I don't often see RM Williams boots discounted. So if you're looking to spend half a grand on boots, this could make it worthwhile.
The theory is that a pair of RMs last a lifetime. Not personally tested.
$20 off for the referee ($99 minimum spend), and $20 credit for the referrer.
Quality shoes are cheaper than buying cheap shows, in the long run. Nike and similar brands charge a real premium for giving you utter junk. Try a few italian walking/hiking shoes and not only do they feel many times better they are also better made, so they will last significantly longer.
These italian shoes will last 5x longer than any Nike crap.
Which Italian shoes?
B: Which Italian shoes?
99: Any. Comeon try a bit harder.
@ninetyNineCents: so all italian shoes are better than nike crap? Thats a very bold statement to make. At least give a few examples to back it up
H: so all italian shoes are better than nike crap?
99: Are you really that childish that i need to qualify all possible combinations ? Surely you can figure out from context what im talking about.
H: At least give a few examples to back it up
99: Asolo
@ninetyNineCents: from context you are saying any italian shoes will last 5x longer than any nike crap
Are they the same price for comparison? Last 5x as long for 5x price? Id rather get a new pair of nikes 5x over with a new style each time.
H: Are they the same price for comparison? Last 5x as long for 5x price?
99: Well firstly i will set up some context.
Im going to assume you buy the italians for about $400, and nikes for $200. I know prices may vary but lets try and keep this simple.
If you spend $800 on 2xItalians rather than 4x on nikes, the former will last you significantly longer. I cant give you an exact amount, but i get years out of my italians and they look pretty damn good, not perfectly new which is a lot more than i can say about Nikes.
There are even people selling second hand italian shoes on ebay they keep that well.
Not only that they are a significantly better shoe, you wont get sore feet from long walks and so on.
~
H: Id rather get a new pair of nikes 5x over with a new style each time.
99: Nikes have a style ? All they do is change the colour of the plastic, or the fabric, in the end the performance and feel of the shoe is a joke.
You are still buying junk.
@ninetyNineCents: you are really clutching at straws here. Firstly no one on ozbargain is paying more than approx $100 for nikes. There are also second hand nikes et al on ebay…
By your logic the italians dont have style either.every brand has different models/styles of shoea right? Thats why they have style codes….
They performance and feel that many people run marathons and compete in events for doesnt match the comfort of your italians on your walk to the shops?
Cmon. Try a bit harder
H: you are really clutching at straws here. Firstly no one on ozbargain is paying more than approx $100 for nikes.
99: And nobody pays full price for the italian shoes as well.
H: There are also second hand nikes et al on ebay…
99: Have those nikes had years of wear ?
H: By your logic the italians dont have style either.every brand has different models/styles of shoea right? Thats why they have style codes…
99: Thats a fallacy, choice doesnt imply other choices are less stylish.
H: They performance and feel that many people run marathons and compete in events for doesnt match the comfort of your italians on your walk to the shops?
99: Yes, because they havent tried the options im discussing.
Your original question was about overall cost, and ive tried to share examples where people who need reliabi;ity, durability and comfort pick the better brands and not nike.
@ninetyNineCents: youd be surprised how many people take care of their nikes for resell.
How does 'choice doesnt imply other choices are less stylish' apply here? You dismissed the idea that nikes have style… when they have many styles.. thats all i said.
Youd think elite athletes would try anything that gives them advantage when so much is on the line, right? If your italian shoes are better trust me they would all be wearing them.. but, they are not.
Italian shoes are not exclusively better than nike etc when looking at the costs
H: You dismissed the idea that nikes have style… when they have many styles.. thats all i said.
99: Everything footwear wise has some element of style, and some have considerable more. You obviously are nitpicking me and turning this into a boring conversation. I dont want to waste my time adding and qualifying every single statement that i make. Grow up and get with the program and understaand the spirit of my comments.
H: Italian shoes are not exclusively better than nike etc when looking at the costs
99: They are the vast majority for the time, and thats whats important.
Next your going to tell me a Ferrari or Lambo has less stye than a toyota. You really have no clue …
H: Youd think elite athletes would try anything that gives them advantage when so much is on the line, right? If your italian shoes are better trust me they would all be wearing them.. but, they are not.
99: You are a fool if you think Messi, Federer wears the same shoes that you buy in the shops. Even if they are wearing the "same" model they dont buy their gear from the shop like you or me.
i suppose you think the bathurst / v8 super car drivers just goto a holden or ford shop and buy a new car, paint up a few sponsors and they are 90% ready for the next race.
@ninetyNineCents: your saying I'm nitpicking you and calling it a boring conversation because its clear that youre trying to backtrack out of everything you've said. Calling me to grow up and get with the program just because I have a different opinion about italian vs nike shoes, which is a point you brought up in a RMW post shows it all.
You keep making gross generalisations and dont even make an effort to support them and when someone disagrees with evidence you start bringing up irrelevant points to change the discussion.
Now you feel the need the bring in expensive cars (which are extremely expensive to maintain) to draw a comparison with shoes. Thats a completely different conversation to be had. Which I am happy to have if you would like.
@ninetyNineCents: why are you introducing common knowledge into the argument. We all know superstars have different racquets and custom boots, the 'pro' models. But remember this, its the NIKE court vapors and the ADIDAS nemeziz messi boots they respectively wear. Not the ASOLO court vapors or ASOLO nemeziz messi.
These guys train so hard that sponsorships aside the desire to win a title would seem them wearing blacked out versions of whatever performance enhancing italian footwear there is. But they dont. Because whatever italian shoe out there isnt any better.
@ninetyNineCents: How ignorant. Yea cuz when I watched the pre race show when I was 10 yrs old I didnt see mark larkham explain how the fuel tanks were in a different spot. Or explain the sequential gearbox. Or explain how they were mostly empty inside. Or explain the modified air intake. Or explain soft and hard tyres. Or explain running an alternative fuel strategy. Or explain how the cars we're built in their own team garages separate from the ford/holden production line.
You really think you are gods gift to the world and that everyone is inferior to you?
H: why are you introducing common knowledge into the argument. We all know superstars have different racquets and custom boots, the 'pro' models.
99: because a few comments previously you made the following comment…its pretty obvious you were implying that elite atheletes wear the same nikes you can buy.
Youd think elite athletes would try anything that gives them advantage when so much is on the line, right? If your italian shoes are better trust me they would all be wearing them.. but, they are not.
So nike sponsors a lot of athletes that doesnt make their shoes better or worse than anyone elses. Because A sponsors Messi does that make them a better shoe than B who sponsors Ronaldo or C that sponsors Salah ?
Of course not sponsorship is complete irrelevant, and anyone who cant grasp that introducing such things is a fool.
H: You really think you are gods gift to the world and that everyone is inferior to you?
99: Here we go, the little crybaby who cant argue about facts, so they start making up pointless unfounded nonsense about the other person.
@hadz:
H: your saying I'm nitpicking you and calling it a boring conversation because its clear that youre trying to backtrack out of everything you've said. Calling me to grow up and get with the program just because I have a different opinion about italian vs nike shoes, which is a point you brought up in a RMW post shows it all.
99: i havent backtraced out of anything. Next time you claim i said something provide a quote that actually backs your statement.
H: I have a different opinion about italian vs nike shoes, which is a point you brought up in a RMW post shows it all.
99: Did i commit a hcrime against humanity for mentioning that better shoes cost more money and give you more value for money, last longer and actually cost less in the end ?
As always tyou introduce another nonsense that proves nothing about my original argument.
@ninetyNineCents: Yep, doesnt say anywhere that I said elite athletes wear the same as the average consumer. And that point was brought in by you… and only the superstars in the biggest leagues get that provided to them. I can tell you (for a fact as I have seen a few signed game worn pairs) that JT and many other stars of the NRL wear the top model of the boots you can buy off the nike or asics website. My comment doesnt even imply that anywhere. You've just read it with your mind already made up, so you just trying to convince yourself thats what I said.
Again you call people a fool for understanding things differently.
@ninetyNineCents: Absolute hypocrite. Read over the comments and you will see that you started to make personal statements about me.
You've made no effort and the fact that you repeat my arguments about you trying to reflect it back to me shows exactly how each of your following arguments get weaker and weaker. You've run out of ideas.
@ninetyNineCents: 'i havent backtraced out of anything. Next time you claim i said something provide a quote that actually backs your statement.' wow. just wow. read the comments and you will see unlike you who makes sweeping generalisations because youve seen the world and know how it works.
' better shoes cost more money and give you more value for money, last longer and actually cost less in the end ?' you've come up with the claim. Can you prove it? So that you can objectively even make this statement? Didnt think so.
'As always tyou introduce another nonsense that proves nothing about my original argument.' yep another non original from you stolen from my argument just repeating what I said, which doesnt make any sense when you are referring to what I have said
H: Absolute hypocrite. Read over the comments and you will see that you started to make personal statements about me.
You've made no effort and the fact that you repeat my arguments about you trying to reflect it back to me shows exactly how each of your following arguments get weaker and weaker. You've run out of ideas.
99: Here we go again. i asked you to quote me when you make claims i said anything…
Do you even know what the word hypocrite means ?
I have quoted you multipe times when making a point, you on th eother hand have avoided providing quotes for practicaly every single one of your claims. Even the one "quote" of mine, you cant even manage to put my name along with the text. Do you know how quotes work ?
ninetyNineCents 2 hours 2 min ago
@hadz:
H: your saying I'm nitpicking you and calling it a boring conversation because its clear that youre trying to backtrack out of everything you've said. Calling me to grow up and get with the program just because I have a different opinion about italian vs nike shoes, which is a point you brought up in a RMW post shows it all.
99: i havent backtraced out of anything. Next time you claim i said something provide a quote that actually backs your statement.
H:
' better shoes cost more money and give you more value for money, last longer and actually cost less in the end ?' you've come up with the claim. Can you prove it? So that you can objectively even make this statement? Didnt think so.
99: I gave my personal stories and i gave examples of adventurers avoiding nikes when they got into serious terrain.
If you cant appreciate that theres a reason why most of these adventurers dont use nikes and pick better shoes and gear im dumbfounded. I will repeat again, MOST not ALL, but MOST.
@ninetyNineCents: again you're repeating the same blabble which makes no sense. You still continue to avoid all my points from two, three four comments prior and make new questions for yourself to answer. Now you're trying to take away from the argument for formatting reasons? think about how petty that is.
The entire comment I first replied to saying you were backtracking was exactly that. I replied directly to it. Why the need to repeat myself? Asking if I dont get it… looks like its you not me.
@ninetyNineCents: 'i gave examples of adventurers avoiding nikes when they got into serious terrain.' where? is ? this?
exactly. you've already forgotten what you said before because its meaningless.
Also why focus on hiking? You introduced the parallel right?
I though we were talking about italian vs nike that an ozbargainer would encounter on a day to day. See what I mean? you're changing the conversation to a different idea to suit you when you havent even addressed what the MAJORITY are concerned with. Didnt you put the emphasis on MAJORITY?
H: 'i gave examples of adventurers avoiding nikes when they got into serious terrain.' where? is ? this?
99:
https://www.ozbargain.com.au/comment/5889051/redir
ninetyNineCents on 27/04/2018 - 11:53
@hadz:
Since you are unconvinced, let me give you something to think about.
Im going to assume you watch adventure / nature documentaries, which shoes do you think those people wear when they go into the bush/forest ?
They never wear nikes - what does that tell you ?
Shows you have terrible memory.
~
H: Also why focus on hiking? You introduced the parallel right?
99: Do i really need to explain again ?
The tougher the terrain proves the quality of the product and it shows the conform or lack thereof.
Why do i need to explain this ?
~
H: I though we were talking about italian vs nike that an ozbargainer would encounter on a day to day. See what I mean?
99: Im not changing the subject, a better product that can take tougher environments with comfort will perform better for far longer in the easier city life.
~
H: you're changing the conversation to a different idea to suit you when you havent even addressed what the MAJORITY are concerned with. Didnt you put the emphasis on MAJORITY?
99: Im not changing the subject at all you are shall we say a bit simple.
~
h: n you havent even addressed what the MAJORITY are concerned with. Didnt you put the emphasis on MAJORITY?
99: I have addressed what the needs of the majority you are just too simple to understand.
Lots of areas of industry test things beyond what typically happens in normal typical life. Its called stress testing. Before they opened the harbour bridge for public use, they filled it up with lots of trains with lots of load. Before a plane is certified for production and carrying passengers, they very it can handle conditions that way out of the ordinary, like flexing wings.
I was trying to show you with examples you wluld have seen that tougher conditions demand better shoes, but obviously that was all above you, because you think its just a question of money and that all shoes are equal.
I asked you previously if money is the only thing that counts, why dont you just wear fakes from paddy's market ? Its the same question about better shoes but in reverse in case you accuse me of changing the subject.
@ninetyNineCents: My question still stands, where is it? Where is the examples of adventurers avoiding nike in serious terrain? Are all nature/forest docos in serious terrain? Why go to one side of the spectrum but not the other. You just make a generalisation of the bush/forest in general. You're just emphasising the serious terrain to make an argument when you only mentioned the bush/forest. Gotcha.
Why focus on hiking when the majority arent? Theres your answer to you convoluted mashed up statement. Nice and simple.
There we go again. Why pay extra for something you dont need? If a pair of nikes does the job on a day to day basis, that you can buy anywhere, why pay extra? Is it really that much more comfortable? The general consensus I've heard is that the ultraboost are the most comfortable shoe in the world. You can generally get them for $100 - $200. Theyre light, and not so rigid and waterproof because the majority dont need that. And guess what? its made by adidas. Definitely not italian.
Have you ever heard of diminishing returns? If I put a basic running shoe on your feet, most will be more comfortable than walking barefoot everywhere right? Big improvement. Then you get a pair of nike or whatever runners, more comfortable but not by as much. Then we can get to your italian shoes lets say theyre as good as you say they are. But the jump in comfort becomes less significant. So you're getting less and less and less benefit , but you're paying more. The competitive equilibrium is where the consumer maximises their satisfaction given their resources. The producers take these prices and the markets clear. IF you want to see this equilbrium, walk outside and look at what people are wearing. In a casual setting, the market has decided that they would rather be wearing nikes et al rather than some italian shoes.
''Im not changing the subject at all you are shall we say a bit simple.'' Classic, read before you speak. Why attack me instead of the arguments?
How does stress testing add to your argument. I would also like to unsubscribe from Harbour Bridge facts.
When did you ask me if money is the only thing that counts? You didn't. Heres what you said
"Im surprised you simply dont buy fake nikes from paddy's market for $20."
You just tried to make a little statement about how my arguments mean I should buy fake nikes. At what point did you ask me if money is the only thing that counts?
I'm keeping things simple and on point. Thanks for the compliment. I like to be concise
H: Where is the examples of adventurers avoiding nike in serious terrain?
99: We obviously watch different shows, i cant help that.
H: Are all nature/forest docos in serious terrain?
99: This is getting tiresome, do i need to qualify all the locations away from cities that are subject documentaries. You really arent trying to think for yourself in the spirit im trying to share with you.
H: Why focus on hiking when the majority arent? Theres your answer to you convoluted mashed up statement. Nice and simple
99: I already explained that hiking etc is just an example of testing the shoes. How else can one test shows for durability and comfort without considerable use ?
If you want to test how long a tire lasts, you cant just it for 5 mins, you need to either simulate or drive a lot. Its that simple. I hope you can appreciate that hiking is a good test.
H: How does stress testing add to your argument. I would also like to unsubscribe from Harbour Bridge facts.
99: Because stress testing show the quality of the shoe. If it can handle tough environment then it can handle city life.
~
H: When did you ask me if money is the only thing that counts? You didn't. Heres what you said
"Im surprised you simply dont buy fake nikes from paddy's market for $20."
You just tried to make a little statement about how my arguments mean I should buy fake nikes.
99: You implied previously that you would r
H: At what point did you ask me if money is the only thing that counts?
99: I didnt ask the direct question, but you have multiple times mentioned money or cost. Not once have you said you mentioned concerns about comfort or durability. You sort of said "change of style" was important to you.
What else am i to think are your concerns ?
The question remains for the third time, why dont you just buy $20 fakes from paddy's ?
~
H: Have you ever heard of diminishing returns?
99: Just mentioning a term doesnt make it true. I can say you have six legs and green hair - that doesnt make it true.
If you want to claim diminishing returns - prove it.
H: If I put a basic running shoe on your feet, most will be more comfortable than walking barefoot everywhere right?
99: Given typical street walking - sure.
H: Big improvement. Then you get a pair of nike or whatever runners, more comfortable but not by as much. Then we can get to your italian shoes lets say theyre as good as you say they are. But the jump in comfort becomes less significant.
99: Im sorry i cant agree with your last sentence. I have no idea how you can confidently say that without personal experience of some sort from yourself or friend/family etc.
h: So you're getting less and less and less benefit , but you're paying more.
99: heres where your argument is completely broken, because you have ZERO proof or methodology for deriving your comfort ratings. Originally i said italian shows last longer AND were more comfortable. If we just ignore the later (being more comfortable) i already said in my personal experience they last longer by a factor greater than their increased price.
~
H: The competitive equilibrium is where the consumer maximises their satisfaction given their resources. The producers take these prices and the markets clear. IF you want to see this equilbrium, walk outside and look at what people are wearing.
99: Your entire sentence is based on ZERO facts or numbers. Its total bullshit. For example in your example NIKE spends MORE paying athletes than they do on manuf the shoes. THe italian shoes dont waste money on that nonsense, which if anything means they should be able to spend more on the product.
If anything your argument actually harms your claims.
H: In a casual setting, the market has decided that they would rather be wearing nikes et al rather than some italian shoes.
99: Truth is not a popularity contest. Just 200 year ago, most people believed in witches. Only 30 odd years, most of the "market" also thought smoking was brilliant. THe market isnt always right, because well ill let you think about why …
You should take a quick look at debating and the basic list of fallacies. Its amazing how many of them you keep throwing at me.
@ninetyNineCents: ''99: We obviously watch different shows, i cant help that.'' Thats right, you referenced a statement you never made.
Im not telling you to describe every documentary. But to give an accurate representation when adventure/nature documentaries arent all 'serious terrain' documentaries. Or you wouldve said that instead.
Your italian shoes can be tested all they want. But that doesnt mean nike etc dont test their shoes and that they wouldnt stand up to day to day wear…. Why pay extra? A useful simulation for running shoes would be running, for hiking shoes would be hiking. Why wouldnt nikes shoe range be enough for day to day wear?
Implied this, implied that, implied this, implied that. This means you cant counter the points I've made on face value and need to use a version of events which suits what you want to say.
I havent mentioned comfort? How about performance and feel? https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/374538#comment-5888448
Atleast 100 years economic theory developed just for you to dismiss it. You actually dont see diminishing returns? You dont understand that with all the technology there is a point where as we approach it, the 'comfort' just doesnt' get any comfier? If you want the proof go read as you would say 'any' microeconomics textbook. I wont say which one because thats what you've been doing the whole time. Saying go look at any this any that without even giving an example. Even at the end of this last comment you do it. 'Basic list of fallacies' - well, which one then?
Diminishing returns… just google it.
Broken argument? or you not understanding when the marginal costs are greater than the marginal return.
You have to understand that comfort is subjective. Bringing this back to the original argument of which shoes are better you specifically commented that ''not only do they feel many times better they are also better made, so they will last significantly longer.'' You didnt mention from your personal experience.. You said that statement just like that. Now youve cut your argument down in half (taking out comfort) and youve added that its from your personal experience. That is completely different to your original claims.
Its basic economic theory which we see repeated in most cases over and over again. This is better than your statements you've made with no support.
"For example in your example NIKE spends MORE paying athletes than they do on manuf the shoes." can i get a reference for this please? Remember cases where A=B and B is kinda like C so A is equal C following your logic. None of that here please.
Right, so market leaders like nike are doing it all wrong. Instead some random Italian company is doing it all right but no one has heard of them. So these italian shoemakers dont spend anything on endorsements? They can spend more on the product… They must be doing so well they cant set aside some capital to improve their marketing. Meanwhile Nike can do both, market and keep developing products.
Taste and preferences change over time as youd understand but the market is still simply a collection of buyers and sellers for the exchange on goods and services. Your argument is based on the idea that the market is tastes and preferences when its only a proxy.
''The market isnt always right'' Please elaborate on this one, I want to see you try a little harder.
PS dont forget to let us all know these fallacies as I mentioned earlier.
H:
Im not telling you to describe every documentary. But to give an accurate representation when adventure/nature documentaries arent all 'serious terrain' documentaries. Or you wouldve said that instead.
99: I thought it was understood i was referring to documentaries into difficult terrain, it gets tiring to write paragraphs defining everything in minute details.
~
H: Your italian shoes can be tested all they want. But that doesnt mean nike etc dont test their shoes and that they wouldnt stand up to day to day wear….
99: What you dont appreciate is there are different standards and everyone is building to different standards, life isnt as simple as what you claim.
The same is true of cars, a german luxury car is built to a higher level in many areas than a Hyundai. Sure they both drive you from A to B, but there are differences.
Yet again you confirm what i implied earlier you have no concept of comfort, durability and other similar qualities, all you can see is the price.
H: Why pay extra?
99; For the fourth or fifth time, why dont you buy fake nikes from paddys and save yourself even more money.???
How mahy times do i have to ask this question ?
~
H: ''The market isnt always right'' Please elaborate on this one, I want to see you try a little harder.
99: The market choices are made by people. People all over the world today and in the past, make choices. It doesnt matter if their choices are about buying shoes, other any other choice they may make.
A lot of people eat the wrong food and live the wrong lifestyle, thats why obesity is a growing problem today. Obesity is a significant minority in Australia. There are far fewer people riding their bike than fat people, does that mean the later lifestyle is better than the former ?
Are you seriousy going to say because there are MORE fat people than Bicyclists that the bucycle riders are doing the wrong thing ?
Of course not, because truth or doing things right isnt a popularity contest.
~
H: Right, so market leaders like nike are doing it all wrong. Instead some random Italian company is doing it all right but no one has heard of them.
99: 300 years ago, when Newton discovered gravity almost nobody on earth agreed with him, does that mean because he was outvoted a billion to one, that he was wrong ? Of course not, becuse truth isnt a popualrity contest.
Just because you havent heard of something doesnt mean they are wrong. There are a billion muslins who think islam is wonderful and shariah law is the answer to everything, again that doesnt make that true.
Truth is established by facts and ONLY facts.
~
H: Right, so market leaders like nike are doing it all wrong. Instead some random Italian company is doing it all right but no one has heard of them. So these italian shoemakers dont spend anything on endorsements? They can spend more on the product… They must be doing so well they cant set aside some capital to improve their marketing. Meanwhile Nike can do both, market and keep developing products.
99: There are probably shoe companies we have never heard of in India or China that sell their fake nike looklikes by the zillions as well. Again you keep thinking this is a popularity contest, and you never think about quality and performance.
H: PS dont forget to let us all know these fallacies as I mentioned earlier.
99: Go read a dictionary what a fallacy is, and then google "debating fallacies".
You have used so many of the list its not funny.
https://thebestschools.org/magazine/15-logical-fallacies-kno…
- Bandwagon Fallacy
The bandwagon fallacy assumes something is true (or right, or good) because other people agree with it. A couple different fallacies can be included under this label, since they are often indistinguishable in practice. The ad populum fallacy (Lat., “to the populous/popularity”) is when something is accepted because it’s popular
How many times have i mentioned your claims to popularity ?
- Ad Hominem Fallacy
When people think of “arguments,” often their first thought is of shouting matches riddled with personal attacks
paraphrasing here, but you called me a snob.
etc etc
Ive already established with quotes these two, i hope you dont waste my time on finding the quotes again, but if you want i will.
@ninetyNineCents:
Did I say write paragraphs to define everything in minute details? I only said to be more accurate in your representations. The only scenario you've covered is rough terrain, thats not every accurate of all hiking, forest, or even for our purposes day to day condtions. See what I mean? You've changed the environment to serious terrain when on a day to day basis it shouldnt make a difference. Youre arguing italian hiking shoes are good for hiking compared to a pair of nike runners. This isnt a hiking shoe thread. You know that once we get into the details your generalisations fall apart, hence why you avoid them.
When did I claim life was simple? Again stop making things up. You cant say whether italian shoes have more rigorous testing relative to nike shoes. Are you on the production line all the way to when the shoes are on the shelves? How can you make such an assertion?
You keep saying I only focus on price when I linked you the exact comment where I talked about performance and feel. I had to laugh at that one.
Did you know that it is illegal to knowingly trade counterfeit merchandise? Why ask such a stupid question which is aimed at what I can afford rather than the discussion on shoes.
"Are you seriousy going to say because there are MORE fat people than Bicyclists that the bucycle riders are doing the wrong thing ?" Again, where did I say this? Why do you always change the words coming out of my mouth, even adding new ones? Thats right you cant argue the relevant arguments. So you introduce points that suit yours.
Bringing in newtown doesnt strengthen anything you are trying to say at all. You're just speaking words for the sake of adding more words. Talking about scientific definitions and theories to draw comparison to the value of shoes? Fetching straws…
Im saying you are wrong in saying that italian shoes are exclusively better. You've realised this and in the previous comment you've added that its only your opinon, which means I was correct.
"There are probably shoe companies we have never heard of in India or China that sell their fake nike looklikes by the zillions as well" how does this respond to my comments?
"Again you keep thinking this is a popularity contest, and you never think about quality and performance." So what are they popular for? looks only while they feel like bricks? RM williams are pretty popular too how about that? Shoes arent just something you pull out of the air.. Are you telling me customers wont take into account quality and performance for a nike shoe?
Wow, this is one corner you really gotta dig out of. Good thing you have your hiking boots.
@ninetyNineCents: Thanks for the link. How many times have you personally attacked me? Then you backed off. Thats a fallacy by you. Here it is from the same link.
You called me simple, You called me obtuse. How do these add to the arguments of the topic? Thats right youre committing one of the fallacies you listed.
You said I committed this fallacy because I somehow called you a snob through implying? Imply this, Imply that, imply this, Imply that. How many times have you said imply throughout the entire conversation? You dont have any clear evidence of me saying anything so you try to manipulate what Ive said to mean something completely different. I bet you struggled to find me commiting that fallacy that you settled on that I mightve implied something. Nice touch with the etc etc. If you found something you wouldve wrote it because you need something, ANYTHING so support what you say. But the trend continues with lack of support in each argument.
By the time you finished writing that sentence you coulve found the others. Why dont you just save time and just post them to strenghthen your argument? Its because they dont exist!
Not part of my argument but I think this is relevant:
"By the way things are going, the next thing we know youre gonna say that I implied is 'the earth is flat' just because I looked at you funny"
@hadz: Wow…. the trophy for the longest running argument on OzB???
FWIW, Italian shoes, IN GENERAL, are extremely high quality and really do last much longer than shoes made in Asia. Italians are well known for their workmanship and take pride in their shoes, even the cheapest pair is very good. Shoes made by US companies in Asian factories are made to a price without longevity in mind.
So - which are better value? Well, if you're buying a sneaker - then probably go the disposable fashion Nike. If it's a work shoe / boot - then Italian.
Doesn't everyone know this?
Get the chip off your shoulder. Shoes last long if you take care of them, that goes for this expensive "premium" boot. Nike and Adidas serve a complete different purpose and demographic and shouldn't be compared to a cowboy boot, vice versa.
What do you mean by take care of them? I don’t understand what that involves.
Many people buy Nike etc as a general purpose everyday shoe, and in that use case which covers the vast majority its perfectly sensible to compare Nike "runners" with an Italian walking / hiking shoe.
@ninetyNineCents: so how many italian walking shoes do you have and how many nikes/adidas do you have?
Theres your answer
@ninetyNineCents: adidas? You did say similar brands in your original comment so what about adidas, puma etc?
i dont have any nike/adidas/puma or any other brand. I have worn them in the past but not anymore.
Since you are unconvinced, let me give you something to think about.
Im going to assume you watch adventure / nature documentaries, which shoes do you think those people wear when they go into the bush/forest ?
They never wear nikes - what does that tell you ?
@ninetyNineCents: at what point did i say go hiking in your nike runners? And i actually recall seeing members of the camera crew wearing some nikes so theres that.
Until your sure every adventure/ nature documentary has everyone not wearing nikes etc you cant make sweeping statements like that.
H: at what point did i say go hiking in your nike runners?
99: Does it matter ? You obviously are obtuse and have no concpet of the purpose for my discussing hiking or general purpose walking.
Im surprised you simply dont buy fake nikes from paddy's market for $20.
H: And i actually recall seeing members of the camera crew wearing some nikes so theres that.
99: Rubbish, nobody is going to wear nikes on a 5 day hike thru Papua and if they did they are idiots.
Just because ONE does doesnt mean its a recommendation, you have to look at the big picture at what the MAJORITY wear. Just because one muslims is a suicide bopmber doesnt mean all are, just because one person wins lotto doesnt mean everyone does.
Are you really that simple you dont get it ?
@ninetyNineCents: Now you are personally attacking me as you feel like you can no longer rebut what I said.
Again you are introducing points with no evidence to support them apart from your own personal anecdotes. I only mentioned my anecdote of seeing a filmer wear nikes because of your own anecdote. The world doesnt revolve around you.
Here we go again, its clear you're starting to get uncomfortable in talking about shoes and you're drawing wild examples to convince yourself. and you ask me that I don't get it?
@ninetyNineCents: Sorry to break it to you, but RM Williams isn't Italian…
$399 all day everyday at DFO at homebush
I live in Canberra. All day everyday.
go to the RM outlet store at COC, I got a pair for $350 last year
Picked up a cream pair for $200 the year before
Yeah got two pairs from there. That said, they’re dealing in seconds etc and stocks therefore not necessarily consistent and can be hit or miss.
For Victorians - any Melbourne DFO (South Wharf or Spencer Street) opportunities like this?
been there - closely inspected, concluded these units must've failed quality testing, uneven stitching, strange leather fold marks, uneven cutting. I just hope these discounted units are actual store stock instead of also qa rejects
I think 'outlet' stores often contain 'factory seconds' and other items that didn't meet QA standards.
Yeah and the concerning thing is there's no way to tell whether these ozbargain units are factory rejects or not. Maybe it's common practice!
@echelon6: rm williams factory rejects/seconds should have a hole punched in them. at the back of the boot, near the top:
Why did tuzii get negged? This is useful information that there is a similar price available somewhere else. Thanks tuzii!
I know a million ways to better spend $400
Please list the million ways. Not that I think $400 on these is something I would like to spend but I'm genuinely interested in your list…
so are you listing it?
I bet he doesn't have 1 million reasons
He's typing up the doco with the million reasons.. might take awhile
I bet $1 you're 12 years old.
You think so but you are probably the persin that spends 40-50 dollars at spend less shoes twice a year on crap shoes that fall apart. Sometimes quality costs a little more initially.
but you were killed and brought back to life, now how does the lifetime warranty work with that?
Kept my receipt.
Hopefully not in your back pocket?
Damn, hanging out for Comfort Craftsman Boots - Wide Fit to go on sale. This post got me excited
No dice. Not sure why they are excluded. Popularity maybe. I took the last pair of Gardeners.
Curse my wide feet
Comfort tambos are wider…
plenty of online resellers that are around this sort of money including shipping every day of the week.
thestabledoor.com.au
bootsonline.com.au
nungar.com.au
portphillipshop.com.au
I need the benefit of free exchange becuase I don't know for certain that they'll fit
go in store to get fitted then go online and purchase. That's what I did
Bought a pair on eBay, fit wasn’t great. I got fitted at RM. I simply took the box into an RM store and they exchanged. The guy I spoke to at the store said just go to any other store (with stock) and tell them it was a gift. Just be sure to buy a pair with a normal box and everything.
IMO, the best way to buy is from eBay (new), when there’s 10% off everything. Managed to get a pair of Comfort Craftsman’s for about $405. You could probably even get away with ordering the non-wide or whatever, but I’d try to get it right the first time.
@Blorgglorg: considered this but feels like a dick move to the shop, and they probably get it all the time. I don't want to pretend I'm buying, waste the time and walk out
Why would to do this? The in-store price will always be greater than the online because they have greater overheads, like more expensive rent and the staff's time that you are wasting. It's unfair on a business to incur costs for them if you have no intention to purchase from them. If that business closes because of behaviour like that, then the people that prefer to buy in-store will suffer too.
RM williams get the profit no matter if you buy it online or instore because they make the boots. so not really a dick move. i went into an RM store and got fitted and they even mentioned that i could buy it online if i wished because i was hesitant at the time.
@bn030687:
Then dont be a dick and just tell them straight up you're intentions. I don't go in pretending to buy, I tell them I want to buy a pair online but am not sure what my sizing is. The staff are all human, they understand what saving $100+ could mean.
@dazweeja: Unfair on a multi billion dollar business? (49.9% is owned by Moët Hennessy Louis Vuitton)
I've done this and they understand. It doesn't take an exceptionally long time to fit a boot.
Avoid nungar if possible. Customer service does not exist.
Myself and a friend had no issues buying from Nungar. Then again, we got what we were after, so didn't require customer service.
I have placed two separate orders with Nungar. Both times I spoke to owner and he was fantastic with advice both on fit and on custom modifications. Even warned me about price rise coming and let me put an order in to lock the price and then sort out the specifics after. It was by phone as I think he probably prefers the old school business approach.
Consistently lower prices than most stores, both physical and online.
I really hope people continue to support an aussie business which provides good service at a great price.
@Gradesbrah:
Fair enough and good to hear.
I didn't know he only liked phone and got crickets back from my emails. Whenever I tried to call to return the incorrect size boots he sent me it rang out or was engaged. Must have just been unlucky.
Ended up dealing direct with RM who swapped for correct size.
I second avoiding nungar. They are real hit and miss with online reviewers but I took the chance with them last year.
Ordered a pair of comfort craftsman’s in chestnut colour, phoned Steve to confirm and he confirmed saying they should be in stock. 4 weeks later the boots had yet to arrive and there was no communication except the automated order confirm email. Called again and couldn’t get through in the phone multiple times. Eventually got through to him on the phone ~2 months later and he said he’d check on the order and call me back - never got a call back. Tried calling again about 3 months later to no avail. Eventually no boots ever arrived and I ended up putting a claim in with Amex to get my money back.
Even if they had arrived after the three months I would not have bought from him again - savings we’re not worth the hassle.
I have bought from Nungar 3 times recently and had no issues, with two pairs being custom. There has been a few reports of order errors or communication errors however with the core range of boots selling $140 - $190 cheaper than RM Williams retail store prices, I think the positives far outweigh the negatives.
@dandandan: That’s great that you’ve had positive experiences but its only fair for everyone to share both the good and the bad. I bought from Nungar hoping it would be a positive turnout too but it wasn’t and I’ll think a bit harder next time before I shop there again.
the Comfort Craftsman is like bread and butter to RM. They really rarely go on sale.
https://everythingaustralian.com.au/boots-shoes/soft-toe.htm… these guys are always good and some time sale
I've never been rich enough to own a cheap pair of shoes.