K. Goucher has signed with Skechers as her new sponsor

common wrote:

From the Meb video that was just linked, we have confirmation of what I would expect, which is the athletes shoes are modified to the point where they are unrecognizable from the retail shoe. I would even go so far as to guess that their athletes could bring in a competitor shoe that works for them and have it copied down to the stitch in the company's upper, last, and sole design.

Not too different then what they do in professional cycling. Except instead of trying to make a replica, they just rip the maker's badging off it, and replace it with whatever the current sponsor is.

I don't think it's uncommon for the shoes pros wear not to be off the rack. I know I've seen pros with Nike and Asics shoes that aren't available to the public, or at least not in the U.S. Sometimes it's just shoes that will be available to the public in a few months, but other times it's stuff that never goes on sale. Or they may be custom shoes in special widths that aren't normally sold or whatever.

Flabbergasted wrote:

If this is true, I bet that she only took the deal to help tone her butt. I heard those Shape-Ups work wonders!

I heard a radio report (unconfirmed) that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is investigating Skechers re their claims on muscle toning from wearing the Skechers Shape-Ups. Similar to the recently levied fine on Reebok.

Skechers may be looking at a $25 million FTC fine also.

Is their any "independent" scientific evidence on Skechers Shape-Ups?

Forget PEDs, we have an entirely new issue here, PESs performance enhancing shoes. HEELYZ!

i don't see what the bid deal is about skechers getting into the functional/ performance side of the business. i've been around the shoe business a long time and can remember when the holy grail of running brands these days- BROOKS. i was living in Canada in the 1990's and they puked out the worst possible shoes you could think of just to make a buck. then in the late 90's they started building better performance shoes and no look at them. all of these brands make shit shoes and are no different than skechers. kudos to try and build their brand beyond the toning bull-shit. keep in mind that every brand tried to build a toning shoe but only skechers and reebok were the well known ones. nb, nike and adidas all tried but were to late to capitalize on the business. none of these companies have a conscience, it'a all about profit and could really care less about the purity of running.

keep this in mind when criticizing brands like skechers and avia and all the shit brands trying their hand in running.

I don't know if I criticised Skechers as much as just wondered if they have the tenacity to stick with the market. Like you said, so many of these companies make a tentative move, and then run away after missing their first quarterly sales goal. Look at what happened to UnderArmour.

I agree they don't care about the sport. The sport is just a connection to a market.

sorry, didn't my reply wasn't only targeted at your post. i've read many skeptical and harassing opinions towards brands like skechers trying their hand in functional/ performance running.

i completely agree with you on the tenacity to see it through. a friend of mine was at reebok a few years ago when they were trying to get back into the functional/ performance side of running and now they are out as well (he was laid-off twice). i think the UA's, the reebok's and skechers of the world are probably too late to the game to impact the core consumer. they can have some success with the average joe who doesn't care much about the competitive side of running. just needs a pair of shoes to get from point a to point b and will "buy" into whatever marketing is thrown their way.

running as we know and love it, is dying a slow death.

Millrose is owned by the Armory Foundation which is sponsored by New Balance.

Skechers is looking to build a category of technical product with credibility in the market. As is any new launch the product will evolve over time as its distribution.

Its good for the sport to have a company coming in and spending money.

They are wanting to sign an elite female to bring credibility to the product and reach their largest segment of followers , women.

The fastest growing segment of new runners in the current running boom are women with not so defined ideas on running shoes or the history.

She signed with Voit!

Kara and Brooke Burke. Huba Huba Huba.

yeah, look at nike

http://www.nike.com/nikewomen/home?locale=en_US&ref=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.com%2Fsearch%3Fq%3Dnike%2Bwomen%26ie%3Dutf-8%26oe%3Dutf-8%26aq%3Dt%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla%3Aen-US%3Aofficial%26client%3Dfirefox-a

versus

http://store.nike.com/us/en_us/?l=shop,men

women have a way fancy site to motivate them to run...eerrrr...buy...nike...stuff...

Kinney is coming back. They licensed the old Hexalite technology from Reebok and are poised to take over the running shoe market!

On a serious note, I really liked my Reebok Hexalite 5000s back in the day.

Montesquieu wrote:

Goucher is just getting over a nagging hip injury. There are three months to the Olympic Trials. Wouldn't it be a bit imprudent now to be trying a completely new brand of training and racing shoes?

Let me share a secret with you: Endorsing a brand has little to do with the shoes a pro is racing or training in. If she likes the shoes that her sponsor supplies, sure she can use them. But if she does not like the fit or any other features, she can have them as "customized" as she likes. And should this reach a point where her shoes can no longer be made to look like the advertised model, she will simply be "trialling the latest in Skecher shoe technology under racing conditions, that she has helped design all the way through".

So, let's not be critical. Any company that recognizes the marketing potential of distance runners, and is ready to invest money in it will help raise the profile of the sport. That can surely only be a good thing.

ohhh goodness skechers are such shitty shoes. they belong in walmart not on elite runners' feet.

The research says WalMart shoes are at least as good and sometimes better than expensive name brands. Other studies show lower injury rates in runners using inexpensive shoes.

http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/412039/study_cheap_running_shoes_just_as_good.html

Or2CoMoFo wrote:

Kara will sign with Skechers. It is a better situation for all involved. Nike did not want to increase her contract and Skechers was willing to pay big bucks for someone on the down slope of their career. Kara and Meb are big names to Skechers and will help their marketing but not so much to Nike. Nike will use they money they saved from Meb and Kara to sign more up and coming runners that reach their target market better(high school kids). As far as Kara goes, she gets the pay day she wants which will help their real estate situation, they can move back to Colorado to be closer to family(important for the kid), and now has more freedom to train when, where, and how she wants to.

This is a good development for all pro runners -- more corporate players in the sponsorship marketplace competing with each other.

OH YA wrote:

She signed with Voit!

Did not know she signed with them as an athlete but few know of the footwear design business she has on the side. I know she designed a great crosstraining swim shoe for Voit. It's aimed at the Dancing with The Stars group of athletes and set to debut for the summer 2012 swimwear season which will be in stores second week january.

rojo:

This was covered in an earlier thread, but when this is put under the quote of the day in bold, it implies quite strongly that this is news and a fact. It was only after scrolling through 5 pages of patter that it became clear that its just a rumor and one that has no backing what so ever.

Now since I go to letsrun for news, I could have been misinformed by the way its presented. I think you need to review this to avoid this kind of mistake. Thanks