Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
mr.pure - 27-05-09
Best I can do as I haven't got a scanner.
Always felt that the London Lite was a bit weak on content and the quality of the reporting seems to back this up.
The RRP on the Diamond Superstars was £500 and they're still available, in some places for £450 cos they can't get shot of them.
The plain Superstars were only £80 in Dave Kitson land.
Rubbish.
Not even good for chips as I like a bit of print on mine.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
reid - 27-05-09
At least £200 sounds a more reasonable retail for the diamonds - bit gutted with the selection though. Could've chosen an expensive pair of soops that had some history to them (e.g. 35ths) and represented the "culture" more but alas, that's journalistic endeavours thesedays.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
mr.pure - 27-05-09
Yeah, £200 would be a fair price but they never were that cheap ?!?
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
woody - 27-05-09
"The plain Superstars were only £80 in Dave Kitson land"
We could make a few quid opening a shop there
Good find though mr p even if it is clearly bullshit
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
dregz - 27-05-09
Reckon the reporter's a N*ke head. 50% of the images are N*ke, and alot of the content too.
I'm amazed by the 35th's!!! How can the anniversary release of 35 trainers (with a large number of rare ones included) be condensed into just 3 and a half lines of print????
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
Teaj - 27-05-09
I like the interview with the collector.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
Effel - 27-05-09
All Nike SBs are limited editions. I laughed, by that logic everythings a limited edition until they reissue a colourway/scheme.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
mr.pure - 27-05-09
Pretty sure the reporter is a white pump wearing media hatstand.
Charlie gave him my number cos they wanted Londoners for it but they ended up running with just one collector rather than the 4 they originally asked for.
Seems they wanted to make the angle of the piece about making money off trainers at a difficult time.
Looks like they missed the point of collecting completely and got the facts wrong with it.
They should've spoken to Robrim to see how much money can't be made out of trainer collecting these days.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
flyingcod - 27-05-09
That's why I very rarely read newspapers now, aside from the Observer now and again, there's always an angle that the reporter has gone down, rarely do they print facts these days.
white pumps! I bet they were something by diesel or paul smith.
fc
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
spitey - 27-05-09
nah, they were a piss and beer stained battered pair of converse chucks. the interview was nice ish. the man clearly loves his trainers.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
mr.pure - 27-05-09
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
steve-o - 27-05-09
I love newspapers... its fantastic reading day old news and poorly researched articles based on the writers own narrow minded views
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
woody - 27-05-09
Just read through it again, the reporter obviously knows absolutely nothing whatsoever about collecting any brand, it reads like a primary school report.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
spitey - 27-05-09
johnny needs to try harder. needs more homework.
RE: Crap article in the London Lite yesterday. -
streak - 27-05-09
That's Kish Kash isn't it?
He lives in Aylesbury, not London!