How to judge whether a sneaker is soft or not?
In advance, Siwei didn't write this article to force everyone to believe what I said. Everyone has the right to choose whether to believe it or not. If you think Four-dimensional Shoes Review looks sincere and objective, you may wish to read this article carefully. If you think the four dimensions are not so credible, you can read them and do the math.
There are many evaluations of sneakers on the Internet, and there are also a few official WeChat accounts and video broadcasters who do evaluations. The significance of evaluation of sneakers is to let buyers know about the products before buying, so as to decide whether to buy them. To some extent, a high-quality evaluation of sneakers can maximize the consumption value and help many basketball fans who may not have so much research on sneakers to make choices. However, it is precisely by taking advantage of the reference needs of consumers that some online platforms and self-media have become the main battlefields for brands to play soft advertisements.
Siwei doesn't think there is anything wrong with these self-media that play soft and wide for the brand. If they have an interest in the brand, it is their duty to play soft and wide. In the final analysis, consumers choose to believe those soft and broad, no wonder others. So, how do we judge whether a sneaker evaluation or an evaluation platform is authentic?
Evaluation frequency is too high.
If an evaluation is supported by only one person, but the evaluation frequency is extremely high (for example, one article every two or three days), then the probability of being soft or untrustworthy will be higher. The evaluation of some sneakers is purely theoretical, and it will mislead consumers if they are not given enough running-in and adaptation time. If it is only static analysis, the high frequency is understandable, but the actual evaluation is not the kind that can be introduced in a day or two. In the past five months, we only tested five pairs of sneakers (the rest of the evaluation articles are from translators), but the average evaluation time of these five pairs of sneakers is at least two weeks, which makes us really understand the actual combat performance of a pair of sneakers. Take the last four-dimensional test of Andemakuri 4 as an example. I mentioned the word "running-in" many times in my article, and the actual combat experience has indeed improved with the increase of running-in time, which I can't feel after playing for one or two games.
Comply with the general trend
This evaluation is basically a statement of the public's impression of a pair of shoes. These articles are not necessarily soft, but they are really not nutritious for readers. There is not much difference between reading and not reading. It is very important to evaluate the personal experience of people. If you don't share your real experience and just follow the brand positioning and description, this article will become meaningless. Some soft articles will put in good words for sneakers in some aspects, but they are vague about their own shortcomings. There are no perfect combat shoes in the world, and every pair of shoes will have shortcomings. If all you see in an evaluation is that these shoes are good, then this evaluation may be suspected of being soft.
Ambiguous
Some soft articles obscure the shortcomings of sneakers, or blur the language, making them sound clear instead of shortcomings, making it difficult for you to pick out their mistakes. This ambiguous language style appears in many brands' soft articles, which expresses the advantages to the maximum, but only scribbles out the shortcomings so as not to offend the brands. Soft articles under the direct control of brands are of course one of the important ways to promote products. Many people will be interested in products after reading them, thus igniting their desire to buy. But consumers should be clear that buying and selling is buying and selling after all, and neither the navy nor the soft text is the truest embodiment of the product.
Evaluate sneakers only by configuration
There are some similarities with the evaluation of a theory. The author of an article is particularly imaginative, and he can talk nonsense just by looking at the configuration of sports shoes. For example, addias Harden Vol. 1 was one of the hottest basketball shoes last year, and an article blew these shoes wonderfully. Although in Siwei's eyes, it was indeed one of the strongest actual combat shoes last year, the toe-sticking and forefoot characteristics of sneakers in the primary stage paid more attention to the ground-sticking rather than softness, which was directly ignored by many soft writers, just because they saw the configuration of knitted uppers and full palm power and then "compiled" an evaluation according to their own imagination. It is true that a person who wears many sneakers and sees the configuration will have a general concept of performance. However, if he wants to write an evaluation that suggests to consumers, his personal feeling is not desirable.
old wine in a new bottle―the same old stuff with a new label
This kind of soft text is the easiest to distinguish, almost repeating the product description of the brand official website, and he will say what official website says. With all due respect, this kind of soft text can't achieve the promotion effect. If I were a brand, I would rather use navy blue and more obscure soft text to promote products. Soft writing is not a bad thing, after all, the brand is profitable. For the vast majority of consumers who don't understand shoes, soft text can easily make them take the bait; However, for consumers who have little knowledge of sports shoes, it is still a skill to identify soft articles and choose reliable sources.
Once again, Siwei does not force anyone to agree and believe my opinion, nor does it want to attack any evaluation platform that publishes soft articles. It just wants to let everyone know how to judge soft articles from an evaluator's point of view and avoid wasting money by trusting others wrongly. If the "four-dimensional shoe review" is already a good place to refer to the information of sneakers in your heart, thank you!