- 12
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 9, 1999
Eric,
Congratulations are in order. Getting an article and picture about yourself in the Wall Street Journal - on the front page no less - is very impressive, especially for a 16-year-old.
However, though it is no fault of your own, I don't think you have any idea of what might happen as a result of the article being printed in such a widely distributed and highly influential newspaper. Lots of executives and investors read that paper. You may have just made it much harder, if not impossible, for internet (and non-internet) sneaker dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps to continue to do business the way it currently is. I must say that you probably have raised a lot of flags and piqued a lot of interest from the people at Nike, especially those in charge of allocation and distribution.
I don't think that Nike can take any legal action against the dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps, as long as they pay full price for the merchandise after the scheduled release dates. I don't think there's anything illegal about that. However, I know that they will not be too happy with the stores that are wholesaling you the shoes before release date. Which, by the way, is a violation of their Nike contracts. Any store that engages in it is just plain foolish.
I will say that Nike is well aware of, and steadily monitors the websites of unauthorized dealers as well as eBay. They check for stuff that isn't supposed to be sold at all, especially on the internet. This includes limited edition releases, player samples, sales samples, weartest samples and other in-house prototypes. How do I know this? We checked our daily website traffic logs. At it's peak, we would see the "c-14.nike.com" address between 12-15 times per day. (I'm not making this up.) They used to check our site out all the time, although not as much since we basically stopped selling shoes.
I take personal enjoyment in seeing Nike look this stupid as a result of this article. Think about it, a few dozen sneaker dealers are effectively circumventing the marketing and distribution strategies of a bazillion-dollar-a-year company. They probably don't like that. While sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping is a pretty crafty trade it's not likely to last much longer in its current form.
Nike will probably come down hard on the rogue stores, as well as the sales reps who handle their accounts.
I think that there will most definitely be repercussions from this, which may include:
1. Store-imposed x-amount-of-pairs-per-customer limits.
2. Nike-mandated strict adhesion to release dates.
3. Closer monitoring of limited edition releases.
4. Increased accountability for sales reps and store owners.
Since most of the valuable shoes are limited editions, that means that they are certainly in low supply. Make no mistake about it, Nike knows exactly what stores get what, how many, and when. Given the low supply, it won't take Nike long to figure out who is wholesaling the shoes and/or selling them ahead of time. Remember, Nike retailers can't act as wholesalers.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that we at Jersey Joe's were in fact contacted by this reporter to shed some light on how the whole sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping thing works. She said that it had already been explained to her how it all works. She asked us for contact information (and names) of the Niketalk admins/creators, as well as other dealers, but we refused to give it. She seemed to have an understanding of it all, and also seemed pretty nice. (cool voice too, probably 23-24 years old). I think (hope) her intentions were to write a congratulatory article for a 16-year old who has a hell of an interesting business running. I don't think she meant to "blow up the spot" for anybody, but I think that by printing this article, she may have done just that.
Good Luck to all who engage in this. Although it is risky, unstable and filled with uncertainty, it can be pretty profitable way of doing business. However, as a result of the Wall Street Journal article, it probably will become much harder to pull it off. I think the WSJ article will definitely have negative effects on the sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping market. I doubt that a company as large as Nike will sit back and continue to allow a few dozen dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps to make them look like fools on the front page of the most important financial newspaper in the world.
Regards,
Jersey Joe
PS: Whoever gave our contact information to this reporter - and told her to contact us - PLEASE DO NOT EVER DO IT AGAIN.
Congratulations are in order. Getting an article and picture about yourself in the Wall Street Journal - on the front page no less - is very impressive, especially for a 16-year-old.
However, though it is no fault of your own, I don't think you have any idea of what might happen as a result of the article being printed in such a widely distributed and highly influential newspaper. Lots of executives and investors read that paper. You may have just made it much harder, if not impossible, for internet (and non-internet) sneaker dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps to continue to do business the way it currently is. I must say that you probably have raised a lot of flags and piqued a lot of interest from the people at Nike, especially those in charge of allocation and distribution.
I don't think that Nike can take any legal action against the dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps, as long as they pay full price for the merchandise after the scheduled release dates. I don't think there's anything illegal about that. However, I know that they will not be too happy with the stores that are wholesaling you the shoes before release date. Which, by the way, is a violation of their Nike contracts. Any store that engages in it is just plain foolish.
I will say that Nike is well aware of, and steadily monitors the websites of unauthorized dealers as well as eBay. They check for stuff that isn't supposed to be sold at all, especially on the internet. This includes limited edition releases, player samples, sales samples, weartest samples and other in-house prototypes. How do I know this? We checked our daily website traffic logs. At it's peak, we would see the "c-14.nike.com" address between 12-15 times per day. (I'm not making this up.) They used to check our site out all the time, although not as much since we basically stopped selling shoes.
I take personal enjoyment in seeing Nike look this stupid as a result of this article. Think about it, a few dozen sneaker dealers are effectively circumventing the marketing and distribution strategies of a bazillion-dollar-a-year company. They probably don't like that. While sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping is a pretty crafty trade it's not likely to last much longer in its current form.
Nike will probably come down hard on the rogue stores, as well as the sales reps who handle their accounts.
I think that there will most definitely be repercussions from this, which may include:
1. Store-imposed x-amount-of-pairs-per-customer limits.
2. Nike-mandated strict adhesion to release dates.
3. Closer monitoring of limited edition releases.
4. Increased accountability for sales reps and store owners.
Since most of the valuable shoes are limited editions, that means that they are certainly in low supply. Make no mistake about it, Nike knows exactly what stores get what, how many, and when. Given the low supply, it won't take Nike long to figure out who is wholesaling the shoes and/or selling them ahead of time. Remember, Nike retailers can't act as wholesalers.
I would be remiss if I didn't mention that we at Jersey Joe's were in fact contacted by this reporter to shed some light on how the whole sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping thing works. She said that it had already been explained to her how it all works. She asked us for contact information (and names) of the Niketalk admins/creators, as well as other dealers, but we refused to give it. She seemed to have an understanding of it all, and also seemed pretty nice. (cool voice too, probably 23-24 years old). I think (hope) her intentions were to write a congratulatory article for a 16-year old who has a hell of an interesting business running. I don't think she meant to "blow up the spot" for anybody, but I think that by printing this article, she may have done just that.
Good Luck to all who engage in this. Although it is risky, unstable and filled with uncertainty, it can be pretty profitable way of doing business. However, as a result of the Wall Street Journal article, it probably will become much harder to pull it off. I think the WSJ article will definitely have negative effects on the sneaker dealing/hustling/selling/pimping market. I doubt that a company as large as Nike will sit back and continue to allow a few dozen dealers/hustlers/sellers/pimps to make them look like fools on the front page of the most important financial newspaper in the world.
Regards,
Jersey Joe
PS: Whoever gave our contact information to this reporter - and told her to contact us - PLEASE DO NOT EVER DO IT AGAIN.