Hacker News Reader

Comment by figassis | Hacker News Reader

It’s not true that established brands made cheaper products to compete. Their prices remained the same or got higher, but quality still suffered. It’s just greed, no complex reasoning required. I recently bought a gym bag from Nike. Feels super cheap, like I could have gotten it from Aliexpress. The zippers keep locking into the fabric. Feels completely disposable.

Bought a pair of running shoes from Skechers early last year, had to throw away this year because the soles got worn out and I kept getting injured on one foot because I was stepping unevenly.

I bought Skechers because I had once had a pair of sneakers that lasted me the entire 5y of college. No such luck now.

No reason, just greed.

View on HN

I see what you are seeing. I recently replaced some major appliances that wore out after 25+ years. Sales people were quite up front about the replacements from the same name brand now being designed to fail after 5 to 7 years: Cheaper motors, flimsier construction, and especially electronics. I could pay 3x for a higher-end brand but there is no assurance that it would buy a more reliable product.

Skechers is building a sprawling set of office buildings in the expensive town of Manhattan Beach, CA. That money has to come from somewhere.

Skechers was founded in Manhattan Beach. They’ve grown their footprint. MB is a very expensive city for housing but the commercial buildings on PCH aren’t outrageously priced. Sure, more expensive than Lawndale or Gardena, but cheaper than lots of DTLA.

As far as I see, they're knocking down and building afresh. The electric signs on PCH say to expect slowdowns for a few years to come.

Whatever they're not spending on their shoes, they're not spending the money on building design either since the buildings aren't much to look at.

Appliances are a tough comparison. Yes, they will "fail" faster. However, material and energy costs means you are still way ahead in many cases. Older appliances were grossly wasteful in both, by modern standards.

And shoes are an odd one. They have never lasted a long time. Ever. Only shoes that will last, are the ones you don't use often. You can kind of make this work with a rotation of shoes. Having recovery between wearing helps. They are still very much a consumable.

I don't follow. If I have to replace a dishwasher, refrigerator, or washer/dryer every five years as opposed to every twenty, that's a lot of stuff going to a landfill. My old appliances didn't break the energy bank. What I'm hearing and reading is that manufacturers don't want things to last and are designing motors, pumps, and circuit boards with cheaper materials and less metal so they will conk out resulting in either expensive service calls or outright new purchases.

Shoes: I can't tell which brands are which anymore and it certainly looks like they're all made in one factory. I can't find a pair of comfortable day-to-day walking shoes. I have to make the best of what's available which means dealing with the discomfort and pain through trial and error.

You don't have to landfill it every five years, so that is a bit of a straw man. Even with it, though, it takes several modern dish washers to be the same raw material as older ones.

For shoes, I don't know what to tell you. They have always been consumable. And often uncomfortable. Such that I honestly think the catch is we get more sensitive as we get older. Certainly moving more weight.

I can't see how a modern dishwasher has multiple factors less material than the older ones. I get the impression that by cutting materials by 10-20%, the makers get 4x lower lifespan which helps them.

Shoes: A month ago I tried on ten pairs of shoes by six or so brands and felt little difference among them. The only difference was price: ~$60 low end, $130 high end. And these were nothing fancy, just shoes intended for daily use by non-athletes. None were good but I had to pick since my current pair were in tatters. I went with the $60 pair and am futzing with different insoles to get something usable. Maybe there is a magic $300 pair that will do the job.

I'd forego the $300 ones. But I'd also recommend 3 pairs of $60ish shoes. Wear a different one each day. And make sure to get at least 4 miles of walking in. Anything less and it likely isn't the shoes making you uncomfortable.

I have to walk a lot at work. Don't know about 4 miles but I am not sitting at a desk. Rockports used to make great shoes that fit without break-in, were suitable for daily use and in the workplace, and that didn't break the bank. Can't find anything in that style anymore so I have to go with so-called athletic shoes that come in a black finish.

I still have some old rockports. I do remember liking them. I don't remember any being particularly good at heavy use. Quite the contrary, last I tried them on, they were rather bad. Reminds me of trying converse shoes. Memory and age conspire to make things way different.

Four miles is clearly me making up a rough number. My assertion is more that many of us do not have great walking posture or ergonomics. Note I am not saying it is our fault, per se. Just that walking and techniques that lead to long term comfort are surprisingly ignored by most of us. And this has far more impact on things than your shoes will.

Related questions, can you still squat with flat feet? Do you keep your back straight when picking up things? Not just lifting heavy things. When picking a dropped pen off the floor, what do you do?

And obviously, it could very well be in your specific case it is the quality of shoe. I've seen a surprising number of folks where it just isn't. :(

> Related questions, can you still squat with flat feet? Do you keep your back straight when picking up things? Not just lifting heavy things. When picking a dropped pen off the floor, what do you do?

The bad experience with shoes has remained constant the past 10+ years through periods of good conditioning and not so good conditioning. I think my ergonomics are pretty good adjusting for age.

Unfortunately I can't go back and remeasure material and construction quality from years gone by. My perception is that the shoe uppers are now all stiffer and less flexible than years gone by and the the sole materials are hard and have no give. I've gone to multiple shoe stores looking but have come up empty.

Adjusting for age is the tough one. And good luck finding something that works for you!

Try merrell. Had a pair for 20 years, happily bought a new pair last year and quality is still good.

Thanks. Didn't know about them. They have some sneakers that look like they could pass in the work environment. Intrigued by the grey soles on some of them. Remind me of the last pair of comfortable shoes I had (circa 1998) which had similar flubbery gray stuff on the sole. Put a spring in my step that I remember fondly.

I’ve had good luck with Adidas shoes for the day to day; other brands don’t last for me.

Well-made leather shoes and boots can be repaired though. With regular oil/polish and a new sole on every couple of years you can keep a good pair for decades.

I walk, a lot. I've been extremely happy with shoes made by Camper - especially their higher end lines - I have several of their Pelotas (not the lite version) with the oldest nearly 20 years old... and they are still all in great shape. I'd also recommend their Beetle, Peu, Peu Stadium, Bill and Atom lines. They have a wide range of styles and different colors and other options introduced seasonally. Unless you are an investment banker on Wall Street, they have shoes that will work in most office environments and also for casual wear. I do find that their leather lines do last much longer than the other materials, and they are priced accordingly, ranging $120-280+. If that seems like a lot, just wait for their quarterly sales of 30-40% (sometimes as much as 50%) off for the best deals.

Ish. The new sole will require a surprising amount of glue, for one. For two, I maintain that this is only true for non daily shoes. I have yet to see shoes worn daily that stand up to this standard.

The most important thing with shoe longevity is to not wear the same pair every day. Buy two and switch between them - or better yet, get three pairs - and rotate. Give them some time to rest, air out, dry out, etc. between wearings. They will last longer and your feet will thank you.

There's pressure on both sides (competition to lower prices vs take profits from the reputation), but I agree with your take.

Primarily, there has been an extraction of excess profit on consumer goods rather than investment in more efficient production or better products. I have suspicions that this is because of the relative ease of growing a profitable (but easily copied) manufacturing business out of China over the last 20 years, but it really doesn't matter why.

The other example of this is Oil Majors who have very little incentive to invest in new oil production or refining (even though it may be needed for the next decade), and instead take all excess profits to pay out as stock buybacks or dividends. They are in the profit taking stage of the business not the growth and investment stage.

Running shoes are good for about 600 to 700km fyi. After that, the foam breaks down too much to provide adequate cushioning and the right sproing.

Having the external hard rubber last longer than that is just unnecessary weight.

You may just be in better shape than you were in college. Distance stacks up fast and running faster wears shoes out faster.

sauce: I run marathons and go through about 6 pairs of running shoes per year

As a "non-runner" who just needs running shoes for the gym and walking around, I found great luck at Thrift Stores. What I found us a marathoner will buy a pair of Nike's and run that 600-700km until they are "spent" and give them to Goodwill. While they aren't good for running anymore, I found most to have plenty of sole left for 6-7 months of walking and going to the gym, all for around $10.

This is probably not the best for my feet, but when I bust a hole where my big toe goes I feel less bad because I spent $10 and not $100.

Which shoes do you use? I use ASICS GT-2000s and they usually last 350km to 400km, or a year, in my case (a couple 5k to 8k runs per week). I guess different styles of running could also cause different amounts of wear and tear.

Adidas Adios stuff has worked best for me. But I’m also 56kg so they prob last longer than they would for a bigger person.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com