pleather/synthetic crap Nike's been pushing on us certainly doesn't crease as easily...it also doesn't flex as well either. My advice if want wrinkle free kicks, stick to pretty much all of Nike's current GR releases, leave these for the fans that know the difference....
