Sneakers are a multi-billion dollar industry and that’s just at the retail level. Within the past ten years, a secondary market for shoes has emerged as consumers have become more and more willing to purchase their favorite new pair of kicks at premium prices. This has led sneaker reselling to become an extremely popular side hustle. Since I was young, I always loved shoes. As I’ve grown, sneaker buying and selling has become a hobby of mine. I aim to explore which shoes have the most hype, which shoes garner the most profits, and what shoes ultimately flop and are sold below retail.
Gone are the days of waiting in line outside of a store to grab a new pair on release day. Now users across the United States and world can easily join draws and log on to attempt to purchase coveted shoes at retail. Stock X is an easy and secure way to purchase and sell shoes.
variable | description | data_type |
---|---|---|
brand | The brand of the sneaker | categorical |
model | The model or name of the sneaker | categorical |
colorway | The colorway of the sneaker | categorical |
retailPrice | The original retail price of the sneaker | numeric |
releaseDate | The date the sneaker was released | date |
deadstockSold | The number of deadstock pairs sold on the StockX platform | numeric |
averageDeadstockPrice | The average price of pairs sold on the StockX platform | numeric |
Below are summary statistics comparing average sale prices on StockX vs retail prices directly from stores. On average a shoe sold on stockx is $60 more than from a retailer. The standard deviation of sale prices on stock x is about 85 dollars more than that of retail shoes. In general, retail prices do not exceed $225 dollars and dip below $80 for adult shoes. Whereas StockX high standard deviation is driven by coveted releases which resell for hundred to thousands of dollars. This is seen in the drastic difference in maximum price between the two.
mean | std_dev | min | max |
---|---|---|---|
200.9155 | 141.4894 | 50 | 2319 |
mean | std_dev | min | max |
---|---|---|---|
142.2161 | 50.29425 | 40 | 580 |
This graph shows pairs sold by month. This relates primarily to the
season. As March and December make up the largest sales by month and
represent the winter and spring seasons. This trend is also seen in the
cyclical nature of May to July and August to October, as every three
months or so companies release their styles for next season. December is
also a popular time for sneaker purchasing due to the holidays.
item | brand | retail | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | totalsales |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) | Nike | 110 | 233962 | 191 | 44686742 |
Jordan 11 Retro Cool Grey (2021) | Jordan | 225 | 115541 | 317 | 36626497 |
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) | Nike | 110 | 135108 | 261 | 35263188 |
Jordan 1 Retro High OG Patent Bred | Jordan | 170 | 59732 | 330 | 19711560 |
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) (Women’s) | Nike | 100 | 109763 | 179 | 19647577 |
Nike Air Force 1 Low ’07 White | Nike | 90 | 160119 | 115 | 18413685 |
Jordan 1 Low Fragment x Travis Scott | Jordan | 150 | 12730 | 1417 | 18038410 |
Jordan 4 Retro Lightning (2021) | Jordan | 220 | 62965 | 285 | 17945025 |
adidas Yeezy Slide Onyx | adidas | 60 | 112758 | 145 | 16349910 |
Jordan 4 Retro White Oreo (2021) | Jordan | 190 | 47020 | 346 | 16268920 |
Six of the top ten shoes by sales have over 100,000 deadstock pairs sold. This indicates that this shoe was a larger general release but was still highly coveted by consumers. The clear most popular shoe here being the Panda Dunk Low, which is seen twice in the top 3. While it may look like a double entry, this shoe has been released multiple times which explains the extreme difference in average resale price between the two. When they were released in their first batch, they were extremely popular and were more limited.
item | brand | retail | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | totalprofit | avg_profit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) | Nike | 110 | 135108 | 261 | 20401308 | 151 |
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) | Nike | 110 | 233962 | 191 | 18950922 | 81 |
Jordan 1 Low Fragment x Travis Scott | Jordan | 150 | 12730 | 1417 | 16128910 | 1267 |
Jordan 11 Retro Cool Grey (2021) | Jordan | 225 | 115541 | 317 | 10629772 | 92 |
Jordan 1 Retro Low OG SP Travis Scott Reverse Mocha | Jordan | 150 | 9617 | 1195 | 10049765 | 1045 |
adidas Yeezy Slide Onyx | adidas | 60 | 112758 | 145 | 9584430 | 85 |
Jordan 1 Retro High OG Patent Bred | Jordan | 170 | 59732 | 330 | 9557120 | 160 |
Nike Dunk Low Retro White Black Panda (2021) (Women’s) | Nike | 100 | 109763 | 179 | 8671277 | 79 |
Nike Dunk Low White Black (2021) (W) | Nike | 100 | 60174 | 234 | 8063316 | 134 |
adidas Yeezy Slide Pure (First Release) | adidas | 55 | 53792 | 203 | 7961216 | 148 |
This table highlights the shoes with the highest total profit garnered. For larger scale resellers, a blend of accessibility in the form of released quantities and resale value are of the greatest importance. The Yeezy Slide onyx only retailed for $60 but fetched a resale price on average of $145 which is a percent increase of 141%.
item | brand | retail | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | avg_profit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jordan 1 Retro High Off-White University Blue | Jordan | 190 | 1285 | 2319 | 2129 |
Jordan 1 Retro High Travis Scott | Jordan | 175 | 2253 | 1855 | 1680 |
Jordan 1 Retro Low OG SP Travis Scott | Jordan | 130 | 890 | 1804 | 1674 |
Jordan 1 Retro Low OG SP Travis Scott | Jordan | 130 | 890 | 1803 | 1673 |
Jordan 4 Retro Off-White Sail (W) | Jordan | 200 | 1271 | 1575 | 1375 |
Jordan 1 Retro Low OG SP Fragment x Travis Scott | Jordan | 150 | 4062 | 1515 | 1365 |
Jordan 4 Retro Off-White Sail (W) | Jordan | 200 | 2553 | 1562 | 1362 |
Nike Air Max 1 Travis Scott Cactus Jack Wheat Lemon Drop | Nike | 160 | 199 | 1514 | 1354 |
Jordan 1 Low Fragment x Travis Scott | Jordan | 150 | 12730 | 1417 | 1267 |
Jordan 1 Retro Low OG SP Travis Scott Reverse Mocha | Jordan | 150 | 9617 | 1195 | 1045 |
This table highlights the top 10 shoes by average profit per pair. This table is entirely made up of shoes that involved collaboration with another brand or individual. This market has been dominated by collaborations with luxury brands like Off-White and Sacai and musical artist Travis Scott.
This bar chart illustrates the power of collaboration within the sneaker market. Travis Scott collaboration Jordan 1’s fetch nearly $1000 more than the average Jordan 1 on StockX.
item | brand | retail | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | avg_profit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
OFF-WHITE Out Of Office OOO Low Tops White Black White | OFF-WHITE | 580 | 387 | 393 | -187 |
Common Projects Original Achilles White | Common Projects | 415 | 3237 | 246 | -169 |
Common Projects Original Achilles White | Common Projects | 415 | 1677 | 269 | -146 |
Alexander McQueen Oversized Ivory Black (W) | Alexander McQueen | 490 | 1154 | 371 | -119 |
Nike Air VaporMax 2020 Flyknit Summit White (W) | Nike | 220 | 1862 | 108 | -112 |
Nike ZoomX Vaporfly Next% 2 Black Metallic Gold Coin | Nike | 250 | 825 | 154 | -96 |
adidas Ultra Boost 1.0 DNA Triple Black | adidas | 200 | 226 | 105 | -95 |
Nike ZoomX Vaporfly Next% 2 White Pink | Nike | 250 | 338 | 155 | -95 |
Nike Air VaporMax 2020 Flyknit Newsprint | Nike | 220 | 1389 | 125 | -95 |
Nike Air VaporMax 2021 FK Black Metallic Silver (Women’s) | Nike | 200 | 1202 | 107 | -93 |
These are the shoes with the highest average losses per pair. These shoes are high in retail price and no shoe had over 5000 pairs sold through StockX. This is particularly interesting as the list consists of luxury brands and shoes from Nikes vapor line.
Considering Nike and Jordan’s domination of the previous tables, it should come as no suprise that both Nike and Jordan are doubling the next closest competitor in Adidas. Adidas also has a significant lead on other competitors within the graph, highlighting the disparity within the sneaker industry currently. Nike and Jordan has a major advantage in sales and profit. This highlighting their ability to release in large quantities, as well as focusing on coveted limited releases that fetch massive prices on StockX. While Nike and Jordan product breadth is superior, these brands ability to generate hype surrounding releases is what truly seperates them.
Jordan and Nike are both owned by Nike, and they primarily release their best shoes via their app Nike SNKRS. Users are able to view Nike’s upcoming release calendar, browse shoes currently available within the app, and most importantly purchase shoes as they release. This is offered in 2 ways via Nike SNKRS. The first is through a draw process, which gives the users ten minutes to enter “the draw” and within the next hour a notification of whether or not the user “got ’em”. This is for drops with the most hype to ensure users have some level of access. The other is a standard purchase at the time of release.
This process does not always run smoothly and due to the sheer volume of users, wins are rare. In gathering tweets surrounding the app itself and some coveted releases, I believe that the biggest releases will garner negative public sentiment as users desire to purchase these shoes at retail elicits anger as retail prices soar.
##
## Attaching package: 'rtweet'
## The following object is masked from 'package:purrr':
##
## flatten
## Warning: package 'httpuv' was built under R version 4.1.3
## Saving auth to 'C:\Users\Jackson\AppData\Roaming/R/config/R/rtweet/default.rds'
## Joining, by = "word"Joining, by = "word"Joining, by = "word"Joining, by =
## "word"Joining, by = "word"Joining, by = "word"
Nike SNKRS has a negative total sentiment, which stems from the nature of the app itself. Users have strong feelings when the results of the draw are released. Win and won are the most common words in positive tweets regarding SNKRS as wins are few and far between for most. The most common words eliciting negative sentiment surround losing.
item | brand | retail | release | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | avg_profit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Jordan 1 Retro High OG Chicago Lost and Found | Jordan | 180 | 2022-11-19 | 31685 | 420 | 240 |
The Lost and Found Jordan 1’s were the first Chicago colorway installment of the Jordan 1 High since 2015. However when conducting sentiment analysis surrounding these shoes, the reaction is negative. This is largely due to the high demand of the shoe as users could not access the draw and did not get pairs. This negative emotion did not have any affect on pricing as pairs sold on StockX go for over $400 on average.
id | item | brand | retail | releaseDate | deadstockSold | averageDeadstockPrice | avg_profit |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2000 | Jordan 1 Retro High Lucky Green | Nike | 180 | 2023-04-15 | 5100 | 193 | 13 |
This example highlights the same shoes, only in different colors. The hype surrounding the Lost and Found Jordan 1, including the high resale value and profits ultimately led to a negative sentiment. Consumers were eager to get their hands on this shoe and expressed their displeasure via twitter. The Jordan 1 Lucky Green, received positive sentiment, although anyone reselling would surely take a loss. This meaning that those who wished to purchase the shoes for themselves had the ability to, and those that didn’t had no feelings that the missed out. For those that had only seen the sales data, they would almost certainly guess that the Jordan 1 Lost and Found would have the higher psoitivity score due to its high sales volume, resale price, and average profit. However this relationship is inverse due to the larger population of consumers that aren’t granted access to purchase, and the general negative sentiment toward the SNKRS app itself. Which would lead consumers to complain, especially due to the level of attachment people have to popular and nostalgic shoes like the Jordan 1 Lost and Found.