- Oct 13, 2000
- 22,885
- 2,317
Just more proof that lots of market share is bad for everyone.
Would u pay extra for better retros?????
- Thread in 'Nike Retro' Thread starter Started by spoiledfeet,
- Start date
- May 9, 2008
- 626
- 10
QFT..... they already charge us too much and make a horrible shoe. Nike needs to take a page out of Reebok's book and make some higher quality retros atreasonable prices.
Bottom line if the nostalgia doesn't get you then speak with your wallet & keep it closed. Hype aside, retroes sell since there is a generation (Icount myself among it) that wants a piece of their past in a tangible sense, i.e., shoes. It's like comfort food for your feet
Speaking as an older shoehead do any of you other guys on this site have younger friends/relatives also into shoes but YOU can say, "Yeah, I used to havethese when I was in HS but man these are cheap*@#$ quality now...."
Nike has got to be ROFL over the fact they have gotten over on those among us that remain so brand loyal despite being shoveled crap quality retros. Would thesame be expected of a car retro? Hell no. On a broad relative scale if anything the retro car would have modern day improvements or an eye towards improvedperformance/handling/ efficiency, etc.
Why can't we expect this out of something as simple as shoe manufacturing?
Speaking as an older shoehead do any of you other guys on this site have younger friends/relatives also into shoes but YOU can say, "Yeah, I used to havethese when I was in HS but man these are cheap*@#$ quality now...."
Nike has got to be ROFL over the fact they have gotten over on those among us that remain so brand loyal despite being shoveled crap quality retros. Would thesame be expected of a car retro? Hell no. On a broad relative scale if anything the retro car would have modern day improvements or an eye towards improvedperformance/handling/ efficiency, etc.
Why can't we expect this out of something as simple as shoe manufacturing?
- Feb 27, 2008
- 5,334
- 288
- Jun 13, 2005
- 3,018
- 1,252
We know they dont put out top notch products as it is. And its a combination of rising costs and greed. They want maximum profit. JB is even worse. They aretrying to be like Nike, but with a bunch of ugly shoes. Im sure they bank on a lot of their retros, which is why they have to cut corners on a bunch of them. Iimagine JB has a ton of overhead, and to add to that investors, so they have to maximize profits any way they can. It sucks, I dont support it, and Idefinitely dont buy any JB products now, but its business.
As for Nike, they have many established product lines. Which is why it would make more sense that quality overall is better with Nike than JB. I mean come on,the jumpman doesnt look as smooth and sleek all over a shoe like a swoosh does.
Taking into consideration inflation, I would definitely pay a little bit more to have better quality retros. For example, if Nike had used the same materialsand shape for the 2009 QS Air Max 1 as they did the Air Max Models from 2005 and before I wouldve easily paid a retail price of 120.00 dollars instead of the92.00. I mean people were paying inflated prices for the qs anyway, so they would definitely pay the higher retail price for better quality.
As for the air units, the old ones are long gone. We could pay 300 dollars for the top of the Line Pippen Retro, but Nike would still have to use the smallerair units. THey are not going back, and we have to accept it. Which is why I will never buy an Air Max 95 ever again.
As for Nike, they have many established product lines. Which is why it would make more sense that quality overall is better with Nike than JB. I mean come on,the jumpman doesnt look as smooth and sleek all over a shoe like a swoosh does.
Taking into consideration inflation, I would definitely pay a little bit more to have better quality retros. For example, if Nike had used the same materialsand shape for the 2009 QS Air Max 1 as they did the Air Max Models from 2005 and before I wouldve easily paid a retail price of 120.00 dollars instead of the92.00. I mean people were paying inflated prices for the qs anyway, so they would definitely pay the higher retail price for better quality.
As for the air units, the old ones are long gone. We could pay 300 dollars for the top of the Line Pippen Retro, but Nike would still have to use the smallerair units. THey are not going back, and we have to accept it. Which is why I will never buy an Air Max 95 ever again.
- Oct 13, 2000
- 22,885
- 2,317
I hate the smaller air units especially with a shoe as beautiful as the 95
- Mar 11, 2009
- 298
- 10
- May 23, 2006
- 1,389
- 12
no i have to say i would be aganst this. Nike's quality should be better than what theyre charging for anyway and i would not be prepared to pay extra forthem to sort out their problem
- Feb 7, 2006
- 962
- 54
All damn day..........if
I'd spend honestly, whatever they marked em at for OG quality.
Not ever so slightly better quality.
Give me a Jordan III or IV with Nike Air on the back, and the same quality as the originals......
......that I don't have to worry about falling to pieces and I'll pay whatever Nike asks.
Obviously, the less the better, but I'm not even going to try and convince
myself that I wouldn't pay whatever they priced em at.
Not that this will ever happen.
I'd spend honestly, whatever they marked em at for OG quality.
Not ever so slightly better quality.
Give me a Jordan III or IV with Nike Air on the back, and the same quality as the originals......
......that I don't have to worry about falling to pieces and I'll pay whatever Nike asks.
Obviously, the less the better, but I'm not even going to try and convince
myself that I wouldn't pay whatever they priced em at.
Not that this will ever happen.
- Sep 18, 2006
- 1,077
- 159
QFMFT!!!!!! Bet not mess up my white Pippen Retro Nike !!!!! I've waited to long for this !!!!!
- Apr 8, 2008
- 1,336
- 11
No im not willing to pay anymore...
- Jan 20, 2005
- 3,283
- 207
yo something gonna be done with these companies. i mean come on they want us to pay more so they can use better materials that they already should have beenusing to begin with.
- Nov 23, 2008
- 1,381
- 10
- Dec 11, 2007
- 14,074
- 14,307
nope, they're already over priced as it is. and even if they're made with better materials they'll still get messed up. this is why i only reallycare about posites/foams.
- Jun 22, 2003
- 138
- 10
we shouldn't have to.
- Mar 26, 2006
- 182
- 10
No because they are already expensive and the quality sucks and paying more wouldnt change the quality, just more profit for Nike
- Dec 25, 2006
- 8,095
- 5,352
i think the nike retros are ok and over priced but JB quality is not good and the price is rediculous. but i would not pay more than the already raping priceof retros
- Jan 1, 2010
- 97
- 10
naw
- Aug 2, 2008
- 37,562
- 13,058
nope.. I think I should be paying less for better quality.. We are probably talking about maybe $5 extra in materials to make a great quality sneaker. Soinstead of $15 to make it would cost $20.. They just like to cut corners.. So certainly not for higher prices.. And soon not even for current price.
flappy188
Banned
- Dec 31, 2009
- 988
- 10
people you are allready doing this: ala: BIN 23
flappy188
Banned
- Dec 31, 2009
- 988
- 10
people you are allready doing this: ala: BIN 23
- May 5, 2009
- 2,283
- 10
I agree with you wholeheartedly.
* I didn't even notice someone had dug this up from months ago
- Dec 9, 2007
- 3,828
- 100
Wow this topic has come back up. Yeah I refuse to pay for shoes when the quality is not there. I might just save up my money and hunt down a pair of retros instead of any new products that come out.
- Apr 4, 2010
- 21
- 10
It depends on what shoe, and if there QS release....
- Oct 22, 2009
- 770
- 10
Id prefer better quality with lower prices. Its not right how much we pay and then there are still little flaws that always show up that could of been avoided (foamposite bubbles and extra glue)
