Dismiss Notice

STYLE. COMMUNITY. GREAT CLOTHING.

Bored of counting likes on social networks? At Styleforum, you’ll find rousing discussions that go beyond strings of emojis.

Click Here to join Styleforum's thousands of style enthusiasts today!

Common Projects S/S '07

Discussion in 'Streetwear and Denim' started by Manny Calavera, Mar 11, 2007.

  1. ghulkhan

    ghulkhan Senior member

    Messages:
    3,198
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    nyc
    i dont think cp does too much marketing
    now go back look at the ndg lookbook, the outfits wouldnt look half as good when paired with stan smiths instead of cps
     


  2. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    i dont think cp does too much marketing now go back look at the ndg lookbook, the outfits wouldnt look half as good when paired with stan smiths instead of cps
    My point regarding marketing wasn't directed towards the CPs, but let's say some Chinese company copied these exactly, branded them as something else (i.e. not a fake) and they had the identical look to the CPs, but the same quality as Chucks, and they cost $30. Would you buy them? What if another company made another pair that were for all intents and purposes identical in every way to the CP, except for the name, including the stitched footbed etc, and they were $50 but a no-name brand. Would you buy them? If i liked the aesthetic and was happy with the quality, I'd be happy to own either of the two above cases. If you wouldn't own them, it would be for two reasons. 1) You're buying them for the brand. 2) You like supporting artisans by paying $200 more for the same thing. FWIW I was underwhelmed by the NDG pic that was posted and I was underwhelmed by seeing, holding, and trying on these shoes IRL.
     


  3. Brian SD

    Brian SD Moderator

    Messages:
    9,760
    Likes Received:
    122
    Joined:
    Feb 5, 2004
    Location:
    Tokyo
    A price quality ratio discussion isn't out of place here, and IMO, it's good for everyone to get a wake up call every once in awhile and be forced to second guess your purchases and re-think how you're spending your money. The problem is that every single Common Projects discussion has turned into a PQR argument, because this is the internet. You see pictures and you form an opinion. CP is the type of brand that you have to check out in person to figure out.

    I'm a little shocked that brandwhoring was used to describe Common Projects. There's a very good rationale for dropping the $ for these shoes.

    The quality definitely makes CP shoes a reasonable purchase at their retail price, considering how the price curve works with sneaks. Stan Smiths, Chucks, Jacks, etc. may look decent enough at their price, but they simply do not compare to designer kicks in the $200+ range in terms of quality. The leather used in them, even the nicer John Varvatos Converses and the Adidas Originals shoes that run around $95, is very low quality. They crack and crease unattractively and lose their patina quickly.

    It's like comparing Levi's STFs to Sugarcanes. Sure, okay, Levi's STFs are raw denim and they start dark, but when they start wearing in you see how crappy they are, when the color is this ugly grey/blue that lacks the depth of Sugarcane's dye. If Levi's STFs were all I'd seen, I'd probably like them.. but when you've seen a nice worn pair of super high quality denim, you realize how much of a difference there is.

    CP shoes are sturdy, which is nice, but the real draw to them isn't the longevity but how nice the leather and other details look. You simply cannot get such nice feeling/looking leather under $200, and as Babar pointed out, Dior Homme kicks in a lesser quality leather run you up to $400+, even second hand. It breaks down to, if you like sneakers, but you also demand really high quality, you simply aren't going to be satisfied with shoes sub-$200. If you want the quality and the style, you gotta pay.

    So that said, everyone be civil, stop insulting each other and shit. I don't want to close this thread.
     


  4. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    A price quality ratio discussion isn't out of place here, and IMO, it's good for everyone to get a wake up call every once in awhile and be forced to second guess your purchases and re-think how you're spending your money. The problem is that every single Common Projects discussion has turned into a PQR argument, because this is the internet. You see pictures and you form an opinion. CP is the type of brand that you have to check out in person to figure out.

    I'm a little shocked that brandwhoring was used to describe Common Projects. There's a very good rationale for dropping the $ for these shoes.

    The quality definitely makes CP shoes a reasonable purchase at their retail price, considering how the price curve works with sneaks. Stan Smiths, Chucks, Jacks, etc. may look decent enough at their price, but they simply do not compare to designer kicks in the $200+ range in terms of quality. The leather used in them, even the nicer John Varvatos Converses and the Adidas Originals shoes that run around $95, is very low quality. They crack and crease unattractively and lose their patina quickly.

    It's like comparing Levi's STFs to Sugarcanes. Sure, okay, Levi's STFs are raw denim and they start dark, but when they start wearing in you see how crappy they are, when the color is this ugly grey/blue that lacks the depth of Sugarcane's dye. If Levi's STFs were all I'd seen, I'd probably like them.. but when you've seen a nice worn pair of super high quality denim, you realize how much of a difference there is.

    CP shoes are sturdy, which is nice, but the real draw to them isn't the longevity but how nice the leather and other details look. You simply cannot get such nice feeling/looking leather under $200, and as Babar pointed out, Dior Homme kicks in a lesser quality leather run you up to $400+, even second hand. It breaks down to, if you like sneakers, but you also demand really high quality, you simply aren't going to be satisfied with shoes sub-$200. If you want the quality and the style, you gotta pay.

    So that said, everyone be civil, stop insulting each other and shit. I don't want to close this thread.


    Good analysis.

    I don't have a problem with people buying whatever they want. If they think CPs are cool, have tried them on, think they're awesome, think they're worth the money, then buy them, then cool, by all means.

    I get annoyed when people pull the "I'll pay whatever they cost because I'm a fucking baller" attitude whenever people suggest looking at the price/quality ratio, and I get even more annoyed when people who have never seen or handled these shoes (or any other product described in SF, not necessarily these) pull that shit.
     


  5. headcoat

    headcoat Active Member

    Messages:
    37
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Oct 6, 2006
    Why don't people ever have these price arguments over Dior sneakers ($400+)? Because they say Dior Homme on the side? Common Projects construction and leather feels far superior to sneakers that cost much more. The styling appeals to me more because there is no visible branding.

    I would also like to mention that Ann D sells plain white Chuck Taylor lookalikes for $800.
     


  6. drizzt3117

    drizzt3117 Senior member

    Messages:
    13,141
    Likes Received:
    10
    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2004
    Location:
    Orange County, CA
    Why don't people ever have these price arguments over Dior sneakers ($400+)? Because they say Dior Homme on the side? Common Projects construction and leather feels far superior to sneakers that cost much more. The styling appeals to me more because there is no visible branding.

    I would also like to mention that Ann D sells plain white Chuck Taylor lookalikes for $800.


    I'll be sure to comment that these sneakers are overpriced the next time there's a thread about them.
     


  7. London

    London Senior member

    Messages:
    1,382
    Likes Received:
    123
    Joined:
    Dec 26, 2006
    Location:
    Brooklyn
    I have the achilles low in black and it's a beautiful sneaker. I see both sides of the argument on this one. It is a lot to pay for a sneaker, but I have worn mine through the nasty NYC streets during the wintertime and they still look damn near brand new. I held off getting them for months, but then I got the discount so I had to cop.

    If you like them purchase, if not don't....it's that simple. In terms of marketing, they dont have to market them becuase this forum is doing it for them.
     


  8. j

    j (stands for Jerk) Admin

    Messages:
    14,914
    Likes Received:
    93
    Joined:
    Feb 17, 2002
    Location:
    Seattle, WA
    I find this argument strange, mainly because it never seems to come up when people discuss buying e.g. Tod's driving shoes... they are about as disposable and cost a lot, but people for some reason can accept that, while these only have the distinction of being sneaker-styled.
     


  9. skalogre

    skalogre Senior member

    Messages:
    6,324
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Mar 9, 2006
    I find this argument strange, mainly because it never seems to come up when people discuss buying e.g. Tod's driving shoes... they are about as disposable and cost a lot, but people for some reason can accept that, while these only have the distinction of being sneaker-styled.

    Tod's and these CPs both look like retirement home specials so I don't really see a distinction, frankly...
     


  10. jet

    jet Persian Bro

    Messages:
    21,200
    Likes Received:
    9,295
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Location:
    socal
    PG, where's the best place I should get my sumis in your opinion?
     


  11. PG2G

    PG2G Senior member

    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I got mine from 2000db, the markup in NYC is pretty damn high. I recently decided that I wouldn't do anymore blind jean purchases though. If I can't try them on or return them, I'm not bothering. Though, I do think I'd have a problem paying $340 for them, or whatever they charge.
     


  12. ghulkhan

    ghulkhan Senior member

    Messages:
    3,198
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2006
    Location:
    nyc
    I got mine from 2000db, the markup in NYC is pretty damn high. I recently decided that I wouldn't do anymore blind jean purchases though. If I can't try them on or return them, I'm not bothering. Though, I do think I'd have a problem paying $340 for them, or whatever they charge.

    how much are they through 2000db?
     


  13. PG2G

    PG2G Senior member

    Messages:
    3,294
    Likes Received:
    3
    Joined:
    May 28, 2005
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    how much are they through 2000db?

    Hrm, I don't remember exactly, but around $270 or $280 shipped.
     


  14. jet

    jet Persian Bro

    Messages:
    21,200
    Likes Received:
    9,295
    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2006
    Location:
    socal
    I got mine from 2000db, the markup in NYC is pretty damn high. I recently decided that I wouldn't do anymore blind jean purchases though. If I can't try them on or return them, I'm not bothering. Though, I do think I'd have a problem paying $340 for them, or whatever they charge.

    Fock that is way too much when you got them for 275.
     


  15. niubi

    niubi Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2006
    For the Edmontonians.....these are at Haven for $270 CAD I believe.
     


Share This Page

Styleforum is proudly sponsored by