Why aren't minimalist shoes minamally priced as well?

Demand is high, thus they can afford to jack up prices knowing people will still pay to be in the 'trend'.

That and lighter materials being used, same reason racing flats can be expensive.

The cost of a shoe isn't in it's materials, its in the design, manufacture, shipping and marketing of the shoe. Cutting down on the amount of material used will do little to reduce the price.

With racing flats, I understand that a lower production run drives up unit cost. But I'm talking more about the hobby jogger variety of $100+ shoes like Merrill, Altra, New Balance and Vibram are hawking.

ps--Yes, I realize I spelled "minimalist" wrong in the header (dammit).

Sloetry in Motion wrote:

The cost of a shoe isn't in it's materials, its in the design, manufacture, shipping and marketing of the shoe. Cutting down on the amount of material used will do little to reduce the price.

Design what? It's just a thin slice of rubber and a simple upper, right? There's no "technology" to pay for. It just seems to me that these shoes should cost $60 at best. If they're going to be using technology from 1973, why not use those prices, or as close as they can get to it?

fad items usually are overpriced to maximize profit on the limited run the fad will have.

I understand all the practical reasons why they are priced as they are, it just amazes my why more people don't feel like suckers.

I recently saw a few pairs of vibrams for sale at Ross, $40. Yes, I said it correctly, ROSS.

Because the target market for "minimalist" products is upper-middle class people with disposable income. Just as Patagonia and The North Face can and do charge an arm and a leg for their products which aren't actually "better." The market decides what products are worth, not the actual cost of production, that's how this capitalist (or whatever you want to call it) market works.

because 10mm-40mm of foam costs presumably less than $1

Prices are based on demand, not cost.

Same reason that people's skills, which may not actually require much physical effort or material investment, or even time investment, can be so expensive.

themanontherun wrote:

Prices are based on demand, not cost.

Regardless, I still think someone should feel like a sucker for plucking down $110 (before tax/shipping) on a glorified pair of house slippers.

Why do you think they should cost so much less?

I've paid between 30-80 for minimalist shoes, mostly shopping for models on clearance. That is cheaper than I can buy conventional trainers.

I usually get 2000--2500 miles out of my shoes, so I consider them a bargain.

Sloetry in Motion wrote:

Why do you think they should cost so much less?

I thought I stated that pretty clearly earlier.

Why are Nike shoes more expensive than Wal Mart shoes? Do they really cost more to make? Certainly not that much. They are more expensive because people are willing to pay for them.

dontflushwhileyousit wrote:

Why are Nike shoes more expensive than Wal Mart shoes? Do they really cost more to make? Certainly not that much. They are more expensive because people are willing to pay for them.

This.

I feel like I'm getting ripped off no matter what shoe I buy.

The difference in design and production cost between different shoes is probably small.

And the thing that minimalist shoes require no design because they are "glorified slippers" is not true either.

But yes, I would love shoe prices to come down a bit.

Because there are people that want the latest trend and the higher the price the better they think the shoe will be. If you are a true runner or work in marketing you would know. But, most people do not know that or careless what is reality, they just want to look cool. And for companies that create these products it is the way they get their money from by jacking up the price. If the shoes were at $60-70 they would seem less interesting as a fad. $100 seems more reasonable for fashionistas that don't even use them to run or could care less about what they are actually for.

orbitboy wrote:

Design what? It's just a thin slice of rubber and a simple upper, right?

It would appear that you don't work in an industry where you create things...

its russia wrote:

Demand is high, thus they can afford to jack up prices knowing people will still pay to be in the 'trend'.

That and lighter materials being used, same reason racing flats can be expensive.

This is why. Simple economics: demand is high so prices are high. The shoe companies will charge the most they possibly can to sell their shoes. Fortunately the more minimalist shoes on the market, the lower the price will be.

Ironically flats have/had the opposite problem: low demand! Only a small percent of runners buy racing flats, so shoe companies could charge a lot for them.