Expand Quote
Expand Quote
Expand Quote
I think the whole "stealing their royalties" shit is way overblown. Y'all really think shoes like the Satire or rabona are stopping janoski & koston from cashing checks? Those wannabe BA's are gross & the only people buying it are people who already only buy generic shit anyways. Dude has hella new colorways for the regular BA's as well as the R&R versions, he ain't trippin over the lil K-mart pricepoint models
It may be but you can't say that it doesn't water down appeal of their original designs.
It's the principle of it. To me it's kind of disrespectful of a company to take the design of one of their own riders shoes (which hasn't even been out for that long) and rehash it as something else.
The way I see it, Nike has the money to test out these rehashes in the market and they can always pull them off the catalog if they don't sell. Just look at the team editions. Those were clearly based off the janoski's and they ended up doing pretty well.
What about Dekline then? All their shoes look exactly the same. Is that disrespectful to Chad Tim Tim or whoever else has a pro model over there? I think they just pump out as much as they can because it's gonna get sold somewhere. Skateshop, foot locker, Ross. Wherever
Yeah that's the idea behind it. Not everyone goes into the nike store or whatever and knows exactly what they want. At the end of the day, "any pair of nikes will do." I'm pretty sure most of the population is like that. So nike has more to gain by selling the uglier "lower tier" shoes at large chain stores without any royalties attached to it, because it'll probably sell more than the signature shoes at smaller number of skate shops.
I don't know about dekline though. I suppose if they released some team shoes that looked just like Chad's shoes after they've been out, it's a bit disrespectful, although looking through their catalog, pretty much all their shoes look relatively the same...so it's not really the same principle