It doesn't cost anywhere near that to make the shoes. It probably costs them 20% of the sale price to manufacture the actual product. The rest is marketing, rents, staff and profit for shareholders.
If you took away all of the marketing and storefronts - you stopped sponsoring athletes, no TV ads, billboards etc and you sold everything online from a single warehouse in each country then the price of the shoes would be about 40-50% of what it actually is.
When we buy these shoes we are paying for kipchoge et al to jet around the world.
In Fairness Shoe Companies give Runners some of the best Sponsorship Deals, When Athletes (Top Runners) Say they are Unsponsored or Don't have a Contract It usually means, With a Shoe Companies, Personally I would rather Shoe Companies get out of the Sponsoring Business, And Have GOFUNDME's set up, so Fans and Friends can support their favorite runners, Look at The Number of Instagram Followers they have usually at least 10k, If they asked their followers to donate even $5 A Month, something just about everyone can do with 10 Thousand Followers that is A RELIABLE 50k a Month for the Athlete, far better for MOST than Shoe Companies, giving NCAA Champions 25-50k a Year, And Many All Americans get NOTHING (Depending on Event and Popularity) and then if you get injured or just have a bad year you get dropped to Apparel Only or Nothing.
The GOFUNDME is good in that it gets fans involved and they feel good about helping the Athletes they like, The Shoe Company looks at the Athletes only for if the Athlete can make the Company Money by Advertising for them, If the Athlete can't do that, they cut the Athlete, The Fans See The Athlete as a Human Being (Unlike Companies) not can they get Money for them.
Lets Get back to People doing things out of the Goodness of their Hearts, Not what can they do for me.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
If people didn't buy those shoes the companies wouldn't make them. When the super shoes came out runners stampeded to buy them most of their reasoning being that the shoes would get them faster times and maybe spending a couple hundred extra dollars for shoes would finally knock five minutes off their marathon time and get them under three hours or their first Boston Qualifier.
In a sport where people pay $200 to enter major races and maybe a thousand or so more flying to those races and spending two or three nights at a hotel it's not surprising that shoe prices have gone where they have. But you don't have to go along with the trend. There are running shoes at discount stores that are perfectly adequate and sell for under $100, sometimes well under. Lots of us live reasonably close to outlet shops. On line shops have close out models and many running shops do too.
I'd love to see some sort of backlash against really high priced running shoes get going. But I don't expect it because yes, running is a sport for the affluent as are tennis and golf and most runners can barely wait for the next high tech shoe that promises to make them faster to hit the market.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
The same thing was said in the golf world when a driver was made out of wood and space age technology was put into the golf ball and a 300 yard drive was no longer "wow". 1 mile is still one mile as long as it's flat and everybody can buy the shoe or order it online.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
I agree shoe prices have gotten really out of hand. Part of it though is to blame on the hordes of 40 somethings all too willing to shell out $280 for alphaflys so they can smash the 5 hour marathon barrier. The companies wouldn't be pricing it like this if they couldn't get away with it...
Cycling called....hold my beer.
Tennis called....hold my wine.
Golf called....hold my beer.
Insert physical hobby....insert innovation.
I have been using the same golf clubs for almost 30 years. Can't say the same about my running shoes
In Fairness Shoe Companies give Runners some of the best Sponsorship Deals, When Athletes (Top Runners) Say they are Unsponsored or Don't have a Contract It usually means, With a Shoe Companies, Personally I would rather Shoe Companies get out of the Sponsoring Business, And Have GOFUNDME's set up, so Fans and Friends can support their favorite runners, Look at The Number of Instagram Followers they have usually at least 10k, If they asked their followers to donate even $5 A Month, something just about everyone can do with 10 Thousand Followers that is A RELIABLE 50k a Month for the Athlete, far better for MOST than Shoe Companies, giving NCAA Champions 25-50k a Year, And Many All Americans get NOTHING (Depending on Event and Popularity) and then if you get injured or just have a bad year you get dropped to Apparel Only or Nothing.
The GOFUNDME is good in that it gets fans involved and they feel good about helping the Athletes they like, The Shoe Company looks at the Athletes only for if the Athlete can make the Company Money by Advertising for them, If the Athlete can't do that, they cut the Athlete, The Fans See The Athlete as a Human Being (Unlike Companies) not can they get Money for them.
Lets Get back to People doing things out of the Goodness of their Hearts, Not what can they do for me.
I agree shoe prices have gotten really out of hand. Part of it though is to blame on the hordes of 40 somethings all too willing to shell out $280 for alphaflys so they can smash the 5 hour marathon barrier. The companies wouldn't be pricing it like this if they couldn't get away with it...
They charge that much for super shoes because they're that expensive to manufacture. It's not like Nike has a monopoly on the market and is price gouging. It's a competitive market and everyone is charging a ton for super shoes.
Like it or not, running is skewed towards the highly affluent. It's right up there with skiing and tennis. The running community is willing and able to spend a lot of money.
Stupid, garbage response from a rich guy. All of these shoes are made in China and Vietnam and cost a few bucks to make, at most.
BS free marketeers NEVER accept truly free markets.
I need more gear. I wake up in the morning and refresh every running brand first thing. I want all the most expensive gear. If i go a month without spending $2k on running gear I get angry at the companies for not providing me with the opportunity to buy more gear.
Sometimes I’ll buy gear on the secondary market. This is helpful because I usually have to pay a premium which allows me to spend more, more quickly.
I haven’t run in months and still most of my money goes to running gear I wear to go food shopping or some other errand. I am a consuming monster and I cannot be satiated. I’m disgusted there are people who complain about the price of gear and aren’t grateful for companies for allowing you to buy such great expensive products.
They charge that much for super shoes because they're that expensive to manufacture. It's not like Nike has a monopoly on the market and is price gouging. It's a competitive market and everyone is charging a ton for super shoes.
Like it or not, running is skewed towards the highly affluent. It's right up there with skiing and tennis. The running community is willing and able to spend a lot of money.
Stupid, garbage response from a rich guy. All of these shoes are made in China and Vietnam and cost a few bucks to make, at most.
BS free marketeers NEVER accept truly free markets.
Shoe company profits aren't the delta between shoe price and manufacturing cost. They have R&D expense, supply chain and warehousing expense, employee expense, legal and regulatory compliance expense, advertising and marketing expense, financing expense, and office expense, among others.
An argument could be made for older runners using these shoes as trainers, not to boost performance, but to enhance recovery. I’ll try anything if it allows me to get out and run more miles.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
the general consensus within the shoe industry is that hoka is the company that started the huge increase in shoe prices. they were the first with a $150 shoe, then eventually, the $180 shoe. this started in 2010/11 and at the time it was outlandish. nike saw that people in ever increasing numbers, were paying these prices without batting an eye, they followed suite and the rest followed.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
Have you people ever heard of Meecari, Poshmark or, if you are dumb, eBay.
It’s where all the Alphaflies and Bostons go to die at 80% off after they been worn once before the hedge fund manager decides one 5-hour marathon was enough to crush in this lifetime.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
Have you people ever heard of Meecari, Poshmark or, if you are dumb, eBay.
It’s where all the Alphaflies and Bostons go to die at 80% off after they been worn once before the hedge fund manager decides one 5-hour marathon was enough to crush in this lifetime.
Honestly if it caught on, we'd have to pay nearly full price so hopefully these goofs keep going to fleet feet.
Some shoe companies still make reliable durable shoes at a fraction of that cost. But they're not sexy brands that make carbon plated shoes, and you guys just won't wear them no matter how often they're pointed out. However, that's mostly your problem.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
running has been ruined by sneaker brands creating 3 new versions of 1 shoe in a 6 month period. $300 pair of shoes that lasts one race. trainers that bust apart.
Have you people ever heard of Meecari, Poshmark or, if you are dumb, eBay.
It’s where all the Alphaflies and Bostons go to die at 80% off after they been worn once before the hedge fund manager decides one 5-hour marathon was enough to crush in this lifetime.
Mercari is not worth it to use compared to the other 2, after they added the new buyer fees.
Poshmark is good, Ebay is also good but usually higher shipping costs.
For people who want the best models, most of the decent deals sell out instantly or are in non common sizes.
I've been able to get by pretty well getting cheap flats / lower stack shoes (Reebok, Saucony) but they are definitely a dying breed. Shoe companies are going overboard with the current maximalist trend.
You reminded me of a ridiculous Nutriment ad that ran in the running magazines back in the '80s. It featured a 7' tall NBA player with a pair of obviously way too small for him track spikes draped by the strings over his crossed forearm. "I run the 10k 84 times a season", was the tag for why he was a great spokesman for telling skinny distance runners they need to drink sugary protein drinks. It was funny and insulting at the same time. Like, who should be our spokesman for runners? Frank Shorter? Bill Rogers? Nah, an NBA center will reel them in.
Mobdro app allows users to stream videos for free on Android device. Mobdro continuously searches YouTube for the best videos and then provides the users ...
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
