Will UB stand against the test of time? We all know NMDs and

idk

can you repeat the question

you're not the boss of me now

>>12613581
I think these samples look pretty good. The pk seems much more like 1.0 and 2.0, instead of the thin and unsupportive 3.0 pk.
I liked some 3.0 colourways but didn't cop because the pk made the shoe less supportive than a fucking pk nmd. Hope these are better

Yeah because they're an adidas flagship model with new technology and will ride on nostalgia like all the air maxes

>>12613581
The 1.0 will. 2.0 is complete garbage and 3.0 is only slightly better but still shit.

>>12613581
Yes. Boost is next gen tech. Nike still playing catchup.

>>12614284
This. Boost is WAY ahead of Nike now. My buddy wears his roshes everywhere thinking they're nice. But I just got some UBs and he is embarrassed to wear his cheap ass roshes while I wear my UBs

>>12614284
You do know that boost is just rubberized styrofoam right?

It's revolutionary because it cuts costs of sole production 10 fold no more vulcanizing

No more injection molding an expensive ass process

Just expanding foam

UBs are the best looking shoe on the market right now, so clean aesthetic and sick, yeezys and nmds are ugliest shit ever

>>12613581
Will Nike ever recover?

>>12614292
Whatever it is, Boost tech is patented. Nike can't even copy it. Not to mention the Continental soles. Got Nike scratching their heads.

>>12614347
the things is that Nike doesn't have to invent anything (they invented enough shit in the past couple of yours), but it still does and is still in the top 100 most innovative companies, while Adidas is nowhere to be found

Nike is 10 times bigger than Adidas, maybe their sneaker sales are lacking this year, but it's only one piece of the puzzle

it's like comparing Yahoo (Adidas) to Google (Nike), just to be able to imagine the size difference