- 1,211
- 813
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
What shoe store you guys shopping at that sells the display shoe that hundreds of people touch lol
Air Jordan 7 Retro "Olympic Alternate" - The Aftermath - NO BUYING/SELLING/TRADING
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand' Thread starter Started by kennmo08,
- Start date
- 19,054
- 9,021
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
huh? every store
- 3,476
- 2,295
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2015
These would go perfect with the dtlr jimmy jazz July 4th fresh gear. American flag shirts matching socks even the flag shorts. So much swag made them Boyz hate my mama
- 6,731
- 11,181
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2015
Oh, I don't know. Let's start with Footlocker, Champs & Finishline, to name a few. Heck, the pair of Black/White Air More Uptempos I bought months back, were the very last pair in the Villa at the KOP Mall. Needed an 11 and that is what was on display. Shoe looked fine to me and I took them (were on display for about a week as we know they sold out quick).
Please tell me what stores you shop at that get a single shoe for display purposes only. Not being sarcastic, I've just never seen that.
Last edited:
- 1,211
- 813
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2015
The footlocker I worked at would not even let us scan the display pair maybe this is just something that happens in Canada
Last edited:
- 19,054
- 9,021
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2013
if it's the last pair of course it's gettin sold.
- 14,036
- 14,199
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
him "scratching" 2 pairs out of 10s of thousands that WILL be sitting and eventually sent to outlets matters how?
how some of u aren't getting this is beyond me
he's saying what he did wasn't forceful enough to warrant such damage to the "leather" therefore the materials are inferior. this isn't hard to understand. and how some of u took offense again is beyond me. if anything, it was a service to anyone that was on the fence thinking of maybe copping. he showed u that u should probably hold onto your money instead of spending it on an inferior, subpar quality product. how is this difficult to understand?
it's like some of u go into blind attack mode without full comprehension of context.
how some of u aren't getting this is beyond me
he's saying what he did wasn't forceful enough to warrant such damage to the "leather" therefore the materials are inferior. this isn't hard to understand. and how some of u took offense again is beyond me. if anything, it was a service to anyone that was on the fence thinking of maybe copping. he showed u that u should probably hold onto your money instead of spending it on an inferior, subpar quality product. how is this difficult to understand? it's like some of u go into blind attack mode without full comprehension of context.
Last edited:
- 8,057
- 5,023
- Joined
- May 24, 2014
I think it's mostly just off the principle of don't damage something that doesn't belong to you. Regardless if it's the "big bad corporate monster" like a Footlocker or Nike, regardless if there will be plenty of pairs to go around that he didn't scratch, regardless if he did anyone a "favor", he still walked into a store and damaged the shoe in a process that isn't a part of the routine consumer buying/inspection process.
- 2,883
- 1,538
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2015
its the principle. the shoes stink. yeah they gonna sit. still give you the right and tear em up.
- 6,731
- 11,181
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2015
Your 1st sentence explains it all for me. You don't damage something that doesn't belong to you/isn't your. For me, it's respect for other people's property. No matter if it's a car, article of clothing, anything of value.
You just don't go doing something that could cause damage of any kind to something that isn't yours. Guess not everyone was raised to respect things that aren't theirs.
- 8,057
- 5,023
- Joined
- May 24, 2014
I don't want everyone to jump out the window on this guy for one thing though. Doesn't make him a POS or a trash individual.
He's just wrong in this instance.
He's just wrong in this instance.
- 1,452
- 4,729
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2004
So trying on shoes isn't damaging them? The minute you throw it on and decide not to purchase it you leave it for another "poor" soul to cop. What's a routine consumer buying/inspection protocol anyways? When you drive a car off the lot (whether you test drive or purchase) the value depreciates. How you guys don't get this is beyond anything I would have expected from this community. For those that do, pat yourselves on the back.
The Fresh Prince
formerly airsakuragi
- 13,464
- 9,384
- Joined
- Nov 17, 2014
Welcome to the world of AirSakuragihim "scratching" 2 pairs out of 10s of thousands that WILL be sitting and eventually sent to outlets matters how?
how some of u aren't getting this is beyond mehe's saying what he did wasn't forceful enough to warrant such damage to the "leather" therefore the materials are inferior. this isn't hard to understand. and how some of u took offense again is beyond me. if anything, it was a service to anyone that was on the fence thinking of maybe copping. he showed u that u should probably hold onto your money instead of spending it on an inferior, subpar quality product. how is this difficult to understand?
it's like some of u go into blind attack mode without full comprehension of context.
- 1,825
- 487
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2015
Lol at comparing cars to shoes; but ill play along. Would you "lightly" run your keys along the side of the car to test the paint quality?
At the end of the day, we dont even know how hard the dude scratched the shoe. We just take his word. While he may say he barely scratched them, he mightve in fact dug in his fingernail. WE will never know for sure
Last edited:
- 1,452
- 4,729
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2004
So you're comparing a fingernail to a key which obviously matched up to a car is metal on metal. I've already addressed the statement someone made about keying cars. Read up.
Last edited:
- 189
- 73
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2009
The whole inspecting the kicks prior to paying for them scenario..
I can definitely say that when FCFS ran my local mall ( 3 JB accounts ) that the majority of heads, even after standing in line for hours, would pay in store and 100 walk out w/o opening the box to inspect AT ALL. Not saying it's a good idea or that it has any weight on the community as a whole, but?
That was just my personal experience on one property over a 5 year span.
Really, damn near no one even opened the box. There's no way to KNOW why most people didn't inspect, but I'd guess that a large percentage of people wanted that shoe bad enough that even an imperfect pair would be better than NOT having the kicks, to them. If they DID open the box, in store, Sat. morning and NOT feel satisfied with the particular pair they were given?
There's NOT another pair. You just don't cop. I'd guess people didn't want to 'miss out'. Just a guess obviously.
Outside copping AM90's, any kicks I want drop on a Saturday, and sell out 'before the store opens'. Whether it was the past w/FCFS, or now w/raffles?
There aren't pairs to happen upon. All of them are spoken for. You're not walking in store at noon and copping J's or Foams. Even the CW's people like to clown disappear like that with damn near no exceptions. There's 'Wu Foams' sitting rn. Obviously not EVERYTHING moves like that, but high 90% easy.
Point being, these aren't display bait here. You're not handling them like they're AM90's. They're not on shelf or display TO inspect. As a rule, it's like that w/J's and Foams.
Now?
If you've got it like that, or are just polite, you can go in the Friday before a Sat. RD and ask someone at a retail spot if you can look at them really quick.
That's a solid route to get an in hand look. You wouldn't be inspecting YOUR pair, tho', unless you had already been informed you won the raffle AND when you went in you told them who you were and they were cool enough to let you handle the pair slotted for you to buy.
All that said? I had zero interest in copping these, and haven't been in a mall or copped kicks since the BM V's. These could be sitting in every store in the region for me to touch if I chose, and I wouldn't know.
Even if these kicks were around like that, I personally don't understand the idea behind a scratch test. No shade. Shoes to cars, leathers to paint jobs, things aren't scratch proof. Intentionally scratching a surface to see how well it holds up to a scratch? That's a sound philosophy at an R&D level, plausibly, but on the floor of a retail spot as a consumer? Just not for me. IDK.
It's hardly going to be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back, two pairs being scratched, either. The sun will still come up. Surely we can all agree to disagree, and by that I mean, think we are right and 'the other guy' is wrong and move on as pals. [emoji]128514[/emoji]
Honestly?
I think this CW did more to reignite love for the OG CW than it did for itself as a stand alone. I wouldn't buy these at any price, personally.
I wouldn't even buy the two scratched pairs for $30 a pair. [emoji]128514[/emoji]
..unless to use for a custom or donor. Blah.
I can definitely say that when FCFS ran my local mall ( 3 JB accounts ) that the majority of heads, even after standing in line for hours, would pay in store and 100 walk out w/o opening the box to inspect AT ALL. Not saying it's a good idea or that it has any weight on the community as a whole, but?
That was just my personal experience on one property over a 5 year span.
Really, damn near no one even opened the box. There's no way to KNOW why most people didn't inspect, but I'd guess that a large percentage of people wanted that shoe bad enough that even an imperfect pair would be better than NOT having the kicks, to them. If they DID open the box, in store, Sat. morning and NOT feel satisfied with the particular pair they were given?
There's NOT another pair. You just don't cop. I'd guess people didn't want to 'miss out'. Just a guess obviously.
Outside copping AM90's, any kicks I want drop on a Saturday, and sell out 'before the store opens'. Whether it was the past w/FCFS, or now w/raffles?
There aren't pairs to happen upon. All of them are spoken for. You're not walking in store at noon and copping J's or Foams. Even the CW's people like to clown disappear like that with damn near no exceptions. There's 'Wu Foams' sitting rn. Obviously not EVERYTHING moves like that, but high 90% easy.
Point being, these aren't display bait here. You're not handling them like they're AM90's. They're not on shelf or display TO inspect. As a rule, it's like that w/J's and Foams.
Now?
If you've got it like that, or are just polite, you can go in the Friday before a Sat. RD and ask someone at a retail spot if you can look at them really quick.
That's a solid route to get an in hand look. You wouldn't be inspecting YOUR pair, tho', unless you had already been informed you won the raffle AND when you went in you told them who you were and they were cool enough to let you handle the pair slotted for you to buy.
All that said? I had zero interest in copping these, and haven't been in a mall or copped kicks since the BM V's. These could be sitting in every store in the region for me to touch if I chose, and I wouldn't know.
Even if these kicks were around like that, I personally don't understand the idea behind a scratch test. No shade. Shoes to cars, leathers to paint jobs, things aren't scratch proof. Intentionally scratching a surface to see how well it holds up to a scratch? That's a sound philosophy at an R&D level, plausibly, but on the floor of a retail spot as a consumer? Just not for me. IDK.
It's hardly going to be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel's back, two pairs being scratched, either. The sun will still come up. Surely we can all agree to disagree, and by that I mean, think we are right and 'the other guy' is wrong and move on as pals. [emoji]128514[/emoji]
Honestly?
I think this CW did more to reignite love for the OG CW than it did for itself as a stand alone. I wouldn't buy these at any price, personally.
I wouldn't even buy the two scratched pairs for $30 a pair. [emoji]128514[/emoji]
..unless to use for a custom or donor. Blah.
- 88,204
- 47,125
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
Last edited:
- 1,497
- 414
- Joined
- Oct 12, 2015
Just received mine yesterday and I would have to say they are okay, even though I bought them at a great discount I would much rather have the Indiglo 14s, so these are going back. I do like the patriotic theme of these but my Olympic Foams look better. Materials are good, minor glue, and construction is good.
- 32,832
- 24,894
- Joined
- Sep 23, 2012
Did they give these actual metallic lacetips while 2012's got the plastic gold?
- 88,204
- 47,125
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
yea i agree
i hate pickles
you dont go see me stick my **** in a jar of pickles just cuz there are millions of jars of pickles out there
its not ok
its wrong to scratch shoes you dont owe
unless its plastically synthetic leather its gonna scratch if you scratch the damn shoe
some poor jabroni is gonna get that **** sent to them when they online store order it through mail
dont do that **** man
- 14,036
- 14,199
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2007
this is the last thing i'll say about it... from what i gathered, he didn't intentionally damage the shoes. gently running a fingernail across the "leather" on a shoe shouldn't cause such damage. BUT, since the leather is so inferior it actually caused damage whereas it shouldn't have. therefore don't buy bc the quality is severely lacking. that's what i got from his post.
then, he tried the same thing in another store to see if that was just a "defective" pair or if they are all made that way, which obviously the latter was/is the case. now, had he done it a 3rd time, i could see intent to damage shoes.
yall got me feeling like i'me in here captain saving this man when, in reality, i don't know
MJO23DAN
i just understood what happened/he was tryna do. he exposed the lack of quality by damaging the shoe without trying to damage the shoe.
then, he tried the same thing in another store to see if that was just a "defective" pair or if they are all made that way, which obviously the latter was/is the case. now, had he done it a 3rd time, i could see intent to damage shoes.
yall got me feeling like i'me in here captain saving this man when, in reality, i don't know
MJO23DAN
i just understood what happened/he was tryna do. he exposed the lack of quality by damaging the shoe without trying to damage the shoe.
- 1,452
- 4,729
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2004
this is the last thing i'll say about it... from what i gathered, he didn't intentionally damage the shoes. gently running a fingernail across the "leather" on a shoe shouldn't cause such damage. BUT, since the leather is so inferior it actually caused damage whereas it shouldn't have. therefore don't buy bc the quality is severely lacking. that's what i got from his post.
then, he tried the same thing in another store to see if that was just a "defective" pair or if they are all made that way, which obviously the latter was/is the case. now, had he done it a 3rd time, i could see intent to damage shoes.
yall got me feeling like i'me in here captain saving this man when, in reality, i don't know
Finally someone gets it. Thank you.
- 88,204
- 47,125
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
no man theres nothing to get
dont scratch shoes!
i live in stockton! dont scratch my shoes!
dont scratch shoes!
i live in stockton! dont scratch my shoes!
rbk93
Supporter
- 13,596
- 12,624
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2016
So doing a damage test to see if said product can withstand damage isn't intentional? You going tell people at Nike doing stress tests on prototype models this same BS?
I honestly don't think it's that big of a deal because the shoe will be sold regardless, but there's no way he didn't put some kind of pressure or at the least had freshly cut nails when he did that.
I honestly don't think it's that big of a deal because the shoe will be sold regardless, but there's no way he didn't put some kind of pressure or at the least had freshly cut nails when he did that.
Last edited:
- 2,224
- 774
- Joined
- Aug 17, 2013