Crocsâ„¢ Shoes: Will it Fly or Flop?

Crocsâ„¢ Shoes is a Boulder, Colorado based company that went from grossing $1,000 in 2002 to $200 million in 2006. It uses a resin formula called Croslite which makes thier shoes comfortable and it said to have orthotic benifits despite the many naysayers. It is also affordable costing just $30. It was a niche shoe for Northwesterners that liked to boat and garden. It is apart of an ugly movement where you would see other companys like Uggs and the Ugly Doll;the owner in which I went to school with. A recent phenomenon is the kids shoe Heelys. That stock (HLYS) is not doing well but Crocs (CROX) is up 217% in a year.

The crocs company plans to launch new stuff this fall with clothing and shoes made with diffrent resin. Will it continue to climb in sales or has it reached its peak?

Would you wear them?

with respect to your thread about the Crocs in how you wanted to talk about the aesthetic phenomenon, I wish to talk about how it will do later this year and beyond.

I am reminded of the earth shoe from the 80’s, a brief but profitable skyrocket.

you mean 70s, and you mean they’re still very-very popular?

70’s/80’s I dont see them much, mostly hemp types, but in a global market almost anything can survive.

Is there a website for the the earth shoe?

An almost 30 year run is not bad.

It would be interesting to see how people would react to the NEW resin they will use.

That would determine if this shoe is a bunch of CROC!

30 year run, not uncommon in niche markets but as % of total market its micro. Ask yourself this question, a royalty of a new nike or one of earth shoe? Now dont get me wrong, lots to be said about micro markets, but you think of them more as life style companies, like being a small vinter not as something that is going to give you the big win.

I think this year will make or break the company. It has to stay true to the ugglyness (original look) and be comfortable at the same time. They are some horror stories involving the resin and how it actually melts, and one kid had a toe removed. There are also anti-croc websites. So with 5 years already in the bag, this year is important. If sales are good then we may have an excellent company on our hands, and one to look at even as a possible investment.

I am dubious, after all your not protected by patents, your “nitch” is after all a fashion type and your reproduceable by competitiors. A bit of brand extension might help, after all in the long run a brand is worth far more than a product.

It will continue to grow. Although everywhere in the USA, it only just got started elsewhere.

An even more incredible part of this story to me is Jibbitz, a “company” (a mom in her basement) that started making little charms (basically lapel pins) that fit in the holes on Crocs. Within 1 year they were doing $2.5 million in sales. And at just over 1 year in business they sold the company to Crocs for $10 million, plus another $10 million if they hit earnings targets. There’s a lesson in there somewhere, and if I could figure it out, I would. Sell out fast to a public company with more money than it knows what to do with would be one lesson. They built this business up and sold it for a hugely overvalued amount (by traditional valuations) before the knockoff artists had even discovered that here was a product ripe for knocking off.

been thinking about this for a while. as much as i personally hate the product, i see it as a prime target to continue based on the market niche that it appeals the core, for the most part, by definition, its a market that really isnt that trend-based or fashion following. moms, dad, families, nurses, etc. sure there is some small blip on the younger trend set, but i see more in the heart of the brand and product as a mass appeal product looking for comfort and something to wear.

i liken it to the continued appeal of birkenstocks sandals (another product i personally dont endorse). they had a big trend hit in the 60s/70s, but have continued mostly because the product was just functional, and non-trend. i’d hardly qualify most birkenstock wearers now as fashionistas.

as the crocs product continues, i predict they will try to ride the trend/fashion way and fail. instead i see a base of consumers that buys the original product and somewhat defines a commodity product like birks or teva sandals.

just my perspective on it.


It seems to be taking off pretty well over here. Main reason for it is the comfort and the kitsch look. Style wise I think it looks great with children especially toddlers. But not on the typical asian feet. It makes our feet look way too big.

It depends on how they want to market themselves further. It is something unusual and new. But I personally do not like the shoes at all, other than it makes very good gifts to friends’ babies.

Well reasoned and consise, nicely done.

if i am not mistaken, the negative publicity for crocs only fuels the need to consume them.

how’s that?

i do not claim to understand how it works although it has something to do with giving an object the aura of taboo.

Some are so “anti marketing” nowadays that people will definitely get some niche thing that gets bad press (especially if it’s already proven to be successful). Lots of folks realize that current trends and pop culture aren’t geared towards them so they’ll look for stuff paris hilton wouldn’t wear, etc.
The exception would probably be the zune. Niche, bad press, but still has the taste of forced marketing (public manipulation to make you buy) and nobody else has one.
Crocks are cheap, anybody can get one, they’re the shoe for everybody. Not for people who want to be like some tv personality. That sits well with regular “non-designery” folks.

Its called buying for utility not status, generaly a wise thing.