Nike Air Jordan 4 Retro "White/Cement" - The Aftermath - NO BUYING/SELLING/TRADING

[Aquamanjay_]

People keep talking about how they corrected the netting, but y'all do realize that even though the angle is correct, the material is completely off?


OG's and 99's had two piece panels. Breathable nylon mesh AND netting over the mesh. All modern retros have had the netting attached directly to the nylon mesh. The netting wasn't thin and perfectly boxy either, it was thicker and a bit rounded.

It's a small detail that doesn't really bother me either way, but I don't understand why people are commending JB for changing the angle when there's so much else wrong with the molds/materials.

that's what JB does. Last year for the Infrareds they have us that 3m but left of the Durabuck upper and leather heel. I could give a **** about mesh angle and the 3m

 

[frankw]

It's cool when people complain and not buy.

It's people that are complaining and then still buy a ton that are the reasons Nike keeps pushing up the retail price. There's nothing to do with inflation and all that BS.

 

[scrubstoreowner]

It's people that are complaining and then still buy a ton that are the reasons Nike keeps pushing up the retail price. 

Actually it would be Ebay, Flightclub, any and all other consignment stores.

the shoe is MSRP $220

resellers will sell them at ?

Nike sees this, changes the price.

rinse, repeat.

one day, not too far from now, the reseller will be priced out.

a great example are the pinnacles.

 

[dankenstien88]

It's cool when people complain and not buy.

It's people that are complaining and then still buy a ton that are the reasons Nike keeps pushing up the retail price. There's nothing to do with inflation and all that BS.

No doubt. The inflation talk kills me...

I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. Inflation has nothing to to with the pricing when it comes to re-releases, especially models with watered down tech and lesser quality materials.

For years on end retros were consistently the same price as their initial release. Retros are much cheaper to produce than a brand new design because the shoe is already designed, patents are already filed, molds are already made, the athletes are paid and there are zero advertising and pre-development costs.

Retros were traditionally a way of the company's paying respect to the oldheads that helped their company grow and a nice little way to give back by offering a 2nd chance to own certain nostalgic shoes.

Take the Jordan 3 for example $99 in 1988, $99 in 1994, $99 in 2001, $99 in 2003. As soon as Nike realized these things were starting to sell better and demand more from re-sellers than their new releases; they began the price hikes $135, $150, $160, $180, then finally double OG retail @ $200 for "88s" with N/A. I understand its a free market and at the end of the day they can charge whatever they want to, but the notion that these price hikes are a result of inflation is a fallacy.

 

[The Fresh Prince]

 
Actually it would be Ebay, Flightclub, any and all other consignment stores.

the shoe is MSRP $220

resellers will sell them at ?

Nike sees this, changes the price.

rinse, repeat.

one day, not too far from now, the reseller will be priced out.

a great example are the pinnacles.

Exactly, inflation is not causing these substantial price increases; you named the problem and the method.

 

[marztharealist]

Originally Posted by geraldg2309  

Man wtf?

How are you gonna post about saying "I'm in", saying stuff like "It's a dream at this point" to get 99s sort of mold and "I'm just gonna DEAL with it", "Just wish it was cheaper" and then LITERALLY your next post is complaining about the EXACT SAME shoe how its "painful" and "sickening to look at" and your complaining about the price.

 Get out of here with that nonsense. Pick a side and stay there.

 

Man, y'all take S*** WAY TOO SERIOUS on here sometimes... 

  Y'all are the ones who NEED to LIGHTEN up. Y'all CAN'T take an OPINION to SAVE YOUR LIVES!!!  YES, I know what I said... And YES, they are PAINFUL to look at in comparison. It's JUST an OPINION, nobody said that you had to agree with me. Just like some prefer the '99's shape over the OGs, and when people say the 2012's were HORRIBLE. Then some say that they're NOT as BAD as people think. It's JUST an OPINION, and I have the right to change it when and wherever. For nowadays, it's a DECENT retro. But, that TOE BOX is HORRENDOUS!

I don't care what y'all say, or think.

 

[rudemiester]

It's amazing how Nike/JB routinely gets away with giving their consumers poor versions of the products they really want. Genius, almost evil, levels of marketing, promotion and consumer psychology.

 

[toneloc2002]

View media item 1783936Best pic I've seen so far

 

[marztharealist]

^^^^^^^^^​

 ​

​

YES!!!​

Here's the MarqueeSole.com pics...​

 ​

​

 ​

​

 ​

​

 ​

​

 ​

​

 ​

​

 ​

 ​

The shoe, and the quality LOOKS REAL GOOD in these pics. The toe box looks WAY better, & the leather is MOST DEFINITELY the same used on the Teal IV's. Just like @faceMizzy said, H*** it MIGHT be even softer. My only concern now is that it looks like a size 9, or some ****. Hopefully, a size 12 has SOMEWHAT  of a slanted toe box like these. If the FINAL product looks EXACTLY like THIS, I'd COP two pairs EASILY. You'll hear NO MORE complains for me, 4 REAL!!! But, MarqueeSole is known to sell FAKES.... So once again, I'm NOT gettin' my hopes up.​

 

[Aquamanjay_]

But doesn't marqueesole sell fa.............

 

[marztharealist]

Originally Posted by jaylaw15  

But doesn't marqueesole sell fa.............

That's what I JUST said @jaylaw15, that SOMEWHAT slanted toe box might be TOO GOOD to be TRUE.......

 

[Nike Still Sux]

Those MS pics.......MAN

 

[locobans]

 

[pmpdaddyrobford]

​

Man wtf?​

View media item 1782884​

How are you gonna post about saying "I'm in", saying stuff like "It's a dream at this point" to get 99s sort of mold and "I'm just gonna DEAL with it", "Just wish it was cheaper" and then LITERALLY your next post is complaining about the EXACT SAME shoe how its "painful" and "sickening to look at" and your complaining about the price.​

 Get out of here with that nonsense. Pick a side and stay there.​

 ​

Man, y'all take S*** WAY TOO SERIOUS on here sometimes...    Y'all are the ones who NEED to LIGHTEN up. Y'all CAN'T take an OPINION to SAVE YOUR LIVES!!!  YES, I know what I said... And YES, they are PAINFUL to look at in comparison. It's JUST an OPINION, nobody said that you had to agree with me. Just like some prefer the '99's shape over the OGs, and when people say the 2012's were HORRIBLE. Then some say that they're NOT as BAD as people think. It's JUST an OPINION, and I have the right to change it when and wherever. For nowadays, it's a DECENT retro. But, that TOE BOX is HORRENDOUS!​

I don't care what y'all say, or think.​

It's painful to read your gibberish

 

[Soul2Sole]

No doubt. The inflation talk kills me...

I've said this before and I'm sure I'll say it again. Inflation has nothing to to with the pricing when it comes to re-releases, especially models with watered down tech and lesser quality materials.

For years on end retros were consistently the same price as their initial release. Retros are much cheaper to produce than a brand new design because the shoe is already designed, patents are already filed, molds are already made, the athletes are paid and there are zero advertising and pre-development costs.

Retros were traditionally a way of the company's paying respect to the oldheads that helped their company grow and a nice little way to give back by offering a 2nd chance to own certain nostalgic shoes.

Take the Jordan 3 for example $99 in 1988, $99 in 1994, $99 in 2001, $99 in 2003. As soon as Nike realized these things were starting to sell better and demand more from re-sellers than their new releases; they began the price hikes $135, $150, $160, $180, then finally double OG retail @ $200 for "88s" with N/A. I understand its a free market and at the end of the day they can charge whatever they want to, but the notion that these price hikes are a result of inflation is a fallacy.

QFT!!! rep'd!!

 

[g money 87]

If it's anything like the Chicago 1s then most likely.

What does that mean?

 

[nomanno]

View media item 1784316View media item 1784317
Back is closet to the 89 than any of em

 

[nomanno]

REALLLLY love the heavy speckling

 

[sthebest]

If it's anything like the Chicago 1s then most likely.

Resell will be a guaranteed 350.

 

[sthebest]

^^^^^^^^^​

View media item 1778997​

YES!!!​

​

Here's the MarqueeSole.com pics...​

View media item 1783914​

View media item 1783915​

View media item 1783916​

View media item 1783917​

View media item 1783918​

View media item 1783919​

​

The shoe, and the quality LOOKS REAL GOOD in these pics. The toe box looks WAY better, & the leather is MOST DEFINITELY the same used on the Teal IV's. Just like @faceMizzy
said, H*** it MIGHT be even softer. My only concern now is that it looks like a size 9, or some ****. Hopefully, a size 12 has SOMEWHAT  of a slanted toe box like these. If the FINAL product looks EXACTLY like THIS, I'd COP two pairs EASILY. You'll hear NO MORE complains for me, 4 REAL!!! But, MarqueeSole is known to sell FAKES.... So once again, I'm NOT gettin' my hopes up.​

These look damn good. And considering that the MS versions of sneakers often look worse than the final product, the final product should look amazing

Im skipping anything coming out in January to intentionally double up on these. One pair is going to get beat into the ground

 

[javyLSU]

Materials, quality, price, unauthorized/fakes... And we're still 3 months out. This thread is shaping up to be epic, I'm pulling up my chair and enjoying... [emoji]128513[/emoji]
View media item 1784344

 

[airflight69]

Ready for the ride!

 

[newgodflow]

What does that mean?

AirSak has PTSD over the Chicago 1 release lol

 

[The Fresh Prince]

AirSak has PTSD over the Chicago 1 release lol

You're right:

 

[The Fresh Prince]