Running Shoe Companies Love the Minimalist Shoe Movement Because It Makes Them More Money

Yes, the cynical R's that you know and love is back with a new post.

So a couple days ago, as I purchased a spanking new pair of Mizuno Wave Riders, I pondered the fact that they kept getting lighter and lighter with every new iteration. For years, the general group-think has been that lighter shoes are better. Less weight to carry around with every step means less energy expended, faster times, fewer injuries, etc. Makes sense as far as it goes. And of course, with the minimalist running trend (can I just call it a "fad"?) making people insane about lighter and lighter shoes with no drop and little support, that idea that a light shoe is a good shoe has been amplified to 11. Never mind that studies about such things are few and far between and vague on conclusions.

To see why the big running shoe companies, such as Nike, Asics, Mizuno, etc, LOVE the minimalist movement and pander to minimalist thinking, let's estimate some numbers:

-First, all of these numbers were found with about 5 seconds of Google searching, so don't take them as gospel.
-Nike sells around 120 million shoes a year, with almost 90% of them running shoes. I'll be tight with the number and say Nike sells 100 million pairs of running shoes a year. Personally, I think they're trying to make them all lighter, but we'll say of those 100 million, Nike is actively trying to make 80% of their running shoes lighter on a regular basis. So that's 80 million pairs of shoes a year, just with Nike.

Now let's look at the weight of an average running shoe. We're going to look at the Mizuno Wave Rider because that's what I wear and I have all the weight numbers.

-Wave Rider 15 / 11.1 oz / $ 115
-Wave Rider 16 / 10 oz / $115
-Wave Rider 17 / 8.6 oz / $115

Now let's really half-ass this experiment and mix the Nike and Mizuno numbers up. If we assume Nike is making their shoes lighter much like Mizuno, and they are, then over three years, we've dropped the equivalent of 240 million oz. or about 15 million pounds.

Think about that. They're using 15 million pounds less of material. Every year. And that's only Nike. The other shoe companies are using far less material as well.

Yet the cost of the shoes never goes down.

And as someone who worked in purchasing for a manufacturing company, believe me when I say the material costs are a huge driver to the bottom line.

The sad thing is losing a pound of weight off your body would make a much bigger difference than losing an ounce of your running shoes, but we still love to focus on the shoes.

Obviously, I'm no scientist and I have no idea how good all these numbers are, but here's what I think: when you're shopping for your next pair of running shoes, keep in mind that not every change a shoe manufacturer makes is to improve the performance of your shoes. Be a smart shopper out there.

TL;DR
Even if minimalist shoes are fading back away, don't expect the big shoe manufacturers to give up on the "less is more theory." It makes them money.

One Million Nike Fuel Points

Yeah, I don't know what that means either, but apparently, it's a lot.



I don't feel particularly fueled, but there you go...

Nike Free Toy Claw Game with Ashton Eaton and Allyson Felix

I've never been a huge fan of the Nike Free, but how can you not like an ad that combines Ashton Eaton with the greatest game of all time!?!

I'll just leave this here...



"Beeeeee the crane..."

Nike Trims Running Shoe Line Down to One Model

Well, not really, but it sure seems like it.

Trust me here, I'm no Nike-basher; I've worn Nike shoes pretty much my entire life and have never run in anything else. But Nike seems to be going down a very unfortunate path. One that seems to have only one clear objective: profit. To achieve this, every Nike running shoe is starting to incorporate the same features. Why? Well, I'd guess because then the shoes are easier and cheaper to manufacture. Believe me, Wall Street loves that kind of stuff.

In the past, you'd have a shoe like the Structure, which had a big, obvious insert in the insole. If you were a serious pronator, this was the shoe for you.



Now, the Structure has a nearly identical insole to every other Nike running shoe.



Surely, Nike wouldn't take away the one thing that made the Structure the Structure (the medial post), would they? Well, let's hear what the Running Shoe Guru has to say about it. Apparently, yes...yes, they would.

Then there's the Pegasus. A shoe that has been well-loved for decades by runners, including by the R's. That love was not enough. Nike changed up the insole and upper, making it nearly identical to all of its Lunar shoes. Note the similarities.

Here's the old one, with the nice heel insert of different density rubber. And an upper that could actually handle some hard miles.



And here's the new Pegasus. Hmmm, looks like every other stinking Nike shoe lately.



And if you can tell the difference between the new Vomero and the new Pegasus, you must have cat-like senses. Here's the Vomero.



It's damn near identical to the Pegasus.

And then there's the LunarGlide, the LunarElite, and the LunarSwift. Apparently, they have differences. I'd say most people, if blindfolded, couldn't tell the difference. They are all put together the same way with nearly the exact same components. And of course, they look a whole lot like the newer Pegasus, Vomero and Structure as well.



So what's the upshot of all this. Well, I can no longer stick up for Nike against all the "real" runners that say Nike doesn't make shoes for runners. I am now forced to admit that I agree. Nike makes one running shoe now, and if you don't like it, sorry.

I don't like it. So now I'm desperately trying to find a replacement.

First up, the Mizuno Wave Precision.



I just got them yesterday. I'll put some miles in them and return with a more detailed review later.

Adios, Nike. It's been quite a ride.