Jordan Brand will be remastering (building better quality shoes) starting in 2015

But just in case you dont understand what I said AGAIN. the ATC IIs increased in price $10 in the same time Jordan retail price increased $60($90 by next year). Please tell me how inflation works like that.
 
Last edited:
sunshineblotters said:
This makes literally no ******* sense. Please stop talking.

Again explain why the ATC II and the Jordan IV arent the same price right now when they came out in the same year with the same retail price? Inflation just got up and said "inflate the prices of the jordan IV twice as fast as you inflate the prices of the ATC II"

Do I need to slow it down even more for you Mr. Expert on inflation and inflationary policies?
Click to expand...
They aren't the same price because they're 2 different shoes worth 2 different prices. The Air Jordan 4's are a model that was used by the greatest basketball player of all time, and the ATC is just another average nike shoes produced in mass amounts. Nike would be foolish to have both be the same price
 
^What does that have to do with inflation? He is saying INFLATION is the reason that Jordans are so much. The reason for the price increase is because they want to make more money off a popular shoe
 
Last edited:
sunshineblotters said:
^What does that have to do with inflation? He is saying INFLATION is the reason that Jordans are so much. The reason for the price increase is because they want to make more money off a popular shoe
Click to expand...
Oh, I see, my bad, I should have read the whole debate. Carry on
 
hulk7280 said:
 
EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999
Click to expand...
False,technology based things are actually all cheaper. here's an example http://static5.businessinsider.com/image/50cf58fcecad04e973000000-1024-818/hqgu1.jpg  even with inflation (which effects the value of dollars not of objects) thats all actually gotten cheaper. Actual computers are SOOOO much cheaper then they were 2 decades ago it's scary.

And the price is just going to drive the resale market prices up HIGHER. Expect to see more 'limited' releases going for 700-800+ out the gate. 
 
Last edited:
sunshineblotters said:
This makes literally no ******* sense. Please stop talking.


Again explain why the ATC II and the Jordan IV arent the same price right now when they came out in the same year with the same retail price? Inflation just got up and said "inflate the prices of the jordan IV twice as fast as you inflate the prices of the ATC II"


Do I need to slow it down even more for you Mr. Expert on inflation and inflationary policies?
Click to expand...


Just like I told him I learned about inflation in 1999 and he took it as me saying Jordans should be the same price as in 1999!!! Even tho I do think yes they should or maybe 10 or 20 bucks more than their original retail that was not what I was saying! Now check this out... each model increased in price by about $10-$15 right??? So why then now are they all bunched into about 3 different price groups??? 11s were $125... 12s were $139... 13s and 14s were like $150! 11s are now what $190? That is due to POPULARITY! Not INFLATION! The last 14 release was $170! I would love for him to explain how inflation works with that??? The price increase can be blamed on the RESALE MARKET not INFLATION!!! But again... I am "complaining" for no good reason whatsoever!
 
Last edited:
Is no one reading my post? I AM AGREEING WITH YOU!

I want hulk to explain why "inflation" has hit Jordan Brand more than NSW. Why are Jordans 170 (200 next year) and ATCs only increased from 110 to 120. Js increased from 110 to 200 in the same time period.
 
Last edited:
Inflation does play a role in the increased prices of material items, but the main reason (I think) is because of supply and demand. Jordan brand knows they can increase the prices and we will still buy them, so why shouldn't they? Until jordans start sitting and JB yearly income starts dropping, they aren't going to change.
 
They circumvent the inflating material costs by using cheaper ones, which is yet another reason why the inflation argument kind of falls flat.
 
sunshineblotters said:
Is no one reading my post? I AM AGREEING WITH YOU!

I want hulk to explain why "inflation" has hit Jordan Brand more than NSW. Why are Jordans 170 (200 next year) and ATCs only increased from 110 to 120. Js increased from 110 to 200 in the same time period.
Click to expand...
I know bro I only used your quote to help further the point! I am speaking to the Hulk fellow who seems to have the same brain frequency as the actual HULK! Like "HULK SMASH"
 
Gordonson said:
They circumvent the inflating material costs by using cheaper ones, which is yet another reason why the inflation argument kind of falls flat.
Click to expand...

Not just that. Technological advances in how anything that goes through a factory is made helps circumvent inflation. So does simply finding a better layout for the factory
 
Quote:
hulk7280 said:
 
lol inflation isnt selective.. correct.. thats why I stated EVERYTHING is more expensive now..

ill say it again

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999

EVERYTHING IS MORE EXPENSIVE IN 2014 THEN IT WAS IN 1999
Click to expand...
the price of a brick phone from the early 90s is equivalent to $10,000 today

would you pay $10,000 for the same huge low-tech brick phone & made with lower quality right now?
 
Last edited:
i dont care how great the materials are.. if they cant get the shape right i still aint buying anything from them.
 
Can we stop justifying the extreme jump in cost? In 2011 retros were still $150. For any product to cost 40-50% more in 4 years is clearly a result of a dedicated consumer base that has shown it will pay the irrational increases. The materials can be better but they're still not costing much more. Should a company pass on "r&d costs" which are essentially relearning their own product in this instance? It's unethical. But most of the sneaker culture today is far from ethical to get a product as simple as a pair of mass produced shoes.

People have only one way to get what they want from a company, and that's to stop paying for what they have a problem with. You stop giving them your money (on a large scale) and they either accept lower sales or drop their prices. No one is willing to do this though because they're addicted in one sense or another.

All I can say is that if they're going to find a way to justify to ignorant consumers why their shoes are now retailing for $50-$75 more than they did 4 years ago, at least the product appears to be visibly better. What more can you ask for from a company driven by greed and trying to milk the MJ cow before it stops producing?
 
^ I agree. If Jordan brand releases white cement 4s with nike air on the back, the correct netting, light grey, the correct amount of speckles, a toebox that doesn't look like a banana, and a tongue that doesn't come half way up to my knees, I would pay $200 in a heartbeat. It isn't looking good so far, the 4s of next year seem I have the same cheap netting and the tounge on the oreo+columbia 4s seems the same height as what we are already getting. My guess is they are going to do the same thing they did on the 88s from this year. Jordan on the sole, nike on the back, horrible shape = instant sellout
 
RickyRiebel said:
^ I agree. If Jordan brand releases white cement 4s with nike air on the back, the correct netting, light grey, the correct amount of speckles, a toebox that doesn't look like a banana, and a tongue that doesn't come half way up to my knees, I would pay $200 in a heartbeat. It isn't looking good so far, the 4s of next year seem I have the same cheap netting and the tounge on the oreo+columbia 4s seems the same height as what we are already getting. My guess is they are going to do the same thing they did on the 88s from this year. Jordan on the sole, nike on the back, horrible shape = instant sellout
Click to expand...

With a light grey midsole they would look more like a "remastered" 99 retro and look less true to design than an 89 OG. I thought the "tech grey" midsole on the 12 retros looked more authentic to the OG's...other than that, one can only wish they bring back an 89 retro 4...
 
Last edited:
Yeah the darker grey is what the OG's had. Just goes to show that their own history of making changes and not staying true to the OG models means not everyone will be happy with what they do moving forward. A lot of people prefer the 99 Cements over the OG's.
 
The 2012 looks "closer" to the 89 shade of grey than the retro 99 version does. I don't even know how that's even a debate...
 
Pretty bad example when you're using such an aged pair in a photo to compare and the 2012 is still closer. Point being some people would like it like the 99's and others want the OG. Not everyone will like whatever retro they do.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

therealest1
Nike SB x Jordan IV Navy - March 2025
Replies
20
Views
2K
Kierris
K
therealest1
Jordan IV RM
Replies
23
Views
3K
Vegeta's hairline
Vegeta's hairline

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