Bred 1 LC

These look good to me.  Lace bag is correct size and there are no widow's peaks on the leather.
 
Thanks Arron.

Anymore feed would be great.
 
Last edited:
agsz said:
 
The new ones pretty much look like these, but the production tag is off a little, and that's it.
Click to expand...
The production tag on mine does look off ish...

ah I've unconvinced myself that they're real
 
cashm0neyand1 said:
the fake leather is still shiny and dull in color. i wouldnt worry
Click to expand...
alright thanks man.

The box looks like it's been sat around for months (not *worn* like a fake box looks, has all the right markings).

I have no idea about ''new'' replicas but these look too real to be fake if that makes any sense, just the tag and the dates (of which the dates aren't a sign I should look for according to the guide, its how the barcode is aligned at the bottom and thats straight)
 
Um, hes showing you two different pairs. I took this picture from the thread you linked, compare the swoosh on the one below (authentic), to the pictures you posted above.
 
agsz said:
Um, hes showing you two different pairs. I took this picture from the thread you linked, compare the swoosh on the one below (authentic), to the pictures you posted above.
View media item 1013011
Click to expand...
So you're saying the pictures I linked you to (the one in the post you quoted) are authentics? And the ones in the og post are reps? I'm confused. Ps the tag I posted earlier in the thread are from the pictures I posted in the thread in your quote.
 
Look at your pictures in your first post, then look at the one I posted, pretty sure they're two different shoes.
 
agsz said:
Look at your pictures in your first post, then look at the one I posted, pretty sure they're two different shoes.
Click to expand...
The ones in the original post are the ones in the eBay listing I purchased them from. I don't understand why someone would advertise reps and send me the authentics, surely that's flawed logic on his part unless I've gotten lucky or the pictures weren't detailed enough in the og post. Literally the only thing I'm iffy about is the tag on the insole. The rest of the shoe is way too detailed to be replicated by a third party in my opinion

P.s the pictures in the other thread are my pictures I took yesterday
 
Last edited:
You're really confusing me..do you have the shoes in hand? Are the pictures taken by you, the seller, or both?
 
agsz said:
You're really confusing me..do you have the shoes in hand? Are the pictures taken by you, the seller, or both?
Click to expand...
The pictures in the first post are from the eBay listing taken from him. The ones in the thread I directed you to are my pictures. I have the Breds in hand. As I said, surely the tag is a coincidence? The thing that's bothering me is the date and the border (the tag picture I posted itt is my picture too taken by me) ahh
 
The numbers tend to get cut off. Maybe it's just the distance/lack of focus in the original pictures, but I believe they're legit. I've never seen a legit pair with the 8/14/13 date
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

carlosGT
Nike Air Challenge Huarache (no news yet...)
Replies
1
Views
1K
nikeairboy
nikeairboy
barrebaby
So will we ever see JB drop the retro 4+ blue speckle that was supposed to be after 25 years of waiting?
Replies
11
Views
3K
airdhazzal
airdhazzal
ike2112
Jordan 1 DZ5329-001 legit check please - bought from Stockx but don't seem right
Replies
4
Views
1K
ike2112
ike2112

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