[ IMAGES: Images ON turn off | ACCOUNT: User Status is LOCKED why? ]

marbury not at practice, in chicago selling shoes
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum
Page 5 of 5 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5 
« Reply To Topic
Author Thread
Erniecat
Posts: 20577
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 1/13/2005
Member: #851
3/28/2007  10:44 AM
Posted by yrubram:

Yo man. Some people just wanna misunderstand on purpose cuz their so blinded by hate. No kid wants to wear pay less shoes. But if you got a pair of affordable shoes and they say starbury on them and the kids know marbury wear these sneakers they will wear them and their parents can afford them. It's a good thing no matter how some want to make it out to be a bad thing.

That's very well said.

This thread is pretty disturbing. I criticize the Knicks as much as anyone (well, almost anyone) and am no big Marbury fan.

But come on. To spin Marbury's shoes into any sort of negative is out of control and ridiculous.

When I was a kid, a teacher of mine once explained how checkbook charity is never a bad thing. In other words, if a wealthy person (or company) donates money only to reap the tax benefits, then so be it. The bottom line is some needy cause is being helped.

So, no matter what Marbury's intentions are (and I have no reason to believe they are anything but pure, to be 100% honest), who cares? He is an NBA star who is helping people (poor and otherwise) to be able to afford nice basketball shoes with the endorsement and the whole nine yards that would otherwise be far too expensive for many people to afford.

Kill Marbury for anything you want on the court. Kill him for that stupid talk show. But don't kill him for doing this.
AUTOADVERT
Nalod
Posts: 72394
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
3/28/2007  10:55 AM
Posted by MS:

The only way I actually really give Marbury credit is if he never sees a dime from this stuff and he uses all the money he would have made to improve inner city communites, set up scholarship funds for kids, and take a more active involvement.

The guy is making 20 million a year and he has probably played as a professional for maybe 82 games in his entire career.

Although what is is doing is admirable, if he is taking a profit off it, he is probably making more than any company would pay him to endorse their product. But, hats off to him if he is doing the right thing with the money helping to make the inner city communities a safer place.

I agree, and have said many times that he should do what Paul Newman does which is donate the profits.

Difference is Newmans products are "premium" products that cost more than similar products. The proceeds I believe to to some childrens charities.

FOr "Starburys", it would not seen well to take a discount product and promote caritable intentions. Basically, donating profits form struggling families might not be seen as positive. Doe these people really want to buy the product knowing they are helping a cause when they MIGHT feel that they themselves still need "help"?

Best thing for him is to likely continue donating money independant of the Starburys to do good, get the positive exposure he craves, and get a tax write off.

They use this "movement" as the bait so many news outlets will pick up on which translates to millions of dollars of free advertising. In a way its manipulative and genious at the same time.

Some people believe this is a genuine good act.

The official Nalod take is its a good thing he is doing, even if its for profit and not exactly honest, but it serves a purpose despite profit intentions.

Think of the money he is pissing by both producing his talk show and BUYING THE TIME TO BROADCAST IT!

Usually networks pay for shows and sell ad space.

But a Marbury doing positive things is better than one that is not. WE hold our stars at a higher level when they proclaim greatness and accept a paycheck of 20million. Thats how it works.

In general I think as his talent has diminished and he has grown up a bit, I find him more attractive as a member of the team. But I am just not buying into him as a "saint".

MS
Posts: 27064
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 7/28/2004
Member: #724
3/28/2007  11:08 AM
Someone like Michael Jordan really falls short in this area, he is somoene that could have really changed the landscape of the industry but profited off kids for years and to my knowledge give little back to the community.
freeskier
Posts: 20124
Alba Posts: 2
Joined: 11/6/2006
Member: #1202
3/28/2007  11:11 AM
Posted by Nalod:

Car companies make "inexpensive" cars and no body hails them as a "movement", Taco bell can sell a taco for .$39 and they are not feeding the poor, and TGF fridays is now downsizing the portions to reasonable levels. Should they be applauded for some benevelent gracious act of corp. selfless practice or admired for savvy manuvering within the market place to satisfy a need in the target market? I say the latter!

$.39 tacos when valued by nutrition are the most expensive item on the menu. Fridays, however, should be applauded because they are taking a huge risk that others have failed at. they are hoping that by serving less food per serving (and taking in less per person) that more people will come. it seems doubtful to me that revenue will increase but it is a well-intentioned attempt
Nalod
Posts: 72394
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
3/28/2007  11:37 AM
Posted by freeskier:
Posted by Nalod:

Car companies make "inexpensive" cars and no body hails them as a "movement", Taco bell can sell a taco for .$39 and they are not feeding the poor, and TGF fridays is now downsizing the portions to reasonable levels. Should they be applauded for some benevelent gracious act of corp. selfless practice or admired for savvy manuvering within the market place to satisfy a need in the target market? I say the latter!

$.39 tacos when valued by nutrition are the most expensive item on the menu. Fridays, however, should be applauded because they are taking a huge risk that others have failed at. they are hoping that by serving less food per serving (and taking in less per person) that more people will come. it seems doubtful to me that revenue will increase but it is a well-intentioned attempt

Gotta leave room for dessert!!!!!!
bigbeast
Posts: 22333
Alba Posts: 1
Joined: 12/21/2005
Member: #1060
3/28/2007  11:46 AM
Posted by BlueSeats:
Posted by Elite:

yall are somethin else and truely fail to see the impact of what Marbury has done with the starbury line

Are you referring to inner-city youth, or afluent suburbanites (where most of the Steve & Barry's are located) or to his image and his personal fortune?

You don't even have to answer any of that. Just answer why Payless. K-Mart, Steve & Barry's, Odd-Lot and others don't get equal praise?

Blue, you sound naive and clueless in this particular area. I grew up in the projects in the Bronx during the 80's when friends of mine were robbing or getting robbed for 100 dollar Jordans. In fact, one kid I grew up with was killed over a pair of sneakers and cazelles (glasses with gold frames).

At the same time, kids in school yards were getting picked on, ostrisized, teased and even jumped because they wore a pair of no-name skips from K-Mart or Payless. The difference here, is Marburys name. The fact that he put his name on a pair of payless sneakers gives it some sort of credibility in the projects. Its the same with Jordan, or Ewing, or Magic etc...its the name that carried the weight not necessarily the sneaker. Addidas was the sneaker of choice in the projects in the mid-80s mainly because Run-DMC said so. Then Jordan put his name on a pair of Nikes and they replaced adiddas.
"Man, who knows with this team." Aguirre.
BasketballJones
Posts: 31973
Alba Posts: 19
Joined: 7/16/2002
Member: #290
USA
3/28/2007  12:02 PM
Posted by EnySpree:

3 pages of non-sense so far. I wonder how much longer it wil go.

LOL!

Just sit back and watch. Could be quite a while at this rate.

https:// It's not so hard.
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
3/28/2007  12:19 PM
Posted by tomverve:
Posted by Nalod:

Car companies make "inexpensive" cars and no body hails them as a "movement", Taco bell can sell a taco for .$39 and they are not feeding the poor, and TGF fridays is now downsizing the portions to reasonable levels. Should they be applauded for some benevelent gracious act of corp. selfless practice or admired for savvy manuvering within the market place to satisfy a need in the target market? I say the latter!

I think the main disanalogy is that for some reason, a big part of what makes basketball sneakers appealing to kids is image, i.e. star power. Kids probably could have bought a pair of Keds or something for $15 before Marbury's shoe, but it wouldn't have been endorsed by an NBA player. There is social pressure on these kids (often financially disadvantaged) to buy into an image rather than just buying into a pair of shoes. By contrast, these kids probably do not feel social pressure to buy caviar instead of taco bell.


I don't see it as a poor analogy. Most people know you can get a much better burger deluxe for the same price at your local Greek Diner, but to some kids it's just not cool to go to "The Acropolis" to get their stuff. McDonald's however is keenly aware of their competition and they know not only do they compete with the local diners, pizzarias, etc, they also compete with Arby's, Jack in the Box, Wendy's, Burger King, Taco Bell, Boston Market, KFC, etc. So they make some "$1 meals" to undercut the competition, which draws people in, in an attempt to continue, reintroduce, or establish brand loyalty.

is that charity?
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/28/2007  12:37 PM
The difference being that kids do not feel pressured to eat at some place that is perceived to be as "cool" as McDonald's but where the meals are $50 a pop.

The insidious thing about the sneaker situation is that (1) kids feel pressure to buy into the image of the sneaker, and (2) often this pressure is working against the existing financial situation (expensive shoes, blue collar wages). I have never said anything about "charity," but for any analogy to this Marbury sneaker thing to hold water, the analogy must meet conditions similar to both (1) and (2).
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
Nalod
Posts: 72394
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
3/28/2007  1:02 PM

So the question is:

Is Marbury "COOL"?
tomverve
Posts: 21407
Alba Posts: 0
Joined: 3/4/2005
Member: #878
3/28/2007  1:04 PM
Evidently he is "cool" enough to sell the shoes. I don't think $15 Tim Leglers would do as well.
help treat disease with your spare computing power : http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/
Nalod
Posts: 72394
Alba Posts: 155
Joined: 12/24/2003
Member: #508
USA
3/28/2007  1:07 PM
I wonder if Nike could do a cheap sneaker?

Call them "Legler Loss Leader"s!

I wonder how Marbury's rep carries outside of NYC?

Is he cool in other cities?
BlueSeats
Posts: 27272
Alba Posts: 41
Joined: 11/6/2005
Member: #1024
3/28/2007  1:08 PM
Posted by tomverve:

The difference being that kids do not feel pressured to eat at some place that is perceived to be as "cool" as McDonald's but where the meals are $50 a pop.

The insidious thing about the sneaker situation is that (1) kids feel pressure to buy into the image of the sneaker, and (2) often this pressure is working against the existing financial situation (expensive shoes, blue collar wages). I have never said anything about "charity," but for any analogy to this Marbury sneaker thing to hold water, the analogy must meet conditions similar to both (1) and (2).


I don't think a $50 meal is the standard that must be met. In the milliea we are discussing lets consider that a few meals a day out of the home at $6-10 each is "expensive". The $1 meal relative to a $6 meal is the same percentage of undercutting as a $15 sneaker is to a $90 sneaker. It's still great value relative to the norm, and it's cheap food that's still cool (assuming McD's is considered cool). I don't care how cheap they make the bait, they could give one free meal to every customer and I still wouldn't consider it charity because it's a marketing tactic.
Page 5 of 5 « First‹ Previous 3  4  5 
« Reply To Topic
marbury not at practice, in chicago selling shoes
Forum Index  ›  NY Knicks Forum

©2001-2025 ultimateknicks.comm All rights reserved. About Us.
This site is not affiliated with the NY Knicks or the National Basketball Association in any way.
You may visit the official NY Knicks web site by clicking here.

All times (GMT-05:00) Eastern Time.

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy