The definitive SF-approved non-baller sneaker thread

Originally Posted by hendrix

Click to expand...

I dunno, i think i'll still like SQs black distressed MMM hitops in 10 years. CP will still look good.



i have learnt from experience that this is not the right option. You just simply don't enjoy the 4 pairs as much.


No real need to answer as you have pretty much covered it. I would venture a guess that most people who buy "luxe" sneakers also own a variety of other shoes. I will agree that the quality to price ratio holds no real water but that's not the point of buying any clothes if you are interested in personal style, design, etc. You buy them because for whatever reason you want to own them and owning them gives you enjoyment. This is only tangentially related, but it blows my mind the amount of money certain posters spend on budget stuff. I have a feeling the income gap between some people who shop budget stuff and some of those who pick up a few designer items here and there is not all that great.

Even my black leather converse which were like, what, $120, look better than most of the stuff in this thread. I'm not saying spend $500 on Lanvins, but there's plenty of middle ground between those and $50 canvas Chucks.

To me it seems like most non-pricey sneakers have at least one thing going on that screams "if you care about how this looks: **** you" like a brand or lame colour/texture for the sole or something. That or they're the basic chuck/keds/etc shape.

Conversely, I think these bronze $60 supras I'm wearing right now are better than quite a few things in the baller thread. This thread does not have the monopoly on ugly ******* shoes. I guess what one of my points is is that I don't buy the shoes because they cost $$$. I mean, I love some of the Lanvins that are posted and I'd absolutely buy them if they were retailing for $80 instead of $500, simply because they're really freaking cool shoes (would a lower retail price point dissuade others from buying them? If so, then i'm guessing they're buying the label, not the shoe). I'm confident that if i were independently wealthy, i'd still like these Supras, and I'd also still like the expensive shoes, and my closet would feature both, and like hendrix my go-to pair would probably just be a simple pair of chucks.

I dunno, i think i'll still like SQs black distressed MMM hitops in 10 years. CP will still look good.

Click to expand...

If SQ's black distressed MMM hitops are still wearable in 10 years, that'd be a damned shame because they do look pretty good and they demand to be worn. I feel the same about those grey nutsack GATs.

Originally Posted by CharlieAngel

Click to expand...

i cant' stand those laceless converse. I used to have a pair, ended up using a sharpie to paint the eyelets black and they still looked "weird". All those eyelets with no laces.. it just bothers me in a weird way.

I have a pair of Varvatos laceless Chucks, I thought I'd just dig them as they were... but after a little while I just said *******. I added laces. So now I basically just have another pair of Chucks, except without the feeling of 'these might slip off if I run or catch my foot on something odd'.

Hey, I like those supras, though I'd like them more without the perforation

However, you can't have an $80 pair of Lanvins; part of what makes Lanvins desirable is the materials and construction, and you can't do that for $80. Maybe the H&M collab will have some cheap ones though.

which converse white leather lows should i get?

purcell

Originally Posted by Uncontrol

Click to expand...

Hey, I like those supras, though I'd like them more without the perforation
Same. But, if they released this exact same colorway in the Skytop II, I'd be on it like white on rice. I'm a sucker for metallic coppers, bronzes, and even some golds. I wish the soles were black, but whatever.

However, you can't have an $80 pair of Lanvins; part of what makes Lanvins desirable is the materials and construction, and you can't do that for $80. Maybe the H&M collab will have some cheap ones though.

Click to expand...

I meant that the high-price isn't what makes Lanvins (or any baller sneaker) attractive to me. If I like them, I'd like them just as much for $80 as I do at $500. At $500, though, it really makes me have to sit down and prioritize a few things where at $80, it's pretty much an impulse buy. I'm keeping my fingers crossed for an H&M Lanvin sneaker, too. I imagine if it exists, we'll be looking at something like a coated/waxed canvas? Which is perfectly fine with me as long as it comes in black and maybe even gray high top.

spring courts...

I have a pair of those laceless canvas chucks. I use them as my work slippers at school.

Evisu X CP has dropped. http://shop.evisu.com/collections/sneakers Not sure what's up with the suede toe on the highs... Edit: Should've looked in the CP-thread first...

what the ****?

yeah i was looking at them too they look nice

First time posting, read most of the thread.

Was thinking about getting these canvas PF Flyers. ($50)

http://www.zappos.com/pf-flyers-cent...t=prodPage2a:0



But am tempted by the amazing sale on these leather PF Flyers. ($36.45 after 60% off)

http://www.6pm.com/pf-flyers-bob-cou...american-white



Not sure what might be best when it comes to leather VS canvas sneakers(still a newbie), but the sale on the latter has the price at cheaper than the canvas sneakers. I might go with the canvas sneakers just because I worry about white leather getting too dirty too quickly.