MEGA New Miami Adidas UltraboostšŸ”„ - The Shoe and Nike/Adidas Thread.

Advertisement
I got mines coming through already.

But hereā€™s a top flight, re-seller who have these available

OK Rell. I ordered mine! I did a little more research and found that they run a little wide and to my surprise, it was suggested that if you have a narrow foot, drop down a half size. Canā€™t say Iā€™ve ever seen that. I ordered a half size bigger like you suggested.

Canā€™t wait to get them!
 
The wait is over šŸ™ŒšŸ¾šŸ™ŒšŸ¾šŸ™ŒšŸ¾
F206940A-8878-457D-82F3-2F0FECB234E0.jpeg
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
You really are not clear on what the First Amendment is. Nor do you understand who/what the First Amendment applies to (and I already told you, it ONLY applies to the government).

So, yes, you CAN lose "your bank account, social media, etc." without it being a First Amendment issue. The First Amendment doesn't cover that. You can say whatever you want about what Kanye should or shouldn't lose, but you are factually incorrect.

Besides, nobody has taken away a single one of Kanye West's bank accounts, though there will be a lot less money in those bank accounts soon. If you don't think there will be economic repercussions to hate speech, you are sorely mistaken.

And, yes, social media accounts can absolutely be suspended for violating the rules of those forums, since all of the social media companies are non-governmental-owned corporations.

Please do what Kanye is not capable of doing: consider the option of not speaking when you don't know what you are talking about.

The First Amendment is not some abstract idea on which people can form their own alternate opinions, it is a written document that can be read and applied. You don't get to take a second-grader-level analytical shortcut and type "First Amendment = free speech". Wrong. That's not what the First Amendment is. The First Amendment does not guarantee that you can engage in hate speech and that other individuals are forced to continue to do business with you.

And I'm not so sure that the "truth and/or balls" defense is the right argument to cite when you are confronted with the option to adopt or repudiate someone else's hate speech. Just trying to help you out before you go past the point of no return.
While youā€™re right that social media companies are non-government owned companies, theyā€™re still protected under Section 230 of USC Article 47 for civil liabilities and a part of that agreement revolves around what social media can/canā€™t remove in terms of written speech.

If they go overboard on their interpretations of ā€œhate speechā€ or ā€œpolitical ideologyā€ they can absolutely lose those protections. Everything else I agree on although the evolution (if you can even call it that) of ā€œhate speechā€, ā€œracismā€, ā€œphobiasā€, and ā€œdiscriminationā€ as it contextually gets applied to the first amendment is dubious at best.

Edit: Wanted to reply after reading this and realized Iā€™m in a **** shoe thread. Wonā€™t comment anymore on it.
 
Wowzers!

I donā€™t think Adidas realizes that the reason y ppl bought these joints was b/c of the hype of Yeezy. It wonā€™t be the same. Desperation move, like they tried to resell the Crazy 8 after Kobe died. Now I see why they r looking for a new CEO.


In fairness, I think it's the best possible choice they can make under the circumstances. adidas owns the designs/silhouettes. Yes, the shoe will not be nearly as popular, but several of the designs are very solid shoes and there will be a market for those who "want Yeezys" but don't want to pay collector's prices.

If adidas figures out a way to make the shoe in slightly higher numbers...still maintain a BIT of scarcity, while not worrying about the fact that the rabid demand will be gone and they will no longer be able to do lotteries...then they can bridge the gap for a few years until they figure out a way forward.

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than feeding all the inventory into a wood-chipper.

You understand this better than I do, @Rellyrell , is it possible to make the "line" more mass market while still satisfying the collectors with rare collabs or colorways? Seems to be what the Jordans are doing (literally, the Air Jordan 1 through 100, or whatever number they are up to).

adidas is still going to have to find some athletes worth doing a signature shoe for, but when it comes to lifestyle, they are "not dead yet". Lean into soccer, lean into Euro, figure out how to revamp the approach to US collegiate and college sports, figure out if they can ever make headway into American football...
 
Advertisement
In fairness, I think it's the best possible choice they can make under the circumstances. adidas owns the designs/silhouettes. Yes, the shoe will not be nearly as popular, but several of the designs are very solid shoes and there will be a market for those who "want Yeezys" but don't want to pay collector's prices.

If adidas figures out a way to make the shoe in slightly higher numbers...still maintain a BIT of scarcity, while not worrying about the fact that the rabid demand will be gone and they will no longer be able to do lotteries...then they can bridge the gap for a few years until they figure out a way forward.

It's not perfect, but I think it's better than feeding all the inventory into a wood-chipper.

You understand this better than I do, @Rellyrell , is it possible to make the "line" more mass market while still satisfying the collectors with rare collabs or colorways? Seems to be what the Jordans are doing (literally, the Air Jordan 1 through 100, or whatever number they are up to).

adidas is still going to have to find some athletes worth doing a signature shoe for, but when it comes to lifestyle, they are "not dead yet". Lean into soccer, lean into Euro, figure out how to revamp the approach to US collegiate and college sports, figure out if they can ever make headway into American football...

Interesting article I saw. Predictions have been coming true.

 


I was reminded of this as I was driving in to work, listening to Howard 101 on Sirius.

SIX YEARS AGO, the Stern Show did a game "Beetlejuice or Kanye", where the contestant had to listen to Howard read a quote, and then tell him if Beetlejuice said it or Kanye said it. The contestant (who happened to be a black Juggalo named "Les Legs" who lost his legs at the knees after a train-jumping accident) struggled with the game, eventually getting his final two questions correct to win the money.

Kanye's had some issues for a while...


1668090451332.png


OR

1668090477598.png
 
Advertisement
Advertisement
Back
Top