ADIDAS BOOST Thread - PAGE 1 for INFO- *NO BUYING/SELLING/TRADING*

How many 3.0s have you copped this year?

  • 0

    Votes: 17 22.1%

  • 1-2

    Votes: 33 42.9%

  • 3+

    Votes: 27 35.1%
  • Total voters
    77
  • Poll closed .
Show All
Anyone ever had trouble returning shoes ordered on adc? I returned two pairs of UB over a month ago and called CS numerous times and complain about it but they kept telling me to continue to wait for refund. 
 
Dang so much movement on this thread today but no online drops for creams. Today must be only in store.
 
ttngu234 said:
Radix said:
I don't get this "let's exclude the lurkers" mentality. Say someone throws a party, and one group of people does all the talking and the other does not or little. The non-talkers are still just as much a part of the party. Trying to create exclusivity in an open forum (and a shoe forum of all things!) is empty elitism and juvenile. You lose diversity, and there are additional possibilities with diversity.
Click to expand...

I get the mentality, because I consider you guys "friends" compared to lurkers. I'm not into this reseller game since it ruins the opportunity for someone who wants the shoe to be able to get it. These resellers buy out stocks and flip them on the bay for such a small profit margin. If you have enough time to hunt down shoes to sell and make $20-$25 a pair, then put your time to use and educate yourself to find a better job.

Plus, I'd rather help ones I know that post on here first prior to helping others. However, at the rate the UBs are flying off the shelf, I don't even think that's possible.

Is it such a bad thing to help your "friends" before you help others?

There is NOTHING diverse about lurkers who do not make any contributions to those who are consistently helping and sharing on here.

I'll be running for forum moderator on here soon. Thank you in advance for your vote and making NT a better place!

P.S. - all collabs are butt ugly. Anything with more than one color, with the exception of the cream/chalk/talc/off-white, are so damn ugly. Most of the time new releases come out, I feel that they are going to be a miss.
Click to expand...

The argument that guests are lurkers and are resellers is a point that should be explored further.

Wednesday just before midnight EST, it was posted that there were at that time "1079 Active Users (363 Members and 716 Guests)" [p. 701, #21014]. That is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio. Based on this, it would not be unreasonable to assume that for any given time there is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio.

There are three types of members and three types of guests: (1) those that are purely consumers who never resell, (2) those that are mostly consumers but resell one or more times, and (3) those that resell all the time.

I bet most folks would not find fault with the #2 type of people so we can combine #1 and #2 into one group. Conservatively, at a 33% distribution, for Wednesday the 6th at midnight EST, that's 240 of types 1 and 2 members and 120 of type 3 members compared to 476 of types 1 and 2 guests and 248 of type 3 guests. Realistically, type 3 is probably closer to 1 in 5 (or 20%) rather than 33%.

So, all guests are not lurkers/resellers, only a minority, and some members are resellers.

Wanting to exclude "lurkers"/guests is not logical but rather an emotional, knee jerk reaction to not being able to buy a limited product at a desired time.

Another viewpoint is that NT is not the sole source of when in-demand shoes are going to drop but rather one resource of many. So, to think that all resellers flock here to get an edge on purchasing shoes ahead of the average consumer does not sound reasonable.

Member or guest, what is wrong with a person being an occasional reseller who buys, for example, a pair of NMDs and reselling to make an extra $100 dollars to offset the cost of their UBs? Further, one could argue that some number of type #3 are part of a healthy market. It's good economy. No demand, no product. More demand, more options.
 
Radix said:
The argument that guests are lurkers and are resellers is a point that should be explored further.

Wednesday just before midnight EST, it was posted that there were at that time "1079 Active Users (363 Members and 716 Guests)" [p. 701, #21014]. That is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio. Based on this, it would not be unreasonable to assume that for any given time there is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio.

There are three types of members and three types of guests: (1) those that are purely consumers who never resell, (2) those that are mostly consumers but resell one or more times, and (3) those that resell all the time.

I bet most folks would not find fault with the #2 type of people so we can combine #1 and #2 into one group. Conservatively, at a 33% distribution, for Wednesday the 6th at midnight EST, that's 240 of types 1 and 2 members and 120 of type 3 members compared to 476 of types 1 and 2 guests and 248 of type 3 guests. Realistically, type 3 is probably closer to 1 in 5 (or 20%) rather than 33%.

So, all guests are not lurkers/resellers, only a minority, and some members are resellers.

Wanting to exclude "lurkers"/guests is not logical but rather an emotional, knee jerk reaction to not being able to buy a limited product at a desired time.

Another viewpoint is that NT is not the sole source of when in-demand shoes are going to drop but rather one resource of many. So, to think that all resellers flock here to get an edge on purchasing shoes ahead of the average consumer does not sound reasonable.

Member or guest, what is wrong with a person being an occasional reseller who buys, for example, a pair of NMDs and reselling to make an extra $100 dollars to offset the cost of their UBs? Further, one could argue that some number of type #3 are part of a healthy market. It's good economy. No demand, no product. More demand, more options.
Click to expand...

TL;DR
noticed there were a lot of numbers and %'s though.
 
Radix said:
The argument that guests are lurkers and are resellers is a point that should be explored further.

Wednesday just before midnight EST, it was posted that there were at that time "1079 Active Users (363 Members and 716 Guests)" [p. 701, #21014]. That is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio. Based on this, it would not be unreasonable to assume that for any given time there is approximately a 2:1 guest to member ratio.

There are three types of members and three types of guests: (1) those that are purely consumers who never resell, (2) those that are mostly consumers but resell one or more times, and (3) those that resell all the time.

I bet most folks would not find fault with the #2 type of people so we can combine #1 and #2 into one group. Conservatively, at a 33% distribution, for Wednesday the 6th at midnight EST, that's 240 of types 1 and 2 members and 120 of type 3 members compared to 476 of types 1 and 2 guests and 248 of type 3 guests. Realistically, type 3 is probably closer to 1 in 5 (or 20%) rather than 33%.

So, all guests are not lurkers/resellers, only a minority, and some members are resellers.

Wanting to exclude "lurkers"/guests is not logical but rather an emotional, knee jerk reaction to not being able to buy a limited product at a desired time.

Another viewpoint is that NT is not the sole source of when in-demand shoes are going to drop but rather one resource of many. So, to think that all resellers flock here to get an edge on purchasing shoes ahead of the average consumer does not sound reasonable.

Member or guest, what is wrong with a person being an occasional reseller who buys, for example, a pair of NMDs and reselling to make an extra $100 dollars to offset the cost of their UBs? Further, one could argue that some number of type #3 are part of a healthy market. It's good economy. No demand, no product. More demand, more options.
Click to expand...

you really put a lot of thought into this.

For shoes.
 
View media item 1861589
Got my creams! I got lucky with a clean pair! Still waiting on my 3m's to arrive.

I guess I'm considered a lurker but regardless thank you for whoever posted the adidas.com link!

Btw Im doubled up on navy and I haven't seen any Uncaged yet, should I chop Em like my wool's?
 
chop them if you like the uncaged look. Plain and simple. For me, they look like dookie without the cage.
 
Valid points made. I understand the economics behind reselling, as I have done it myself in the past. However, I have changed the way I view reselling, which is my own personal preference.

What irks me is that even if it's just one pair that is resold, that one pair could have been purchased by someone at retail. Taking away the supply and creating the demand for a shoe (in my opinion) takes away from the ability to build a collection. Of course, my viewpoint is my ideal scenario, but I understand this is how things will always be with a popular shoe.

I like your analysis and statistics, but you forgot to indicate the p-value to prove whether the data is significant or not.
 
buttercup5324 said:
View media item 1861589
Got my creams! I got lucky with a clean pair! Still waiting on my 3m's to arrive.

I guess I'm considered a lurker but regardless thank you for whoever posted the adidas.com link!

Btw Im doubled up on navy and I haven't seen any Uncaged yet, should I chop Em like my wool's?
Click to expand...

nice haul!
wools are slowly growing on me, kinda wish I bought those instead of Silver LTD
 
Last edited:
buttercup5324 said:
Got my creams! I got lucky with a clean pair! Still waiting on my 3m's to arrive.

I guess I'm considered a lurker but regardless thank you for whoever posted the adidas.com link!

Btw Im doubled up on navy and I haven't seen any Uncaged yet, should I chop Em like my wool's?
Click to expand...
What is the serial number for the bottom right shoe? Must be really LTD.
 
ttngu234 said:
Valid points made. I understand the economics behind reselling, as I have done it myself in the past. However, I have changed the way I view reselling, which is my own personal preference.

What irks me is that even if it's just one pair that is resold, that one pair could have been purchased by someone at retail. Taking away the supply and creating the demand for a shoe (in my opinion) takes away from the ability to build a collection. Of course, my viewpoint is my ideal scenario, but I understand this is how things will always be with a popular shoe.

I like your analysis and statistics, but you forgot to indicate the p-value to prove whether the data is significant or not.
Click to expand...

I also needed a confidence interval
 
mignaci0 said:
My two favorite color ways. Hate that I can't get my hands on olives
Click to expand...

Olives are soooo nice. I'm a sucker for camo/army greens etc so these were a must have. If you can still get them i think its worth paying over retail for these. Pretty sure not everyone will share my sentiments but there it is. [emoji]9786[/emoji]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.

Thread Gallery

View Full Gallery

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