It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Retail Apocalypse: The $16 Million Dollar Sneaker

page: 1

log in


posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 10:55 AM
The Ultimate Flip! Nike Air Yeezy II Red Octobers Listed For $16 Million On eBay

After their surprise release, the Nike Air Yeezy II Red Octobers recently became the most sought after sneakers in the world. The monochromatic kicks practically didn’t have a chance after selling out within minutes of being posted on Nike’s website. But sneakerheads didn’t miss a beat, quickly taking their talents straight to the gods of product flipping: eBay.

It was on eBay where the jaw-dropping price was put on the “Bound 2″ rapper’s heaven-sent sneakers. A UK purveyor posted his Red Octobers for a whopping $10 million Euros, convert that to US dollars and you got yourself $16 million.

But if $16 million is a little too rich for your blood, Instagram may tickle your fancy. The sneaker has been posted for prices ranging from $1,200 to $3,000, still a pretty good come up for the sellers, considering the original retail price was $250.
Why do people spend $250 dollars on products, made in China? lol No offense to the Chinese. hahahahah

Just as a side note: Nike has over 1,000,000 employees and only 13,887 are employed in the U.S., where it was founded; while China has close to 260,000 employees. If you want to know where the "jobs" are at, try looking in different countries. Pretty sad, really. But, that's the price American's pay, for their "F.U. pay me", attitude. It's nothing personal, just "business".

Retail Apocalypse

*JC Penney, which lost $586 million in three months in 2013, is planning to close 33 stores in 19 states and lay off 2,000 people. JC Penney’s stock has lost 84 percent of its value since February 2012.

*Sears has decided to shut down its flagship store in Downtown Chicago, and it has closed 300 stores in the United States since 2010. Stock analyst Brian Sozzi noted that Sear’s inventory levels have fallen by 23.7 percent since 2006. He also noted that Sears had $4.4 billion in cash and equivalents in 2005 but $609 million in cash and equivalents in 2012. Sozzi, who calls himself a guerrilla analyst, has a blog full of disturbing pictures of empty Sears stores.

*Macy’s, one of the few retail success stories, is planning to close five stores and eliminate 2,500 jobs.

*Radio Shack is preparing to close 500 stores, according to The Wall Street Journal.

*Best Buy recently closed 50 stores and eliminated 950 jobs at stores in Canada.

*Target announced plans to eliminate 475 jobs and not fill 700 empty positions to reduce costs.

*Aeropostale is planning to close 175 stores.

*Blockbuster has closed down all of its stores.
Instead of manufacturing sneakers, they need to find a way to manufacture some jobs. It's a slow boil, people. The frogs don't even realize, they're slowly cooking to death.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:06 AM
With any luck, the cheap crap will fall apart the first time they put them on. LOL I don't understand materialism AT ALL. I mean, I like stuff to a point, but really, they're SHOES for crying out loud. I spent $250 for my dog and I thought that was too much, but at least my dog will love me back.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:07 AM
Wow $16 million for a pair of shoes that probably cost a few bucks (if that) to make. I've never understood what people's fascination with expensive shoes though. Shoes are shoes. As long as they don't make your eyes bleed to look at (which frankly those all red things in the OP do to me), they are good enough for me.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:11 AM
reply to post by WonderBoi

Don't know why people keep buying this crap at those prices and I'm just talking about suggested retail price, not to mention the super inflated prices being asked on EBAY and other sites.

I quit buying NIKE products over ten years ago for this very reason and this is exactly why we need legislation that would mandate that products for sell here must be made here and visa versa. In other words, all manufacturing companies should be required to build their products in the same economy they plan on selling them in.

I'd just bet that, (with few exceptions) they don't sell too many of those shoes in China even for $250 a pair, much less the higher prices.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:15 AM
I wudnt pay £16 for those cheap lookin pieces of sh*t......

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:21 AM
reply to post by WonderBoi

I've been saying this (along with a lot of other people) that this was coming. If you dump your manufacturing jobs to another country all you have left is service jobs and you can't export service jobs then make money at it for a country/colony. Eventually, sooner than later, the service jobs start drying up because the value base has gone overseas. That results in higher taxation and jobs shifting to governments who try to spend their way out of the problem by borrowing money from the reserve banks which are controlled by the IMF. Eventually, resource fire sales start, like the one Harper in Canada is running right now. When a country or colony can no longer support itself based on a combination of manufacturing exports and internal services, it always results in the sell-off of the country or colony.

This is planned, the net goal is one world government/currency and a totalitarian/fascist police state because all those bad "nationalists" can't control their own countries. But in fact, the international money power has bought all of those governments and is steering them using economic warfare. The only solution is to go nationalistic, close the borders, nationalize central banks under treasury, repeal treaties, nationalize utilities like electricity and other services required to live, stop immigration and rebuild the manufacturing base so that we can all have equitable export trade. Then everyone wins, except the globalists. We are in the death throws of the end-game, time to act or capitulate.

Seeing the present lot of criminal politicians, international bankers and globalists charged with treason and swinging from lampposts would just be icing on the cake ;-)

Cheers - Dave
edit on 2/12.2014 by bobs_uruncle because: (no reason given)

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:35 AM
reply to post by WonderBoi

Why do people spend $250 dollars on products, made in China?

When there's no other choice BUT to buy Chinese, it doesn't leave you many options. Who else makes affordable major appliances these days? Next time you go appliance shopping take a look at where they're made.
They like to call it "globalization", I call it corporate greed.

As far as those red shoes go, they can keep those ugly ass things. $250? ...LOL

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 11:37 AM
I don't know what is worse.
That there is some idiot out there that thinks people will pay that much for them?
Or that there maybe someone that would?

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 12:42 PM

reply to post by WonderBoi
... and you can't export service jobs then make money at it for a country/colony.

I'm not sure exactly what you're trying to say here. What I am sure about, though, is that a country can make money from exporting services, and that this will support jobs in those service-based firms. I'm using Windows software right now. I'll be using Google later on. I've got a Jayhawks CD playing as I write. I'll watch a re-run of Cheers during my meal tonight. Service-based, all of them, but I've paid good old UK sterling for them ... money which will end up in a US firm's coffers in due course.

... The only solution is to go nationalistic, close the borders ... and rebuild the manufacturing base so that we can all have equitable export trade...

So you want to prevent imports yet allow exports? That doesn't seem very fair. And if the US closed its borders, how long do you think it would be before other countries did the same? I'm sure you can take a guess what would happen to world-wide sales of Texan oil, Californian wine, Mid-Western wheat ...

Then everyone wins ...

No they don't. The people in the industries I've just mentioned don't. They're out of a job. The ordinary citizen doesn't, because he/she is having to pay more for manufactured goods than they need to (in effect, subsidising inefficient US firms who wouldn't be able to compete, at least on price, with goods manufactured elsewhere). Most of the first world has lost the battle as far as low-value, commoditised manufactured goods is concerned. Where they still have the edge is in high quality, high added-value, high-tech goods. That is where they need to focus their energies.

The only solution in the long-run is to keep borders open, and allow countries on both sides of the border to do what they do best. China produces toasters, the US produces software. Vietnam produces footwear, the US produces 787s. Think of the firms that have had the biggest global impact on business in the last 20 - 30 years, and the ones that will continue to have that impact into the foreseeable future. I mean, the real game-changers. They're all American, and they're nearly all service-based. I think the (American) future is rosier than you might imagine.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 05:47 PM
This is what people mean when they talk about greed and its evils.

Who in their right mind would 1. think that this is an appropriate amount for those eyesores and 2. actually fork over that much for them because they have to have them that badly?

Now, I'm all for the free market, so let these two idiots transact if they both exist. This is business between them, but seriously! talk about skewed priorities.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 05:55 PM
reply to post by WonderBoi

Those are the ugliest damned shoes I've ever seen!

I really don't get the desire for Nike shoes .. they suck, just like most of nike clothing. I wish I'd have had under armour when I was younger and playing sports .. instead it was the same old ill-fitting cheap nike gear.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 06:45 PM
reply to post by lacrimoniousfinale

Sorry, I should have been clearer. I meant service jobs in the capacity of restaurant workers, cashiers, store clerks, grocery packers, etc.

BTW, the music, game and television/movie creators provide a product, not a service. Many of those jobs however are drying up also.

Cheers - Dave

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 07:12 PM
reply to post by WonderBoi

but is anyone actually buying them at such idiotic prices ?

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 07:20 PM
reply to post by CoherentlyConfused

it depends what you are buying - last year I paid £305 for a pair of boots - they look hideously ugly - but my life literally depends on them [ alpine winter climbing - ice ] but they are the successor to a pair by the same manufacturer that has lasted me 20 seasons of hard use

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 08:29 PM
reply to post by ignorant_ape

There's nothing wrong with paying a lot of money for a decent product. I've purchased work boots that were expensive, but good craftsmanship. Or opting for the very expensive power-tools over cheap brands (and they last a life time). Nike though is a perfect example of paying a premium price for extremely low quality products. You're essentially buying the name.

posted on Feb, 12 2014 @ 09:21 PM

Wow $16 million for a pair of shoes that probably cost a few bucks (if that) to make.

Well, can you actually see on Ebay where anybody paid that much? Just a beat up!


log in