Air Jordan 17+ Retro "Copper" - The Aftermath - NO BUYING/SELLING/TRADING

my point is there is no use in speculating Jordan brands reasoning for price as the most probable and object conclusion is that hype and popularity drives the numbers which is why show like the 11 is the most expensive each year.

 

True enough. Your OP was just an example thrown at me so I didn't really get the point behind it. I can certainly agree that hype and popularity is a big driving force in the prices but I still can't negate inflation. Everything goes up in price. People born before the 90s can only reminisce about the days when gum and chips and drinks were a quarter each.

 

The original release of the 17s was a gimmick too in a way. CD, pamphlet, suitcase, and the shoe. The shoe def wasnt worth the $200 itself. You were paying for the hype around it.

On the retro we're likely to just get shoe, tissue paper, cardboard shoe trees, and box. Def aint worth 250 unless its got updated tech like the XX9... which still isnt worth 250.

 

while things go up, I think JB(Nike to be honest) has far more control over their prices than other companies. As I said the Spizikes price had not changed and I'm sure that's not all. I've heard mention of many Nike shoes that have seen a $0-$10 change since their original releases years prior. While I won't ignore inflation, I won't acknowledge it as the reason for Jordan price increases.

 

This.

Yeah to me the inflation/price increase is just like what's going on with the foamposites. The coppers will be a game time decision. They'll probably sit in out here in Houston anyways at least for a week or two.

 

I'd be willing to bet it costs them the same or even less to produce most retros than it did to make the originals. like hello, this is Nike. Cost cutting is practically their motto. The cost of materials does not factor into this price increase because they ARE NOT using the same quality material! They are not spending what it would take now days for the same quality, true "inflation". They are simply milking because they can.

 

Anyone prefer the cover on?
I hated how it popped off in certain spots,
and I hate how it looks. I think that's why they went with the coppers. They didn't come with one right?

 

Plus' didn't have the shroud, so yes coppers didn't. Still the wizards cw, white/reds were the best 2 imo. Hoping for those 2 to retro

Far as the price nobody wants to pay 250 but I can understand why it's priced at that. Ppl that don't wanna spend that...DON'T lol. Ppl who do, enjoy em, it's been a long time coming

 

Also, who here actually paid retail for those? Got the lows for $35 and the mids for $69.99 from the outlet.

 

I got lows for 100 and mid for 140.. Foot locker employee discount back then

 

plain and simple the price hike is because of the popularity of their products right now, so if i start a business and sell shoes for $50 and later once the product shoots off in popularity i should still charge $50? not gunna happen but also i wouldnt downgrade my quality and still charge way over my original prices but the consumer has proven over and over again that regardless of price and quality of certain products will sellout instantly regardless so why should they change? they will only change when the demand for better quality is evident and its not at the moment. cant hate on a business flourishing because of its sheep followers, good for them i say

 

I keep saying this. It's like when McDonalds said they would work harder to make their burgers better and look more like they do in advertisements and then you still open the Big Max box and it looks like someone sat on it.

 

paid 200 in 2002 dont mind paying $250 in 2015, prices suck but that's how companies work

 

If you paid full price for Jordan's back in 2000 you were an idiot because they went on sale every time after a month then hit the clearance rack a couple months after that.

 

well I wouldn't of know that back then now would I ?

 

Truth. That's what also kills me about the XVII: this shoe wasn't even very popular. I get why the prices are so high on eBay (no one has them DS), but it's going to kill me to see this shoe sell for so much when it wasn't that popular to begin with!

 

I knew XVIIs were coming. The GM pairs and the sudden popularity of the shoe was a dead give away. It's a shame, I'm going to have to wait for some hipster "rap icon" or a wave of teenies to decide that XVs are "cool" just for them to get a run.

We can't sh*t on hypebeast anymore. They decide what will get released due to popular demand. We'd better be nice to the kids. They're THE ONLY REASON we're getting XVIIs.

 

perhaps.






the 90s fad will def fade soon and attention will shift to the 2000s

 

and then ill be out, for me nothing after 13s were worth copping

 

why? You an old head/ Real MJ fan?

 

Ehhhh, not really true

Depended on the release and your location

 

the only reason this shoe is popular the people who were children when the 17's released back in 2001 are now young adults that can now afford a paue since their use to buying retros for the past 14 years

the 17's will sell better in 2016 then say a release in 2010

when the 17's first came out they tanked

i still have a deadstock white/red 17's

had 2 pairs sold one last year to a niketalker for $550.00

perfect time to retro the 17's

 

R

I still have these OGs in NDS condition. May have worn these once, twice max and then back into the bag. Also still have DS white base in the hard case.

When these came out they were discounted so heavily it wasn't even funny.

The shoe itself is pretty cool was designed when MJ moved to SF and was a jump shooter, needed more support vs. lighter weight.

 

These dropped in what, 02? I agree if you're talking retros. Most of those sold out on RD. New Js collected dust. The TMac II was 100x more popular than this shoe.

 

In general I'd agree with you, however Nike's price increase is simply because they can and have for years controlled supply and demand. I'm interested to see if the last 4 releases sitting on shelves is a long term trend or temporary.

Jordan's cost under $40 landed to the U.S. For a pair of retros. USA Today posted on these years back. And while costs in China are escalating sneakers and Garmants have low labor content due to automation in factories. With all this said, Nike doesn't run a cost plus business. So if a sneaker costs $1 but everyone will pay $250 why lower your Price???

Newer sneaker technology may carry higher costs, but for most of these retros were talking +20 year old technology.