- 34
- 10
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2001
^^^ w/ith "Nike Air" on the back.
March's JB News - add missing Team Jordan shoes pics!
- Thread in 'Jordan Brand Archive' Thread starter Started by Methodical Management,
- Start date
- 105
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 30, 2000
There's no way on God's green earth that JB is giving everyone a $65 voucher.
- 40
- 10
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2000
If you read my post I suggest Nike gives a $65 to everyone who returns a new nubuck hoody and hat.
- 4
- 10
- Joined
- Nov 26, 2003
Man those XIX's scheduled for 8/7 are insane. Best release in years IMO.
- 5,629
- 453
- Joined
- Nov 24, 2002
I just sold my Nubuck package [NDS] for $250 on eBay. XII retro's were like bricks anyways.
Support the Campaign.
Secure these players, ASAP: Brand + House + Jaric + Kaman + Maggette + Q + Simmons + Wilcox
ROGER FEDERER IS THE TRUTH [2 Grand Slam Titles & counting...]
"I like Pete's [Sampras] game, but I like mine better."
Support the Campaign.
Secure these players, ASAP: Brand + House + Jaric + Kaman + Maggette + Q + Simmons + Wilcox
ROGER FEDERER IS THE TRUTH [2 Grand Slam Titles & counting...]
"I like Pete's [Sampras] game, but I like mine better."
- 29
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 9, 2000
thats a croc of ish !!!!
JB knew what they were doing, bottom line is that no matter how much we complain or whateva the case maybe at the end we will still cop jordans. so for all they care JB will do what they want even if its being greedy or lying.......
IT IS WAT IT IS .....................
im selling a ds pair of nubucks size 10.5 any1 interested
worldfamous99 aim
JB knew what they were doing, bottom line is that no matter how much we complain or whateva the case maybe at the end we will still cop jordans. so for all they care JB will do what they want even if its being greedy or lying.......
IT IS WAT IT IS .....................
im selling a ds pair of nubucks size 10.5 any1 interested
worldfamous99 aim
- 3,507
- 3,253
- Joined
- Apr 27, 2002
Read this very CAREFULLY
Companies do this all the time, use creative/suggestive marketing to "sucker" us in, JB in particular is very good at this type of campaign. I do not fault them for this and I do believe that is was not intentional to the point that JB expected these to move units, and when they did not move as exected they had to move them. For them to that it was some inventory "mistake" is definitely bs, this multi-million dollar company can not earmark their excess inventory which was to be sent to places like Canada? & Mexico?, suuurrre.
I personally do not care the shoes are hot, I would have loved to have had the chace to buy them sans package for $135 though.
No idea is original...It is never what you do, but how it is done
Companies do this all the time, use creative/suggestive marketing to "sucker" us in, JB in particular is very good at this type of campaign. I do not fault them for this and I do believe that is was not intentional to the point that JB expected these to move units, and when they did not move as exected they had to move them. For them to that it was some inventory "mistake" is definitely bs, this multi-million dollar company can not earmark their excess inventory which was to be sent to places like Canada? & Mexico?, suuurrre.
I personally do not care the shoes are hot, I would have loved to have had the chace to buy them sans package for $135 though.
No idea is original...It is never what you do, but how it is done
- 123
- 10
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2001
That's what I'm talking about !
[/center]
- 77
- 15
- Joined
- Oct 9, 2002
i am left with a sour taste in my mouth - personally i will refrain from buying j's again....my new hobby will be dunks....i think i need to change my niketalk name
im feenin jordans
im feenin jordans
- 3,850
- 1,968
- Joined
- Mar 20, 2001
I'm starting to find the Jordan forum more and more entertaining each day.
Just Gotty...for now.
Just Gotty...for now.
In the course of business, whether its a memo or just an email you never point blame within or outside of the company by directly associating a name. Whether it was a stroke job or not, thats up to you/us to decide however as company you're never suppose to point blame directly at a name.
Support Pogiboy67, check out his auctions!
Support LazyJ10, I'm a poor college student and you can make a difference, check out my auctions!
- 98
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
I have but two points to make in this argument, and it's mainly for Meth that I'm posting.
1) Your friend claims that Nike produced extra to make sure they'd have enough of everyone's size to make sure none of their US customers went away with a half size off. Isn't that kind of them! I have difficulty believing, however, that there's no one at JB who's smart enough to know that extra pairs = leftovers. And I find it hard to believe that there's such a gap between the the people selling these shoes and the people in the warehouse that no one realized there were going to be extra pairs and informed someone who counted that they'd have surplus that shouldn't be sold. JB is an enormous company, chock-full of intelligent people with at least high school graduate math skills. If they really intended not to sell the surplus, which I find contradictory to all good business sense, I'm sure that would've been known. Someone in the warehouse MUST HAVE KNOWN that JB was going to have unsellable surplus. If not, JB is staffed by ******ed monkeys on crack. It's not like they produced the same amount of shoes as packages, and then destroyed the hoodies and caps while selling the shoes... they knew in advance there would be more shoes than caps and hoodies, and seeing as online you could only buy them together, they knew there'd be extra shoes. It's not that hard, then, if you intend not to sell them, to inform the warehouse not to sell them. What with everything being done so far in advance, it's near impossible for them to have made that mistake honestly and in good faith.
2) So, assuming they knew they were going to have extra pairs, and knew they were lying and were going to sell them in the States, (Who in Canada would buy these? Who in Mexico could afford them?) do they honestly have to care? NO. They have to be one of, if not the most secure company on earth right now. They can put out anything, and sell it. They have a fan base of millions, and comprised in large part of the richest people on earth. Every year, nearly everyone on this board buys more than one of their products, and that's not counting people like Jay who buy 50 or so. They can get away with stuff like this, and make extra money while doing it, and then come out with shoes that no non-sneakerhead in his or her right mind would buy, call them limited and sell them all for 165 USD a pair. It's a very good position to be in, and they figure they might as well profit from it. What business in the world isn't in it for the money? JB sure is. I don't blame them one bit. Why do they have MJ under contract until he's 60 years old? Money. It makes the world go 'round.
1) Your friend claims that Nike produced extra to make sure they'd have enough of everyone's size to make sure none of their US customers went away with a half size off. Isn't that kind of them! I have difficulty believing, however, that there's no one at JB who's smart enough to know that extra pairs = leftovers. And I find it hard to believe that there's such a gap between the the people selling these shoes and the people in the warehouse that no one realized there were going to be extra pairs and informed someone who counted that they'd have surplus that shouldn't be sold. JB is an enormous company, chock-full of intelligent people with at least high school graduate math skills. If they really intended not to sell the surplus, which I find contradictory to all good business sense, I'm sure that would've been known. Someone in the warehouse MUST HAVE KNOWN that JB was going to have unsellable surplus. If not, JB is staffed by ******ed monkeys on crack. It's not like they produced the same amount of shoes as packages, and then destroyed the hoodies and caps while selling the shoes... they knew in advance there would be more shoes than caps and hoodies, and seeing as online you could only buy them together, they knew there'd be extra shoes. It's not that hard, then, if you intend not to sell them, to inform the warehouse not to sell them. What with everything being done so far in advance, it's near impossible for them to have made that mistake honestly and in good faith.
2) So, assuming they knew they were going to have extra pairs, and knew they were lying and were going to sell them in the States, (Who in Canada would buy these? Who in Mexico could afford them?) do they honestly have to care? NO. They have to be one of, if not the most secure company on earth right now. They can put out anything, and sell it. They have a fan base of millions, and comprised in large part of the richest people on earth. Every year, nearly everyone on this board buys more than one of their products, and that's not counting people like Jay who buy 50 or so. They can get away with stuff like this, and make extra money while doing it, and then come out with shoes that no non-sneakerhead in his or her right mind would buy, call them limited and sell them all for 165 USD a pair. It's a very good position to be in, and they figure they might as well profit from it. What business in the world isn't in it for the money? JB sure is. I don't blame them one bit. Why do they have MJ under contract until he's 60 years old? Money. It makes the world go 'round.
SUPPORT THE CAUSE, buy the gear
- 10
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 19, 2003
I'm coppin those AJ XIX lows on 8/7 cause they're hot!
Air Flight Huarache[/i][/b]
- 88,403
- 47,499
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
Well thanks to the mix up, i got me a pair.... :b
All I Want Is To feel This Way.....To Be This Close....To feel The Same..
All I Want Is To feel This Way.....To Be This Close....To feel The Same..
- 7,331
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
Cynicism is inverted naivet. Each of these two mutually exclusive polarities occludes rationality. Jordan brand would NEVER mislead us. Jordan brand ALWAYS misleads us. The truth lies somewhere in between, within spectra invisible to absolutists.
To assume that the sale of these products to stores in the US was intentional would be to accept that Jordan brand fully intended to leave large accounts in Canada and Mexico in the lurch and create a PR nightmare that only has the potential to COST the company far more sales than would be earned by dumping off their supply of LEFTOVERS on domestic retailers. Everyones suddenly an expert on what a world-class company would and would not do. Tell me, would it make sense for a world-class company to intentionally do THIS?
If were to believe that it was Jordan brands intention from the beginning to sell these to domestic retailers, stringing along accounts in Canada and Mexico would be entirely extraneous and would create undue tension with those accounts. Why would they do that?
If Jordan brand was intentionally dishonest in this case, their decision to sell leftovers anywhere even internationally should be faulted. Personally, while I can certainly sympathize with those fans living outside the US and I appreciate the effort to supply them with this product, I believe that in order for Jordan brand to have acted in complete alignment with its promises all leftovers should either have been kept in house or simply donated to charity. In either case, the recipients of the shoes would then appreciate them for the intrinsic value rather than for how limited they are or some other adjunct, illusory value.
I disagree with claims that this somehow denigrates the exclusivity of the product in terms of quantity. No additional Nubuck XIIs were produced to supply these retailers. In that sense, theyre as limited now as they were in December theres just another way for people to purchase them. Theyre only less exclusive in the sense that those other than Team Jordan members may purchase them. However, as soon as this product SHIPPED that was the case as anyone and everyone could purchase them from eBay.
Some people seem to be basing their objections primarily upon the resale value of this product.
If any of you are disappointed in this turn of events from an INVESTMENT stance it is honestly your folly. It is not now, nor has it ever been, Jordan brands responsibility to ensure that each of its customers earns a return as a middleman. If it was your goal to sell these from Day 1, excuse me if your tales of woe dont tug at my heartstrings. If its only been your goal to earn as much money as possible by exploiting the end consumer, how hypocritical is it for you to accuse Jordan brand of the same practice?
To assume that the sale of these products to stores in the US was intentional would be to accept that Jordan brand fully intended to leave large accounts in Canada and Mexico in the lurch and create a PR nightmare that only has the potential to COST the company far more sales than would be earned by dumping off their supply of LEFTOVERS on domestic retailers. Everyones suddenly an expert on what a world-class company would and would not do. Tell me, would it make sense for a world-class company to intentionally do THIS?
If were to believe that it was Jordan brands intention from the beginning to sell these to domestic retailers, stringing along accounts in Canada and Mexico would be entirely extraneous and would create undue tension with those accounts. Why would they do that?
I find those two statements, especially the latter, to be extraordinarily insulting, jingoistic generalizations. Is it your claim that Canadians are not true Jordan fans, and that Mexican citizens are almost universally subject to abject poverty? Thats a terribly ignorant statement, especially to place in a paragraph supposedly constructed around pragmatism. If that was intended as a joke, youll have to excuse me if I abstain from laughter.
If Jordan brand was intentionally dishonest in this case, their decision to sell leftovers anywhere even internationally should be faulted. Personally, while I can certainly sympathize with those fans living outside the US and I appreciate the effort to supply them with this product, I believe that in order for Jordan brand to have acted in complete alignment with its promises all leftovers should either have been kept in house or simply donated to charity. In either case, the recipients of the shoes would then appreciate them for the intrinsic value rather than for how limited they are or some other adjunct, illusory value.
I disagree with claims that this somehow denigrates the exclusivity of the product in terms of quantity. No additional Nubuck XIIs were produced to supply these retailers. In that sense, theyre as limited now as they were in December theres just another way for people to purchase them. Theyre only less exclusive in the sense that those other than Team Jordan members may purchase them. However, as soon as this product SHIPPED that was the case as anyone and everyone could purchase them from eBay.
Some people seem to be basing their objections primarily upon the resale value of this product.
If any of you are disappointed in this turn of events from an INVESTMENT stance it is honestly your folly. It is not now, nor has it ever been, Jordan brands responsibility to ensure that each of its customers earns a return as a middleman. If it was your goal to sell these from Day 1, excuse me if your tales of woe dont tug at my heartstrings. If its only been your goal to earn as much money as possible by exploiting the end consumer, how hypocritical is it for you to accuse Jordan brand of the same practice?
- 341
- 11
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
If everyone was like me, this wouldn't have happened.
Just BUY what you like, I pass on the "nubucks" cause I didn't like the color, the idea that it came as a package (I don't wear pinwheel hats) and the price tag. I don't waste my time getting into the HYPE.
Jordan Brand made a mistake, plain and simple. They are relatively new to this "game". I mean Jordan Brand came out in 1997 if I am not mistaken, so compare with other companies, they are relatively new. Mike made mistakes on and "off" the court. Besides JB is trying to identify themself apart from nike.com by trying to introduce the jumpman23 site as a separate entity and to LAUNCH it as an online store they decided to create an EXCLUSIVITY factor for their members, which are mostly US, niketalkers. They did what they promised by releasing them ONLINE only, but since their inventory system is still shared with nike, the mistakes of releasing them to local stores occurs.
Look at how finishline is selling the XIX for $174.99. The inventory system were confused with the regional XIX and thus all finishline HAVE to sell them for $174.99.
Mistakes happen folks, not EVERYONE is IN-TUNE to what happen in the shoe game like most of you. Do you think the data entry person at finishline care about the price of the NEW Jordan.
People in the REAL world have rent/mortgages to pay, bills & such. When they come to work they don't care about "oh, these shoes are exclusive and nobody besides Jordan Brand member can have them"
BUY shoes, cause you actually like them ( wear them, stare at them or lick them, I don't care) and not for investment purposes.
I don't have the best collections and I haven't been collecting sneakers like most here have supposedly, but by golly I spent my hard earned money on them cause I LOVE them. They are the ULTIMATE comfort zone.
Just BUY what you like, I pass on the "nubucks" cause I didn't like the color, the idea that it came as a package (I don't wear pinwheel hats) and the price tag. I don't waste my time getting into the HYPE.
Jordan Brand made a mistake, plain and simple. They are relatively new to this "game". I mean Jordan Brand came out in 1997 if I am not mistaken, so compare with other companies, they are relatively new. Mike made mistakes on and "off" the court. Besides JB is trying to identify themself apart from nike.com by trying to introduce the jumpman23 site as a separate entity and to LAUNCH it as an online store they decided to create an EXCLUSIVITY factor for their members, which are mostly US, niketalkers. They did what they promised by releasing them ONLINE only, but since their inventory system is still shared with nike, the mistakes of releasing them to local stores occurs.
Look at how finishline is selling the XIX for $174.99. The inventory system were confused with the regional XIX and thus all finishline HAVE to sell them for $174.99.
Mistakes happen folks, not EVERYONE is IN-TUNE to what happen in the shoe game like most of you. Do you think the data entry person at finishline care about the price of the NEW Jordan.
People in the REAL world have rent/mortgages to pay, bills & such. When they come to work they don't care about "oh, these shoes are exclusive and nobody besides Jordan Brand member can have them"
BUY shoes, cause you actually like them ( wear them, stare at them or lick them, I don't care) and not for investment purposes.
I don't have the best collections and I haven't been collecting sneakers like most here have supposedly, but by golly I spent my hard earned money on them cause I LOVE them. They are the ULTIMATE comfort zone.
- 98
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
Method Man: My last post was entirely in an attempt to see what you thought of my problems with the whole affair. I actually don't believe they swindled their customers, nor do I really care. I just find it downright pathetic that something like that could happen when it's so easily preventable.
As for the Mexico/Canada comment, that was not entirely serious. I'm Canadian born and raised, and currently residing in Canada, for one. Obviously both statements were gross generalisations, but neither entirely untrue. Being a sneakerhead, I pay attention to what's on people's feet - and perhaps Montreal is not a good sample of the Canadian population (which I doubt, but that's another story) - but I rarely see anyone in Montreal wearing Jordans and/or high-end Nikes. Everyone I know thinks it's unheard of for a guy to have more than two or three pairs of shoes. Saying that everyone in Mexico is poor is obviously incorrect - but they're certainly far poorer, as a country, than the United States or Canada. Many people there live in abject poverty, and I think that's a far greater problem than my generalizing it.
As for the Mexico/Canada comment, that was not entirely serious. I'm Canadian born and raised, and currently residing in Canada, for one. Obviously both statements were gross generalisations, but neither entirely untrue. Being a sneakerhead, I pay attention to what's on people's feet - and perhaps Montreal is not a good sample of the Canadian population (which I doubt, but that's another story) - but I rarely see anyone in Montreal wearing Jordans and/or high-end Nikes. Everyone I know thinks it's unheard of for a guy to have more than two or three pairs of shoes. Saying that everyone in Mexico is poor is obviously incorrect - but they're certainly far poorer, as a country, than the United States or Canada. Many people there live in abject poverty, and I think that's a far greater problem than my generalizing it.
SUPPORT THE CAUSE, buy the gear
- 109
- 135
- Joined
- Dec 18, 1999
My sympathies to those who bought what was supposed to be an exclusive package. JB made a mistake, it's up to you to decide to forgive them or not. In the end, you have the choice as a consumer to stop buying Jordan Brand products, it's as simple as that.
I'm r2kidd, #20 on the , eBay user r2traps (142 positive feedbacks), email: [email protected]
>WE'RE FILIPINO<
>WE'RE FILIPINO<
- 3,842
- 442
- Joined
- Jul 9, 2002
Simple, yet so hard for some NT'ers to grasp.
- 7,331
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
The problem sounds easily preventable in retrospect, but hindsight is 20/20, after all. Jordan brand, as you might imagine, does not RUN nike.com.
Now, regardless of whether you feel Jordan brand should have, as the result of thorough investigation, foreseen this potential loophole far in advance or whether you feel that the nike.com staff dropped the ball by not adapting to Jordan brand's specified wishes with this release - Jordan brand has accepted full responsibility, as they should.
To characterize this accident as easily preventable after the fact is, of course, easy for you to say. If you know the EXACT cause of the problem, it would be difficult NOT to immediately develop a solution. However, who's to say just how difficult it would be to foresee this glitch when seemingly everything WAS set up to deliver the leftover product to its intended recipients? None of us on the outside know. All we can do is speculate - and it's a far easier task to mold imaginary circumstance to our liking than it is actually oversee such a complex launch in a real world environment.
It's easy for us to criticize, but it's not so easy for us to make an objective assessment given just how little we truly know about this situation.
Are they ultimately responsible? Yes.
Is the company contrite? I have reason to believe so.
Was it intentional? Absolutely not. Such a statement is sheerly irrational. If there is an intentional action that may be faulted as dishonest - it would be the original plan to sell these shoes without the accompanying apparel products to accounts in Canada and Mexico. However, many of us would've had no problem with that - especially considering that Jordan loyalists in those countries could not directly purchase these shoes for themselves. To sell the product anywhere else is, at minimum, a nominal betrayal of the product's promised exclusivity. I will not dispute that. However, this notion that the account I've presented at the start of this thread is somehow a "cover story" or a bold-faced lie is simply nonsensical.
As for the generalizations regarding Canada and Mexico, you've said,
By that logic, murder is a far greater problem than assault, so we should therefore ignore any and all instances of assault. There's simply no practical utility in marshaling insulting, erroneous generalizations as evidence to further a point.
Now, regardless of whether you feel Jordan brand should have, as the result of thorough investigation, foreseen this potential loophole far in advance or whether you feel that the nike.com staff dropped the ball by not adapting to Jordan brand's specified wishes with this release - Jordan brand has accepted full responsibility, as they should.
To characterize this accident as easily preventable after the fact is, of course, easy for you to say. If you know the EXACT cause of the problem, it would be difficult NOT to immediately develop a solution. However, who's to say just how difficult it would be to foresee this glitch when seemingly everything WAS set up to deliver the leftover product to its intended recipients? None of us on the outside know. All we can do is speculate - and it's a far easier task to mold imaginary circumstance to our liking than it is actually oversee such a complex launch in a real world environment.
It's easy for us to criticize, but it's not so easy for us to make an objective assessment given just how little we truly know about this situation.
Are they ultimately responsible? Yes.
Is the company contrite? I have reason to believe so.
Was it intentional? Absolutely not. Such a statement is sheerly irrational. If there is an intentional action that may be faulted as dishonest - it would be the original plan to sell these shoes without the accompanying apparel products to accounts in Canada and Mexico. However, many of us would've had no problem with that - especially considering that Jordan loyalists in those countries could not directly purchase these shoes for themselves. To sell the product anywhere else is, at minimum, a nominal betrayal of the product's promised exclusivity. I will not dispute that. However, this notion that the account I've presented at the start of this thread is somehow a "cover story" or a bold-faced lie is simply nonsensical.
As for the generalizations regarding Canada and Mexico, you've said,
By that logic, murder is a far greater problem than assault, so we should therefore ignore any and all instances of assault. There's simply no practical utility in marshaling insulting, erroneous generalizations as evidence to further a point.
- 33
- 10
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2000
wow meth, i swear, sometimes i read your posts just to study your writing!
Anyhow, please relay to nike to put up a very attractive online exclusive package and EVERYONE will forget what happend with the nubucks.
-marshall
Anyhow, please relay to nike to put up a very attractive online exclusive package and EVERYONE will forget what happend with the nubucks.
-marshall
- 4
- 10
- Joined
- Mar 16, 2004
Telling the truth and admitting your mistakes is always ok in my book- as long as it's not done with ill intention. Forgiven.
- 98
- 10
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2002
The murder/assault analogy is, in my opinion, flawed. Firstly, I don't believe that everyone in Mexico is poor. I never did, and never will, unless it somehow tragically comes true. Secondly, I was simply arguing the point, and as you've laboured so hard to prove to us, they didn't do this purposely, so I was to some extent grasping at straws. The statement was made from the warped point of view of JB executives justifying the sale of excess Nubucks in the United States. Obviously nothing of the sort happened.
SUPPORT THE CAUSE, buy the gear
- 7,331
- 28,780
- Joined
- Dec 8, 1999
I'm not interested in being lured off on a tangent here, especially when your comment was so flagrantly irresponsible and unnecessary.
You attempted to excuse yourself from a clearly insulting generalization by saying, "You should be more concerned with poverty itself than with my little joke about it." I certainly don't think the importance of the former excludes the significance of the latter.
We had somebody in this forum the other day trying to make a cute little joke about domestic violence. Should I have let that joke slide without stepping forward because the actual ACT of domestic violence is more repugnant than frivolously making light of such a crime? Naturally, the person who made the joke said something to the effect that they DESPISE domestic violence "in real life." Yet, for whatever reason, that person felt it was acceptable to make fun of a real life victim of domestic violence for a cheap laugh. In my mind, that's not ok - and I'll stand against that whenever I see it.
If it was your intent to portray the rationale behind the sale of the black/unc retro xii in the US from a JB executive's point of view, that intent was not rendered explicit. You parenthetically cited these generalizations as though they somehow proved that Jordan brand neither would nor could seriously entertain the notion of selling such a product in these countries. The implication that JB executives would employ such narrow-minded, ignorant thought processes in their decision making is quite an insulting, irresponsible claim to make - even in jest.
I understand that the perceived betrayal discussed here will elicit strong emotional responses. However, I think we've had more than enough time to process the hurt and anger and return to rational thinking.
I've yet to read a single 'conspiracy theory' that explains why in the world Jordan brand would willfully erode the invaluable customer loyalty that's taken them years to accumulate. Why would they exchange our collective loyalty for a few LEFTOVERS? Why "cash out" with a pittance?
By offering an online exclusive, clearly Jordan brand is at least AWARE of its online fan base. How could they possibly think that they could betray the conditions of their launch without a significant number of their online fans finding out? It just isn't worth it - and if you're giving Jordan brand enough credit to consider them impervious to unintentional human error (despite the numerous unforeseen launch problems - or were those intentional, too?) does it really make sense that Jordan brand would intentionally risk so much for so little?
Each one of these theories assumes that Jordan brand is either inept or fiendishly brilliant, and that their decisions are either forged from raw idiocy or cold, calculated capitalism. Personally, I find it far more reasonable to believe that this launch was well conceived and relatively well planned but, being the first launch of its kind, suffered several damaging setbacks.
You attempted to excuse yourself from a clearly insulting generalization by saying, "You should be more concerned with poverty itself than with my little joke about it." I certainly don't think the importance of the former excludes the significance of the latter.
We had somebody in this forum the other day trying to make a cute little joke about domestic violence. Should I have let that joke slide without stepping forward because the actual ACT of domestic violence is more repugnant than frivolously making light of such a crime? Naturally, the person who made the joke said something to the effect that they DESPISE domestic violence "in real life." Yet, for whatever reason, that person felt it was acceptable to make fun of a real life victim of domestic violence for a cheap laugh. In my mind, that's not ok - and I'll stand against that whenever I see it.
You may not believe it, but your statement, "Who in Mexico could afford them?" belies that belief. Regardless of intent, dropping a statement like that in this forum certainly has the potential to insult a great deal of people.
If it was your intent to portray the rationale behind the sale of the black/unc retro xii in the US from a JB executive's point of view, that intent was not rendered explicit. You parenthetically cited these generalizations as though they somehow proved that Jordan brand neither would nor could seriously entertain the notion of selling such a product in these countries. The implication that JB executives would employ such narrow-minded, ignorant thought processes in their decision making is quite an insulting, irresponsible claim to make - even in jest.
I understand that the perceived betrayal discussed here will elicit strong emotional responses. However, I think we've had more than enough time to process the hurt and anger and return to rational thinking.
I've yet to read a single 'conspiracy theory' that explains why in the world Jordan brand would willfully erode the invaluable customer loyalty that's taken them years to accumulate. Why would they exchange our collective loyalty for a few LEFTOVERS? Why "cash out" with a pittance?
By offering an online exclusive, clearly Jordan brand is at least AWARE of its online fan base. How could they possibly think that they could betray the conditions of their launch without a significant number of their online fans finding out? It just isn't worth it - and if you're giving Jordan brand enough credit to consider them impervious to unintentional human error (despite the numerous unforeseen launch problems - or were those intentional, too?) does it really make sense that Jordan brand would intentionally risk so much for so little?
Each one of these theories assumes that Jordan brand is either inept or fiendishly brilliant, and that their decisions are either forged from raw idiocy or cold, calculated capitalism. Personally, I find it far more reasonable to believe that this launch was well conceived and relatively well planned but, being the first launch of its kind, suffered several damaging setbacks.
