White Cement IV Returning Spring/Summer 2025

[forest hills]

Damn my 12' cooked.

...Game time decision on these based on official pics.

If the recent Military Blues are anything to go by, I think the White Cements next year will go on to be the best retro since the '99 release.

 

[patb23]

Those military blues felt cheap in hand imo. Hope the WC “feel” better.

 

[forest hills]

Those military blues felt cheap in hand imo. Hope the WC “feel” better.

Understandable. I was using the Military's in the same way that people usually use the SB's when talking about 4s, meaning I was only talking about shape and cut not material quality. But yes, while I love my pairs, the leather on the Military Blues could have been better and they should have used polyurethane insoles. Everything else about them was fine in my book.

 

[Myke_Iso]

Damn my 12' cooked.

...Game time decision on these based on official pics.

The wing on mine is held together by gorilla glue lol. Looks iight, but my joints cooked too

If these are looking good, I’m in for the rare double up

 

[beh235]

Those military blues felt cheap in hand imo. Hope the WC “feel” better.

I don't like MB, so they weren't on my radar, but this doesn't sound promising. BUT, I will say this, over the years of buying kicks, a lot of anticipated releases feel "cheap" in hand when I first held them, so that's ok. No real reason to panic about that observation from my POV.

 

[kingsrborn]

Militaries were A1 to me, and im a very hard critic, when it comes to the quality and to the shape on shoes. Of course, it's not going to have the best quality in the world on these retros. But Nike/Jordan are definitely improving in shape, cut, and quality with every year that passes us by. The 2024 Military release, was light years ahead of those last two montrosities, of the militaries that they gave us.

None of us really should be complaining, given the BS low quality retros, that would only hold up for a couple of months of consistent wear, that we were given in the early 2000,s. But i get it, it's NikeTalk though, so it doesn't matter if we get 1 of 1,s retros, people are still going to nitpick and complain about something on the shoe.

Reimagined 4,s is a top notch good quality retro. But nobody wants to talk about how good the quality are on those, simply because alot of people aren't fans of the leather that was put on them. Meanwhile, I've been wearing them multiple times a week, and they're hardly any creases on my pair yet.

Long story short, this brand is headed in the right direction, and we're getting everything that weve imagined and wanted, without having to go the resell route. But i get it, lets complain, complain, complain, complain, lol.

 

[forest hills]

Militaries were A1 to me, and im a very hard critic, when it comes to the quality and to the shape on shoes. Of course, it's not going to have the best quality in the world on these retros. But Nike/Jordan are definitely improving in shape, cut, and quality with every year that passes us by. The 2024 Military release, was light years ahead of those last two montrosities, of the militaries that they gave us.

None of us really should be complaining, given the BS low quality retros, that would only hold up for a couple of months of consistent wear, that we were given in the early 2000,s. But i get it, it's NikeTalk though, so it doesn't matter if we get 1 of 1,s retros, people are still going to nitpick and complain about something on the shoe.

Reimagined 4,s is a top notch good quality retro. But nobody wants to talk about how good the quality are on those, simply because alot of people aren't fans of the leather that was put on them. Meanwhile, I've been wearing them multiple times a week, and they're hardly any creases on my pair yet.

Long story short, this brand is headed in the right direction, and we're getting everything that weve imagined and wanted, without having to go the resell route. But i get it, lets complain, complain, complain, complain, lol.

Constructive criticism =/ complaining, imo. Calling a solid release trash is one thing. Saying that a solid release could be a little better with valid reasons for the statement is another.

 

[kingsrborn]

What are you talking about? We have people up in here talking about how the 2024 Military 4,s felt cheap, and I have ALOT of retros throughout these past few years. And there's nothing cheap about the military 4,s that just came out, especially when you're comparing them to the last couple of previous releases of the same colorway.

im not sure if the quality varies, depending on what size you wear, small or Big, or which factory your pairs came out of, but nothing about the two pairs that i have are cheap and low quality at all. Also, take into consideration, that we had retros from 2003 to 2010, that would paint chip and look like 20 + year old shoes, just after a couple of months of wear.

Then we have people on this message board, and also on other platforms, always talking about how the quality on these retros aren't good. When that's the furthest from the truth, and not true. Nike/Jordan are on record saying that they spend anywhere from $15.00 to $35.00 dollars per retro, that's the cost of manufacturing per pair, depending on which materials that they're using on certain retros.

Meanwhile, we just found out that Christian Dior spends around $54.00 on certain high end designer handbags that sell well over $3,000.00 in stores right now. That was found out by some inside investigator,s that investigated different manufacturing facilities, that produced products for name brand companies overseas.

So there's basically no difference between Nike/Jordan Brand retros, in comparison to high end designer shoes today. Especially with the upgrade that was done by Nike and JB within the last few years. Because if these high end designer brands are only spending $54.00 to $100.00 on Big purses and Handbags, to be sold for thousands of dollars, what make yall really think that they're spending over $35.00 to $40.00 to produce a pair of shoes, that's smaller in size?

I personally think that either people are getting bad pairs, which happens on a high number production release, or they're not even buying the shoes. Meaning that they walk in a store, and look at it for a few minutes, and consider it to be cheap, simple because they didn't throw tumbled leather on it, which everybody considers to be the best type of leather. Just because it's harder and stiffer than regular smooth/flat leather.

Long story short, it doesn't matter what company you're buying tennis shoes from nowadays, (not dress shoes or coats). Because it's not a company out, right now in this world, that's throwing high grade leather, that cost hundreds of dollars to produce on one pair of tennis shoes. I get tired of the down talking about any recent retros, when the quality of the cuts, shape, and materials have definitely upgraded in every year as of recently.

If you personally don't like a specific colorway, or model, or even if you don't like the type of materials used on a retro, that's understandable. But to call certain recent retros like the Militaries 4,s, reimagined 4,s cheap isn't true. Because we've seen what cheap really is in the past retros we've gotten. Im sure that yall are going to call the next Blk/Cement 3,s Metallic 5,s Grape 5,s and other retros cheap as well, it doesn't make it true though,considering what we use to get from this brand a few years ago.

 

[forest hills]

What are you talking about? We have people up in here talking about how the 2024 Military 4,s felt cheap, and I have ALOT of retros throughout these past few years. And there's nothing cheap about the military 4,s that just came out, especially when you're comparing them to the last couple of previous releases of the same colorway.

im not sure if the quality varies, depending on what size you wear, small or Big, or which factory your pairs came out of, but nothing about the two pairs that i have are cheap and low quality at all. Also, take into consideration, that we had retros from 2003 to 2010, that would paint chip and look like 20 + year old shoes, just after a couple of months of wear.

Then we have people on this message board, and also on other platforms, always talking about how the quality on these retros aren't good. When that's the furthest from the truth, and not true. Nike/Jordan are on record saying that they spend anywhere from $15.00 to $35.00 dollars per retro, that's the cost of manufacturing per pair, depending on which materials that they're using on certain retros.

Meanwhile, we just found out that Christian Dior spends around $54.00 on certain high end designer handbags that sell well over $3,000.00 in stores right now. That was found out by some inside investigator,s that investigated different manufacturing facilities, that produced products for name brand companies overseas.

So there's basically no difference between Nike/Jordan Brand retros, in comparison to high end designer shoes today. Especially with the upgrade that was done by Nike and JB within the last few years. Because if these high end designer brands are only spending $54.00 to $100.00 on Big purses and Handbags, to be sold for thousands of dollars, what make yall really think that they're spending over $35.00 to $40.00 to produce a pair of shoes, that's smaller in size?

I personally think that either people are getting bad pairs, which happens on a high number production release, or they're not even buying the shoes. Meaning that they walk in a store, and look at it for a few minutes, and consider it to be cheap, simple because they didn't throw tumbled leather on it, which everybody considers to be the best type of leather. Just because it's harder and stiffer than regular smooth/flat leather.

Long story short, it doesn't matter what company you're buying tennis shoes from nowadays, (not dress shoes or coats). Because it's not a company out, right now in this world, that's throwing high grade leather, that cost hundreds of dollars to produce on one pair of tennis shoes. I get tired of the down talking about any recent retros, when the quality of the cuts, shape, and materials have definitely upgraded in every year as of recently.

If you personally don't like a specific colorway, or model, or even if you don't like the type of materials used on a retro, that's understandable. But to call certain recent retros like the Militaries 4,s, reimagined 4,s cheap isn't true. Because we've seen what cheap really is in the past retros we've gotten. Im sure that yall are going to call the next Blk/Cement 3,s Metallic 5,s Grape 5,s and other retros cheap as well, it doesn't make it true though,considering what we use to get from this brand a few years ago.

I was at work so I couldn't reply. I understand what you're saying and I agree to an extent. We've undoubtedly come a long way compared to the horribly shaped, easily paint chipped, low quality abominations we were getting in the mid 2000s until 2015 or so. Honestly the only recent OG colorway retro that comes to mind when I think "cheap feeling" is the '16 True Blue 3s. Those were awful. Beyond those, I think Jordan Brand has been doing well as of late. Granted I don't own nearly as many pairs as everyone in here does, but all my 22 pairs are OG colorways from the 2016 Metallics onward. None have felt cheap to me. Sure some could have used some cosmetic adjustments like the '18 Black Cement 3s, but when I owned them, they never felt cheap. They were very well made and quite sturdy actually.

But at the same time, I could understand why some people would say some releases feel cheap when you compare a general release OG retro to a general release New Balance 998 for example. I dunno. People are going to think what they want to, and on NT where a lot of us hyperfixate on details that the average sneaker consumer does not, there's bound to be some opinions and standards that clash.

 

[Belair5]

Lol I didnt know where else to post this but anyone hear bizarres line on the antichrist

So glad all the features were hidden.

 

[JMB10215]

Those 2013 fire red black tongue 5’s had some of the worst leather or pleather of all times. My pair came from Nike pre creased I kid you not.

 

[Girl Thats Jules]

Military Blues definitely FEEL cheap when it comes to Nike and Jordan Retros. I'm not disputing manufacturing costs or methods just the look and feel.

Also, recent retros have thinner cuts of leather than past ones, that is one way Nike is making new retros cheaper/worse.

 

[dhtowng]

I struggle to believe anyone that’s been collecting and holding Nike/Jordan shoes in hand (particularly 4s) for the last several decades up until recently can honestly hold a pair of 2024 Military 4s and say they “feel cheap”. To that, I say, compared to what? Literally all Jordan’s must “feel cheap” to you then. They not only have good quality materials, it’s also a very well built/made shoe. One of the better made pairs from JB in a long time. They actually feel the opposite of cheap. Materials and build mimic the OG almost to exact specs. To say they (or even the leather) feels cheap is a gross misrepresentation of the facts and just patently false when we compare it to actual cheap feeling pairs from the past and present. Just say you don’t like the cw and call it a day lol. No need to go wild and say things that obviously don’t even make sense on a factual basis. You can say it’s your opinion to say it feels cheap all you want, but again, compared to what? I swear up is down and down is up these days lol.

 

[headdetective]

Cmon bro, you should know by now.

Feels cheap is a hypebeasts way of saying easy to buy/no resell value/bricks

 

[jordanhead718212]

Don't think it's one of those situations at all lol. The leather just feels kinda hard/plasticky compared to most other 4s that have dropped recently. That's it. Still a great looking retro.

 

[trappedintime]

Don't think it's one of those situations at all lol. The leather just feels kinda hard/plasticky compared to most other 4s that have dropped recently. That's it. Still a great looking retro.

Which ones? Cause there’s almost no difference compared to my SB’s and the leather is noticeably better than fire red IVs.

 

[jordanhead718212]

That's interesting, my SBs feel way better. So do the leather black cements, but those are tumbled I guess.

 

[trappedintime]

That's interesting, my SBs feel way better. So do the leather black cements, but those are tumbled I guess.

Comparing tumbled leather isn’t helpful cause you’re looking at a chemical layer above the leather. While there is a thin PU coating to the MB’s it’s not hard plastic leather like they’ve ruined way too many retros with. The side panels push in as much as the SBs and the toe box creases rather naturally. So I really can’t understand quality complaints when you’ve got something like the FRs that feels like trash in hand

 

[trappedintime]

Also the 2024 MB is way better leather than either of the two WC retros we’ve had in the past 25 years. I’ve sold those all off cause the leather is hard and uncomfortable to wear.

 

[jordanhead718212]

None of those are recent lol. Fire Reds came out 4 years ago, White Cements 8 years ago. The two 4s I mentioned were in the last year basically. I also never said anything about quality as it's all a matter of opinion anyway, I said they feel kind of hard/plasticky. I can only speak on my pair, if you got a softer feeling pair then you got lucky lol.

 

[hitman243]

Didn't buy the military blues, but I examined them in the store this week. They are nothing like the prior retros in terms of quality. Much nicer than the pair I had back in the day.

 

[KanyIZZY]

Here comes the MB capers again.. the leather (if it even is leather) on those are buns.. If you got lucky with your pair OR you just really like the colorway OR you’ve been pining for them for so long you drank the cool aid.. that’s fine but ya’ll not pushing that p over here I don’t know how anyone can cop and hold a pair of Reimagined IV’s then get MBs and say the leather is QUALITY.. Leather Cements is what good leather feels/looks like. Practically no one in that thread complained about quality on those aside from Euro pairs

I had WC IV’s from 2016.. those aren’t tumbled at all.. Leather is way better on those. I have UNC I’s from 2015 and Black Toe I’s from 2016 (not a IV but..) leather is better on those. They could’ve given them Air ship leather, 85 low (metallics/NG) leather, etc but we got flat, dry, kind of stiff leather. I don’t have SB’s but seems wild that MBs are closer to those than they are 2020 Fire Reds

I hope to God they don’t put anything close to MB leather on these WC’s. lmao

 

[Magic33]

Military Blues definitely FEEL cheap when it comes to Nike and Jordan Retros. I'm not disputing manufacturing costs or methods just the look and feel.

Also, recent retros have thinner cuts of leather than past ones, that is one way Nike is making new retros cheaper/worse.

Some of you really expose yourselves

 

[dhtowng]

Here comes the MB capers again.. the leather (if it even is leather) on those are buns.. If you got lucky with your pair OR you just really like the colorway OR you’ve been pining for them for so long you drank the cool aid.. that’s fine but ya’ll not pushing that p over here I don’t know how anyone can cop and hold a pair of Reimagined IV’s then get MBs and say the leather is QUALITY.. Leather Cements is what good leather feels/looks like. Practically no one in that thread complained about quality on those aside from Euro pairs

I had WC IV’s from 2016.. those aren’t tumbled at all.. Leather is way better on those. I have UNC I’s from 2015 and Black Toe I’s from 2016 (not a IV but..) leather is better on those. They could’ve given them Air ship leather, 85 low (metallics/NG) leather, etc but we got flat, dry, kind of stiff leather. I don’t have SB’s but seems wild that MBs are closer to those than they are 2020 Fire Reds

I hope to God they don’t put anything close to MB leather on these WC’s. lmao

Unhinged…I’d gladly take WC 4s with the exact same materials and build as MBs and I know I’m not alone in that statement. And frankly you simply just don’t know what you’re talking about. None is this factual and makes no sense. Maybe you got extremely unlucky with your pair? And then look at what you’re saying. It has flat leather, so you wanted it to be tumbled and super textured (not consistent with the OGs)? You complain about it being dry. I can’t even begin to try to understand what you mean by this statement. What are you talking about? It’s about as dry as any leather shoe would be. You say it’s stiff, okay but again these aren’t supposed to have super soft, tumbled leather and neither were those AJ1s you mentioned. OG 1s from 1985 leather was not soft, it was flat and it was dry/hard by your standards. We enjoyed the softer leather on the ‘15 AJ1s, but it wasn’t OG. You probably hated the “hard leather” on recent OG 85 HI cuts too because those are stiff too but I dare you to tell me that leather feels cheap. We know for a fact that leather is pure cow hide. The OG MB 4 also had simple flat, dry cow hide “hard” feeling/looking leather, just look at the photos.

You don’t have SBs but saying you can’t imagine these being close to those. Well, I have both and while the SB are softer, it’s by not by a lot. Leathers on both shoes grain up nice when you press with your thumb. It’s actually nice quality cut of soft yet firm leather that they used. I can go on and on about why all those shoes you mentioned are horrible comparisons/examples. I guess you wanted MB 4s to come with materials not even the OGs came with. Anyway, whatever, not going to try to convince you. You obviously feel strong in your thoughts but yeah, you’re wrong on the facts. You’ve gone quite mad my brother, it’s okay .

 

[headdetective]