- 19,054
- 9,021
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
Oh but I say ***** not real leather and I get dogged at
dudes really be in denial that it's synthetic
Nike Air Jordan 4 Retro "White/Cement" - The Aftermath - NO BUYING/SELLING/TRADING
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by kennmo08,
- Start date
dudes really be in denial that it's synthetic
- 19,054
- 9,021
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
all my places did for aquas too but kinda shocked they sat and still are
- 18,192
- 27,328
- Joined
- Dec 18, 2015
Yeah, Maroon 6 was a raffle, but not needed also. I was able to pick them up later that night.
Same goes for Aqua 8, but I checked yesterday for Alternate 5 low release, those were FCFS. I don't know what Foot Locker determines which shoe release is a raffle or not.
I would just guess Foot Locker will be raffles for White Cement 4, don't know if needed. But will try, lots of local stores around me. If they do raffles, I hope I can score.
Like above mentioned, too old and no have no time to camp for these.
- 21,797
- 30,425
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2013
The mall round my way got Maroons hares and aquas fsr. No need for raffles anymore
alp
Banned
- 39,966
- 8,990
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
Looking good
- 8,799
- 10,385
- Joined
- Apr 23, 2015
not really
- 54,690
- 61,109
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
I know for a fact the 99 retro and the command force pump retro do not have the same leather
The synthetic leather they used around that 90's/early 2000's was soft and flexible and creased
They wont use that now bevause it probably cost more and todays generation is so anal about creasing
They wont have that on these. It will probably be like the maroon 6 retro which was far from good but way better than the infrared and sport blue 6 retro which were toilet seat leather
If you kicked somebody in the stomach with the sport blue 6 your foot would go clean straight through that somebody
Are you buying them?
- 298
- 39
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2015
are these gonna be $320 in canada?
airthompson
Staff member
- 13,724
- 9,321
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
The whole comparing this version to the previous release and/or OGs is just a silly thing to discuss. If you actually have the OGs they've aged to the point where they're virtually unwearable. So you're comparing a 27 year old shoe to one that was just produced in the past year.
Then we need to get into the whole materials argument like materials don't change over time, or become unavailable, or suppliers of materials to Nike don't change or go out of business over time....
Then we get into the whole molds of the shoe argument, Nike uses multiple molds over a release, let alone rereleases. Molds wear out during production and have variance and over time are out of tolerance.....
Then we get into stitching.....when you have different sewers assembling a shoe you have variance because no two sewers, sew the same.....
I may have missed a few other long standing debates from posters who know nothing about producing anything let alone a shoe or garment. It must just feel good for people to complain???
People need to realize this is the best Nike is willing to produce at this time. The sneaker costs a maximum of $30 landed in the US to produce. The $220 retail price is because they CAN charge it and get it. Like any business they want to make the most money they can........
Probably better for those who don't like the shoe to spend their dys building a time machine
View media item 1891120
You said they charge $220 cuz they can, however cannot produce the same mold or use the same material because it's possibly unavailable? *insertnickyoungmeme
Nike is beyond capable of producing a even higher quality leather if they chose to. Don't say that material is unavailable when the Team Jordan sneaker on the shelf made in the same factories have full grain leather at a cheaper price.
Nike is beyond able to recreate the same exact mold if they wanted. Its not that they're out of tolerance, more the fact they change them purposely to save money, have you buy the better retro down the line, and or both. For example of shape changes see '13-'14 OG 1 vs Remastered OG 1, post '04 Jordan 7 to the remastered, post '00 Jordan 5s to the '13 5s, and so on.
- 1,423
- 1,338
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2012
I think you missed my point in your excitement.....:x
What Nike charges for a shoe has little do do with the cost to produce it. This is a point often debated on these forums. I'm saying they're not related. Nike doesn't price in a cost plus model. Jordans let alone other models don't cost more than $30 to produce and ship to the US, the highest cost of the shoe is the sole.
Another topic that often comes up is how molds play into producing a given shoe. My point was that Nike uses multiple molds over a given run. With that said molds do wear over production so there are differences between the first sole that comes off a mold and the last sole. The molds are 'good' until they no longer produce a product that is considered in spec. Molds do wear out and are scrapped, and remade often, but this wasn't the point I was making.
Your point of changing a mold to save money isn't correct. Minor variances in design have little to no cost impact on producing the mold itself. If Nike changes the design of the mold, it's for other reasons like design improvements or material cost reduction (less material used in the soles which again are the highest cost of the shoe). The highest cost factors are how many cavities the mold has which equates to more steel (or aluminum in low run production).The actual cost of molds are amortized over the production run.
Nike can source any quality materials they'd like to. My point was that the sources may not be the same as 27 years ago.
Your point about the quality of a full grain leather on a team Jordan vs. a synthetic is comparing apples and oranges. Why Nike chooses to use a different material we won't know. I'm assuming on this statement because I don't know, but real leather is a natural product and has variation which could affect how the product is dyed, where synthetic can be better controlled in that process which could be argued as higher quality (variation of process vs. quality of materials).
Overall, it's that consumers have unrealistic expectations. They compare a product, this IV to their vision of what it should be as opposed to what it is. Then they complain and either buy the product or not, then repeat the same thing over and over, and over again. I think that time could be better spent.
For me, I like the shoes, grew up wearing them all. I'm now in a position where I work in the garment industry and I try to help people on these boards with better information about how the products are made.
Here's another gem for those that care....we'll start seeing made in the USA Nike products in the not too distant future. They'll be around the ID line(s) and any of the flyknit or similar construction products. Adidas has already started the process of bringing manufacturing back to Oregon which personally for me is super cool. For those that don't know both Nike and Adidas are headquartered here in OR.
Last edited:
- 722
- 655
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2015
So Nike is selling this shoe for 220 plus tax and it isn't even made of real leather?
- 3,669
- 3,613
- Joined
- Jun 21, 2006
- 5,000
- 6,401
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
Regardless of manufacturing processes, you'd think the attempt to achieve the original design (ex. Higher wings). They can't not see that massive difference. Maybe they think it's more comfortable to have banana toes?
- 1,423
- 1,338
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2012
This is exactly my point. Your expectations aren't what the shoe is. People the shoes are 'remastered' they're 'more like' the originals but not the originals. Those originals will never be made again.....
- 4,467
- 1,493
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2012
Then don't buy them.... Why are you posting in a thread for a pair of shoes you have no intent of purchasing???
airthompson
Staff member
- 13,724
- 9,321
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
Yeah, thats been established. My point was at the $220 they could've done more to satisfy the consumer, because this is virtually the same shoe as the '12 retro but at a $60 mark-up for what?
I said and or to leave the door open to a better retro. I get your backgroud with the garment industry, but thats half of it. Nike is a business. Businesses cut back when prices of their resources increase. Thats why a burger from your fav fast food joint is noticeably smaller, because $ period! Same with Nike. If it no cost impact to make the mold, then their changing it to double dip purposely. It's def a reasoning other than improvements. Because the sneaker turned from a performance to a casual.
Let me recant what I said. They dont use full grain leather because Nike rarely ever does. But they use more higher quality synthetics on Teams, and we know why. Retros can move themselves, while the other lines cant.
Unrealistic? Nah fam. JB showed they can come correct when they chose to with spot on retros. Remeber they were the ones who alluded to drastic changes with the remastered line. So if anything they set themselves up for more criticism for not delivering. I dont get why you think people want a exact 1989 rendition, because all I'm seeing is people wanting solid retros. Thats why people show displeasure, because we know Nike/JB is capable.
Last edited:
- 37,352
- 31,610
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
tonytobacco is on suicide watch.
Its just shoes man.
Its just shoes man.
- 37,352
- 31,610
- Joined
- May 1, 2011
and this maxmaxjordan paid $367 for those fugazis???
I missed that part.
I missed that part.
airthompson
Staff member
- 13,724
- 9,321
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
These are a solid retro IMO but I'm not gonna sit here and acting like this is as good as it gets.
- 585
- 263
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2015
Wait, these don't come with real leather?
- 298
- 39
- Joined
- Jan 2, 2015
How do the 4's fit?
Last edited:
- 594
- 569
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2012
Like 4s
- 1,423
- 1,338
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2012
We're talking past each other, and I'm trying more so to be helpful in educating people on the board.....to comment on a few things you posted. You can't compare burgers to garments/shoes. Very different things, main thing being manufacturing always chases the lowest cost labor. This is why most of Nike's production moved from China to Veitnam and Indonesia. Burgers are bought locally, a person in New York doesn't get a prepared meal from another country.
My main point was about the complaining that comes from someone's dissatisfaction with a product, and then the fantasy f that perfect product that will never be. So let's say there are what 20, 50, maybe 100 people tops on theses boards that don't like the product??? That's below the noise level to influence Nike to make a better (fill in the better part which would then not make another 100 people happy) product.
For me, I like the model. Had the originals, still have the 2012 version deadstock and will get these.......
airthompson
Staff member
- 13,724
- 9,321
- Joined
- Jul 30, 2008
We're not. You can compare the business aspect. When meat goes up the patty shrinks, cheaper outlet. When labor goes up you move factories, cheaper outlet.
Yeah end discussion here.
