longstroke
Banned
- 1,461
- 376
- Joined
- Aug 20, 2012
Sure.Enlighten us as to how Adidas USES QUALITY as a selling point please. If they have "abandoned" their tech, then what is Adidas selling that is better than Nike? Also, please scientifically or definitively prove that Adidas quality is superior to or surpasses Nike's on A) Their most expensive price point shoe, B) Their "mid-range" priced shoe and C) Their lower price point shoe.
Is it safe to say that you can scientifically and without question prove that all Nike athletes who wear their basketball product would be unable to "blow out" or damage an Adidas shoe or is it POSSIBLE that the same if not worse would happen if Blake. Kobe, or Lebron wore say a Crazy light or D-rose sig version?
When I say that Adidas has abandoned their tech, they move on, but they do not skimp on quality, especially in regard to the upper of their shoes, in which recently, specifically with the zero series, they've focused more on the upper in regard to performance. We all know that tech is an overused term in regard to footwear, but in regard to quality, the tech that goes into the durability of the lighter uppers, really makes a big difference, thus Blake's shoe ripping during play. Nike obviously didn't test that tech, which are nothing but engineered materials.
This is one of my big issues with Adidas, along with their lacking visibility.
They do not promote their products in a manner that people will KNOW that the quality of their items, are far superior to that of Nike. I can give you two examples, with one showing how Adidas deals with anything that may be deemed either dangerous, or of poor quality. A few years ago, they were ready to release the team colorways of the A3 superstar ultra, but received information that a batch that were made, may have been defective. The heel would separate upon impact or something to that effect. So instead of finding the batch there were considered defective, they killed the whole line, instead of risking missing another batch they may have had issues.
This leads me to the other example, Adidas cannot afford to put out cheaply made products. In order to gain consumer confidence, they do not have the luxury that Nike has, making mistakes in regard to quality control. Nike can simply say, hey, whatever. On to the next. Just put out something new, then call it innovative, hopefully people will forget about the old stuff.
Now the examples I've given you are not really scientific. But they are great examples of how a company may deal ethically with their customer base.
I don't know what you are asking here. Mind you, I am trying to be respectful in regard to your questions.You say quality lacks, and Nike is bending everyone over and laughing about it, so please provide something other than an article link to without question prove that Adidas or any other brand for that matter isn't doing the very same thing. Yeah, I am sure Reebok really can justify selling all the zig-tech crap in their lineup for the price they do, and for that matter, adidas probably putting Howard's shoe in walmart, menards, and Costco huh? I will expect to see D-rose's 3rd sig up in Meijer, Dollar General, and Aldi soon as well.
[color= rgb(255, 255, 255)]Rip on quality all you want, but don't try and manipulate the reality which is that most companies, whether they be shoe related, clothing related, consumer good related will skimp on quality whenever and wherever possible to improve their bottom line. Certain companies, like Patagonia for example, stand behind their quality and really emphasize that aspect of their product- but the flipside to that, is they have a loyal customer base that doesn't mind paying a premium for their product. They may be able to get cheaper, flashier, and trendier product, elsewhere, but they stick with a company like Patagonia because they really stand by (see their warranty and return/repair policy) their quality product.[/color]
Patagonia may have a wonderful reputation in regard to that, and I am certain that many companies would love to live up to that standard. However, it's pretty clear that Nike doesn't care, wouldn't you say? For the last few years, can you explain the constant complaints on the quality of Jordan Brand products?
They are made by Nike you know, never mind only talking about how bad Nike basketball has been for the last few years. They know that they must meet product demand, and it's killing their overall reputation. You cannot focus on quality, then put out as much as Nike does on a constant basis. It is their fault.
Companies like Adidas, Patagonia, puts out far less, then having more control.
Last edited: