Juggernaut
1 Like
Vans posted a comment about COVID19 delaying plans.
Tony surely must have been approached by Adidas/Nike at some point over the last decade so it’s admirable that he’s always opted for skater owned* shoe companies.
*Yes i know Vans is big business but you get the point
Ah nostalgia!
I loved how he had the control and readiness to ollie up that same block into the flower bed after doing a 360 nollie over the light grey wall at 6.02. Lamos is so rad to watch, speed, power, pop, finesse, he has it all. Every time he shows up at a plaza spot or similar, he seems to just take to it like he’s been skating there for years. For me, he’s basically a younger, more athletic version of Kalis.
1 Like
Vans definitely not skater owned. Never was.
Big business/small business does not denote skateboarder ownership.
2 Likes
I know Vans isn’t skater owned in the Lakai/Soletech sense. Hence the asterisk. But Vans are from skateboarding. One could argue about the technicalities of that statement, but they’re undoubtably different from Adidas/Nike.
1 Like
Not so sure. They dabbled with tennis shoes and football boots in the early 80s, which failed big time and I’m pretty suree nearly killed the company. Definitely more of a SoCal surf lifestyle brand that skaters happened to wear and like. Not a fan of Vans myself - different strokes for different folks.
1 Like
I thought they were deck shoes for sailing first?
1 Like
Vans slipons were once prison issued footwear in US prisons
Whoever brokered that deal must have made a few quid.
I’m a big Vans fan…but to say that they are “from” skateboarding isn’t really true, in my opinion. I mean, skaters bought them. They were also buying Nike around the same time.
The skaters adopted Vans and Nike in the 70s and Vans opened up their marketing to them whereas Nike didn’t.
4 Likes
Then you’ll love a Tony shoe as they will be big Vans.
4 Likes
No? You see no distinction between them at all?
I disagree. Vans might not have started out as shoes for the act of skateboarding like say Etnies. But that’s because skate-specific shoes didn’t exist when Vans were starting out, so I image the reason skaters started wearing them at the time was because they coincidentally were suitable. Good timing I suppose and something for Vans as a business to latch on to. But they’ve stayed latched on for 40 years.
I just think, in terms of sports footwear, you say Nike you think basketball, you say K-Swiss you think tennis, you say Vans, you think skateboarding.
2 Likes
Totally.
I agree with all what you are saying here.
This sums it up nicely:
“Yeah course but Nike and Adidas started out humble too- of course the skate heritage sets them apart but the commercial reality is what it is like anyone else”
4 Likes
In a way, I’d put Vans and adidas in the same category and Nike in a different one.
Vans and Nike started supporting skateboarding and stayed even when skateboarding was dead. Whole different story with the swoosh.
Is that the right way round Franc?
Nike are the swoosh.
Did you mean Vans and adidas started supporting…
No mention of Converse here I notice.
Skaters rocked them too and they never made an actual skate shoe for a long time while they did have skateable shoes like the other big companies.
Ah yeah of course Vans and adidas versus Nike.
Had a long day at work… 
2 Likes
