Why is it that Brooks and Hoka are the preferred brands of casuals?
Why is it that Brooks and Hoka are the preferred brands of casuals?
That's what they push because that's how they make their money.
Nike screws mom and pop running stores
Adidas trainers suck
Saucony and New Balance are love or hate on most peoples feet
Brooks and Hokas nearly always feel good
Hence, why Brooks and Hoka now outsell Nike in specialty running stores. That and Nike's strategy of only selling to a limited number of high volume accounts. Trying to get a Vaporfly or Alphafly at you LRS? Nope. But, Dick's Sporting Goods has them and the 17 year old high school JV basketball player working Sunday afternoons thinks they look weird but, they got to be good because they are $275!
coachy wrote:
That's what they push because that's how they make their money.
+1
They get extra moneys from those crappy brands to sell their shoes because that's the only way they're going to sell them is if the workers push them on the customers. I used to wear Asics in high school, then they stagnated and didn't improve their shoes. Switched to Nike and wore Nike in college. Been wearing Pegasus for years now. I've tried some other brands periodically but they all feel like crap except a couple Adidas shoes. I don't want to run 100+ miles per week in shoes that feel like crap.
I know sometimes there are competitions from a brand for which store can sell the most of their product, so they're pushing some random brand reeeeaaaally hard just to get some bonus. Not because it's a good shoe, it's because they want the extra money.
I count on Nike’s long-term profits for my Roth, but They do not tend to make the best trainers
Fax wrote:
Why is it that Brooks and Hoka are the preferred brands of casuals?
Brooks are the most sold shoes for runners.
Hokas probably have the best margin.
Nike sells to people who weight 300 pounds and want to look cool. The two track runners don't matter in their calculations. Even the Brojos didn't get that right.
I don't know as I'm not in that industry, but I'll take a random guess based on nothing:
Maybe Brooks and Hoka treats their bricks and mortar sellers better than the other brands.
Nike doesn't even need them, I'd guess. My local running stores don't even carry Adidas (I've heard they're really hard for local stores to deal with). The running store closest to me almost looks like a Brooks/Hoka outlet shop. Their stuff is EVERYWHERE.
P.S. I know Brooks has a reputation as being for hobby joggers, but I've found some of their more recent models to be really, really good. Then again, I AM a hobby jogger, so take that with a grain of salt.
If Nike allowed their shoes to be sold in local running stores....
As someone who works at a running store, our profits from both brands mentioned sht on the remaining pairs we sell at the store solely of the fact that they just work for everyone. Our store is actually pushing to flip the agenda and get more sales in new balance and Altra and saucony for the reason that hoka has been really hard to get recently. Most of the people I work with push for the same shoes hence why brooks and hoka are superior to the others in margins. Bias from outside influences also have brooks and hoka the first two brands out the door.
Their softness I bet sells easier too. It's the first impression after putting them on. Brooks is very comfortable on the first step in.
Fax wrote:
Why is it that Brooks and Hoka are the preferred brands of casuals?
In the UK, it's On. You go to parkrun and they're all over. I can see why. You put them on and they feel comfortable, soft and springy. And they have tents at a lot of mass running events with shoe displays. As a brand, they're aggressively pushing themselves into the mass running community.
Fax wrote:
Why is it that Brooks and Hoka are the preferred brands of casuals?
Nike MFing blows. Brooks are the best shoes for anyone who isn't some lameass running club fanboy. Specifically Ghosts.
As a running store employee, this is actually pretty accurate even though I love all the brands personally. At my store, I believe Brooks is our best seller and Hoka is number two, but we don't push either. It's amazing how many people come in and ask about Hoka because they're heard about it from a doctor or friends. I actually stopped bringing out Hokas for people who didn't ask for them in order to save the ones we have for those who specifically ask for them. Brooks are simply very comfortable right out of the box due to the both the uppers and midsoles being on the plusher side. The Ghost, Glycerin, and Adrenalines are great examples of this. The only models that Nike gives us are the Pegasus, Infinity React, and their three premium trail shoes, so we don't sell too many compared to other brands. A good portion of the ones we do sell are to customers specifically looking for a Nike because a lot of their models are either love-it or hate-it (the Infinity React especially).
My wife was fitted for New Balance by a wonderful gentleman in Winchester VA.
I rarely go to my local running store due to the prices as online stores are always more affordable. After I tried on brooks, saucony, nike, hoka, mizuno, and diadora I ended up leaving with the diadoras. While not the fastest shoe it fit exactly what I needed at this time. The saucony and mizuno were the next two choices.
Extra moneys wrote:
coachy wrote:
That's what they push because that's how they make their money.
+1
They get extra moneys from those crappy brands to sell their shoes because that's the only way they're going to sell them is if the workers push them on the customers. I used to wear Asics in high school, then they stagnated and didn't improve their shoes. Switched to Nike and wore Nike in college. Been wearing Pegasus for years now. I've tried some other brands periodically but they all feel like crap except a couple Adidas shoes. I don't want to run 100+ miles per week in shoes that feel like crap.
I know sometimes there are competitions from a brand for which store can sell the most of their product, so they're pushing some random brand reeeeaaaally hard just to get some bonus. Not because it's a good shoe, it's because they want the extra money.
These are both completely wrong. Having worked at a shoe store and giving customers a fair look at every brand, especially when they didn't know anything about the brands coming in, they would choose Hoka or Brooks most of the time because that is what felt best to them. As a poster above said, adidas has crap trainers and nike picks and chooses the markets they allow to sell their stuff. The adrenaline, ghost and clifton are good shoes and feel good, it has nothing to do with the brand being pushed.
I don't know, why are there pricks who have something against those shoe brands? Me personally I love Hoka. Plus I don't like to give money to a company who business practices goes against what I believe.
ultra thon bro wrote:
I don't know, why are there pricks who have something against those shoe brands? Me personally I love Hoka. Plus I don't like to give money to a company who business practices goes against what I believe.
Nike interns, shills, and execs are known to post here.
My local here in South Jersey Rolled out 6 pairs for me to try. What felt the best to my was the Hoka Arahi 5. I bought two pair, the only issue I have is I strike pretty hard and their compounding on the rubber is not as good as other brands I have run in the past, which is to day I'm never going to get over 300 Miles not hem but they are still a great shoe that I picked from a multitude of brands that my local Running Co selected for me to try.