Thereâs nothing like a debate about a $300 sneaker â" if thatâs really the actual price come sales time â" to generate a stroll down memory lane.
A new line of Nike shoes with LeBron Jamesâ name on them is supposed to hit the market soon with the aforementioned cost affixed (the Wall Street Journal has reported a $315 figure, which Nike has said is incorrect). So, thereâs nothing official in that regard. A low-end version of the LeBron X model wonât even come close to breaking the $200 mark, according to the Nike website, but the high-end model is expected to retail for something in that $300 range ⦠give or take an Andrew Jackson.
Itâs all very hush-hush.
âWeâre not supposed to talk about it, corporate says,â said a salesperson at Champs Sports in the Palm Beach Gardens mall who asked not to be identified.
But a pair of the current LeBron shoes, one of which was in my hand at the time, is going for $250 at the store and, according to the salesperson, âhas been a good seller.â
The expectation, of course, is that the LeBron X version will be, too, when it gets to the shelves complete with motion sensors. The Bourne Legacy comes to hoops and hops.
âWe donât have our manifest yet,â said Roy Franklin, assistant manager at Foot Locker in Wellington, âso we donât know if weâll carry them, but we probably will.If the price does turn out to be $300, it might take some time to sell, but it wouldnât kill it. Itâs mostly high-school kids who are buying (the current LeBron shoes), and they always want the newest style.â
Nike hasnât announced a specific roll-out date but said in a statement that it likely will be in the fall. Just in time for the holiday shopping season.
Hey, itâs marketing.
Meanwhile, the arguments regarding Jamesâ involvement are that heâs either a symbol of personal and corporate greed or just an NBA superstar capitalist undeserving of blame for getting his share of what-the-market-will-bear money.
But it seems clear to me.
Itâs the consumers who drive the madness. Always have and always will. Nobody is holding anybodyâs feet to the fire and demanding a purchase. Itâs not Jamesâ fault â" or Michael Jordanâs as the original shoe god â" that buyers often have out-of-whack priorities when it comes to owning a luxury-brand item.
And, yes, my hand is raised. A text exchange with my now-adult son this week is proof of a fatherâs willingness to do something silly in the name of love.
Me: When did you get your first Air Jordans?
Jay: They were the 1990s, so I was 9.
Me: Still have âem?
Jay: I have all of them. The â91s came back to the market as a re-issue and I seriously almost went to Foot Locker with $200.
Me: How many pairs do you have?
Jay: 5 or 6.
Oh, and those 1990 Airs retailed for $125, according to my research, which means Pop must have shelled out a fair amount of cash into his sonâs teenage years for status footwear back in the day.
That doesnât make me ashamed of the extravagance, but it does make me cringe to remember reports of violence when some kids were beaten up and had their Air Jordans stolen. No such thing ever happened to my son, thank heaven, who wore the shoes almost exclusively to actually play basketball. He also knew his father was more economically conservative than the Nike spending suggested, and thereâs a certain frugality to Jayâs own buying habits now.
He didnât buy the retro-Jordans, did he?
None of that, however, makes it any less frightening that the Wall Street Journal reported how Nike wants no midnight first-releases of the LeBron X shoes.
It was all enough for the National Urban League to release a statement objecting to the pricing. CEO Marc Morial called it âan outrageously overpriced productâ representing âconfused values.â
Heâs absolutely correct.
Nobody needs a pair of $300 sneakers, but enough people want them â" itâs the consumers, stupid â" that a marketplace has been created. (Same thing with women who buy those Christian Louboutin stilettos, which, at the most-expensive end of price range, make the cost of Nike sneakers look like something off a flip-flops rack.)
No amount of warning from a civil rights organization rooted in the protection of the economically disadvantaged is going to make a difference.
Not if our priorities remain out of whack.
Not if our values remain twisted.
Not if we canât save ourselves from ourselves.
How is that LeBron Jamesâ responsibility?
No comments:
Post a Comment