***New Reebok Pick-Ups, Release Info, etc.***

[jacobmontana]

Originally Posted by vood99

Originally Posted by DeadStock Js

^^^I hear this a lot with people complaining about Reebok and why they dont bring back the Shaq's, Kemp Kamikaze, and the Emmit Smith Pre-Seasons. There are 2 reasons for this, the first being that they dont have the molds for any more of these original models and in order to make the molds it cost over $100K to do so, and they have to make a crazy amount of the shoes in order to get the order placed, something like 50,000 pairs. If they brought back the Shaq's they dont want to make that many, they want them to be limited. The Second reason is all those guys had contracts where if these shoes ever got made again they would have to be compensated for that, mainly for the fact that it was their signature shoe and for instance Shaq had his logo on the shoe, not quite sure if Kemp and Emmit had logos.

With the case of Nike doing limited shoes its easier because the molds already exist so they do not have to put the initial investment in for the mold, and if they do decide to do it any way they just take a hit on that shoe and make that money up somewhere else.

Thanks for dropping the facts. Nike can get away with retooling and butchering their classics but Reebok can't mess around. Their re-imagining of the Kamikazes, Blasts and Preachers are pretty neat though. Well priced and very comfortable.

  

DJ...if they dont have the molds for these models than why do they still have the molds for all,of their other older models like Bringbacks, Court Victories...etc? It seems ridiculous that they would destroy a mold for Shaq but keep one for Michael Chang.

 

[tokes99]

Originally Posted by jacobmontana

Originally Posted by vood99

DeadStock Js wrote:

---

^^^I hear this a lot with people complaining about Reebok and why they dont bring back the Shaq's, Kemp Kamikaze, and the Emmit Smith Pre-Seasons. There are 2 reasons for this, the first being that they dont have the molds for any more of these original models and in order to make the molds it cost over $100K to do so, and they have to make a crazy amount of the shoes in order to get the order placed, something like 50,000 pairs. If they brought back the Shaq's they dont want to make that many, they want them to be limited. The Second reason is all those guys had contracts where if these shoes ever got made again they would have to be compensated for that, mainly for the fact that it was their signature shoe and for instance Shaq had his logo on the shoe, not quite sure if Kemp and Emmit had logos.

With the case of Nike doing limited shoes its easier because the molds already exist so they do not have to put the initial investment in for the mold, and if they do decide to do it any way they just take a hit on that shoe and make that money up somewhere else.

Thanks for dropping the facts. Nike can get away with retooling and butchering their classics but Reebok can't mess around. Their re-imagining of the Kamikazes, Blasts and Preachers are pretty neat though. Well priced and very comfortable.

  

DJ...if they dont have the molds for these models than why do they still have the molds for all,of their other older models like Bringbacks, Court Victories...etc? It seems ridiculous that they would destroy a mold for Shaq but keep one for Michael Chang.


all of those reasons could be true in the case of reebok, cost, out-dated technology that no longer exists or can be supplied, order numbers, factory capability, internal politics, relationships with prior athletes all factor, though not in every case are they equal or even relevant. i'm sure the cost could be amortized (that is, stretched out over time) at an initial loss, because they would almost certainly be keeping those molds in rotation for the foreseeable future...you also have to figure how many of any of those models would or EVEN could really do a respectable amount of business

as for the wherewithal footwear companies had as to what mold(s) to keep or destroy...it was TOTALLY random, you have to remember that this retro stuff is a relatively new phenomenon. companies (and more importantly the factories they contract) were not thinking that they would need those blueprints, drawings, and in this case, molds, sometimes they were stored (which can take up alot of space for full size runs of all those sneakers!), and in other cases they were "destroyed" (mold are made from metal, (aluminum, brass, copper, maybe even iron or steel)---expensive stuff) which mainly means recycled so they could use that metal to make molds for newer shoes, instead of spending $$$ to get new metal.

i would think that the same is true for both adidas & nike and any other brand that is doing retro product...is likely having to re-create older product by reverse engineering it, because it is rare that the original documents, even people who worked on that original product to still be with the company. the reason most of the stuff that stuck around (think af1s, reebok classic leathers, adidas shell toes), is because they never really stopped making them. really the biggest difference is that each of the brands has a very different approach to product in general, and thus both from a retail & consumer standpoint, it makes easier/harder for the respective brands to bring back/make certain products...

 

[tokes99]

Originally Posted by jacobmontana

Originally Posted by vood99

DeadStock Js wrote:

---

^^^I hear this a lot with people complaining about Reebok and why they dont bring back the Shaq's, Kemp Kamikaze, and the Emmit Smith Pre-Seasons. There are 2 reasons for this, the first being that they dont have the molds for any more of these original models and in order to make the molds it cost over $100K to do so, and they have to make a crazy amount of the shoes in order to get the order placed, something like 50,000 pairs. If they brought back the Shaq's they dont want to make that many, they want them to be limited. The Second reason is all those guys had contracts where if these shoes ever got made again they would have to be compensated for that, mainly for the fact that it was their signature shoe and for instance Shaq had his logo on the shoe, not quite sure if Kemp and Emmit had logos.

With the case of Nike doing limited shoes its easier because the molds already exist so they do not have to put the initial investment in for the mold, and if they do decide to do it any way they just take a hit on that shoe and make that money up somewhere else.

Thanks for dropping the facts. Nike can get away with retooling and butchering their classics but Reebok can't mess around. Their re-imagining of the Kamikazes, Blasts and Preachers are pretty neat though. Well priced and very comfortable.

  

DJ...if they dont have the molds for these models than why do they still have the molds for all,of their other older models like Bringbacks, Court Victories...etc? It seems ridiculous that they would destroy a mold for Shaq but keep one for Michael Chang.


all of those reasons could be true in the case of reebok, cost, out-dated technology that no longer exists or can be supplied, order numbers, factory capability, internal politics, relationships with prior athletes all factor, though not in every case are they equal or even relevant. i'm sure the cost could be amortized (that is, stretched out over time) at an initial loss, because they would almost certainly be keeping those molds in rotation for the foreseeable future...you also have to figure how many of any of those models would or EVEN could really do a respectable amount of business

as for the wherewithal footwear companies had as to what mold(s) to keep or destroy...it was TOTALLY random, you have to remember that this retro stuff is a relatively new phenomenon. companies (and more importantly the factories they contract) were not thinking that they would need those blueprints, drawings, and in this case, molds, sometimes they were stored (which can take up alot of space for full size runs of all those sneakers!), and in other cases they were "destroyed" (mold are made from metal, (aluminum, brass, copper, maybe even iron or steel)---expensive stuff) which mainly means recycled so they could use that metal to make molds for newer shoes, instead of spending $$$ to get new metal.

i would think that the same is true for both adidas & nike and any other brand that is doing retro product...is likely having to re-create older product by reverse engineering it, because it is rare that the original documents, even people who worked on that original product to still be with the company. the reason most of the stuff that stuck around (think af1s, reebok classic leathers, adidas shell toes), is because they never really stopped making them. really the biggest difference is that each of the brands has a very different approach to product in general, and thus both from a retail & consumer standpoint, it makes easier/harder for the respective brands to bring back/make certain products...

 

[deadstock js]

^^good points tokes, you are correct. As I have done a lot of work with Reebok in the past I have been able to talk with a lot of people at corporate. Most of these models were destroyed not necessarily on purpose but because they were damaged over time or they just didnt think they would have a use for it. If Reebok does decide to retro a product and they dont have the mold or original shoe they actually go online/eBay and re-purchase the shoe, take it apart and dissect it in order to make the new mold.

Reebok does not have a vault of original shoes anymore either, which Is why I was lucky enough to get in contact with them. They use my original models, etc when they do trade shows or events.

People just have to realize that to these large companies the higher ups are who make the decisions, and they are all about numbers and profit. Not whether or not a group of people are happy because they retro'd an old Shaq pump

 

[deadstock js]

^^good points tokes, you are correct. As I have done a lot of work with Reebok in the past I have been able to talk with a lot of people at corporate. Most of these models were destroyed not necessarily on purpose but because they were damaged over time or they just didnt think they would have a use for it. If Reebok does decide to retro a product and they dont have the mold or original shoe they actually go online/eBay and re-purchase the shoe, take it apart and dissect it in order to make the new mold.

Reebok does not have a vault of original shoes anymore either, which Is why I was lucky enough to get in contact with them. They use my original models, etc when they do trade shows or events.

People just have to realize that to these large companies the higher ups are who make the decisions, and they are all about numbers and profit. Not whether or not a group of people are happy because they retro'd an old Shaq pump

 

[transam]

Great replies, I've learned alot about how the retro process of Reebok works. And I definately agree that higherups are more concerned with the future and profits but I'm sure they greatly noticed that Nike Sportswear's retros of various models have been extremely popular?

Bringing back products that Reebok was known for wouldn't be a good move? Catering to those who are in their mid to late 20's and their 30's are more aware of the player lines then a non-endorsed Nike model from the same years. They're already using the Kamakaze, Preacher and Blast names to bring a nostalgic twist to new models. Reebok must be well aware those names mean something to many people.

 

[transam]

Great replies, I've learned alot about how the retro process of Reebok works. And I definately agree that higherups are more concerned with the future and profits but I'm sure they greatly noticed that Nike Sportswear's retros of various models have been extremely popular?

Bringing back products that Reebok was known for wouldn't be a good move? Catering to those who are in their mid to late 20's and their 30's are more aware of the player lines then a non-endorsed Nike model from the same years. They're already using the Kamakaze, Preacher and Blast names to bring a nostalgic twist to new models. Reebok must be well aware those names mean something to many people.

 

[southwestern]

has anyone customized the furys on reebok.com? if so could you give a review on the materials, sizing, overall quality? thanks

 

[southwestern]

has anyone customized the furys on reebok.com? if so could you give a review on the materials, sizing, overall quality? thanks

 

[dmxfury]

Good stuff in here, sometimes I (and others) get too nostalgic and don't always want to think rationally with ideas. That said, I think that certain retro/releases would just be great for brand awareness. Heck look to do some sort of dual pack (retro Kamikaze and new Kamikaze) to promote the brand and get consumers interested in the new stuff. Even if done at a minimal profit (again wishful thinking). I just hate to think my only option will be $300 plus on eBay and that's it for my lifetime (but it probably will be)

 

[dmxfury]

Good stuff in here, sometimes I (and others) get too nostalgic and don't always want to think rationally with ideas. That said, I think that certain retro/releases would just be great for brand awareness. Heck look to do some sort of dual pack (retro Kamikaze and new Kamikaze) to promote the brand and get consumers interested in the new stuff. Even if done at a minimal profit (again wishful thinking). I just hate to think my only option will be $300 plus on eBay and that's it for my lifetime (but it probably will be)

 

[tokes99]

Originally Posted by southwestern

has anyone customized the furys on reebok.com? if so could you give a review on the materials, sizing, overall quality? thanks

quite a few options and the materials are generally very good, but i guess that might depend on what materials you pick, i think the furys run small but that could be me, and the overall quality was good though i had never owned an og pair

Originally Posted by dmxfury

Good stuff in here, sometimes I (and others) get too nostalgic and don't always want to think rationally with ideas. That said, I think that certain retro/releases would just be great for brand awareness. Heck look to do some sort of dual pack (retro Kamikaze and new Kamikaze) to promote the brand and get consumers interested in the new stuff. Even if done at a minimal profit (again wishful thinking). I just hate to think my only option will be $300 plus on eBay and that's it for my lifetime (but it probably will be)

trust me, plenty people there would agree with you...the pump 20 thing was probably the best thing they did from any angle as far as relating to the 'sneaker enthusiast' crowd, why they haven't tried to replicate that on some level is beyond me. instead they seem to think swizz beatz can somehow make them relevant, go figure...

 

[tokes99]

Originally Posted by southwestern

has anyone customized the furys on reebok.com? if so could you give a review on the materials, sizing, overall quality? thanks

quite a few options and the materials are generally very good, but i guess that might depend on what materials you pick, i think the furys run small but that could be me, and the overall quality was good though i had never owned an og pair

Originally Posted by dmxfury

Good stuff in here, sometimes I (and others) get too nostalgic and don't always want to think rationally with ideas. That said, I think that certain retro/releases would just be great for brand awareness. Heck look to do some sort of dual pack (retro Kamikaze and new Kamikaze) to promote the brand and get consumers interested in the new stuff. Even if done at a minimal profit (again wishful thinking). I just hate to think my only option will be $300 plus on eBay and that's it for my lifetime (but it probably will be)

trust me, plenty people there would agree with you...the pump 20 thing was probably the best thing they did from any angle as far as relating to the 'sneaker enthusiast' crowd, why they haven't tried to replicate that on some level is beyond me. instead they seem to think swizz beatz can somehow make them relevant, go figure...

 

[freshbottoms]

Starcows are sick

 

[freshbottoms]

Starcows are sick

 

[jacobmontana]

Packer Shoes...

 

[jacobmontana]

Packer Shoes...

 

[cmoneymontana]

If there was not patent leather, I might have grabbed a pair of these. They are suppose to drop tomorrow on PYS(pickyourshoes)

 

[cmoneymontana]

If there was not patent leather, I might have grabbed a pair of these. They are suppose to drop tomorrow on PYS(pickyourshoes)

 

[Fresh Like Will]

Not a fan of the patent or the black midsole/silver outsole combination.

Replace the patent and have a white midsole, keeping the silver outsole and I would be all over them.

 

[Fresh Like Will]

Not a fan of the patent or the black midsole/silver outsole combination.

Replace the patent and have a white midsole, keeping the silver outsole and I would be all over them.

 

[thorrocksjs]

I like these alot .Looks like something Darth Vader would wear in the dunk contest

 

[thorrocksjs]

I like these alot .Looks like something Darth Vader would wear in the dunk contest

 

[igniteandexcite]

 

[igniteandexcite]