- Jan 27, 2003
- 1,490
- 722
Candyland is god awful
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
They come out with a trash question every week now! I just want answer 3s at this point! Please Reebok! I’m begging! Just the 4 og colorways
They come out with a trash question every week now! I just want answer 3s at this point! Please Reebok! I’m begging! Just the 4 og colorways
wish we could get the answer 1 or 3 tried of these wack question colorways.
They come out with a trash question every week now! I just want answer 3s at this point! Please Reebok! I’m begging! Just the 4 og colorways
Adidas officially has Reebok for sale. A motivated buyer will need to come in and dig into the Iverson collection and Reebok's archives.
Until then we'll continue getting weak Question re-retros.
I’ve honestly been wondering if Nike could turn Reebok around like they did with Converse way back when.
thing with converse is that they have the chuck taylors which is a timeless shoe that will sell regardless of hype
no doubt nike has the marketing capability to make reebok big, but i honestly don’t like the idea of them making a move to own reebok and also don’t think it’s within their best interest to do so.
And let’s not forget that Nike has mostly unsuccessfully attempted to “re-launch” Converse as a basketball brand 3 times in less than 20 years that they’ve owned it. They struck some organic success with how great Wade was early in his career, and with Bosh being an All-Star (but big men don’t sell shoes—especially in Canada), but both were ultimately moved to Jordan Brand & Nike after a handful of years or less. There’s little to no interest from the mass market for things like the Aero Jam, Weapons, Pro Leathers, etc.
I assume if Nike were to purchase Reebok, they’d suffer the same challenges as they do with Converse. Except as mentioned above, Converse has Chuck’s which will sell regardless of the year, tech or marketing.
I’ve honestly been wondering if Nike could turn Reebok around like they did with Converse way back when.
And let’s not forget that Nike has mostly unsuccessfully attempted to “re-launch” Converse as a basketball brand 3 times in less than 20 years that they’ve owned it. They struck some organic success with how great Wade was early in his career, and with Bosh being an All-Star (but big men don’t sell shoes—especially in Canada), but both were ultimately moved to Jordan Brand & Nike after a handful of years or less. There’s little to no interest from the mass market for things like the Aero Jam, Weapons, Pro Leathers, etc.
I assume if Nike were to purchase Reebok, they’d suffer the same challenges as they do with Converse. Except as mentioned above, Converse has Chuck’s which will sell regardless of the year, tech or marketing.
Nike's the last company I'd want purchasing Reebok. They've only got the Chuck Taylor going for the past decade and nothing else notable from Converse - despite the brand having some memorable sneakers in their archives. They dropped the ball with Cole Haan and Umbro too.
The best bet for Reebok is to get some private investors with deep pockets. FILA's got a niche market with the Korean investors and is doing fine - slowly and steadily increasing market share. I'd venture that Reebok's catalog is far bigger than FILAs.
You don’t think the Golf le Fleur line was notable? I thought that was a fantastic collab with Converse, I love the one pair I have. People also loved the Varvatos collab and the Margiela one as well.