4 ms·

I have a friend who works for a running publication (and is a long distance runner), and she noted that Vibram got kinda lucky with this design. Born to Run wa

by bmj 16y ago

I have a friend who works for a running publication (and is a long distance runner), and she noted that Vibram got kinda lucky with this design. Born to Run was published after they introduced their shoes. While Vibram's marketing department certainly did their part, without the book (and associated media), one wonders if they would be so popular. As an aside, both my friend and her husband (who sometimes runs barefoot) said they didn't like the shoes. Since the glove-like fit actually forces the toes a bit further apart, they prefer lightweight "natural" trainers like these: http://tinyurl.com/yagubt5 http://tinyurl.com/yagubt5

nchlswu 16y ago
I think saying "Vibram got kinda lucky with their design" is taking away from what Vibram achieved with this product. It's no different from any new venture. I've been interested in barefoot running ever since products like Vivo and Nike Free began making headways into the market. The article posted makes it seem like these are competitors introduced after Vibram Five Fingers, but they were all introduced at roughly the same time. The barefoot products mentioned were all introduced at a time period where barefoot running was beginning to gain serious traction. It was excellent timing for all companies pushing barefoot products. Personally, I think alot of Vibram's press has to due with their unorthodox design. Nike's barefoot alternative is a much more traditional shoe design (that I think is more known for its comfort). Vibram is popular due to a quality product with some timing that wasn't just coincidence (they weren't the only company who saw the trend). I think their "honest" and unorthodox design gave was the real differentiator that made them that much more popular than the competition
- bmj 16y ago
  I didn't mean to imply that Vibram produced a mediocre product that took off thanks to a book and a trend. Vibram did do their design homework, and the shoe itself is well-designed. My point is that without Born to Run and the "natural" footwear trend, it's unlikely Vibram's product would have the following it does without that.

by bmj 16y ago

nchlswu 16y ago

I think saying "Vibram got kinda lucky with their design" is taking away from what Vibram achieved with this product. It's no different from any new venture. I've been interested in barefoot running ever since products like Vivo and Nike Free began making headways into the market. The article posted makes it seem like these are competitors introduced after Vibram Five Fingers, but they were all introduced at roughly the same time. The barefoot products mentioned were all introduced at a time period where barefoot running was beginning to gain serious traction. It was excellent timing for all companies pushing barefoot products. Personally, I think alot of Vibram's press has to due with their unorthodox design. Nike's barefoot alternative is a much more traditional shoe design (that I think is more known for its comfort). Vibram is popular due to a quality product with some timing that wasn't just coincidence (they weren't the only company who saw the trend). I think their "honest" and unorthodox design gave was the real differentiator that made them that much more popular than the competition

bmj 16y ago
I didn't mean to imply that Vibram produced a mediocre product that took off thanks to a book and a trend. Vibram did do their design homework, and the shoe itself is well-designed. My point is that without Born to Run and the "natural" footwear trend, it's unlikely Vibram's product would have the following it does without that.