221–230 of 301 posts
There is a great article [0] that has some interesting points about this: - Nike used to be very "male coded" e.g. "Be like Mike" - So much so that they were one of the only companies where men bought more clothes than women - The powers that be wanted to go after the "Adjacent Whale" (explained in the article) that was the female consumer - They ended up alienating their core customer base while competing poorly wit…
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…
+1 for poor quality. New Nikes seem to be blatantly made to wear out in a short few years. I got a pair of Air Max 270 in mid 2021. By 2025, the outer sole was so worn off that the air-sole was exposed to the ground while walking. That happened with very light use: COVID + WfH + not used when away + not used at sports + not my only pair of shoes. I still buy Nike, but I go for classic models like Air Force, or Air 18…
Personal anecdote I treated myself last year to some Nikes (Vaporflys) because they looked suave on a friend's feet.. Did 180km of training, maybe 5 weeks worth, and the soles utterly shredded. Couldn't put my foot down level, corners of the soles completely gone. Shoe store said that's what they're designed to do, no refund. Cost me about $2AUD per km. But it'll cost Nike a bit more than that.
The article has one heading which is "Why is Nike dropping?" But to me when looking at that graph the question is: what in the world happened in 2020-2021 to make it go up that much? The graph looks like some kind of crypto scam or AI hype, but neither makes any sense for a shoe company. Can anyone explain the rise?
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
Hoka blew up in the running space, like, ten+ years ago. The first Cliftons were pretty novel for being extremely plush. Light-ish weight maxi shoes weren't really a thing before Hoka popularized them. Now every running shoe brand offers something in that space. More recently I think they've been adopted by the "active retiree" crowd? They're nice to walk in. (I owned some of the original Cliftons myself. Did not lov…
I wonder if this is a market signal to short Hoka; old people wearing them will be dead in <10 years, and no young person will be caught dead wearing them because it's an old person shoe. What is the Instagram of shoes?
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this a US thing? In Australia all sports/shoe retailers have been stocking Nike the whole time. If I understand correctly folks are saying in the US Nike gave up its retail shelf space in favour of their own stores and online?
Can’t speak for worldwide, but in the US Nike decided to aim for exclusivity and basically pulled their shoes from a ton of retailers. It went… not how they hoped.
but it went how most mere mortals would expect ...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Nike used to be very "male coded" e.g. "Be like Mike" There are very-few male-coded places left. I think any Mall is like 80% for women and 20% food court. Beside that, there are jewelry stores, nail salons, spas, hair salons. Drive around the 'burbs and the only male-coded place is probably hardware stores and Pizza Hut
For every shop that exists in the real world to sell shit to women you have to remember there's an offshore sports betting portal on the world wide web to relieve men of their disposable income.
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…
Wendover did a good overview of Nike's strategic implosion a few months ago [1].