So Chucks were supposed to have been cheap. I heard you could buy a pair in the 70s/80s for $10. How much money was that back then? And also, does anyone know what they originally sold for?
In 1953 they cost $6.95. I’m looking at the ads right now.
ummmm, I think the bigger question is, why are you looking at the ads right now? Did they just happen to be laying around?
He’s been busy and has a lot of reading to catch up on. Everything after 1953 requires a Spoiler tag for SamClem.
Hehehehe. Nice one, Shibb0leth.
I’ve read that Chucks were the official shoe of the NBA for some time. Does that mean they were worn by professional basketballers? It strikes me as kind of weird to find “cheap” and “professional sports shoe” in the same sentence.
I also forgot to mention that this is for an essay I’m writing about sneakers. I hope it’s okay that I’m asking this. I couldn’t find any sources on the affordability of All-Stars so I figured I’d ask anyone here who remembers. It’s a fairly small part of my essay overall.
More specifically, in 1946, “Chuck Taylor” Converse All Stars in 1946 ad were $3.75.
I don’t remember where the “today’s dollars vs. yesteryear’s dollars” converter is, but I don’t think that $6.95 was cheap in 1953. Also note that the price increased about 85% between 1946 and 1953, the immediate post-war boom years.
Depends on how you look at it. When I was buying them in the mid sixties they were $19.95. However, at about that time, having decided that I was a grownup and no longer interested in comics, I traded my entire Spiderman collection (issues 1-76) for a brand new pair of Chucks. I don’t even want to know what those mags would be worth today.
I SAID I DON’T WANT TO KNOW!
Interesting. I pretty much exclusively wear Chucks, and I can find them for $30 for my lowtop blacks if I look around enough before buying them. In a pinch I’ll pay $35. This means that in the last 30 to 40 odd years they’ve only gone up $10 in some cases. Of course I’ve also seen them as high as $100 for some of the limited edition ones, but that’s not important.
Heh-heh…my grandfather was an athletic shoe salesman back in the day. I’ll bet he sold these.
That’s all I got.
On second thought, you’re right. I was thinking of a different kind of shoe. I think Chucks were around ten bucks.
I remember as a kid (early 70’s) wanting Converse All-Stars and having to beg my mother, since they were “high-end” (more expensive then Keds).
Back in the mid/late 70s, low-top Chucks were selling for something around $15. You could get a mid-grade mens dress shoe (like an ordinary shoe from Sears or Pennys) for about twice that.
So if a mid-grade dress shoe is selling for maybe $110 today, that would put basic Chuck’s at about $55. I haven’t priced either dress shoes or Chucks in awhile.
You could buy a tank of gas for less than 7 dollars in 1960. Shoes have risen in price faster than that, though, because the cost of being cool has to be much higher than other sorts of frivolity.
Chucks were cool by 1960, but before that, they were sports wear.
Tris