🎾 OFFICIAL AGASSI RETRO THREAD - ATC II 2024 Hot Lava “aged” retro 🎾

ARK27 said:
Many Bothans died to bring you this information.

roll.gif
Click to expand...
Thanks Mon. 
 
ARK27 said:
It's called the Air Flare one of Agassi's shoes he wore back in the day. That was a retro color way from around 2000. Sadly the midsole recently crumbled. Nike did a retro last year of that model but that color way has never been retro'd.
Click to expand...

The pair in your profile pic was an OG colorway. I bought them at an NYC Foot Locker when I was on a trip there in 1995. I don't ever recall those being retroed though.

Peace,
J
 
Last edited:
jshortt said:
The pair in your profile pic was an OG colorway. I bought them at an NYC Foot Locker when I was on a trip there in 1995. I don't ever recall those being retroed though.

Peace,
J
Click to expand...
[emoji]129300[/emoji]
 
jshortt said:
The pair in your profile pic was an OG colorway. I bought them at an NYC Foot Locker when I was on a trip there in 1995. I don't ever recall those being retroed though.

Peace,
J
Click to expand...
I asked a buddy of mine about these as we worked at Champs at the same time. They were exclusives to Foot Locker Corp. along with a white and pine green Flare. They came out in 95 after the OG color ways released in 94. They never really caught on as well as the original release did.
 
Last edited:
KB24strikesagain said:
I figured you did but as ARK ARK mentioned I remember them coming out after the initiial colorways released. It is possible that it was 95.
Click to expand...

It was definitely 95. No mistake about it. I got mine that May. I wouldn't consider that a retro though. Just a natural part of the production cycle back then. Fed is still having Vapor 9.5's produced 2 years later. Are any of them considered retros? Back then, that was pretty much the norm. Keep pumping out colors til the model is retired.

A good example is the white/black Limited Editions. Those came out ages after the first colors dropped, but they aren't considered a retro.

Peace,
J
 
Last edited:
jshortt said:
It was definitely 95. No mistake about it. I got mine that May. I wouldn't consider that a retro though. Just a natural part of the production cycle back then. Fed is still having Vapor 9.5's produced 2 years later. Are any of them considered retros? Back then, that was pretty much the norm. Keep pumping out colors til the model is retired.

A good example is the white/black Limited Editions. Those came out ages after the first colors dropped, but they aren't considered a retro.

Peace,
J
Click to expand...

Was the tongue different though? Agassi A vs a Nike swoosh?
 
Last edited:
jshortt said:
It was definitely 95. No mistake about it. I got mine that May. I wouldn't consider that a retro though. Just a natural part of the production cycle back then. Fed is still having Vapor 9.5's produced 2 years later. Are any of them considered retros? Back then, that was pretty much the norm. Keep pumping out colors til the model is retired.

A good example is the white/black Limited Editions. Those came out ages after the first colors dropped, but they aren't considered a retro.

Peace,
J
Click to expand...

I wasn't saying it was a retro just saying I thought it released in 95 :smile:
 
Last edited:
A retro in a sense that they were released the next year after the original color ways released. It was exclusive to Champs/Foot Locker only as they were trying to capitalize on the popularity of the shoe the prior year. It never did however and they went on sale. There was also an all white with pine green on the top of the shoe and white laces.

2043719
 
Last edited:
ARK27 said:
A retro in a sense that they were released the next year after the original color ways released. It was exclusive to Champs/Foot Locker only as they were trying to capitalize on the popularity of the shoe the prior year. It never did however and they went on sale. There was also an all white with pine green on the top of the shoe and white laces.
Click to expand...
100 bucks for these back in 95? that seems to me like a pretty exspensive sneaker for its days but that may have been the norm for Nike Tennis idk I was only 4 then lol. 
 
johhnykicks128 said:
100 bucks for these back in 95? that seems to me like a pretty exspensive sneaker for its days but that may have been the norm for Nike Tennis idk I was only 4 then lol. 
Click to expand...

Average to low for the top of the line shoe. The OG ATC 2's were $110 along with the AJ 4 in 1989. THAT was considered high. 1994-95 was an odd era for Nike that saw them actually drop prices on a few top tier models.

Peace,
J
 
johhnykicks128 said:
100 bucks for these back in 95? that seems to me like a pretty exspensive sneaker for its days but that may have been the norm for Nike Tennis idk I was only 4 then lol. 
Click to expand...

100 bucks was quite a lot for the shoes back in the day. BUT despite price increases, for the most part nikes pricing has not kept up with inflation. Adjusted for inflatiion, $100 in 1995 has the same buying power as $157 today,but the flares were selling for $130 retail when they retroed this year.

So the things are expensive now but we're outrageous at the time. However the tech in shoes was much more state of the art at the time, and the models were built for performance. Still while quality was better then, nikes production costs (materials, labor, and shipping) were also cheaper.
 
Last edited:
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

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

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