It seems like from 1996-2006 running shoe prices didn't really increase that much, maybe $1 a year. But in the last 2 or 3 years shoes have increase more like $5 a year. I'm just basing this on a mid-level trainer like an Adrenaline or 2140 that used to be $80/85, rose to $90/95, and is now $100/105.
Am I just imagining this sudden increase because it was too long ago and I was too young, or does anybody else notice this trend?
Just accounting for inflation alone a shoe that cost $85 in 1996 would cost $111 in 2007. So in fact the cost of shoes has gone DOWN when inflation adjusted.
Cooler Ethan wrote:
It seems like from 1996-2006 running shoe prices didn't really increase that much, maybe $1 a year. But in the last 2 or 3 years shoes have increase more like $5 a year. I'm just basing this on a mid-level trainer like an Adrenaline or 2140 that used to be $80/85, rose to $90/95, and is now $100/105.
Am I just imagining this sudden increase because it was too long ago and I was too young, or does anybody else notice this trend?
Who pays full price for running shoes anyways?
Adjusted for inflation, shoes do cost less than they did 10 years ago. The bigger increases in the last couple of years has to do with three primary factors...all of which have been slowed/stopped in the last six months:
1. Increasing price of oil
2. Falling US currency
3. Increasing cost of labor in China (in prep for the Olympics)
There's also the issue of shoes creeping upmarket. Some shoes have eventually moved into higher price brackets, and newer models have filled the entry-level void.
Running times had an article about this a few months ago.
A pair of $125 shoes costs about $20 to produce. It's my job as a consumer to find a pair of shoes--these days, the Nike Vomero II's--as close to that production price as possible. I'm happily out of the loop and off the grid---I personally don't give a sh*t if this week's 20-something shoe rep gets his share of my $$, or that I'm not helping the Gene Mitchell's or Gary Muhrke's of the world pay for their Volvo's.
"Mitchells" "Muhrkes" "Volvos" oh snap!
Guess they don't teach correct apostrophe usage off the grid.
juventus wrote:
Running times had an article about this a few months ago.
Link?