My open letter to the sneaker community…
I have read a lot of comments from you, the sneaker community, that seem to be a negative connotation for the Air Jordan 2012, for instance: “I don’t care if Jordan himself designed it, that is ugly. Will be discounted in a few just like most Jordan’s.” I fully believe that everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion about a product but I don’t believe that people grasp how great of a shoe this is. Do I think it is the best Jordan ever? No, but it is a damn good product.
The next hot thing rules the sneaker world and the bulk of the focus of the past five years has been on limited retro releases and product that ties into the heritage of the brand. For instance, in the last industry sales quarter the Air Jordan III “Cement,” the Air Jordan XI “Concord,” the Air Jordan XIV “Last Shot,” and the Air Jordan X “Chicago” were all top earners. There is nothing wrong with those products, they are necessary and obviously provide great revenue. But why is it when a new product comes along the community seems to chastise it? Saying it is not as good as the retros or the worst comment yet, “Tinker obviously wasn’t involved with this product.” Those comments are quite disappointing.
The Air Jordan 2012 takes basketball footwear in a completely new direction. The most successful element of this shoe is that it doesn’t rely on any of Michael Jordan’s past accolades to make the product worthwhile. What it relies on is the pure performance it provides. It’s not about selling a high gloss patent leather or an elephant print, it is about providing their consumer, the basketball player, with a shoe that meets any demand they may encounter on the court. To me, this project is a great representation of how a “what if” idea comes to life. I can imagine when Tom Luedecke was thinking how to improve the footwear of basketball he thought, “What if we could make interchangeable soles so people can pick their comfort level?” but why stop there? “What if they could pick if they were in a high or low top?” He then took his crazy “what if” idea and made it a reality. It took him and the team four years to provide the consumer with something new that actually provides them with a better playing experience that is catered to them.
A similar comparison I can think of is in the automotive world. Take if you will the Ferrari FXX, a car that was developed from the Ferrari Enzo to provide a test bed for future performance elements for the company. Customers pay an astronomical price to be a part of a program that provides Ferrari with crucial information about their driving experience. The use of the car only provides those customers with future benefits. The aesthetics of the car are raw and completely performance driven. It is not about sculptural beauty, it is about pure function. To me, the 2012 is the same philosophy but in a much more attainable way.
This shoe will be the first product to really show you the true benefits of Nike iD. The options for the shoe are about providing you with more than just a dope colorway; it is about letting you create a shoe that meets the demands of your game. You can choose everything from insole type, to material type, to the cut of the shoe, to the type of rubber you use. It is the closest offering a mass produced shoe has become to being a bespoke shoe and that is not an easy feat.
This product is truly a blend of art and performance. It’s the perfect hooping shoe but its production techniques are bar none. A product is about creating revenue but I would not be shocked if they were coming close to taking a loss in revenue on this shoe because of the way it is manufactured. The upper of the shoe is very complicated making it so the shoe has to be taken off of the production line and have hand-crafted techniques to insure its quality. If you notice the pattern of the upper, the pieces come to a corner, almost to a point. What you may not know is that corners are damn near impossible to be stitched down on a sewing machine so you have to take it off of the production line and have it hand-sewn by a very skilled worker. Which is a big deal because it means more time is being spent on the shoe and that ultimately means more money is being spent on the manufacturing. Next you have the “Flight Carbon,” which will be a staple of the Jordan Brand going forward; that is a custom weave developed to allow flex and strength. It is not just a graphic or pattern, it is a functional piece that only adds to the performance of the product.
All of these elements combined with an unlimited amount of color options provide you, the sneaker community, the opportunity to own a piece of footwear that has virtually been crafted for you. Who doesn’t want that?
If you don’t grasp how much of a luxury that opportunity is then you don’t grasp why the Air Jordan exists in the first place, it is about providing performance first. The cultural impact of a shoe was never taken into consideration. So do yourself a favor and grab the most coveted pair of Air Jordan’s ever, the XI; and read the tag on the tongue. It says: “Quality basketball products inspired by the greatest player ever.”
My suggestion to anyone that is doubting this product is to go out and try it. Don’t just look at photos that have been put on the sneaker sites. Get a pair and go ball because that is what it is made for.
You won’t regret it,
B
–
Brett Golliff is a Lead Designer at General Motors and former Designer at New Balance.
Or how about not even sell a 2012 shoe.. just have all the players play in it for a month.. and not sell that shoe at all but.. build that version into next yrs model.
Im telling you.. Jordan brands needs to really think differently(like apple) because they are going to continue to have to conquer this hurdle.
With the endless resources they have.. im pretty sure that can do some things drastically different.
I think just to communicate the significance, and importance of the legacy. At least one Air Jordan package needs to always be the” most expensive shoe on the market”.
The company offers more reasonably priced products with retros and mashups. But in my opinion, the Air Jordan sneaker needs to always do at least 2 things.
1.) Be radically different than any other shoe on the market.
2.) Push the limits of technology and performance in some way.
If you take a look at some of these mashups, trunners, CP3s and Melos, we can all agree than JB comes out with some pretty sick stuff. But do you honestly think they’re just ” dropping the ball” on the flag ship shoe?
No, its been designed to have a unique look to it that’s not seen in any shoes currently on the market place, and since we’re not used to it; our natural tendency is to hate.
Hildred, excellent ideas but I disagree with you about the price of the shoe. Especially since the bulk of basketball product never touches the court. Every market, whether it be electronics, automobiles or clothing has a product line that sets the highest price. While this price point is new to athletic shoes it can sustain depending on the amount of units they created. While people say this shoe will hit outlets, the University Blue one is selling quite well. So it is possible to succeed at this price.
I do think you have some very interesting ideas on how to reinvigorate the flagship shoe. I really like the idea of taking it away for a couple of seasons.
At GM I work on the Camaro, it has great history for the company since starting in the late 60′s but around 2000 sales went dry and GM decided to kill it then they brought it back for 2009 and it now owns 85% of the performance car market in the US. Maybe a similar concept could work here but I don’t know if it is necessary yet.
I think the main issue is the customer has become more aware and we expect a shoe so the Brand needs to come up with ways of surprising the hell out of us. I think the “light” version of the 2012 that is coming is awesome and I think the customization factor could be huge. I really think using that idea to create an unattainable product for most but attainable for some could create a very interesting market.
And while todays youth didn’t experience MJ, I don’t think his effect on the league will ever truly go away. That man changed the world in a way that can’t be recreated. No signature athlete can recreate what he did.
B
@ B I hear what your saying, and although I like the idea of “slowing supply” to “build demand”? I’d be super pissed if they stopped Air Jordans even for a year.
However, if they decided to bring back the numbered series? for special years: 30, 35,40 45, and keep the “year labels” for shoes between milestones, perhaps that could add some additional interest?
I don’t know either way good point B and Hildred
Hello,
Why the choice of poorly breathable flywire material for a “performance” shoe?
To all the guys who have posted to this discussion, I have one question…
‘Has anyone’s opinion changed, regarding the innovation aspect on the Jordan 2012, since the Nike Innovation Summit where they’ve just unveiled some new tech, like FlyKnit, Dynamic Flywire, and the iphone communicating footbed sensors?’
When I first saw those headlines and press releases, I reflected back to our discussions here, and part of me thought about how the jordan brand isn’t getting that kinda love from Nike these days…meaning some unique (and JB specific) innovations.
While I do think that the midsole and upper concept is innovative, I’m reminded at how the new Kobe has poached it and marketed it even more (via the ‘Success’ commercials). Granted you could argue that JB has now borrowed Flywire from Nike.
So overall there’s definitely a ‘graying’ of the two brands and where one begins and the other ends is getting harder to define.
I think back to the automotive industry and there are some parallels there for sure. Ford and Mercury…Ford was to be more of the everyday man’s brand and Mercury was to be a more luxurious version (or to a lesser degree Toyota and Lexus, where the models aren’t identical, but the brands share certain manufacturing aspects).
I know Nike’s products can be found at much cheaper pricepoints (like $50/$60), but I wonder if Jordan needs to set itself up to be a little more of a premium product line than what they are showing now. I know people will say $230 is pretty premium, but there’s a lot of other jordan products that aren’t really setting the tone of ‘premium’ to me…Melo’s and CP’s shoes are what come to mind.
It has become harder and harder to innovate in footwear, but Nike has done an amazing job at bringing new tech to all sports. However, per our conversations on this post, there isn’t really an exclusive innovation that can only be found on JB products right? The jumpman logo can’t be the only difference between the brands.
If the removable midsole / upper concept (which, again I think is pretty cool) was exclusive to the Jordan lineup, then I think you might have a reason to be looking at JB INSTEAD of Nike. But at the moment, I’m struggling to find the uniqueness of the Jordan Brand. Even the ‘Flight’ name is a throwback to the old ‘Force’ and ‘Flight’ that Nike used to distinguish the shoes for the bigs and the shoes for the skill guys.
I know JB’s roots are from Nike, but they really need to develop their own identity and I haven’t been able to really put my hand on it. I know they are trying to EXPLAIN/NAME their product lines better..like the ‘A’ versus the ‘Q’, but I’m not sure that the products visually show those differences well.
I think it would be cool for JB to be luxury. Let Nike do all the synthetic and plastic uppers, but maybe have Jordan use the best performance leathers and suedes and crafted details that you just can’t find on the Nike products. Aside from the nostalgia of the retros, I think that the JB consumer likes some of the ‘old school’ shoe making aspects…like the leather and stitching and unexpected materials that you might only find in fashion. That doesn’t mean it has to lack performance. The patent leather from the XI is a perfect example of fashion material used on a performance product.
sorry for the rant
One Track Mind, good point. I honestly thought the similar as I as following the Olympic Innovation Summit as well.
Your automotive comparison is well thought but could use an update since Mercury doesn’t exist anymore. I actually think a good contrast would be Audi/VW because in the early part of the decade they were virtually the same vehicle, especially with the A4 and the Jetta, the A6 and the Passat and then the A8 and the Phaeton but now they are nearly incomparable. Audi has taken the lead on technology, especially in headlights and after a few years it replaces the technology then VW gets to use it.
I couldn’t help but think what is Jordan getting and when while looking through the Olympic photos, but if I recall correctly Jordan has always been the last to get the technology, especially when it was still a part of the Nike line. For instance Hurache started in running which then reflected into the VII. The III shared the Air Unit that was launched on the Air Max 1 and I am sure there is other situations. Traditionally Nike has always used running to launch their technologies and then trickled them out into the rest of their product family.
I think Jordan can be successful with the technologies they have, it is not what they use it is how they use it. The problem is that Nike Basketball has used the bulk of these technologies in much more dramatic way compared to the Jordan, especially Flywire. But I think that is the wrong thing for consumers to get caught up in on the 2012 because thats not the story of the shoe. I was told from Tom and Tinker that Flywire is there as support story but not as a focal point. The true hero is the interchangeable components.
I think what has lacked from the Jordan since the XX3 is that kind of punch you in the face attitude towards materials. There is very few things that standout with an impact (outside of a large transparent circle) like we used to get. But I believe it is coming and this shoe is a right step in the right direction.
B