Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 398 posts

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#71

Post by globular-toast »

branko_d wrote: post #51

Last month, I bought two pairs of sneakers: one was a full leather design made in Spain, the other was a leather/cloth combination (Italian design, I'm not sure where they are made). Both are comfortable, seem to be of very good quality and look premium. The price of these two pairs together was less then one Nike pair made of synthetic materials. This was in Novi Sad, Serbia. I don't know what's going on around the…

Leather shoes are still disposable if you can't unstitch the sole. You need a Goodyear welted shoe if you want one that will last decades.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#73

Post by freetime2 »

omnimus wrote: post #47
nemothekid wrote: post #11

Nike's destruction over the past 5 years was really surprised and until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. About 2-3 years, it felt like, out of nowhere everyone was wearing Hoka and On brand sneakers. In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere. Wh…

Whats surprising to me is that all the brands you mentioned are just so ugly and simply not cool. Nike tries to position itself as Apple of sports but it probably doesn't work that well outside of high tech market because there are still many brands doing the high end at leas as well as them.

Probably because fitness-conscious (i.e. attractive) people started wearing them. And they are expensive enough to show status.

Crazy thick soles have become pretty normalized recently. But I remember when I first bought my Hokas I felt a bit like I was wearing orthopedic shoes like my grandma used to wear. Now I wouldn’t think twice about wearing them out.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#74

Post by Onavo »

nemothekid wrote: post #11

Nike's destruction over the past 5 years was really surprised and until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. About 2-3 years, it felt like, out of nowhere everyone was wearing Hoka and On brand sneakers. In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere. Wh…

What's the best generic allbirds style shoe? I refuse to play for the branding premium.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#75

Post by yolo3000 »

mahrain wrote: post #67
mamonster wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. In Switzerland, every decent sports store now has a whole treadmill with some sort of gait analysis thing and a dedicated guy that is going to pick a shoe for you based on that + your running level. Anecdotal evidence, but 80% of the time I see someone buying running shoes in Ochsner t…

Having gone through this process what surprised me was that they were advising along brand lines: “Brooks are sturdy, ASICS are narrow shoes, Hoka have thick soles and a lot of bounce”. They didn’t have differentiation within a same brand.

No mention of heel drop? I thought Hoka's were in the low heel drop category. Or maybe it's not a thing anymore

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#76

Post by legitster »

nemothekid wrote: post #11

Nike's destruction over the past 5 years was really surprised and until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. About 2-3 years, it felt like, out of nowhere everyone was wearing Hoka and On brand sneakers. In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere. Wh…

> In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere.

Man, I'm in such different circles than everyone. I've never heard of Hoka and I don't know any sneakerheads. Everyone I know is into Keens, Toms, or Sketchers.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#77

Post by chantepierre »

yolo3000 wrote: post #75
mahrain wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having gone through this process what surprised me was that they were advising along brand lines: “Brooks are sturdy, ASICS are narrow shoes, Hoka have thick soles and a lot of bounce”. They didn’t have differentiation within a same brand.

No mention of heel drop? I thought Hoka's were in the low heel drop category. Or maybe it's not a thing anymore

Low-ish (4 to 6mm) but not really advertised.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#78

Post by arlattimore »

mamonster wrote: post #64
nemothekid wrote: post #11

Nike's destruction over the past 5 years was really surprised and until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. About 2-3 years, it felt like, out of nowhere everyone was wearing Hoka and On brand sneakers. In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere. Wh…

>until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. In Switzerland, every decent sports store now has a whole treadmill with some sort of gait analysis thing and a dedicated guy that is going to pick a shoe for you based on that + your running level. Anecdotal evidence, but 80% of the time I see someone buying running shoes in Ochsner t…

The comments in the article about 'performance' are very real. When Nike was still in retail stores, 9/10 shoes were fashion sneakers and had nothing to do with athletics/running/performance.

By comparison, Hoka is positioned as a runners shoe. They have a variety of models based on the type of running you need (daily, long run, race), provide road/trail variants (their Speedgoat is amazing trail shoe), have large toe boxes to give your forefoot/toes the space needed to spread out on impact, also room to grow from swelling.

I'm sure Nike don't want to walk back from their fashionista offerings, but there are lessons in here for sure - maybe they need sub-branding like Nike Road, Nike Trail, Nike Casual or Nike Performance and Nike Casual.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#79

Post by torben-friis »

branko_d wrote: post #51

Last month, I bought two pairs of sneakers: one was a full leather design made in Spain, the other was a leather/cloth combination (Italian design, I'm not sure where they are made). Both are comfortable, seem to be of very good quality and look premium. The price of these two pairs together was less then one Nike pair made of synthetic materials. This was in Novi Sad, Serbia. I don't know what's going on around the…

>Nike is simply too expensive for the (lack of) quality they have.

I always go to buy Nike first after decades of conditioning. These past years I always return.

Outer soles are of a recycled material that slips and feels like packaging material, the upper part is badly stitched and I've had two times where left and right shoes where slightly different size or shape.

I swear Nike knockoffs are significantly better quality than Nike itself now somehow.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#80

Post by arlattimore »

yolo3000 wrote: post #75
mahrain wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having gone through this process what surprised me was that they were advising along brand lines: “Brooks are sturdy, ASICS are narrow shoes, Hoka have thick soles and a lot of bounce”. They didn’t have differentiation within a same brand.

No mention of heel drop? I thought Hoka's were in the low heel drop category. Or maybe it's not a thing anymore

It's a thing for sure, maybe just not screamed about. If you run in a shoe that is 10mm+ and then go to a 0mm like an Altra - it is wild how different it feels.
Post reply on HN