why is it ok to put 'NIKE AIR' on the back of bootleggish AFJordans?

[neptunesfinest]

The "Nike Air" thing really gets to me along with most of what JB stands for these days. In the Black/Cement IV CDP thread, there seemed to be anequal mix of people saying they hated the new 08 retro and wouldn't buy it and the sheep that will buy anything JB feeds them. The sheep say that peopleshouldn't complain. We should "take what we can get". Why? Why do people not demand more when we are paying premium prices for garbagewal-mart quality shoes?
I remember back in '99 when the retro IV's dropped and I felt like I was looking at a reproduction of the actual AJ IV's. I mean, they were AirJordan IV's! Same thing with the V's and VI's. The retro's these days are not the same. They lack the retro feel. They lack Jordan quality. (What ever happened to "Quality Basketball Products Inspired by the Greatest Player on Earth"?) What I think many people don't realize is thatthe "Nike Air" is a MAJOR contributing factor to the overall design of shoes from that era (Late 80's/Early 90's). To take that and justremove it just destroys the design of the shoe. I use the IV's as an example because JB really killed that shoe and it happens to be my favorite Jordan. What's the MAIN design detail on the IV? It's the heel plate. Why on earth would you change something so prominent.
Gentry's argument that he want's to protect the collectors is complete B.S. How many people have a pair of WEARABLE O.G. Jordan 1-6? Probably nobody. Hell, most of the '99 retros are unwearable now. I think most of these collectors would gladly accept a fresh pair of O.G's that they could actuallywear.
Anyway, I feel sorry for all you high schoolers now. You have to shell out $350 for a 2 pack that contains 1 pair of 'retros' that has been heavilyaltered from it's original form and one pair that is almost universally hated. Back in the day when I was in high school, a pair of retro Nike Air Jordanswas $100 and they were in their original form. Oh yea, and the new Air Jordans were actually something to behold. Eff you Gentry.

 

[mastaace718]

^^

Agreed. When I heard the Black/Red IVs were retroing, I was feeling happy. Especially when insiders so called claim NikeAir as returning. I thought I was finally going to get a pair of these IVs(Could've gotten them in 99 but settled for the White/Cements). Now when I sawthese IVs, I instantly shook my head. The

look exactly like fakes.This is why I choose not to buy the pack. This was the time to bring back the Nike Air since they are so called "celebrating" the legacy. Why notjust do it right? What's the sense of altering

when itwas fine the way it was?

 

[solezprogression]

I'm laughing my *!% off at all you people complaining about Nike Air and the quality of retros these days. I'm 27. I was around to witness the entireJordan legacy unfold. Honestly I don't care that much about the Nike Air. Admittedly it would make the shoes better if they remained true to the OG's,but in the end WHO CARES!!! This is funny to me because all you whiners and complainers still buy the shoes, so you're walking contradictions. Either quitbuying Jordans alltogether or shut up and take what they give you. But complaining about it and buying the shoes anyway doesn't do anyone any good(including yourselves).

 

[3thaman]

Originally Posted by solezprogression

I'm laughing my *!% off at all you people complaining about Nike Air and the quality of retros these days. I'm 27. I was around to witness the entire Jordan legacy unfold. Honestly I don't care that much about the Nike Air. Admittedly it would make the shoes better if they remained true to the OG's, but in the end WHO CARES!!! This is funny to me because all you whiners and complainers still buy the shoes, so you're walking contradictions. Either quit buying Jordans alltogether or shut up and take what they give you. But complaining about it and buying the shoes anyway doesn't do anyone any good (including yourselves).

So how does a 4 year old scrape together enough money to buy the I's?

 

[aliq87]

cuz its a collab with the airforce...they have that on the back dont get me wrong i wish it was like that as well!

 

[jordanretrohead23]

Tinker had a vision of "JB" with the VII, when there wasn't a Jordan Brand. Tinker really is smart. No sarcasm, he knew what he was doing whenthe VI was the last of the NIKE AIR...

Edit: People at Nike were saying, "We can't sell it without the check, it's a Nike product after all." That was the beginning of down-playingthe Nike Air. We'll never see it again IMHO.

 

[vick619]

Originally Posted by xxSC Trojanxx

Personally I don't care if its Nike Air or the Jumpman on it. But some make a HUGE deal about it. Let's be realistic here, it's probably not going to happen. Live with it and move on to the next pet peeve.

I'm sure it has to do with brand recognition. It's a jordan product, so why revert back to Nike Air when you already have your own logo?

thats exaclty what it is. If you had your own company which was a subset of another, you would rather have your logo over the other company's logo.Kinda like FootAction and Foot Locker, FTA is not going to have a FL logo in the store

 

[visualmusic]

Its not the same. That shoe has the back of the Air Force, not the Jordan. Thats why its so small and way up there.

 

[randz4937]

its a collector thing. if your asking this, im sure you wouldnt understand

 

[supermanblue79]

Originally Posted by Method Man

Never say never but as long as I'm around, I don't plan on it. Want to reward
the early collectors for being smart enough to collect, way back in the day!

This is the all time biggest load in the history of sneakers.

Go look up with this clown told Slam magazine about a retro II back when the company was still in "brand building" mode. He said they'd never retro the II while he was around since it wouldn't be 100% accurate. (the original IIs were made in Italy.) Read the comments Erin Patton made regarding the brand's commitment to quality. It's a complete 180.

I've come across a lot of collectors over the years. I can't think of ONE - not ONE - who actually prefers inaccurate retros just to preserve the value of their originals. Why? If you actually LIKE those shoes, wouldn't you want an accurate pair to WEAR? The market for original Air Jordans III-VI is so small... only the most hardcore collectors are really going to pay $800+ for half-decayed shoes they can never wear and, of those willing to pay those prices, do you REALLY think those collectors would RATHER have a '99 Air Jordan IV retro over the originals? Don't be stupid. Collectors KNOW. Even if the only difference is the tag, they KNOW. The cachet of having one of the ORIGINALS is enough.

So, the tired excuse of "protecting collectors" is 100% spin on their part. Anyone who falls for that line is a sucker, period. The guy's a proven hypocrite on the issues of product accuracy and quality, and it's right there in print if anyone has the time or interest to look up the interviews.


They should thank their lucky stars counterfeiters are, so far, too stupid to put Nike Air on the back of Jordan III-VI fakes. How hilarious would it be for counterfeiters to produce more accurate replicas than Jordan Brand?

They get let off the hook because all these 90's babies who never saw MJ play in his prime are only into Jordans because everyone else is. They don't care about Nike Air vs. Jumpman, because they never owned the originals, they really don't even care that it's Michael Jordan and not Kobe Bryant, because they only saw MJ play as a Wizard... they just care if it's still the "in" thing to wear. I don't expect a 15 year old to understand why Nike Air matters. You weren't even born when the V first came out, so you couldn't care less that it was my first pair of Air Jordans and I have fond memories of that shoe. For you, the fake-looking replica is "good enough." For me, it's not the same shoe.


The royalty "theory" makes an awful lot of sense to me. Anyone who's caught a glimpse of Nike's internal operations knows that their teams/divisions are very competitive - to the point of counterproductivity and utter stupidity. It's not just that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, the left and right hands squabble like spoiled children. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Jordan had to pay some sort of internal royalty to use the swoosh. Just look at Nike basketball vs. Jordan, they're hurting and embarrassed.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if, as part of whatever deal produced the Jordan/Af1 monstrosity, Nike decided to trot out their cheap lowtop versions like the black/red fusion knockoff to get a little boost out of it for themselves - and it'd certainly explain why Jordan brand isn't putting ANY Nike logos an the fusion lows. They bit the bullet and put Nike Air on the mids, but they're cutting corners and going cheap on the lower priced lows this summer. Are they saving money on royalties? I don't know for certain, but I think that's certainly a strong possibility.

Look, there's obviously a reason why there isn't ONE consistent push for the Jordan fusions. You have Jordan X Nike on the mids, Nike going it alone on their cheap lows, Jordan going it alone on THEIR cheap lows. That's no accident, it's a product of their moronic corporate structure that produces petty sibling rivalry. How much more efficient would the company be if they functioned in concert and behaved COHERENTLY? We'll probably never find out, because all these pitiful middle-managers base their lives and livelihoods around competing with other divisions of the same parent company. It's like an NBA roster full of overpaid "stars" in their contract years, just playing for stats and individual glory. It didn't work for the Clippers. It didn't work for the Knicks.




Well said Meth.

 

[addicted2fresh]

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans. Thats just how i feel.

 

[Methodical Management]

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans.
And this DOESN'T?

That's like saying every print of the Mona Lisa should have sunglasses and a moustache on it, because, you know, we need to maintain the integrity of theoriginal. If you can't own the original, why should you get the true experience? All of you who couldn't afford or weren't even alive when theoriginals came out don't DESERVE the true experience, right? You'll get cheap knockoffs and like it.

Nah, I don't think so.

 

[neptunesfinest]

Originally Posted by Method Man

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans.

And this DOESN'T?

That's like saying every print of the Mona Lisa should have sunglasses and a moustache on it, because, you know, we need to maintain the integrity of the original. If you can't own the original, why should you get the true experience? All of you who couldn't afford or weren't even alive when the originals came out don't DESERVE the true experience, right? You'll get cheap knockoffs and like it.

Nah, I don't think so.

Haha Im glad we have you here to articulate how we all feel about this Meth. It's amazing people stick up for and actually DEFEND JB/Nike fortheir idiotic decisions on the quality and content in their retros. I get that they're out to make a profit but damn...if you have to pay a royalty toyour own parent company to use the symbol then pass the cost along to the consumer. How about this JB; double the cost of materials and construction fromtheir current price (around $5) to about $10 hell TRIPLE it to $15. Add in your royalty to your own parent company (let's say $5 per pair). Then insteadof charging us $115 for a pile of garbage, charge us $130 for a pair of NIKE AIR JORDANS. I'd happily pay it and i'm sure others would too. Call it apremium retro or whatever helps you sleep at night. Just stop butchering the original designs and feeding us these abominations (fusions, spizikes, six rings,stupid colors, poor materials, no nike air etc.) By the time Nike/JB realize that they are destroying their base, they will have lost most of them for good.

 

[nbloomaz]

Not just on those horrible fusions, but why is it ok for all JB shoes boxes to have the nike air/nike logo on the bottom if JB were trying to "keep the OGlegacy" or trying to not have to pay royalties to nike?

 

[i love af1]

what about this? why don't Nike/JB pump out whatever crap Middle/HighSchoolers like or they think will bring the $, while at the same time make retros thatlook like the OG's to a T, looks and quality wise. Like Meth said, we would happily pay a small premium for a quality product.

 

[enyceking]

meth was right on the money. nobody can really argue that

 

[sunshining7]

And what if NIKE felt that the Jordans shoes will not be their main market in the futur years, with all the new emerging sport stars such
as NADAL, KOBE, LEBRON... and all the new divisions that they created since. NIKE probably decided to let go a part of Jordan benefits and
development so they dont have to support their politics and new models and eventually the disapointment of the buyers that dont get the same quality shoes asbefore, we re in the world of beast where profits is the main target.
With putting out NIke Air logo everyone feels that its not NIKE anymore, and if NIKE knew that ??!!
A company like NIKE has also to move on and cant leave in the past, Unfortunely they might think that Jordan shoes are closer
to the end than the beginning

Sad for us

 

[sickickz23]

Originally Posted by 3thaman

Originally Posted by solezprogression

I'm laughing my *!% off at all you people complaining about Nike Air and the quality of retros these days. I'm 27. I was around to witness the entire Jordan legacy unfold. Honestly I don't care that much about the Nike Air. Admittedly it would make the shoes better if they remained true to the OG's, but in the end WHO CARES!!! This is funny to me because all you whiners and complainers still buy the shoes, so you're walking contradictions. Either quit buying Jordans alltogether or shut up and take what they give you. But complaining about it and buying the shoes anyway doesn't do anyone any good (including yourselves).

So how does a 4 year old scrape together enough money to buy the I's?

got em.

Nicely done Meth. All the youngsters and the "27" or "34" year olds that fall into the new-age era, just don't see or want to ignorewhat you are trying to say. It's probably hate to their eyes.

Simply put:

Meth, a person representing the OG heads, brings out a well designed post on explaining why

"27" and "34" year olds along with young kids, laughs and cries out hater, and posts an elephant pic.

Now I see how big the gap is between the two groups.

Personally if you asked me, if I was a teenager growing up now, I'd kill myself.

Everything was soooo much better back then.

 

[sickickz23]

Originally Posted by Addicted2fresh

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans. Thats just how i feel.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

 

[sunshining7]

Originally Posted by NeptunesFinest

Originally Posted by Method Man

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans.

And this DOESN'T?

That's like saying every print of the Mona Lisa should have sunglasses and a moustache on it, because, you know, we need to maintain the integrity of the original. If you can't own the original, why should you get the true experience? All of you who couldn't afford or weren't even alive when the originals came out don't DESERVE the true experience, right? You'll get cheap knockoffs and like it.

Nah, I don't think so.

Haha Im glad we have you here to articulate how we all feel about this Meth. It's amazing people stick up for and actually DEFEND JB/Nike for their idiotic decisions on the quality and content in their retros. I get that they're out to make a profit but damn...if you have to pay a royalty to your own parent company to use the symbol then pass the cost along to the consumer. How about this JB; double the cost of materials and construction from their current price (around $5) to about $10 hell TRIPLE it to $15. Add in your royalty to your own parent company (let's say $5 per pair). Then instead of charging us $115 for a pile of garbage, charge us $130 for a pair of NIKE AIR JORDANS. I'd happily pay it and i'm sure others would too. Call it a premium retro or whatever helps you sleep at night. Just stop butchering the original designs and feeding us these abominations (fusions, spizikes, six rings, stupid colors, poor materials, no nike air etc.) By the time Nike/JB realize that they are destroying their base, they will have lost most of them for good.

The best quote I have read for a long time, I wish my english was good enough to express myself like you do.
Like the Olympic games, I say for the buyers, boycott Jordan Brand !!! Anyway Im already not buying retros so...

 

[easy713]

Are you serious? They're AF1's and it's put exactly where it is on AF1's (which is not where they are on Jordan's). So obviously that'swhy it's okay. I understand your frustration... to less of an extent, but I wish people would wait until they had a good point. For instance MethodMan's example of the Mona Lisa made a lot of sense. Original Paintings don't lose their value because prints are made. Just like og's don'tlose their value because retro's are made. If that was the case we wouldn't be having the most frequent conversation on here, because their value wouldhave been ruined when the first retro's came out period... especially since they had Nike Air. So if he wanted to protect it, a simple solution would be tolable retros inside like samples, or just simply date them. something minor, not change a large panel of the shoe that basically changes the way the whole shoelooks. that's just my take on the whole Nike Air/Jumpman situation.

But come on, why is it ok to put 'NIKE AIR' on the back of bootleggish AFJordans? They put part's of the Jordans on AF1's that had the existingNike Air in that spot. I'm sure it's still on the xii fusions even though they don't have it on the back of xii's. If anything you should beasking why is it okay to put Nike Air on actual bootleggs, at least they put it in the same place as on Air Jordans. Not the same place as almost allNike's with air pockets.

 

[iwillskuffyajayz]

Is it that bad the shoe looks dpe buy it rock it it coudl have anythign on the back the front and sides matter most to me

 

[dat sick kid]

Originally Posted by sickickz23

Originally Posted by Addicted2fresh

I dont believe Nike Air shuld be on any Retros. It would take away some of the legacy from the original Jordans. Thats just how i feel.

BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!

 

[stizzle79]

I thought the reason why it has nike air on the back is because its part nike and part jordan I mean look at the fusion 12's the swoosh on the side so itwould be 100% jordan so they added the nike air on the back so it can be the fusion but other then that who cares i dont its a shoe and I'm wearing themand besides if you don't like the shoe dont buy it saves us a good chance to get a pair instead of people who get the shoe and then CRY about it

 

[jvhoop22]

Originally Posted by Method Man

Never say never but as long as I'm around, I don't plan on it. Want to reward
the early collectors for being smart enough to collect, way back in the day!

This is the all time biggest load in the history of sneakers.

Go look up with this clown told Slam magazine about a retro II back when the company was still in "brand building" mode. He said they'd never retro the II while he was around since it wouldn't be 100% accurate. (the original IIs were made in Italy.) Read the comments Erin Patton made regarding the brand's commitment to quality. It's a complete 180.

I've come across a lot of collectors over the years. I can't think of ONE - not ONE - who actually prefers inaccurate retros just to preserve the value of their originals. Why? If you actually LIKE those shoes, wouldn't you want an accurate pair to WEAR? The market for original Air Jordans III-VI is so small... only the most hardcore collectors are really going to pay $800+ for half-decayed shoes they can never wear and, of those willing to pay those prices, do you REALLY think those collectors would RATHER have a '99 Air Jordan IV retro over the originals? Don't be stupid. Collectors KNOW. Even if the only difference is the tag, they KNOW. The cachet of having one of the ORIGINALS is enough.

So, the tired excuse of "protecting collectors" is 100% spin on their part. Anyone who falls for that line is a sucker, period. The guy's a proven hypocrite on the issues of product accuracy and quality, and it's right there in print if anyone has the time or interest to look up the interviews.


They should thank their lucky stars counterfeiters are, so far, too stupid to put Nike Air on the back of Jordan III-VI fakes. How hilarious would it be for counterfeiters to produce more accurate replicas than Jordan Brand?

They get let off the hook because all these 90's babies who never saw MJ play in his prime are only into Jordans because everyone else is. They don't care about Nike Air vs. Jumpman, because they never owned the originals, they really don't even care that it's Michael Jordan and not Kobe Bryant, because they only saw MJ play as a Wizard... they just care if it's still the "in" thing to wear. I don't expect a 15 year old to understand why Nike Air matters. You weren't even born when the V first came out, so you couldn't care less that it was my first pair of Air Jordans and I have fond memories of that shoe. For you, the fake-looking replica is "good enough." For me, it's not the same shoe.


The royalty "theory" makes an awful lot of sense to me. Anyone who's caught a glimpse of Nike's internal operations knows that their teams/divisions are very competitive - to the point of counterproductivity and utter stupidity. It's not just that the left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing, the left and right hands squabble like spoiled children. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if Jordan had to pay some sort of internal royalty to use the swoosh. Just look at Nike basketball vs. Jordan, they're hurting and embarrassed.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if, as part of whatever deal produced the Jordan/Af1 monstrosity, Nike decided to trot out their cheap lowtop versions like the black/red fusion knockoff to get a little boost out of it for themselves - and it'd certainly explain why Jordan brand isn't putting ANY Nike logos an the fusion lows. They bit the bullet and put Nike Air on the mids, but they're cutting corners and going cheap on the lower priced lows this summer. Are they saving money on royalties? I don't know for certain, but I think that's certainly a strong possibility.

Look, there's obviously a reason why there isn't ONE consistent push for the Jordan fusions. You have Jordan X Nike on the mids, Nike going it alone on their cheap lows, Jordan going it alone on THEIR cheap lows. That's no accident, it's a product of their moronic corporate structure that produces petty sibling rivalry. How much more efficient would the company be if they functioned in concert and behaved COHERENTLY? We'll probably never find out, because all these pitiful middle-managers base their lives and livelihoods around competing with other divisions of the same parent company. It's like an NBA roster full of overpaid "stars" in their contract years, just playing for stats and individual glory. It didn't work for the Clippers. It didn't work for the Knicks.




Well said as usual. I remember that exact interview with Gentry when he said they wouldn't retro the II's. Of course, not only did Jordan Brand thenretro the II's, but they even put "NIKE" on the back. The idea that they aren't accurately retroing Jordans because of "real"collectors is a joke; it's purely a well rehearsed line that Gentry uses to dodge the truth. Jordan Brand is a massive corporation and the bottom line isthe most important thing for them. If he feels he can save money or make more money by putting the Jumpman on Jordans instead of Nike air then he'll do it.I've heard about this internal "Nike Air" tax for years and have never heard it verified, but it seems more and more credible to me. I was luckyenough to go to Nike HQ a couple of years ago and from what I saw the different departments operate in a relatively isolated manner.

With that said, this issue of accurate retros is not only a Jordan Brand issue, but also a Nike issue. Not only that, but there is also a quality issue.Quality and accuracy continue to crumble year after year. For example, it's not only that the most recent V's have a Jumpman instead of "NikeAir", but the quality of the leather is atrocious compared with the '00 retros (and probably even more inferior compared to the OG's).

I've noticed myself buying fewer and fewer new Nike and Jordan Brand releases year after year. I imagined myself buying some of the countdown packs, butso far it hasn't happened and I doubt it will. That same excitement isn't there. I'm not a true OG head, but I'm old enough to have watched MJtorture the Knicks in the playoffs year after year. I remember him playing against the Magic in the XIs. I remember desperately wanting the XIII's when Iwas in 7th grade and I remember finally convincing my parents to get me the first colorway of the XIVs for my birthday and feeling like I was the man himselfwhen I slipped my feet inside and laced them up. It was obvious some of that intangible feeling associated with Jordans would diminish once MJ retired, butJordan Brand has found a way to obliterate it completely.

Shame on Jordan Brand and shame on Gentry for destroying something that does hold meaning and nostalgia for so many people. Jordan Brand has not only soldMJ and their fans out, but they are selling themselves out and eventually it will come back to bite them in the you know where. Their lifeblood was and isMJ's legacy and image; the more they destroy it the less brand identity and cache they will have and their customers will start to dissipate like the hotair that comes out of Gentry's mouth.