Complete CDP set?

1c3m4m

1c3m4m

15,610
11,874
Joined
Sep 30, 2006
I know theres a few NT's with em, just thought it would be cool to see them all in a group shot. Only seen 1 pic and it was blurry I think it was the dude with the sneaker museum. The value of a complete DS set tho
eek.gif
 
I have all of them... never took the time to take a full group pic. Value - 300x12=3600.... probably double that resale wise.

iJapino has a set as well I assume
 
I bought them all. But sold the pairs that were not "the business"
& also bought single pairs from friends.
 
I bought them all as well. Still have them. And I doubled up on some. 
30t6p3b.gif

I would say, they are worth a little over 6Gs right now maybe. 
 
i have/had every pack, still have all except the 11/12pack. sold them for a good profit

everyone will have their own opinion on worth resale wise
 
I went a little overboard when the packs were coming out. I bought 3 of the 3/20, 2 of the 5/18, 3 of the 6/17, and 3 of the 7/16

thankfully, i got rid of all them for a profit. I kept one pair of the 3, 6, 5, 7.

I feel much better about the situation now lol
 
Don't really know why people went in on the CDPs. They were a gimmick, IMO, and about half of the shoes would have been dead weight at OUTLETS had they released individually. What the CDP was useful for was a quick and dirty way for noobs to get a complete 1-23 set. But, if you're going to spend 3 Gs for Jordans, you would have been better off buying half as many quality older releases. 310 for a 5/18 pack, when you could get a pair of '99 Vs for less than that? Really, is a crappy pair of XVIIIs, ones that many tried to sell like $100, worth the difference between a 99 V and the CDP V?

As long as those who bought them were/are happy, that's all that matters, but I think the whole CDP madness was basically a foolish way for somebody to spend 3K on Jordans in a year. I don't support the idea of bundling a "hot" shoe with an "outlet" shoe, to compel customers to pay retail for something they otherwise wouldn't in order to get the piece they really want. So, I didn't buy a single pack. I was tempted to buy the Carmine pack, but I had no desire for the XVII, so I didn't buy it on principle.
 
Wow, ijapino, hat is the most impressive CDP collection I've seen.

As for myself, I was/am nowhere near the full set. Purchased two XI/XII, one XVI/VII, and a X/XIII in 2009. I later sold a pair of the XII, and the X's. So that doesn't leave me with much.
 
Had every pack except the 11/12 and 7/16. Have sold all of them since except the 17s which I wore for beaters.
 
Originally Posted by BIP Roberts

Don't really know why people went in on the CDPs. They were a gimmick, IMO, and about half of the shoes would have been dead weight at OUTLETS had they released individually. What the CDP was useful for was a quick and dirty way for noobs to get a complete 1-23 set. But, if you're going to spend 3 Gs for Jordans, you would have been better off buying half as many quality older releases. 310 for a 5/18 pack, when you could get a pair of '99 Vs for less than that? Really, is a crappy pair of XVIIIs, ones that many tried to sell like $100, worth the difference between a 99 V and the CDP V?

As long as those who bought them were/are happy, that's all that matters, but I think the whole CDP madness was basically a foolish way for somebody to spend 3K on Jordans in a year. I don't support the idea of bundling a "hot" shoe with an "outlet" shoe, to compel customers to pay retail for something they otherwise wouldn't in order to get the piece they really want. So, I didn't buy a single pack. I was tempted to buy the Carmine pack, but I had no desire for the XVII, so I didn't buy it on principle.
Click to expand...

Why buy a pair of 99 v's to rock tho when you can get a cdp pair? Never understood the reason to cop a og shoe when the same shoe just retroed, im not a collector I wear my stuff so i want my shoes to be wearable, i could give 2 feces abt a nike air logo

ijapino, i hate you fam
pimp.gif

  
 
Originally Posted by 1C3M4M

Originally Posted by BIP Roberts

Don't really know why people went in on the CDPs. They were a gimmick, IMO, and about half of the shoes would have been dead weight at OUTLETS had they released individually. What the CDP was useful for was a quick and dirty way for noobs to get a complete 1-23 set. But, if you're going to spend 3 Gs for Jordans, you would have been better off buying half as many quality older releases. 310 for a 5/18 pack, when you could get a pair of '99 Vs for less than that? Really, is a crappy pair of XVIIIs, ones that many tried to sell like $100, worth the difference between a 99 V and the CDP V?

As long as those who bought them were/are happy, that's all that matters, but I think the whole CDP madness was basically a foolish way for somebody to spend 3K on Jordans in a year. I don't support the idea of bundling a "hot" shoe with an "outlet" shoe, to compel customers to pay retail for something they otherwise wouldn't in order to get the piece they really want. So, I didn't buy a single pack. I was tempted to buy the Carmine pack, but I had no desire for the XVII, so I didn't buy it on principle.
Click to expand...

Why buy a pair of 99 v's to rock tho when you can get a cdp pair? Never understood the reason to cop a og shoe when the same shoe just retroed, im not a collector I wear my stuff so i want my shoes to be wearable, i could give 2 feces abt a nike air logo

ijapino, i hate you fam
pimp.gif

  
Click to expand...
I wear my stuff too. Not trying to be condescending, but if you don't understand what is so superior about '99 Vs vs. CDPs, then I'm not really sure what I can tell you. I understand your point if the prior releases aren't rockable... like the IVs for example, which are notorious for crumbling.

Are you old enough to remember OG Vs? At that time, Nike was still making lots of shoes that weren't "Air." "Nike Air" on the back of the Vs was like the biggest inscription of "Nike Air" on any shoe out at the time. It's shallow, but it was a big deal. And, that huge "Nike Air" on the back was as defining a characteristic of the shoe as any. Just like the netting, or the reflective tongue. So, without it, the retro loses luster, IMO. Every change from the original is a demerit. And, this "Nike Air" to Jumpman is a huge change; it's ostensibly a rebranding of the shoe. Retros are about nostalgia and memories, so therefore accuracy to the original is important. It's about looking back to a different era, when there's a major change, it doesn't reflect the past - completely to the contrary, it just serves to emphasize that things aren't the same anymore.

And, of course, you have the issues relating to the quality of the product, which is a whole other discussion unto itself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

therealest1
Nike Air DT Max 96 (Deion Sanders)
Replies
15
Views
2K
truenike81
truenike81
B
Black woman calls cops only to be killed by cops.
Replies
11
Views
2K
1995
1995
feeninlikejodeci
Went Off On Some Kids in the Wal-Mart Parking Lot.
2 3
Replies
59
Views
6K
DCAllAfrican
DCAllAfrican

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