So when was the sneaker game officially ruined? Vol: Galaxy Foamposite's SMH

[jordanhead718212]

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

http://www.ebay.com/itm/N...#!%!&hash=item2ebbcb50cc

Sold For: US $900.00

One of the biggest, if not the biggest shoe release in 2012. The Nike Foamposite One Galaxy. These shoes sold out in minutes!! Please note, that you are not bidding on the actual shoes. You are bidding on the photo in this listing. Don't miss out on this offer! You won't find it anywhere else on the web! Once in a life tome chance. You will recieve these pics 10000 % authentic!

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Please don't use the "DC is trolling" card to try and get out of this discussion.

Companies make products so people can buy them. They can give a damn about what you do after, of course they wouldn't want someone to resell them but the bottom line is a sale. Point blank.

No, I talked about a single group of individuals artificially limiting the supply of a product.  There is something in fact wrong with that.  For example, the day before school starts at a local college, I go to the bookstore and buy all the copies of a university published book that everyone needs for a class.  I then resell the book for double the retail price. 

That is wrong.  It's not illegal, but it is wrong.  Furthermore, wrong by definition is based upon morals and not necessarily legality.  If your morals suck, there is nothing I can do to change your mind.

The fact that you had to go to academia to cite an example is funny. Buying books so students can't buy them and are forced to buy from you is not the same as sneakers. Yes the item matters here, we are talking about shoes. Nice try though


My whole point is there is no place for morals here. Unless we are talking about robbing folks, me being able to buy and resell and you being salty about not being able to buy a shoe doesn't make me morally wrong. Again, nice try.

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Please don't use the "DC is trolling" card to try and get out of this discussion.

Companies make products so people can buy them. They can give a damn about what you do after, of course they wouldn't want someone to resell them but the bottom line is a sale. Point blank.

No, I talked about a single group of individuals artificially limiting the supply of a product.  There is something in fact wrong with that.  For example, the day before school starts at a local college, I go to the bookstore and buy all the copies of a university published book that everyone needs for a class.  I then resell the book for double the retail price. 

That is wrong.  It's not illegal, but it is wrong.  Furthermore, wrong by definition is based upon morals and not necessarily legality.  If your morals suck, there is nothing I can do to change your mind.

The fact that you had to go to academia to cite an example is funny. Buying books so students can't buy them and are forced to buy from you is not the same as sneakers. Yes the item matters here, we are talking about shoes. Nice try though

Obviously you didn't read my post before it where I used the example of buying up all the milk before a snowstorm and reselling it.  Like I said, stop trolling.

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican



My whole point is there is no place for morals here. Unless we are talking about robbing folks, me being able to buy and resell and you being salty about not being able to buy a shoe doesn't make me morally wrong. Again, nice try.

Do you understand the definition of the word "wrong"?

 

[me no pass]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by cguy610

No, I talked about a single group of individuals artificially limiting the supply of a product.  There is something in fact wrong with that.  For example, the day before school starts at a local college, I go to the bookstore and buy all the copies of a university published book that everyone needs for a class.  I then resell the book for double the retail price. 

That is wrong.  It's not illegal, but it is wrong.  Furthermore, wrong by definition is based upon morals and not necessarily legality.  If your morals suck, there is nothing I can do to change your mind.

The fact that you had to go to academia to cite an example is funny. Buying books so students can't buy them and are forced to buy from you is not the same as sneakers. Yes the item matters here, we are talking about shoes. Nice try though

Obviously you didn't read my post before it where I used the example of buying up all the milk before a snowstorm and reselling it.  Like I said, stop trolling.

at these piss poor examples. comparing food, a necessity to designer brand sneakers, a luxury? riiight.

 

[thorrocksjs]

I hate the fact folks equate sneaker collecting to just Nike we got adidas,new balance,reebok,saucony ,Bape,visvim,Gucci ,Christian louboutin (if your in to higher end sneakers) All great brands doin phenomenal work and releases.No excuse for you to limit yourself to just nikemmy friends.We diversify and they will meet our demands.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Obviously you didn't read my post before it where I used the example of buying up all the milk before a snowstorm and reselling it.  Like I said, stop trolling.


If I called academia a bad example why wouldn't I call milk a bad example? I am not trolling, again stop using that as an way to get out of the discussion.
As the man above me said Needs vs. Wants. YOU stop trolling.

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by ME NO PASS

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

The fact that you had to go to academia to cite an example is funny. Buying books so students can't buy them and are forced to buy from you is not the same as sneakers. Yes the item matters here, we are talking about shoes. Nice try though

Obviously you didn't read my post before it where I used the example of buying up all the milk before a snowstorm and reselling it.  Like I said, stop trolling.

at these piss poor examples. comparing food, a necessity to designer brand sneakers, a luxury? riiight.

When has rock salt and shovels been a necessity for life?  Furthermore, milk isn't a necessity for life.  Ever heard of water, juice, soda, etc.

Like half of our whole country is lactose intolerant but you are telling me milk is some necessity that people will die without it?

 

[supermanblue79]

Limited numbers are driving these.  I can honestly see nothing that places this shoe above the better looking eggplant colorway.

...carry on.

 

[savraj1]

The shoe game actually died once people came back to JB in droves from nike sb. Around my area, that was like in 2009 for most of the hypebeasts. 
Then, all of a sudden these people bid up the prices on the models from the "23" packs in 2008. If you looked around hard enough in 2008 for a pack split like just the Carmines, you could get them for $225, now if you want the CDP Carmines, they're in the neighborhood of $500.  

 

[rex ryan]

once people realize that there's more to life then sneakers and if they don't get their coveted pair that life actually goes on their mindset changes.

the way things are sneaker wise today is disgusting and blame could and should be distributed all over the place.

from a realist standpoint nike isn't obligated to give a single damn about the carnage that occurs during these releases but from a moralist standpoint they should realize the effects from how they market these releases and take that into consideration even though it isn't their responsiblity

but nikes tactics or not, when you have people of all races, ages, and both genders acting like uncivilized barbarians over a pair of sneakers you know the world is a screwed up place in general.

the day i heard people talking about "You need to put work in" when it comes to buying a pair of sneakers is when I realized this hobby.  I guess i'm supposed to "Put work in" and neglect school, priorities, and responsibilities just to be lucky enough to buy a pair of sneakers for retail price plus tax these days.

personally i could care less these days if i miss out on a release, somewhere down the line they'll end up on NT for retail or less when someone who bought em is desperate to move em and if they don't then oh well.  most of these people acting like idiots over these releases will look back and laugh at how stupid they were while nike moves on to the next group of gullible teenagers with their priorities all screwed up.

 

[stillin729]

DC seriously stop; all you do is come into threads to argue and then when someone makes a point that you don't like you ignore it because you CAN'T stand to ever be wrong

log off and get out for once

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by Dead Stokc

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Explain to me how it is wrong.

People that really want the shoe, have a hard time getting it, because
someone wants to make money off of it. Resellers have no appreciation
for the shoe itself, nor do they care about the people who really like them.
Nike didn't release them for people to sell it to the people they made them for.

So your approach is the motive of the buyer.
I still don't see how one is right (appreciating the shoe) and the other is wrong (the re-seller of the shoe). 

Why should someone that buys a product care about what another potential buyer cares about that product? When you buy any other entertainment product do you take into consideration the desires of other buyers? I don't think you do, I could be wrong though.

It is just weird to me that some of you feel there SHOULD be some sort of honor code when it comes to who "allows" others to buy the product. Again, unless we are talking about robbing, killing, and stealing, I really don't think morality is even in the equation.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican



My whole point is there is no place for morals here. Unless we are talking about robbing folks, me being able to buy and resell and you being salty about not being able to buy a shoe doesn't make me morally wrong. Again, nice try.

Do you understand the definition of the word "wrong"?

Yes we are speaking about morals here. I don't see a person that buys with the intentions of reselling as having a negative/wrong/bad ethical code. I just don't see it at all. by any stretch, I don't view it as being wrong. Go head and tell me how that somehow means I have no honor or I cheated on my taxes but I am not on the same page as you with this discussion.
If you have another definition of wrong please enlighten me.

 

[Betonblck]

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by cguy610

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican



My whole point is there is no place for morals here. Unless we are talking about robbing folks, me being able to buy and resell and you being salty about not being able to buy a shoe doesn't make me morally wrong. Again, nice try.

Do you understand the definition of the word "wrong"?

Yes we are speaking about morals here. I don't see a person that buys with the intentions of reselling as having a negative/wrong/bad ethical code. I just don't see it at all. by any stretch, I don't view it as being wrong. Go head and tell me how that somehow means I have no honor or I cheated on my taxes but I am not on the same page as you with this discussion.
If you have another definition of wrong please enlighten me.

We are speaking about my morals here and ignoring everyone else's morals because this is all about me.

Fixed your post for you.

By the way, are you going to continue to ignore my point about buying all the milk before a snowstorm and reselling it for $10 a gallon?  You can eat your cereal with water or juice, or pay me $10 a gallon.  That sounds good right?

 

[limitedretroog]

How do you not see it as wrong?
Believe it or not, there are actually people who buy shoes because they want to keep them. The people who only buy them to resell makes that almost impossible for the former. Do you know how much easier it would be to cop if resellers don't exist? The people who want to keep the shoes have a slim chance because of people who would rather get rid of them for a quick buck.

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Why on earth should one buyer take into consideration the feelings of another buyer? Are you implying that if he/she doesn't then something is wrong with his moral code? This is new to me.

 

[limitedretroog]

How would you feel if you're interested in some shoes that you actually wanna keep and you're #11 in line. Your store is getting 10 pairs. All 10 people in front of you are only interested in reselling and getting rid of them. That wouldn't piss you off?

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

How do you not see it as wrong?
Believe it or not, there are actually people who buy shoes because they want to keep them. The people who only buy them to resell makes that almost impossible for the former. Do you know how much easier it would be to cop if resellers don't exist? The people who want to keep the shoes have a slim chance because of people who would rather get rid of them for a quick buck.

See you all are looking at it from the buyers that actually want the shoe. So of course you naturally think it is wrong. It is a purchase, a person has the right to make a purchase for whatever reason they chose. If I want to buy it to resell fine. If you want to buy to wear fine. If I want to buy to put in my collection fine. If she wants to buy to burn fine. No reason is any more right/wrong than the other. We are talking about buying tennis shoes, not a need. It is a luxury item that nobody is destined/obligated/reserved to have. I think the confusion here is you all believe people that like the shoes deserve to have the shoes more than anyone else. I don't feel they do. Whoever gets them gets them (without robbing). 

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

How would you feel if you're interested in some shoes that you actually wanna keep and you're #11 in line. Your store is getting 10 pairs. All 10 people in front of you are only interested in reselling and getting rid of them. That wouldn't piss you off?

I would be mad as hell (not the point of the discussion) but I wouldn't label those people as WRONG (the current discussion). I don't deserve those shoes any more than those people in front of me. <~ This is what you all aren't getting. I wouldn't tear down their moral code because they have different intentions than I have. I would be mad that I went shoe-less but they aren't wrong for buying them for reasons that differ from mine.

 

[ksteezy]

My man DC

Troll level = SUPER SAIYN

Entertaining to see how he gets Under people's skins so easily

 

[DCAllAfrican]

Originally Posted by ksteezy

My man DC

Troll level = SUPER SAIYN

Entertaining to see how he gets Under people's skins so easily

Please stop that because I am being serious here. You saying that just gives them reason to dismiss my points. I am dead serious.
Where do you stand on this though? What we are currently discussing. Should a buyer take into consideration the purchase intentions of another buyer before buying? Shoes here. You read the replies, what do you think?

 

[AIR J XIII]

kix4kix wrote:

---

In my opinion, Nike is to blame for the sneaker game coming to this, but I can't blame them, I would have done the same thing. If I produced a product that got inferior in material, and I could sell it for almost double the price I sold it for at first, I would sell it to my mother.

 More specifically for me, the concord release was my last straw, I could take no nike air on jordans, I could take the diminishing materials even, because well- I just stated I would do the same, and after all- its a luxury item anyway. But the concord mess, and the obvious lack of givedambness on nikes part to get true collectors a pair made me sick 

. Didn't even try because of the madness that ensued out here. The most telling part that I am on the downside of the sneaker game was when my Mother gave me a 100$ gift card to Footlocker this year for christmas, and I haven't even used it yet 

, 5 years ago, it would have been gone before the 26th of December

. I might get the all star game kobe's, but even those are meh. My goal is to narrow my shoe collection to 7 or 8 shoes that I love, and will wear. Have about 20 now, will gradually sell and wear out the rotation until it gets to my desired number, I can't even look at them the same anymore.



Those black cement 3's were no help to my opinion either, I copped the whites thinking it was all good to get the blacks, only to see those jawns 

 

[703 hwy]

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

http://www.ebay.com/itm/N...**#+&hash=item2ebbcb50cc

Sold For: US $900.00

One of the biggest, if not the biggest shoe release in 2012. The Nike Foamposite One Galaxy. These shoes sold out in minutes!! Please note, that you are not bidding on the actual shoes. You are bidding on the photo in this listing. Don't miss out on this offer! You won't find it anywhere else on the web! Once in a life tome chance. You will recieve these pics 10000 % authentic!

WELL DAMN!

  

 

[limitedretroog]

Originally Posted by DCAllAmerican

Originally Posted by LimitedRetroOG

How would you feel if you're interested in some shoes that you actually wanna keep and you're #11 in line. Your store is getting 10 pairs. All 10 people in front of you are only interested in reselling and getting rid of them. That wouldn't piss you off?

I would be mad as hell (not the point of the discussion) but I wouldn't label those people as WRONG (the current discussion). I don't deserve those shoes any more than those people in front of me. <~ This is what you all aren't getting. I wouldn't tear down their moral code because they have different intentions than I have. I would be mad that I went shoe-less but they aren't wrong for buying them for reasons that differ from mine.

So you wouldn't be pissed that you went home shoeless because the people in front of you have no interest whatsoever in keeping the shoes but you do? If not, then I don't know what to tell you.