Why Is The Air Jordan 1 So Expensive? A Breakdown

Sure, the 35-year-old-silhouette is more accessibly-priced than mainline Nike LeBron sneakers, but at $170 USD, it still boasts a higher price tag than other products from NIKE, Inc.

Yet, if you’ve landed on this page, it’s likely that you’re okay with paying retail for a pair. It’s also likely that you recently caught an “L” on the Nike SNKRS app, checked resale prices on every platform between Stadium Goods and your local Facebook group, and (either internally or externally) uttered the question, ‘Why are Jordan 1s so expensive?’ You’ll probably receive different answers depending on where you search and who you ask, but basic economics may help lay a solid foundation.

The price of a product – Jordans included – is determined by the law of supply and demand. While scholars, small-scale entrepreneurs, and business magnates have mulled over the microeconomic theory, the law boils down to the following: A good’s market price is the figure at which quantity supplied equals quantity demanded. In a sneaker context, here are two examples of the premise in action:

Market price is the figure at which quantity supplied equals quantity demanded.

As a business, NIKE, Inc. is continuously shifting its manufacturing in order to maximize profit margins while keeping product at a price point comfortable for consumers. A common belief for those critical of the brand’s release approach for the Jordan 1 is that supplying more pairs will stabilize – or nullify – resale prices. While this strategy would surely impact the after-market, it would not entirely deal with another factor in why Michael Jordan’s first signature sneaker has become so expensive: hype.

Although the Swoosh has been manufacturing products since 1964, the North American sportswear behemoth experienced its best-selling sneaker launch in history on December 14th, 2019. The release in question?:

December 14th, 2019

The Jordan 1 was recognizable, but didn’t have the mainstream “cool factor” that the Air Foamposite had, for example. So for West, Don C, and others of the same mindset, adopting the decades-old silhouette was, to a degree, an act of counter-culture.

Having grown up in Chicago, West was all-too-familiar with Peter Moore’s design, but the same could not be written about most of his mainstream following. Therefore, the sneaker had a somewhat of an “If you know, you know” association.

As other “cool” artists, athletes, and influencers began donning every new release of Jordan 1, the masses took notice and flocked to grab a pair, regardless if the pair had Jumpman logos instead of “NIKE AIR” branding. Another group internalized the model’s newfound popularity and began hunting for older, ideally original, pairs of Brand Jordan’s first sneaker.

[The] silhouette was…counter-culture.

Now that high-profile celebrities like Kylie Jenner have been repeatedly photographed wearing the Jordan 1, demand for the sneaker is unlikely to wane. Therefore, prices are almost guaranteed to increase, too, which will surely make us re-ask ‘Why are Jordan 1s so expensive?’

But, if we take a moment of genuine introspection, would we still want the sneaker if it was accessible and cheap?

The Air Force 1 has proven that good design will always warrant attention, but it’s also enjoyed longstanding cachet from associations to hip-hop culture and New York City street-style.

Will the Jordan 1 ever see the widespread availability of a triple-white Air Force? It’s possible, but unlikely. For the time being, what’s certain is that the first Jordan sneaker isn’t going anywhere. If and how we decide to enjoy it is up to us.

[W]ould we still want the sneaker if it was accessible and cheap?