Early Releases are High Quality Fakes

Status
Not open for further replies.
ninjahood said:
this is grade A bologna.



had nike NOT known about how royally da factory that made these screwed up and shipped em to stores as is under your definition they would ALSO be fake.

and its just not true.

origin of where things are made and Materials of which they are made from tell da real story of which if a product is authentic or not, not a damn opinion.
Click to expand...

No disrespectq intended. But I dont know what any of your post means.

Are you just saying that the materials are the sole driver of authenticity? If so then if I can source the same materials and molds of any brand's signature items I can just make authentic iPods, rolexes, or nikes at home. That's just not the case.

Btw this happens all the time. No frills brand supermarket items are often procured from the same sources as brand names and supplied with identical product but without the branding. By your logic the store would be justified in selling those items as their brand name counterparts.
 
maxdunker said:
How are fake and unauthorized the same thing? If I work at popeyes, make the chicken there but take it home and say sell it at a bake sale for my nephew is that fake popeyes chicken? Bootlegs/fakes/replicas are just that. An attempt to copy an item using subpar materials and craftsmanship. How are the extra 50 pairs of shoes made at the Nike factory when they make 350 instead of 300 fake? So you can't return them to Nike, doesn't mean they weren't made with the same craftsmanship.
Your definition is way off base. Something isn't "fake" simply because it doesn't exist on a Nike manifest.
Click to expand...

First of all, your are making a false analogy.

A more proper analogy would be this -

You work at Popeyes. Popeyes pays you to make chicken. Popeyes closes for the evening. After hours, when the store is closed, you come back in with your own batch of chicken. (Maybe you got it from the same place Popeye's gets theirs or maybe you didn't.) You then use their facilities to make a batch of chicken. You use their recipe, but purchase all the ingredients elsewhere and bring them when cooking. You also go to Kinkos and get Popeyes boxes printed up without their knowledge (a crime, BTW - trademark infringement). You pack up your chicken in the reproduced boxes and exit, clean up so nobody knows you were there and leave to go sell your chicken elsewhere.

Now, do you have Popeye's chicken?

I'll leave that to the group to decide.

...Just because you work at Nike that doesn't give you free reign to produce as many Nike products as you want - and it doesn't mean that anything you do in your non-Nike production time is sanctioned by Nike.

I'll say it again - the concept of a brand is abstract. ...What is the difference between Polo and US Polo Association? What is the difference between a Louie belt and just some checkered piece of crap? It is the brand's stamp of approval as legitimate.

The reason most people want to dismiss my statements is their own cognitive dissonance. They don't want to admit to themselves how arbitrary this whole process is and how they are essentially enslaved to some faceless, abstract notion of a "thumbs up" from a paper pusher in Oregon. Essentially, it's an admission of some level of shallowness - that the "brand" is more important than all the other stuff we claim to be important - craftsmanship, quality, etc.
 
Last edited:
BIP Roberts said:
ninjahood said:
this is grade A bologna.



had nike NOT known about how royally da factory that made these screwed up and shipped em to stores as is under your definition they would ALSO be fake.

and its just not true.

origin of where things are made and Materials of which they are made from tell da real story of which if a product is authentic or not, not a damn opinion.
Click to expand...
No disrespectq intended. But I dont know what any of your post means.

Are you just saying that the materials are the sole driver of authenticity? If so then if I can source the same materials and molds of any brand's signature items I can just make authentic iPods, rolexes, or nikes at home. That's just not the case.

Btw this happens all the time. No frills brand supermarket items are often procured from the same sources as brand names and supplied with identical product but without the branding. By your logic the store would be justified in selling those items as their brand name counterparts.
Click to expand...
knock off =/= fake =/= grey market

all three of those terms are independent of eachother.

no frills brand = knock off

other people infinging a brand = fake

people who work at da brand making "extras" = grey market

its that simple b
 
BIP Roberts said:
maxdunker said:
How are fake and unauthorized the same thing? If I work at popeyes, make the chicken there but take it home and say sell it at a bake sale for my nephew is that fake popeyes chicken? Bootlegs/fakes/replicas are just that. An attempt to copy an item using subpar materials and craftsmanship. How are the extra 50 pairs of shoes made at the Nike factory when they make 350 instead of 300 fake? So you can't return them to Nike, doesn't mean they weren't made with the same craftsmanship.
Your definition is way off base. Something isn't "fake" simply because it doesn't exist on a Nike manifest.
Click to expand...
First of all, your are making a false analogy.

A more proper analogy would be this -

You work at Popeyes. Popeyes pays you to make chicken. Popeyes closes for the evening. After hours, when the store is closed, you come back in with your own batch of chicken. (Maybe you got it from the same place Popeye's gets theirs or maybe you didn't.) You then use their facilities to make a batch of chicken. You use their recipe, but purchase all the ingredients elsewhere and bring them when cooking. You also go to Kinkos and get Popeyes boxes printed up without their knowledge (a crime, BTW - trademark infringement). You pack up your chicken in the reproduced boxes and exit, clean up so nobody knows you were there and leave to go sell your chicken elsewhere.

Now, do you have Popeye's chicken?

I'll leave that to the group to decide.

...Just because you work at Nike that doesn't give you free reign to produce as many Nike products as you want - and it doesn't mean that anything you do in your non-Nike production time is sanctioned by Nike.

I'll say it again - the concept of a brand is abstract. ...What is the difference between Polo and US Polo Association? What is the difference between a Louie belt and just some checkered piece of crap? It is the brand's stamp of approval as legitimate.

The reason most people want to dismiss my statements is their own cognitive dissonance. They don't want to admit to themselves how arbitrary this whole process is and how they are essentially enslaved to some faceless, abstract notion of a "thumbs up" from a paper pusher in Oregon. Essentially, it's an admission of some level of shallowness - that the "brand" is more important than all the other stuff we claim to be important - craftsmanship, quality, etc.
Click to expand...
this is how i know you dont get it.

those are 2 different brands, and one is knocking off da other one. its not making "fake" polo its making a knock off "me 2"

now if i worked at a factory that made ralph lauren and sewn up my old # of shirts and sold em off to da side, then that grey market.

google why patrick ewing sued next sports back in da day, because they were making TONS and TONS of unauthorized grey market ewings

and selling em to da other markets and wasn't reporting any of those earnings to patrick ewing's management.

it doesn't mean they were fake sneakers, da company was IN CHARGE of making da ACTUAL 

RUN of ewing's sneakers, it means that da other pairs they made were unaccounted and therefore UNAUTHORIZED grey market pairs.
 
I see where the argument is and I was going to bring it up also. First dude made it seem as though if you get the sneakers early. Or work in a mom and pop and buy it early, that made it fake off the back. As though for your sneaker to be real you had to get it on or after release date which is foolish.

Most stores get there shipment about 1-2 weeks prior to release. And when those stores do get it they sell it for a higher price. Nike is the one sending them their shipment. Although Nike tells them they are not suppose to sell before such and such date. But as a small business owner what would you do, especially if your making a extra buck.

The store downstairs from me has been doing this for years. I know with them they dont allow you to charge it, only cash. I guess they can get in trouble if a paper trail is left behind. And no I am not backing them up, but from working in retail stores, and knowing plenty of people that work in them. I know how it goes.

Unauthorized products, are those that the company has no clue about. They are authentic, made in there factories, using there provided materials. The most you can say about them is that they are B-Grade.
 
I don't agree with OP. You know why?

1. The retail for those early release Jordans have nothing to do with JB/Nike's retail policy. These shoes
can be manufactured in the same factory and using the exact materials like the original product

2. These are illegally produced copies and usually don't come with any box or production tag

3. These have not been gone through the random sample test for quality

4. The production cost for an authentic Jordan shoe is way below the reseller's price!

Yet, I agree beware of fakes because there are also factories who copy the look of the
Jordans but actually use different materials and have slighly different shape etc.
 
ninjahood said:
this is how i know you dont get it.

those are 2 different brands, and one is knocking off da other one. its not making "fake" polo its making a knock off "me 2"

now if i worked at a factory that made ralph lauren and sewn up my old # of shirts and sold em off to da side, then that grey market.

google why patrick ewing sued next sports back in da day, because they were making TONS and TONS of unauthorized grey market ewings

and selling em to da other markets and wasn't reporting any of those earnings to patrick ewing's management.

it doesn't mean they were fake sneakers, da company was IN CHARGE of making da ACTUAL 

RUN of ewing's sneakers, it means that da other pairs they made were unaccounted and therefore UNAUTHORIZED grey market pairs.
Click to expand...


You misinterpreted the USPA and Polo sentence. My respect for the Lo is second to none, and I understand the difference. My point there was in reference to the arbitrary nature of a brand and how nothing but a brand's okay of something turns a simple rugby shirt to something millions of people go crazy for.

But, since you think it is that simple, let me show you how simple it is, actually.

Outside of their own people's skill to innovate, the only thing a company has is the ability to control who, what, when, where their corporate logo and trademark is stamped onto a product. If your argument was printed as fact in the Wall Street Journal - that is, if the business community and the consumer base at large decided that products produced by the means in discussion were "authentic," Nike's stock prices would fall by 90%.

The overall economy would no less than collapse. No exaggeration. You are, in so many words, essentially denying one of the core tenets of the notion of intellectual property.

You're saying it doesn't matter if Nike knows or not because the quality is the same and the production crew are the same. But, in fact, it is actually the only thing that matters,
 
Last edited:
say i work at burger king - and I make a whopper after we close cause im hungry as **** and want some dinner..

but I dont ask my boss if i can make it, and I eat that bad boy..

I guess that would mean im eating a "fake" or "b-grade" whopper right?
 
Do you read?

I already addressed that false analogy.

maxdunker said:
How are fake and unauthorized the same thing? If I work at popeyes, make the chicken there but take it home and say sell it at a bake sale for my nephew is that fake popeyes chicken? Bootlegs/fakes/replicas are just that. An attempt to copy an item using subpar materials and craftsmanship. How are the extra 50 pairs of shoes made at the Nike factory when they make 350 instead of 300 fake? So you can't return them to Nike, doesn't mean they weren't made with the same craftsmanship.
Your definition is way off base. Something isn't "fake" simply because it doesn't exist on a Nike manifest.
Click to expand...


BIP Roberts said:
First of all, your are making a false analogy.
A more proper analogy would be this -
You work at Popeyes. Popeyes pays you to make chicken. Popeyes closes for the evening. After hours, when the store is closed, you come back in with your own batch of chicken. (Maybe you got it from the same place Popeye's gets theirs or maybe you didn't.) You then use their facilities to make a batch of chicken. You use their recipe, but purchase all the ingredients elsewhere and bring them when cooking. You also go to Kinkos and get Popeyes boxes printed up without their knowledge (a crime, BTW - trademark infringement). You pack up your chicken in the reproduced boxes and exit, clean up so nobody knows you were there and leave to go sell your chicken elsewhere.
Now, do you have Popeye's chicken?
I'll leave that to the group to decide.
...Just because you work at Nike that doesn't give you free reign to produce as many Nike products as you want - and it doesn't mean that anything you do in your non-Nike production time is sanctioned by Nike.
I'll say it again - the concept of a brand is abstract. ...What is the difference between Polo and US Polo Association? What is the difference between a Louie belt and just some checkered piece of crap? It is the brand's stamp of approval as legitimate.
The reason most people want to dismiss my statements is their own cognitive dissonance. They don't want to admit to themselves how arbitrary this whole process is and how they are essentially enslaved to some faceless, abstract notion of a "thumbs up" from a paper pusher in Oregon. Essentially, it's an admission of some level of shallowness - that the "brand" is more important than all the other stuff we claim to be important - craftsmanship, quality, etc.
Click to expand...
 
misterj said:
say i work at burger king - and I make a whopper after we close cause im hungry as **** and want some dinner..
but I dont ask my boss if i can make it, and I eat that bad boy..
I guess that would mean im eating a "fake" or "b-grade" whopper right?
Click to expand...

Well what if Burger King stopped selling whoppers 3 years ago and you started bringing in your own buns, stealing burgers from a different sandwich, printed your own wrappers from kinkos, and started selling whoppers out of the trunk of your car? Is that still a real whopper?
 
Do you read?

I already addressed that false analogy.

maxdunker said:
How are fake and unauthorized the same thing? If I work at popeyes, make the chicken there but take it home and say sell it at a bake sale for my nephew is that fake popeyes chicken? Bootlegs/fakes/replicas are just that. An attempt to copy an item using subpar materials and craftsmanship. How are the extra 50 pairs of shoes made at the Nike factory when they make 350 instead of 300 fake? So you can't return them to Nike, doesn't mean they weren't made with the same craftsmanship.
Your definition is way off base. Something isn't "fake" simply because it doesn't exist on a Nike manifest.
Click to expand...


BIP Roberts said:
First of all, your are making a false analogy.
A more proper analogy would be this -
You work at Popeyes. Popeyes pays you to make chicken. Popeyes closes for the evening. After hours, when the store is closed, you come back in with your own batch of chicken. (Maybe you got it from the same place Popeye's gets theirs or maybe you didn't.) You then use their facilities to make a batch of chicken. You use their recipe, but purchase all the ingredients elsewhere and bring them when cooking. You also go to Kinkos and get Popeyes boxes printed up without their knowledge (a crime, BTW - trademark infringement). You pack up your chicken in the reproduced boxes and exit, clean up so nobody knows you were there and leave to go sell your chicken elsewhere.
Now, do you have Popeye's chicken?
I'll leave that to the group to decide.
...Just because you work at Nike that doesn't give you free reign to produce as many Nike products as you want - and it doesn't mean that anything you do in your non-Nike production time is sanctioned by Nike.
I'll say it again - the concept of a brand is abstract. ...What is the difference between Polo and US Polo Association? What is the difference between a Louie belt and just some checkered piece of crap? It is the brand's stamp of approval as legitimate.
The reason most people want to dismiss my statements is their own cognitive dissonance. They don't want to admit to themselves how arbitrary this whole process is and how they are essentially enslaved to some faceless, abstract notion of a "thumbs up" from a paper pusher in Oregon. Essentially, it's an admission of some level of shallowness - that the "brand" is more important than all the other stuff we claim to be important - craftsmanship, quality, etc.
Click to expand...

...I'm starting to wonder whether the idea of you guys working at a fast food joint is really all that hypothetical at all
 
dtb00201 said:
Well what if Burger King stopped selling whoppers 3 years ago and you started bringing in your own buns, stealing burgers from a different sandwich, printed your own wrappers from kinkos, and started selling whoppers out of the trunk of your car? Is that still a real whopper?
Click to expand...

Thank you!! This isn't really that complicated, right?

You'd think we're trying to explain super string theory here...
 
It's really coming down to peoples definition of what a fake sneaker is. If people know the information and possible scenarios of what's taking place, and they still don't care, that's fine. If they're happy with what they get, who am I to judge? I would just hope that these people would mention where the shoes were purchased to any potential buyers if they try to resell them in the future.
 
dtb00201 said:
It's really coming down to peoples definition of what a fake sneaker is. If people know the information and possible scenarios of what's taking place, and they still don't care, that's fine. If they're happy with what they get, who am I to judge? I would just hope that these people would mention where the shoes were purchased to any potential buyers if they try to resell them in the future.
Click to expand...

But, it's really not all that open to opinion. And, here's why -

1. If the grey market pairs were actually considered legit by the populus, that would literally cripple innovation and business in the global economy. Not because people care about Jordans, but because this would be considered an overturning of intellectual property and patent laws. These laws don't just govern ownership of the idea, but of production of product too. The exclusivity of production is the guarantee that makes companies willing to invest in innovation - it's what makes R&D profitbale and what pro-market folks (ironically, I lean very socialist) would say drives the entire global economy. This means that anybody can make anything as long as the quality is equal or better. That's patently absurd. The rights to sole control of your trademarks are among the most foundational rights of any company.

2. Would anybody argue that the production of the grey market pairs is not a crime? Of course it is. So, how can good produced from illegal procedure be legit? If Nike doesn't bless them, then they aren't Nikes. And, if they aren't Nikes, despite whatever they say, then they can't be "authentic" regardless of the quality.

You want an accurate term for what they are, here - "high quality replicas."

Now, in some fields this doesn;t matter. Say, generic drugs for one. That is an entirely function-driven product. But, in fashion, the brand is as important as the look, like it or not. So, a replica is a faux pas.
 
Last edited:
But they're not high quality replicas...thats what yeezy II's suffer from..people

Making pairs that that are ALMOST that good. Da problem HERE is UNAUTHORIZED

REAL pairs being made WITHOUT CREDIBLE REASONS.

And THAT DOES NOT constitute "fake" in da minds of alot of people.
 
they aint fake, they are made with everything the exact same as the real. how could they be fake? make with same materials, same factory. everything is the same= not fake


fake bred IVs

repic.asp
 
I see your food analogy but with one difference: your analogy represents what bootleg/fake shoe sites do i.e. shoeking23.net, hiphopiop, etc., etc. Except they aren't using Nike materials but subpar materials. They are however printing their own boxes etc.

Grey Market pairs are just run off pairs that are made probably with the knowledge of Nike but written off. Where do you think A-Grades and B-Grades come from? You think Nike orders 500 pairs and they only make 500 pairs? They need to anticipate production errors and bad runs. Also why are these sites charging higher than bootleg sites? Bootleg Nike sites sell kicks from $45-$65 yet these charge over retail. Even the highest quality Hermes, LV, Burberry or Gucci knockoffs don't command a higher than retail price. The way I see it these early release pairs command the price they do because they anticipate or set the resell price, are authentic shoes and take a much higher risk in attaining. Your thought that simply because Nike may or may not know of the existense of these shoes deems them fake is too idealistic.

Consider why are all these sites still up and not shut down? Especially because they use actual production Nike names and numbers as opposed to generic Nike/Jordan names. Because if it were to go down to an examination of quality and craftsmanship it would show that these early release site shoes are of the same and maybe in some cases better than retail versions.
 
Last edited:
Zyzz said:
they aint fake, they are made with everything the exact same as the real. how could they be fake? make with same materials, same factory. everything is the same= not fake
fake bred IVs
repic.asp
Click to expand...

Here's the Popeyes analogy
 
Zyzz said:
how is it popeyes analogy? they are made by nike
Click to expand...

Your former father Jay from Slam Dunk Space came on the damn site and even said he got duped by his supplier and had fake space jams. You have to be kidding me right now. I'm almost positive you were one of the main dudes going after early release shoes after that.
 
Last edited:
i was but its hard to go against it, the shoes cant be fake.

i dont support the sites or buy from them. look at the damn shoes, are you serious :lol:
 
maxdunker said:
Grey Market pairs are just run off pairs that are made probably with the knowledge of Nike but written off. Where do you think A-Grades and B-Grades come from? You think Nike orders 500 pairs and they only make 500 pairs? They need to anticipate production errors and bad runs. Also why are these sites charging higher than bootleg sites? Bootleg Nike sites sell kicks from $45-$65 yet these charge over retail. Even the highest quality Hermes, LV, Burberry or Gucci knockoffs don't command a higher than retail price. The way I see it these early release pairs command the price they do because they anticipate or set the resell price, are authentic shoes and take a much higher risk in attaining. Your thought that simply because Nike may or may not know of the existense of these shoes deems them fake is too idealistic.
Consider why are all these sites still up and not shut down? Especially because they use actual production Nike names and numbers as opposed to generic Nike/Jordan names. Because if it were to go down to an examination of quality and craftsmanship it would show that these early release site shoes are of the same and maybe in some cases better than retail versions.
Click to expand...

Why do they sell above retail? It's the big lie theory.

The easiest red flag to raise in terms of something being fake is price. That's the damn irony of the whole thing - if they would just price them lower, every last one of you claiming they are real would change your tune. That's why why they bump the price up.

...The same reason Supreme changes $60 or whatever for a screen printed Hanes shirt with their logo on it. They are getting credit the oldest way there is - they are buying it. If they tried to charge you $25, you'd be like, but that's just a Hanes shirt with a word on it. Nearly all streetwear brands live by the big lie theory - the easiest way to obscure what your product really is? Ratchet up the price point to the level of exclusivity.

And, of course there are overruns and B-grades. But, those are plucked by Nike and distributed by Nike and with Nike's knowledge. They are Nike's property and produced knowingly, though accidentally. That has nothing to do with unauthorized runs.


...I feel like I'm feeding y'all soup with a fork right now.

#foodmetaphors
 
Last edited:
So how do you guys explain celebrities rocking early releases?

Damn I guess they just rocking fakes.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

The ultimate sneaker enthusiast community.

NikeTalk was created as a way of giving back to both the sneaker enthusiast community and to the greater global community of which we are all a part.

NikeTalk is NOT affiliated with Nike Inc. in any way, shape, or form. All opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of Nike, Inc.

© 1999-2024 NikeTalk.com

Share this page

Back
Top Bottom