Early Jordan Release INFO. Its time everyone knows.

[jordanxi45]

Still can't believe some people in here still think these kicks are legit.

But he has FOAMS!

Like they can't fake those too.

More and more comparison/review videos are popping up on YouTube about these "early release" sneaks and more & more info is finally coming to light. These shoes that come from Air Randy & other sites are nothing but fakes and soon you guys won't be able to argue otherwise, just wait. People are already dissecting more of these kicks and all the materials inside the shoes is bootleg. No air-units, just the same deflated/plastic unit. Wait until you see whats inside the Foams these guys make. Cheap, bootleg carbon fiber knock-offs and just all-around cheap material inside all of these shoes. They do a pretty good job on the outside materials, but these kicks are fake and this is the last comment I make on this subject. If you still think these are just "B-Grades" or these were stolen from a factory, you are sadly mistaken.

 

[dro3000]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by wilmusrandolph3

Originally Posted by ninjahood

if they were made in Nike's facilities then YES they were made by Nike..having consent to make em is are 2 TOTALLY different issues.

really you guys. just like someone said earlier in this thread; if not being authorized by nike makes them fake then when you buy from footlocker or champs then youre just buying 'authorized fakes.' think about it. authorization by nike can't be the distinguisher from fake to real kicks. there is just no substance in that.

/thread.

ya gotta come harder with da slander with these early sites....im all for burning cats at da cross if they doing something bad, but all ya got is speculation, fueled by frankly alot of jealously and hate.

release date pairs be having TONS of #$%@ wrong with em, where's da riot mob for footlocker. niketown, eastbay, modells, etc?

distribution channels dont matter once da kicks leave da nike factories in china.

nobody is gonna deny that there aren't a few questionable pairs that make their way to retail but let's be honest, if Foot Locker, Eastbay, NDC, and whatever other authorized retailer was selling whats coming out of these sites, JB and NIKE would have gone bust a long time ago

 

You guys act like the chances of getting an F'd up pair from a retail joint is just as likely if you ordered from these BS sites........YOU ARE MISLEADING THE PEOPLE WHO COME HERE FOR INFO BY SAYING STUFF LIKE THAT!

I don't know where you all shop but I genuinely can say I rarely run into the issues found on the sneakers these guys sell. 

Some of these dudes buying from these mom n pop shops think theyre getting their stuff from an authorized retailer 

 

 

[verysteri otypical]

Originally Posted by green rhino123

^
can you argue a point w/o being derogatory?
some of the advocates of these sites

Im not being derogatory nor am i advocating for certain sites, I'm simply arguing a point by exaggerating truths to emphasize that point. Sometimes it's the only way to make people see past their blinders...

 

[ninjahood]

Originally Posted by JordanXI45

Still can't believe some people in here still think these kicks are legit.

But he has FOAMS!


Wait until you see whats inside the Foams these guys make. Cheap, bootleg carbon fiber knock-offs and just all-around cheap material inside all of these shoes. They do a pretty good job on the outside materials, but these kicks are fake

you can't fake foamposites, they start off as a liquid and have to be poured into a mold...there is no "wait till you see whats inside da foams" da material is a one piece construction...da carbon fiber is legit.

stop tryin to slander da foamposites when you damn well know got zero clue on how to make em culpable as being fake.



 

 

[i mrdr peeps 4 fun]

Originally Posted by SneakerHeathen

Originally Posted by Fully Calibrated

SDS? What's the website to "SDS"?

nice avy, slamdunkspace.com
proceed with caution.

Jay and slamdunkspace.com are CROOKs!!!!! Don't trust this website. They will steal your money and keep you dangling thinking you'll be refunded. Excuse after excuse. I want to kick his !%+!!!

 

[verysteri otypical]

Originally Posted by DRO3000

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by wilmusrandolph3

really you guys. just like someone said earlier in this thread; if not being authorized by nike makes them fake then when you buy from footlocker or champs then youre just buying 'authorized fakes.' think about it. authorization by nike can't be the distinguisher from fake to real kicks. there is just no substance in that.

/thread.

ya gotta come harder with da slander with these early sites....im all for burning cats at da cross if they doing something bad, but all ya got is speculation, fueled by frankly alot of jealously and hate.

release date pairs be having TONS of #$%@ wrong with em, where's da riot mob for footlocker. niketown, eastbay, modells, etc?

distribution channels dont matter once da kicks leave da nike factories in china.

nobody is gonna deny that there aren't a few questionable pairs that make their way to retail but let's be honest, if Foot Locker, Eastbay, NDC, and whatever other authorized retailer was selling whats coming out of these sites, JB and NIKE would have gone bust a long time ago

 

You guys act like the chances of getting an F'd up pair from a retail joint is just as likely if you ordered from these BS sites........YOU ARE MISLEADING THE PEOPLE WHO COME HERE FOR INFO BY SAYING STUFF LIKE THAT!

I don't know where you all shop but I genuinely can say I rarely run into the issues found on the sneakers these guys sell. 

Some of these dudes buying from these mom n pop shops think theyre getting their stuff from an authorized retailer 

 

you dont have to be a large chain store to be an "authorized retailer", pretty sure any store with a jordan brand account can be considered "authorized"...

 

[rtdix214]

these early release jordans are fake in a sense that they are not up to quality with the later released version they are just B-Grade.... If you could make millions off of your "garbage" wouldn't you find a way to sale them??

 

[ka0tik1]

Sad to see so many people sticking up for all these FOREIGN sites.. its not like these are people here in the states doing this stuff, where there are more rules and regulations to follow..  all these FAKE shoes are coming in from overseas and are ripping people off by having them pay more than retail for a inferior product that is a high quality knock off..  its sad to see how far the fake world has come along and im sure there are quite few "collectors" out there that have a whole collection of this crap and don't want to realize the reality of the situation.. i think in the coming weeks/months a lot more info/proof is going to hit and people are going to realize what is really going on...  

 

[nikedealer]

I dont think people are defending the sites my man... I think people are asking for clairfication on what is considered to be fake/unauthorized/grey or whatever.

As for people paying more than retail...thats something that is purely on the person choosing to do so. Whether its an US stateside mom and pop shop or a website overseas.

Thats a buyer option and choice. No one is forcing the buyer to make a purchase from the seller on either side.

 

[memphissfinest]

ANYTHING CAN BE FAKED.

AND YES THAT INCLUDES THE PRECIOUS FOAMS.

 

[rareair45]

Originally Posted by memphissfinest

ANYTHING CAN BE FAKED.

AND YES THAT INCLUDES THE PRECIOUS FOAMS.

+1

 

[nikedealer]

This is true...

Fake makers had the Foam Lite material before Foam lites were even a shoe.

They were just called the Lebron IV

 

[rtdix214]

So where did the B-grade rumor start, (thats what i thought), was it just people in denial about gettin a pair of "Mitchell Jordan's".. I almost always have to look at my shoe in person before i cop

 

[drewsone]

I don't think it was a rumor. I think that at first it really was B-Grades (or perhaps a little lower) that were supposed to be scrapped but were being sold, but then I think the sites may have started to just straight up mass reproduce them because I think more and more people started buying from them. Then they doctored pairs, and even made a "45 Sample Concord". I know that some of them are coming from factories though, and they really produce a crap load. I know of a site that just ordered like 300 pairs of Cool Greys LOL.

 

[jayzrdead]

So let me guess the yotd 2012s that just popped up are fakes even tho we didn't even know they existed. I guess we will see if they release

 

[bip roberts]

People are throwing the terms "B-grades" "fakes" and authentic Nike product around without particular regard to the fact these words have specifc, objective meaning. "B-Grades" aren't just lesser versions of a product; they are authorized Nike product that failed quality inspection and are therefore taken out of mainstream distribution channels and made available via other means, primarily Nike Outlet stores.

To understand this situation, you have to understand both how shoes are made, legitimately, as well as consider a bit of a philosophical question. First of all, learning to make a shoe is a skill. Workers need to be trained how to make a certain model, and then it becomes part of their skill set. Nike places orders to factories for X amount of Y model. The workers are trained to produce the shoe, the shoes are inspected by Nike, and then distributed with Nike's seal of approval. It's isn't when the shoe is produced that the shoe becomes an "Air Jordan," it is after Nike accepts them as such. And, this is the key concept to keep in mind. It's also a bit unsettling in something of an existential sense.

Once workers know how to make a shoe, they can do so independently of Nike - just like once I'm a trained chef I can cook any dish I do at my restaurant in my own kitchen. Presuming the factories/workers are able to source the same materials, they can produce identical products to those stamped authentic by Nike.

Consider the analogy of "store brand" food items. Now, it is well established that for many products, brand name food items and store brand or generic items are produced at the same exact factories, and with the same exact ingredients. So, what makes Gulden's mustard Gulden's and White Rose mustard White Rose's, if they are produced with the same ingredients, same recipe, and at the same factory? ...Well, it's basically just the brand's stamp of approval. Even a better analogy is brand name and generic pharmaceuticals.

So, "real" and "fake" is kind of the wrong dichotomy. What you really have is more of a "brand name" vs. "generic" or "authorized" vs. "non-authorized" situation. Whether the products themselves are identical is not the determinant of these dichotomies. It's not about quality, it's about brand.

As for the tweaks between AR or SDS pairs and Nike pairs - I'm just speculating here - perhaps not all accessories are produced in the same place. From Nike's perspective, that would be a wise move. If I want to prevent one factory from using their material overruns to produce additional grey market pairs, then one thing that would make sense to do would be to not let them know what else goes in the packaging. Sort of like the vault with 2 locks, and only 1 key given to each of 2 guards. So, perhaps, the sites who are making these grey market products are hypothesizing on their own what else will accompany the final release product when officially distributed from Nike - perhaps going off of past releases, etc. And, sometimes they are right, and sometimes they guess wrong - i.e. producing and including keychains where there are none.

But the point to remember is that it is not the quality that makes a shoe "real," nor is a shoe with a jumpman on it, produced at a Nike factory actually an Air Jordan when it comes off the production line. A shoe doesn't become "legit" until Nike blesses it as such. It's kind of wild to think about how much we pay and value the basically magical approval process - how devoted we are to nothing but a BRAND - but that's the source of a shoe's legitimacy, the word of some faceless guy (or gal) in Beaverton.

 

[jayzrdead]

Originally Posted by BIP Roberts

People are throwing the terms "B-grades" "fakes" and authentic Nike product around without particular regard to the fact these words have specifc, objective meaning. "B-Grades" aren't just lesser versions of a product; they are authorized Nike product that failed quality inspection and are therefore taken out of mainstream distribution channels and made available via other means, primarily Nike Outlet stores.

To understand this situation, you have to understand both how shoes are made, legitimately, as well as consider a bit of a philosophical question. First of all, learning to make a shoe is a skill. Workers need to be trained how to make a certain model, and then it becomes part of their skill set. Nike places orders to factories for X amount of Y model. The workers are trained to produce the shoe, the shoes are inspected by Nike, and then distributed with Nike's seal of approval. It's isn't when the shoe is produced that the shoe becomes an "Air Jordan," it is after Nike accepts them as such. And, this is the key concept to keep in mind. It's also a bit unsettling in something of an existential sense.

Once workers know how to make a shoe, they can do so independently of Nike - just like once I'm a trained chef I can cook any dish I do at my restaurant in my own kitchen. Presuming the factories/workers are able to source the same materials, they can produce identical products to those stamped authentic by Nike.

Consider the analogy of "store brand" food items. Now, it is well established that for many products, brand name food items and store brand or generic items are produced at the same exact factories, and with the same exact ingredients. So, what makes Gulden's mustard Gulden's and White Rose mustard White Rose's, if they are produced with the same ingredients, same recipe, and at the same factory? ...Well, it's basically just the brand's stamp of approval. Even a better analogy is brand name and generic pharmaceuticals.

So, "real" and "fake" is kind of the wrong dichotomy. What you really have is more of a "brand name" vs. "generic" or "authorized" vs. "non-authorized" situation. Whether the products themselves are identical is not the determinant of these dichotomies. It's not about quality, it's about brand.

As for the tweaks between AR or SDS pairs and Nike pairs - I'm just speculating here - perhaps not all accessories are produced in the same place. From Nike's perspective, that would be a wise move. If I want to prevent one factory from using their material overruns to produce additional grey market pairs, then one thing that would make sense to do would be to not let them know what else goes in the packaging. Sort of like the vault with 2 locks, and only 1 key given to each of 2 guards. So, perhaps, the sites who are making these grey market products are hypothesizing on their own what else will accompany the final release product when officially distributed from Nike - perhaps going off of past releases, etc. And, sometimes they are right, and sometimes they guess wrong - i.e. producing and including keychains where there are none.

But the point to remember is that it is not the quality that makes a shoe "real," nor is a shoe with a jumpman on it, produced at a Nike factory actually an Air Jordan when it comes off the production line. A shoe doesn't become "legit" until Nike blesses it as such. It's kind of wild to think about how much we pay and value the basically magical approval process - how devoted we are to nothing but a BRAND - but that's the source of a shoe's legitimacy, the word of some faceless guy (or gal) in Beaverton.

Don't know you but i think I like you. Probably the best said rant in this topic. Without a doubt there real just questionable elsewhere.

 

[bip roberts]

^
Thanks, man.

Assuming one accepts my explanation/analogy, the question of "real" or "fake" is kind of like a square peg round hole. Again, I'd use the terms "brand name" vs "generic." The product may be the same in its parts, but if Nike didn't bless the shoe, then it's not a NIKE BRAND shoe. The skeleton itself is that of a real Nike shoe, but if workers are making identical runs of legitimately blessed Nike products, it's more of a copyright infringement issue.

When you have the classic Air Max X Jordan X Spongebob fakes, there are two issues at play. One, the product - meaning its essential parts - is not identical to the "real" product. Two, those making the product and falsely proclaiming Nike as stamping the product as official. In the SDS case, they may have the first variable covered, but the pairs that go out the back door still fail the second criterion. The people producing the shoe would still be guilty of copyright infringement because Nike is not blessing those pairs, nor have they permitted the factory/workers to use Nike's molds, techniques, patented technologies, etc. for this use - they are in violation of their contract as a service provider to Nike.

So, although I don't think real/fake is the best way to understand that - because that conjures a more practical context, while the issue is actually more abstract - if I had to put myself on one side of the debate and choose one of those particular words, I'd side with FAKE. Now, if you asked me whether the product is inferior to the authorized Air Jordans, that's not so straightforward.

Many will decide their opinion based on the quality, but IMO, those people are missing the point. The quality of AR or SDS's products are irrelevant to their legitimacy as authorized Nike products. If they're not authorized, they're not "real" - it doesn't matter if the shoes are of OG quality; that's not what determines legitimacy.

 

[bip roberts]

Sorry for the opus, but I'd like to add one more point --

In my original post, I summoned the brand name/generic analogy regarding pharmaceuticals. Now, pharmaceuticals, as a commodity, are quite different than fashionable basketball shoes.

By the logic of a shoe not truly being authentic until it is stamped as such by Nike, then these grey market pairs are fakes. But, by the logic of having identical essential parts, these shoes could also be argued to be "real."

Now, let's go back to drugs for a second. After the patent protection is lifted off a drug, it can be manufactured by generic manufacturers, legally. So, you might have an bacterial infection and get a prescription for Proquin, but your pharmacist may offer to fill it with ciprofloxacin - the generic - less expensively. In this case, the drug's essence is nothing more than its chemical structure - the difference between the brand name and the generic is just its packaging, name, and maybe some coating on the brand name that makes it easier to swallow or something. Certainly, ciprofloxacin is not FAKE Proquin.

But, designer athletic shoes are not the same as drugs. People don't consume Air Jordans because of what they are, not exclusively so at least. People consume them because of what they represent, to express themselves to others, etc. Perhaps, if you are strictly an athlete, it would not matter to you whether the product was blessed by Nike because your sole concern would be the product's performance on the court. But, since all of our consumption of Jordans is partially - either very slightly, or predominantly - tied to the status conferred on he who wears the shoe, it is more than the elemental nature of the product that we investing in. We are invested in the BRAND. And, if these pairs are not authorized by Nike, they are not official Jordan Brand sneakers.

For anybody who is tempted to be self-righteous enough to proclaim they aren't this shallow, consider the following thought experiment. The pairs made with the overrun materials that are never reported to/sent to Nike for their approval technically are not granted the right to use the Jordan logos (ignore the patented internal tech, even, for the moment). So, imagine factories produce these models, but instead of the jumpman, they insert their own logos - some logo created by the factory, or Air Randy's signature - would you buy those? Would you consider THOSE Real. Air. Jordans. ...Of course not. But, why not? The essential nature of those shoes are just as real as they would be with the jumpman on it. The only thing off is the BRANDING. And, that's a deal breaker for everybody. Hell, essentially, that's what the 45 concords were - same essential product, incongruous branding to the Nike authorized product. So, by our collective behavior, we determine whether it is the essential nature of the product or the blessing of the brand that determines whether a product is legit. When it comes to antibiotics, we've concluded what matters is the essential nature of the product. But, when it comes to Air Jordan basketball shoes, we've decided that the arbiter or authenticity is Nike's stamp of approval - something the grey market pairs never receive.

These are actually pretty well-established sociological concepts. I can probably recommend some research for anybody who is really interested in the underlying sociological and academic issues surround this particular debate.

 

[rtdix214]

so outlets get the bgrades?

 

[memphissfinest]

DAMN BIP ROBERTS. YOU KILLED IT.

WELL SAID.

 

[1c3m4m]

Originally Posted by ninjahood

Originally Posted by wilmusrandolph3

Originally Posted by ninjahood

if they were made in Nike's facilities then YES they were made by Nike..having consent to make em is are 2 TOTALLY different issues.

really you guys. just like someone said earlier in this thread; if not being authorized by nike makes them fake then when you buy from footlocker or champs then youre just buying 'authorized fakes.' think about it. authorization by nike can't be the distinguisher from fake to real kicks. there is just no substance in that.

/thread.

ya gotta come harder with da slander with these early sites....im all for burning cats at da cross if they doing something bad, but all ya got is speculation, fueled by frankly alot of jealously and hate.

release date pairs be having TONS of #$%@ wrong with em, where's da riot mob for footlocker. niketown, eastbay, modells, etc?

distribution channels dont matter once da kicks leave da nike factories in china.

Good point guys, i wanna hear meth's opinion on this
  

 

[vood99]

Originally Posted by BIP Roberts

Sorry for the opus, but I'd like to add one more point --

In my original post, I summoned the brand name/generic analogy regarding pharmaceuticals. Now, pharmaceuticals, as a commodity, are quite different than fashionable basketball shoes.

By the logic of a shoe not truly being authentic until it is stamped as such by Nike, then these grey market pairs are fakes. But, by the logic of having identical essential parts, these shoes could also be argued to be "real."

Now, let's go back to drugs for a second. After the patent protection is lifted off a drug, it can be manufactured by generic manufacturers, legally. So, you might have an bacterial infection and get a prescription for Proquin, but your pharmacist may offer to fill it with ciprofloxacin - the generic - less expensively. In this case, the drug's essence is nothing more than its chemical structure - the difference between the brand name and the generic is just its packaging, name, and maybe some coating on the brand name that makes it easier to swallow or something. Certainly, ciprofloxacin is not FAKE Proquin.

But, designer athletic shoes are not the same as drugs. People don't consume Air Jordans because of what they are, not exclusively so at least. People consume them because of what they represent, to express themselves to others, etc. Perhaps, if you are strictly an athlete, it would not matter to you whether the product was blessed by Nike because your sole concern would be the product's performance on the court. But, since all of our consumption of Jordans is partially - either very slightly, or predominantly - tied to the status conferred on he who wears the shoe, it is more than the elemental nature of the product that we investing in. We are invested in the BRAND. And, if these pairs are not authorized by Nike, they are not official Jordan Brand sneakers.

For anybody who is tempted to be self-righteous enough to proclaim they aren't this shallow, consider the following thought experiment. The pairs made with the overrun materials that are never reported to/sent to Nike for their approval technically are not granted the right to use the Jordan logos (ignore the patented internal tech, even, for the moment). So, imagine factories produce these models, but instead of the jumpman, they insert their own logos - some logo created by the factory, or Air Randy's signature - would you buy those? Would you consider THOSE Real. Air. Jordans. ...Of course not. But, why not? The essential nature of those shoes are just as real as they would be with the jumpman on it. The only thing off is the BRANDING. And, that's a deal breaker for everybody. Hell, essentially, that's what the 45 concords were - same essential product, incongruous branding to the Nike authorized product. So, by our collective behavior, we determine whether it is the essential nature of the product or the blessing of the brand that determines whether a product is legit. When it comes to antibiotics, we've concluded what matters is the essential nature of the product. But, when it comes to Air Jordan basketball shoes, we've decided that the arbiter or authenticity is Nike's stamp of approval - something the grey market pairs never receive.

These are actually pretty well-established sociological concepts. I can probably recommend some research for anybody who is really interested in the underlying sociological and academic issues surround this particular debate.

BIP my man, you're dropping knowledge in the Retro forum and the JB forum.

I like your post and I agree with you. As much as cats want to dispute it - Air Gordons are being misrepresented and sold as Air Jordans.

 

[heatmeizer1]

Preach Bip, Preach

 

[bip roberts]

Thanks for all the kind words folks.

Here, I'm going to be a bit judgmental. ...You know what's kind of interesting? So, what would motivate anybody to buy from AR or SDS in the first place - to pay like double MSRP to have shoes a few months early. To have a pair of shoes that originally released in 1995 "early." I mean the only way you can justify that purchase is to value image and status so greatly that the "props" from having the shoe early is worth as much as or more than the SHOE ITSELF! Then, the AR and SDS customers turn around and claim that if the shoes are the same materials, etc., they're legit. So, they are obsessed enough with the emotional, brand-related qualities of the shoe to the point that they pay literally hundreds of dollars for those qualities, yet the claim that the same exact branding they're enslaved to doesn't even have the final say, or is a non-essential partner in determining the "legitimacy" of the product. I mean, talk about simultaneously holding two mutually-exclusive beliefs... This is the cognitive dissonance of legends!

Again, for those of you caught up in having them "first" Remember this shoe has been out since Jay-Z didn't have enough clout to be listed by name as a guest on Mic freaking Geronimo's album...