What non-J's has Tinker Designed

I'd just like to say this is a great and very informative topic.

But I have to agree with Billy. My problem isn't necessarily the colors being off, it's the quality of leather on a lot of the sneakers and how a lotof the retroes are made. They don't seem worthy of the price tag that Nike puts on them. That's why with a lot of Nike retroes(besides Jordan's), Ican wait, because I know they will be on sale in a month or two. The retroes don't seem much better than the knock offs. If anyone saw the Air ForceBarkley 180's before they were released, they'd think they were fake with the way the air bubble looks.

It's as if Nike really doesn't care. They figure because of nostalgia reasons, people will get them anyway.

And I am still at a loss about the packs. Are they trying to squeeze every last dollar from us?

It's as if Nike lost it's connection with the public, and only cares about profits.
 
nerd.gif
MenofOregon
nerd.gif
--- Why are you quiet? You had so much to say right before people
started to slightly challenge you.
 
^ not to add too much fuel to a fire (one that is probably not worth even delving into mind you), but from MenOfOregon's "We" responses, hisanswers which seem to be readily available anywhere, his "kiss the pope's rings" mentality, I get the impression that he really isn't in aposition of being "in the know" at Nike. Does he work there? Probably. Does he have info? Not so much. The way he comes across is that of a 14 yearold boy who just fingered his first girlfriend and is letting his pal sniff his fingers while telling him that they actually had sex.
 
To add what everyone else is saying, I still don't understand the logic of keeping true to the OG heads and something about how Nike is trying to preventresellers. I have passed on so many retros due to quality and I have helped resellers by purchasing older retros/OGs due to the quality of the product thatNike puts out. And that garbage about how Nike can't make it close to the OG due to the intricacy of the dyes and paint is just simply ridiculous. Andwith the Supreme AF1s going for $200.00 when that quality of leather used to be on regular GR shoes is just makes me wonder why I support a company thatcompletely lost their main focus and just didn't care about true sneakerheads.
 
shabooyah1124 said "And that garbage about how Nike can't make it close to the OG due to the intricacy of the dyes and paint is just simplyridiculous. "

I totally agree with what was said. Nike knows the chemical buildup of the colors and dyes they put into their products. They don't just take a wild guessat what type of mixture or formula is needed to make "mean green" or "engine red". It's just like mixing paint. They know what formulato use to make it exactly how it's displayed on the color swatch. It's just being lazy IMO. And I'm pretty sure Nike has a HUGE vault with tons ofshoes they produced. Not even including all the blueprints from other shoes, pictures and other things. I seem to have rambled a lil bit, but you get thepoint. The majority of things they do is done on purpose.
 
Originally Posted by B1LLY HOYLE

I know firsthand the awful decisions that are made, and that cheaper materials, leathers, and appearances are chosen purposely.

.........

Nike Retro shoes don't perform. They're gutted of their technology, ridden of key functional elements and cheapened in materials, just making for worse durability over time. I don't want to hear that I have other choices...'cause all that says to me is that thought and effort isn't being put into the products that we love so dearly.
Click to expand...

as a counterpoint - in my opinion:

- those reasoned decisions to cut corners are most likely results from issues dealing with production costs/sales margins.
- Im sure you know that thevast majority of customers use retro product for non-athletic activities. hell - the avg. consumer uses PERFORMANCE product for non-athletic activity.
expecting performance out of retro product is a losing battle.

edit -

Originally Posted by abernja

Nike knows the chemical buildup of the colors and dyes they put into their products. They don't just take a wild guess at what type of mixture or formula is needed to make "mean green" or "engine red". It's just like mixing paint. They know what formula to use to make it exactly how it's displayed on the color swatch. It's just being lazy IMO. And I'm pretty sure Nike has a HUGE vault with tons of shoes they produced. Not even including all the blueprints from other shoes, pictures and other things. I seem to have rambled a lil bit, but you get the point. The majority of things they do is done on purpose.
Click to expand...

of course Nike knows - but the real issue is does the factory producing the product know.
Lets just say for arguments sake that the factory thatproduced the OG infrared 90's doesnt exist anymore. when Nike wants to retro that style they basically need to start from scratch again in developing thecolor. their is no factory reference point. this is just one of many situations that would make the exact re-production of an old product extremelydifficult.

its a difficult/complex issue to understand if you don't deal with international production.
when you do understand the issues - you realize its a wonder we get retro's that are as close to the original as we do.
 
I understand everyone's complaints and gripes. It is very much noted. There's no sense in having an open two-way discussion about those kinds of topicsif the other party is not willing to discover and research the "other end of the spectrum". But mheftman seems to be one of the veryfew that are grasping the concept of factory production and its difficulties. Try to read his comments thoroughly and follow that wavelength. It's not toofar from the truth.

I'm not going to get into a "battle of retro quality" because it would be too lopsided, given the information that I have and the comments andgripes that you all are sharing. I'm merely stating that the consumer has the option of either buying the particular shoe model, or not. Keep in mind thatwe do have to alter our production practices at times to be "environmentally sound" and to use "earth friendly" chemicals/materials; and toalso do away with chemicals/materials that we have used in the past that we have found to harm the environment. There have also been industry regulations inthe past few years that have also mandated us to use alternatives and alternative methods. Hence, the "birth" of the Nike Considered line.

lobotomybeats, very inappropriate, immature comments. Didn't help the discussion much. It would have been to your benefit to leave thatlast part out. But maybe I do have the info., but am not at liberty to share ALL that goes on around the company that I work for. Ever thought of that one???At any rate, I will never disclose my position at Nike because I value it tremendously. I've worked too hard, spent countless hours, made greatfriendships, have numerous resources/information, and given enough years to Nike to lose it all that easily. Too much at stake as far as I'm concerned.
 
^~~~~
laugh.gif


Ok, I can sort of understand that reasoning, but my gripes aren't the colors, but this isn't the place, so moving on
ohwell.gif


MenOfOregon, is Eric Avar still with Nike?
 
Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

It would have been to your benefit to leave that last part out.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
my benefit? was I to get a rebate or something before then?
This comment, along with your other comment, leads me to believe that you are not quite "suited" for this discussion. Unless you haveanything remotely logical to add then I can bypass your posts.
 
^ yeah the complex ideas behind such blasé attitudes regarding why people choose not to buy "your" product is far beyond my grasp.
There will always be complaints due to the diversity of the consumers. We can't cater to everyone's own personal taste in this world, so the bottom line is ........you make the decision.
And I'm not suited for such conversation? Since when is quality a matter of taste? My taste isn't different than yours if I can point outthe sharp decline in the quality of "your" products. You are passing the buck if you think that us having a choice in what we buy warrants Nike (oryour "we") being able to reduce the quality to whatever Nike finds fit. Nike, erm I mean "you", does have quality control. You don'thave to put something out if it isn't up to standard.
I'll admit, some of us are a little surprised ourselves when we receive the product from the factory, but we cannot return back hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of merchandise because of slight differences.
What a joke. Is it any less of Nike's fault if the arrive from the factory and they deviate from what they SHOULD be? Are the factories not anextension of the Nike brand? Is it up to the buying public to be able to differentiate between the factories that make the shoes and Nike themselves?"Grrrr, these damn factories. If I didn't know any better I'd blame Nike, they had nothing to do with how these turned out. I will blame the fouryear olds making them"
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Originally Posted by B1LLY HOYLE

The designer of the Air Jordan II, Bruce Kilgore , is still very much with us. In fact, he re-designed and released the Air Force 1 2007.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
Tracy Teague designed the AF25.

Nike quality is getting continually worse. I DO have a choice in purchasing, but hearing the "shop elsewhere" attitude is nothing short of disheartening.

Sure there's production difficulties -- but that's an easy excuse. I know firsthand the awful decisions that are made, and that cheaper materials, leathers, and appearances are chosen purposely.

Once-loyal customers are turning their backs. There's a countless number of shoes I would've bought this year that I passed on due to quality.

The DT Max being a great example. That shoe IS a swingman version to the original. The appearance isn't remotely close.

The other thing Nike forgets about, and something that Tinker so often stresses himself, is that true innovation is through performance. I don't like a shoe because somebody put a clear plastic upper onto it, made the heel carolina blue, limited its production numbers and charged $150 for it....I like a shoe because it performs.

Nike Retro shoes don't perform. They're gutted of their technology, ridden of key functional elements and cheapened in materials, just making for worse durability over time. I don't want to hear that I have other choices...'cause all that says to me is that thought and effort isn't being put into the products that we love so dearly.


B1lly's post just about sums up my thoughts/feelings as well. I passed on lots of shoes last year that I anticipated the retro of....only to see theend product and be very disappointed with the quality. Its not just one or two - its a lot.

M.O.O., I don't care if you work for Nike, but you do like to carry this high & mighty attitude like you're the one who calls all the shots inBeaverton and you continually push this wannabe "PC" stance. I don't think there is a need to talk down to patrons of your company'sproduct.

A lot of the folks here, new and old, are disappointed with the product being issued and are merely expressing their dissatisfaction. I don't have any orall the answers to debate you all day, but I do know the voice of the members of this board and many lived thru the glory days of the mid to late 90s to beable to tell the lack of quality nowadays with Nike.
 
if we can all act like adults this could turn into an insightful and worthwhile discussion.

again - just some counterpoint.

Originally Posted by lobotomybeats

Are the factories not an extension of the Nike brand?
Click to expand...

in large part - no.
to some extent - yes.
the production facilities are sub-contractors of Nike. they work autonomously in many respects.
but in the end it is up to Nike to approve the final confirmation samples that they receive. so the final onus IS on them(Nike).

Originally Posted by FLINTGREY

I don't have any or all the answers to debate you all day, but I do know the voice of the members of this board and many lived thru the glory days of the mid to late 90s to be able to tell the lack of quality nowadays with Nike.
Click to expand...

comparing the overall quality of Nike's performance products from the mid/late 90's (as great as they were) to their current retro product line isan apples to oranges comparison.
if you want to use old performance product as a benchmark for quality - you really need to compare it to the quality ofNike's current performance product (not its current retro product).

I love talking production and manufacturing.
smile.gif
 
in large part - no.
to some extent - yes.
the production facilities are sub-contractors of Nike. they work autonomously in many respects.
but in the end it is up to Nike to approve the final confirmation samples that they receive. so the final onus IS on them(Nike).


Yes, this is understood....by myself. What I am saying is that they are an extension of Nike. To the buying public, the factories are Nike. No one cares whatfactories the shoes come from. No one is going to cut them any more slack because the shoes were made my sub-contractors. If Apple has a different companyassemble their iPods and they do a terrible job, no one is going to say "oh well, Apple didn't put it together themselves". That logic isridiculous. You guys make it sound like you just give them the orders on good faith that they will produce something similar to what Nike has envisioned.
Click to expand...
 
Anyway, back to the original topic, two shoes that I recently discovered that Tinker designed are the Lava Dome and Presto.
 
interesting roundtable guys...this is one of the few threads i have read all the way through

let's get back to tinker! (side note: that beach house is sick! esp the use of materials)
 
^ I agree- glad you liked the link. It's cool that Tinker takes the same thought that goes into his shoe designs when designing his beach house.
 
Originally Posted by Three6mafia2007

are those track shoes the ones michael johnson wore in the 1996 olympics?
Click to expand...
those track shoes do seem like the zoom jst(johnson sprint trainer) w/o spikes. oli if thats him, has a pair, someone else had a pair too, beenbrowsing ebay since then to get a pair.
prestos by tinker = HEAT.
stretchy molding to fit your foot, waffle sole, zoom air in the heel if im correct. and washable shoe - take out laces throw in the wash.
downside is i have ones that had clear lacestays lateral wraps, and they turned yellow .....smh
 
just a couple cents..


as far as the color swatches, i can see both sides of it. oftentimes, nike stuff is made in different factories - that's why, for example, the cool gray onair jordans, and the cool gray on t-shirts made to match - doesn't match. it's hard to get the exact color sometimes, especially with differentmaterials.


HOWEVER.. being as we're paying some crazy premiums.. i mean, seriously, 30 bucks for a t-shirt? 150 for shoes? you'd think they'd have enoughquality control to get it right.


i know for a fact that stash sent back the first batch of p.rods that bore his name because he was dissatisfied with the deepness and quality of the laseringon them. so, it has been done on a smaller scale, and i'm sure if there were people in beaverton that cared enough for the quality of their product to beable to swallow making slightly less profit per pair, then it could be done.


the question is, do they have the desire to? if this guy is really an official representative of the brand sent to attempt to appease us with his propaganda,then i think some swooshes are more equal than others.
 
lobotomybeats--- Fall back. You really are not contributing anything to thisconvo but personal attacks
without having the benefit of knowing people personally. All you had to do was edit
your original post (i.e 14y/o....).

MenofOregon--- My only problem with yourargument is the fact that you openly state that the consumer
has to make their own decision. This, of course, is not new information. But from a
business point of view, you NEVER say that because before too long, one would be
begging them to come back. Your thought process as it relates to the factories and
enviornmental regulations make perfect sense to me. Good info.
 
I am not here to appease anyone on an "official level" for the company. That's not my job. My job, and every other Nike employee's job, is toeducate the consumer/public on issues about our company and products. I merely contribute any info. that I see fit for the topic, considering that this is apublic message board. It is done as a courtesy on my part. It's up to all of you individually how you perceive the info.. You all can judge if my info. islegit and/or credible. You make the call. Like everything else on this message board, take it, or move on. No pressure, right? I remain anonymous for obviousreasons; one being because of the information/resources that I have at my disposal, and the people that I am associated with within the company.

KICKINHEADZ1, I state that you all have a choice because obviously from reading the posts/comments/gripes that there's nopleasing some of you when it comes to our products, EVEN if I provide relevant, thought-provoking, insightful information. The sole purpose of some of you isto deliberately come on this board and "verbally attack" our company, products, and people WITHOUT giving a second thought about doing the researchnecessary for making a logical, substantial statement. There's an intelligent, effective, civilized way to communicate your dismay/displeasure aboutthings without looking unintelligent. Your individual statements can only be taken seriously if it comes with substantial, PROVEN fact, results, or data.That's how you seriously debate issues. If you want to be heard, say things that have substance, not "cheap shots". THAT gets respect in life,and in this business.

I don't retaliate at ANY opinions that seem like a valid point in reference to our products. I merely answer them with info. or resources that I amequipped with. I do however retaliate at "cheap shots" at my company that I've worked so hard for, my coworkers, Executives, and even ourathletes. Products can always be debatable. No problem there.
 
do what you do, bro. either way, nike's still a billion dollar company. i'd just advise you to chill a bit because your attitude is starting toalienate some of the loyal consumers. like you said yourself, we have a choice what to and what not to spend our hard earned money on. and many of us haveenough pairs of Airs to which we don't really need any more.. we just want them.. we've been down for decades and have helped build the company intowhat it is.. don't desert us just for the fickle hype dollars of kids who might move on to other fads as they continue to grow up.


at the very least please listen to some of our constructive criticism. come out with a few wild colorways in bastardized materials if you must, but please atleast drop a couple original colorways with decent quality.


i hope that's not too much to ask. the zoom flight 95s in the original carbon fiber colorway are an example of a good retro in my opinion, but there aremany more examples of retroed shoes i had been waiting for - pippen 2s, air tech challenges, bo jacksons.. to name a few.. that were simply not done justiceto. also, some new performance shoes that push the envelope and that are not just amalgamations of other nikes thrown together would be nice. the zoom bb lineis starting well, but please don't let it go the way of the huarache 2k line.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

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