Kobe II in retrospect

[never wear them]

& when Playoffs start, drop the Lites.
thats if they make the playoffs which they did... but for a short second.
still love my lakers

 

[duke4005]

Exactly my thoughts about the III. Two of the best reviewed performance shoes of the past 5 years were the Ultraflight and the Ultraposite. But to the generalpublic, these were ugly and served no purpose. They, I feel, scared off consumers unfamiliar with the tech and ideas behind each, and most people weren'tNikeTalker's who bought the hype. They both ended up at clearanc eprices in FSR's and the Ultraposite was scrapped after one color. Now, look at a shoelike the Hyperflight. No new tech, flashy colors, crap performance, and it was bought by everyone. 99% of the public cares less about the tech and cut-outs andcourt feel. Does it look good with jeans? What fitted can I get? The III's will be lauded here, but on a complete level, they will bomb (unless you put aJumpman on them).

 

[reggie2k8]

Duke4005 your completely right of what you said. I'm the opposite of the general public. I don't care how they look in jeans because I will wear themwith jeans anyway. I don't keep up with these trends. It seems like the ZK line is about pushing performance forward by introducing new materials, tech,etc. Lebron's having been playing it safe with the exception of the ZKIV. I kinda see the Lebron's line trying to emulate what they did with Jordan,while ZK line will try to emulate the Penny line. By the mid 90's Jordan no longer had the top performing shoe or envelope pushing shoe on the market.ZK>ZL performance. ZL>ZK marketability.

 

[mister jack johnson]

Well, they don't make hoops shoes for the small segment on Nike Talk, those that approve of such "performance", nonsense.

A shoe doesn't have to look like the ZKIII, in order to be consider a great "performance shoe". That is a bunch of crap. What a shoe LOOKS like,does not, and then cannot suggest its performance capabilities. This was just another ploy driven by Nike, to pull the wool over your eyes.
It is an aggressive design, but since when does that translate into top quality?

It doesn't.

The ZKII concept was flawed from the beginning, and this hi tech ZKIII look is flawed as well. Especially since the market is begging for a retro look andfeel. Simply put, Nike is out of touch and then have been for quite a while.

On the other hand, Jordan is the spearhead for Nike, especially in that urban market. Nike Basketball is strugglin' for an identity, and with Kobe andLeBron in their ranks, then to still be failing, points directly at NIKE, not anyone else.

IMO, Kobe Bryant isn't marketable in the US, and then LBJ hasn't done enough yet to steal the spotlight from MJ, and I DOUBT that it is gonna happen,especially with how Nike is handling their kicks, most notably Kobe Bryant.

If there was anyone who needs a safe, simple shoe, it is him! But what does Nike do? Three shoes as one, and then the III, a retooled Air Darwin that lookslike a Totes bad weather boot.

 

[deezyvsop]

^While I think the Lebron line hasn't really pushed any boundaries with their shoes, except for the IV's, the Kobe line hasn't really either withthe exception of what we're seeing right now with the III's.

And in terms of performance and strictly performance, because of the design and goal of most of Lebron's shoes, I don't think you can really comparethem to any other line. They're built for a physical freak of nature, while Kobe and Jordan were more traditional shooting guard shoes, LB's line canbe worn by centers, guards, PF's, etc.

But your last statement pretty much nailed it I think. The Kobe line pretty much dominates over the Lebrons for me, if I'm playing a game, I'd take anyNike Kobe shoe (2K4-ZK2) over any Lebron shoe with no hesitation. Market-wise, there are so many PE Lebrons and special make ups that the public was able toget their hands on, and the colorways introduced are sick, like the Dunkmans and SVSM's. So in terms of casual, off-court wear, it seems like people aregunning for Lebrons more than Kobes.

And about the whole 3 shoe concept, I forgot it was even supposed to be a concept until I saw this thread. It probably didn't go the way it was planned, Idon't really care. As a consumer, all I really care about is how the shoe performs and it didn't work out for me, how the thing sells rarely crossesmy mind and if it does I wouldn't really be partial one way or another.

 

[theprocessofbelief]

Nike Basketball is in disarray. There seems to be a contingent here that doesn't want me to say this, as the market is proving everything I say to be correct.
Reebok and Adidas are doing better? You seem to be basing most of your one sided opinions on sales....well why don't you take a look at thetop 100 selling basketball shoes of 2007 and see what percentage Nike has, and what percentage Adidas/Reebok has.

Basketball footwear as a whole is down....not just Nike. But market share is relatively the same.

 

[mister jack johnson]

Originally Posted by DeezyVSOP

And in terms of performance and strictly performance, because of the design and goal of most of Lebron's shoes, I don't think you can really compare them to any other line. They're built for a physical freak of nature, while Kobe and Jordan were more traditional shooting guard shoes, LB's line can be worn by centers, guards, PF's, etc.

I've never bought into that line of thinking. A shoe is a shoe, a good shoe is simply a good shoe, for any position, I reference the AdidasPro Model S, Gil Zeros and the Zoom BB's, and the Shox BB4 here. I firmly believe the Nike created the "guard shoe", myth, in order to create anew market, and then lessen the overall quality of their shoes.

Nevermind that both Kobe and MJ are both over 200 pounds...but hey, I get the gist of what you are saying. Lebrons 245 doesn't necessarily warrant a LBJ4,especially since he wears a new pair every game.

 

[duke4005]

I think every one here is missing one major test of the shoe's marketability: When we go to the gym, or walk down the street, what are people wearing? Isee very few AZKII's now, but last year I saw very few AZKI, and this year they are everywhere. Price drop=next year II's are everywhere. The mostpopular shoe right now here in Arlington is the Starbury or a Jordan Retro of the week. The mid-rande adidas shoes are hitting, and the Elite Nike's, owthat the price dropped, are popular. What does this tell us? Who knows. Except that I again have to at least partially side with Jack, the shoe of the year isthe Starbury. Why is it popular? Like I explained with the AZKI, no matter what tech, when they get cheap, people buy them.

 

[deezyvsop]

I'm only talking about some of aspects of the shoe, some of them lean in a certain direction. Like large volume air bags, as opposed to thinner bags.Materials used for the upper, stitching, outsole design, etc.

Some shoes are suited for styles of play, ex. I love gil zero lows, I'm a runner, slasher, perimeter player, etc. and I rarely post up.

I hear what you're saying, I think Gil zeros are excellent basketball shoes but they definitely won't suit a lot of people and their styles of play.


For the "popular" shoes, you have to consider region too. It's not even regions, when I go play at one gym I see a lot of Adidas shoes. 2 hourslater I see a lot of Team Jordans. 1 hour later I see a lot of running shoes, believe it or not. But price definitely makes sense, it's a major factorfor me in terms of purchasing or not.

 

[duke4005]

Jack, remember Force vs. Flight? They knew what they were doing, even back then, and today just perpetuates the myth.

 

[rob strongo]

I agree that Nike Basketball is failing, but Adidas and Reebok are doing much worse.

 

[mister jack johnson]

Originally Posted by duke4005

Jack, remember Force vs. Flight? They knew what they were doing, even back then, and today just perpetuates the myth.

Yes...I...do! That was the beginning of the bull...

 

[mister jack johnson]

Originally Posted by Rob Strongo

I agree that Nike Basketball is failing, but Adidas and Reebok are doing much worse.

Not that I care but, WRONG! Adidas has gained a 12% marketshare in the past year. Read the Wall Steet Journal.

 

[mister jack johnson]

DeezyVSOP wrote:
I hear what you're saying, I think Gil zeros are excellent basketball shoes but they definitely won't suit a lot of people and their styles of play.



Whose to say? 250 here, at 6"4. I play ALL positions these days, regardless of the shoe. I was taught as a point, then as I began liftingafter college, I got bigger, and bigger, and bigger, but I still played. I know how to play down low very well, and the Gil Zero suits me fine.

Now I HATED the ZL4...which was supposed to be for guys like me, as it was TOO heavy. That made no sense!

 

[rob strongo]

I'm just talking about Adidas Basketball. If you look at a list of the top selling basketball sneakers it is dominated by Nike Brand. Maybe JM can post acurrent list. I believe the real problem is that people aren't wearing NEW basketball shoes in Genral for casual purposes as much as they did in the 90s.It's all retros and retro Jordans these days. I mean i'm only 22, but I don't wear basketball shoes or running shoes for that matter outside oftheir intended purpose. I'd much rather wear some leather soled John Varvatos lace up shoes or something like that, but thats just me. The basketball shoemarket in general is hurting, not just Nike or Adidas or any other brand.

 

[mister jack johnson]

Originally Posted by Rob Strongo

I'm just talking about Adidas Basketball.

Wrong again! Market shares are not measured in that manner, as gains are indicators that you may not understand, dig?
Not to talk down to you, but sales reports such as that, do not cover current trends.

Adidas Basketball is doing well, better than some on Niketalk expect.

 

[menoforegon]

Mister Jack, I'm not here to change your mind on anything. My company has more important things to do, along with myself. You're certainly entitled toyour own OPINION, which is just that, YOUR OWN opinion. I'll just state the facts that mostly everyone is aware of and leave it at that.

FACTS:

We are a 16.3 billion dollar company for a reason. It's not by accident! That is certainly a heck of a lot of money to be saying we "suck". It isbecause we know how to capitalize on our key growth areas such as Nike Basketball. adidas basketball fails in comparison to Nike Basketball, PERIOD. adidas maybe doing "well" as far as "their standards", but we'll always be ahead as far as revenue. Why? Because adidas does NOT know how tomarket their players very well, either overseas or here in the U.S. . adidas cannot generate any "buzz" whatsoever in the retail field like Nike can.No one stands in line for the next kevin garnett/tim duncan shoe, because quite frankly, there IS NO line for the release of their shoes. Their marketingdepartment is poor along with very weak advertising campaigns. Take a look at the adidas basketball roster and take a look at Nike's roster. Pretty bigdifference there as far as marketability huh?

 

[AIR J XIII]

It was supposed to be 3 shoes, and it turned out to be ONE mediocre shoe

Kobe is a very good player in an NBA weakened through expansion.
WOW.

 

[rob strongo]

Nah I understand what it means, but the increase in the market share over the past year were mainly due the aquistion of Reebok whose market share was justaround 12% when they were bought.

 

[menoforegon]

Originally Posted by Rob Strongo

Nah I understand what it means, but the increase in the market share over the past year were mainly due the aquistion of Reebok whose market share was just around 12% when they were bought.

THIS is what it means to do your research instead of ranting ridiculously with criticism and no proof to back it up.

 

[vulkanthekrusader]

MenofOregon wrote:

---

Mister Jack, I'm not here to change your mind on anything. My company has more important things to do, along with myself. You're certainly entitled to your own OPINION, which is just that, YOUR OWN opinion. I'll just state the facts that mostly everyone is aware of and leave it at that.

FACTS:

We are a 16.3 billion dollar company for a reason. It's not by accident! That is certainly a heck of a lot of money to be saying we "suck". It is because we know how to capitalize on our key growth areas such as Nike Basketball. adidas basketball fails in comparison to Nike Basketball, PERIOD. adidas may be doing "well" as far as "their standards", but we'll always be ahead as far as revenue. Why? Because adidas does NOT know how to market their players very well, either overseas or here in the U.S. . adidas cannot generate any "buzz" whatsoever in the retail field like Nike can. No one stands in line for the next kevin garnett/tim duncan shoe, because quite frankly, there IS NO line for the release of their shoes. Their marketing department is poor along with very weak advertising campaigns. Take a look at the adidas basketball roster and take a look at Nike's roster. Pretty big difference there as far as marketability huh?
I know this guy makes it seem like all hell has broken loose and heads are gonna roll or as if Nike Basketball will be discontinued

It dont even matter what this cat saids see you guys in the "Zoom Kobe VIIIflopped" Thread he will make here once again and claim its the worse shoe in history and people at Nike basketball are fools...

 

[chris chicago]

Nike as a company is very very successful. Much bigger/more profitable than adidas. That should be a mute point. And historically they are the very best atmarketing. Really the areas where they may show weakness are 1)nike basketball (excluding jb). 2) what they've done with kobe (including the zk3 which ishilarious) . 3) running.

there are probably more. but both nike fans and haterz should just drop the who's a better company overall. adidas may be gaining, or may catch them inthefuture. but over the course of history nike is the clear victor at making money.

of course, this is mostly b/c adidas passed on mj. lol.

 

[menoforegon]

Originally Posted by chris chicago



of course, this is mostly b/c adidas passed on mj. lol.

chris chicago, one can only imagine the possibilities ........*shivers*

 

[rockdeep]

Originally Posted by Mister Jack Johnson

Originally Posted by Rob Strongo

I agree that Nike Basketball is failing, but Adidas and Reebok are doing much worse.

Not that I care but, WRONG! Adidas has gained a 12% marketshare in the past year. Read the Wall Steet Journal.

Jack J.. I admit sometimes you make compelling arguments. I have learned to cut out the fat when reading your discertations.

However, the quote above is almost an "in your face" reply. But you do realize 12% is still poo poo compared to Nike correct? I wouldn't be soexcited about 12% market share.

That also is to say Nike Basketball doesnt have a large segment either, as Nike Sport Culture has a good portion of that.

 

[rob strongo]

^ Exactly, and as I stated previously the reason they gained 12% market share was because they purchased Reebok whose market share at the time was around 12%.The fact that they purchased Reebok in order to gain market share on Nike who is killing them in sales.

Furthermore about a week and a half ago Adidas stock rose simply due to rumors that Nike and Asics were planning a joint venture to buy them out even thoughboth companies hold that there was no truth to the rumor. Take what you want from that.