Comments on: What is Nike Doing?: Speculating on a Shoe Market in Motion

By: frodo b.

frodo b. — Tue, 17 Feb 2015 00:51:31 +0000

More likely, Nike was smelling the trend so it funded the nonsense research. Nevertheless, it was just a trend. Look, all fast runners use light and flexible shoes for good performance. It’s hard to get fast (say below 4:00 min/km with shoes that feel like damping. But if you’re going to run on the road and train for long distance at slow paces do yourself a favor and get some cushion (stability or nor). Anyway, pronation is already some sort of cushion. Too much is problematic. Plus, even if *we* evolved for running and talking, not everybody runs and talks the best way. Some need a little help.The point being, not everyone needs to be specially suited for running in the biomechs dept. If you’re just a casual runner for weekly cardio on the running machine you might get away with those trendy feet gloves (fibram or whatever), otherwise get some real shoes (maybe a pair for long slow runs and some others for faster ones.

Minimalist, my ass! Pardon my French.

By: John

John — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I just read this and although it's a bit late, I'll tell you what I think.

I'm a little bit of an insider and expert on the running shoe industry, and to be frank Nike is not faring all that well. Their Free line does sell well, but the remainder of their shoes do poorly compared with their competitors. Nike funded the study because it would boost sales of their Free line, and that's about it. Their decision to fund a study was nothing other than to boost their Free line. The barefoot running movement won't govern the future of the industry (and will very likely pass), and as a result Nike's position will not be appreciably better than it is now.

By: Pete Larson

Pete Larson — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

In reply to John.

Thanks for the insight!
Pete

By: Greg Strosaker

Greg Strosaker — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Pete, I think your point 3 nails it – Nike are not fools. Running shoes are a competitive arena, in which I’ve never perceived them as the leader (though I’m not the expert you are). If they can build a reputation for setting a new direction (and have greater scale and broader appeal than Vibram), then they can gain a first-movers advantage. I love a post like this that combines the business and science aspects of running – thanks for your coverage of these developments.

By: Reina8292

Reina8292 — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Nike is smart. They are listening to the market, instead of ignoring the change.

By: Martin Whysall

Martin Whysall — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Nike has always maintained its popularity of being at first for shoes and this time also I hope the same.

By: Wolfgang

Wolfgang — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I would buy a Nike 1.0. I wear my Vibrams everywhere, but hate the attention.

By: Tuck

Tuck — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

I agree. Nike's well positioned no matter how the market goes.

By: RunningPT12

RunningPT12 — Tue, 30 Nov -0001 00:00:00 +0000

Certainly, it will be interesting to continue to watch how companies like Nike continue to deal with all of this - thus far, it seems like they've been testing the water in terms of introducing new products more than embracing the concept.

BTW - Wow - really great blog. I just discovered you (via Amby Burfoot's post on RW) and am working my way back through the posts