In the world of sportswear, there are two kinds of shoes. The first kind includes the pricey, highly regarded Nikes, Adidas and Reeboks. The second kind includes the less expensive Converse, Payless shoes, brown paper bags to be tied around ankles or anything else that doesn't carry a name-brand logo. Despite their wallet-friendly price tags (or, perhaps, in light of them), those shoes would make any well-to-do athlete in his or her right mind scoff.
That is to say, these two distinct categories existed until fall 2006, when Stephon Marbury released his line of allegedly high-quality basketball shoes with an unmistakably low price. "Who is Stephon Marbury?" you might ask. Well, he is a two-time NBA All-Star and the starting point guard on the New York Knicks. To keep prices low, Marbury receives no money for endorsing his shoes, and the shoes' advertising budget is bare bones. Although his fame and talent pale in comparison to Michael Jordan's, Marbury will attest that his shoes do not.
But, just how cheap are these shoes? $60? $30? No. They sell for $15 or less (just three easy payments of $4.99, operators are standing by).
Conventional wisdom might tell you these shoes must be cheap pieces of crap. I mean, you might as well stick to the paper bags around your ankles, right? That was my assumption at first. But then I read that in an interview with ABC News, Marbury said his shoes are made of the exact same materials as higher-priced performance shoes. In fact, Marbury puts his money where his mouth is and wears his shoes during NBA games. I mean, either he's shamelessly sacrificing his performance to promote his sneakers, or he's on to something big.
Although I don't know anyone who's actually tried Marbury's shoes yet, and I doubt Nike shareholders are losing much sleep because of the competition, this still manages to fly in the face of the belief that higher price means higher quality. This belief, thanks to effective advertising campaigns by Nike and Reebok, is particularly prevalent in the shoe business. It's no secret much of what justifies the expensive price tags are noteworthy advertisements and endorsements by athletes.
But brand-name products rule more than just shoes. A green polo shirt with a tiny logo of an crocodile can easily sell for five times as much as a nearly indistinguishable green polo shirt without the logo. A Toyota getting similar reviews and ratings as a Hyundai in the same car class will easily sell for thousands more. Softsoap hand soap priced at $1.99 will fly off the shelves faster than CVS hand soap priced at $1.49, even though a quick peek at the label will show you they both contain the exact same ingredients.
What's the deal? Is this rational behavior? Personally, I try to be impervious to brands and hype, but even then there's a small but undeniable part of me that wants the stuff with the recognizable logo and the commercials on TV, regardless of whether it's of a discernibly higher quality. I mean, nobody wants to be that guy who refuses to buy brand products just because they're a tiny bit more expensive or because "it's all the same stuff."
I can just picture the penny-pinching, out-of-touch dad who buys X-brand Frooty O's for his kids (in an over-sized plastic bag, of course) when what they really wanted was the Froot Loops they saw on TV between segments of SpongeBob SquarePants. Who is wrong here? The kids who want a certain cereal just because they saw it on TV, or the father who won't spend an extra dollar to buy it for them?
Whichever side you choose is up to you. To many people, a recognizable brand is a sign of a quality product that will be respected by their peers. As for the rest of us, well, we'll try not to laugh on the basketball courts when we cross you up wearing a $15 pair of sneakers.
Daniel is a Cavalier Daily Life columnist. His column runs biweekly on Tuesday. He can be reached at mcnally@cavalierdaily.com.