Exclusive: Steven Smith's Perspective on the Rise of Fakes and Replicas in the Sneaker Industry
How do you feel about fakes and people replicating your work?
I mean, you can't control it. It's kind of funny to see that some of them are so blatant. I remember when we were at Reebok, when the Pump was on fire, and we couldn't make enough of them. We were selling 14, 15 million pairs a year, it was crazy back then. I remember seeing a Pump knockoff that came out of Mexico. They made a sandcast mold of the pump ball on the top of the tongue, and it said "The Rump," which I thought was hilarious because the shoe looked like, well, ass. So, I don't know, it's always funny to see the designs being ripped off. Some of them are good, you know, some are so good that even I have to look twice and go, "Is this real?" It's just interesting, you know? That's what makes it interesting in itself—because it's so obvious.
From my point of view, I'm a stickler for authenticity. I consider sneakers to be like fine art. I don't see replicas or whatever as legitimate. But it's interesting, as the person who created them, to see how others react on that side. Is it almost a disrespectful thing? Im not sure it's a nuanced issue that's recently become quite a hot topic of conversation...
Some of these fakes were made in the exact same factory as the originals, but they weren’t licensed or official. Back in the day, stuff would go out the back door of the factory in the '80s and early '90s, and you’d see it on the black market streets in Korea or Taiwan. You’d find a Reebok upper stuck on a Nike bottom—just bits and pieces that people would sneak out every night and then stick together. It was hilarious. Some of the stuff you’d see made you go, "Oh my God!" I should’ve bought some of them back then and kept them in an archive just for shits and giggles.
It was like going to places like California to find the worst and the best knockoffs you could. Some of the Red Octobers coming out of China are pretty good—I was even trying to buy a pair to compare.
How can fakes one-up each other? They can’t come out with the next greatest thing. We (The designer) made it interesting. We made it cool, made it fun, made it something kids wanted to be a part of. And I think that’s the key to remember. You can just make another sneaker, sure, but I’ve always seen it as an object of desire. I want to create something that people see as valuable and well-designed—something that looks great, matches what you’re wearing, and makes you feel good. That’s what a sneaker should do.
A shoe isn’t just a shoe. I don’t see it as an appliance—it’s not like a microwave where you just throw in your tea to heat it up. I want it to be special, something you can show off like an art piece. That’s my point of view. If we didn’t have that perspective, it would have just been another shoe, a knockoff of a knockoff, boring and uninspired.
The sneaker industry is highly competitive, with innovations constantly happening, often separated by mere millimeters in technology. But I believe that’s a result of what we did in the '80s and '90s when we created a battle between brands. We fought to be number one, to claim that shelf space. People often forget that at one point in '91/'92, Reebok actually passed Nike. We were the biggest brand for about nine months, and then we stumbled a bit, and Nike took the lead back. But those were the glory days when you could proudly say, “Hell yeah, we’re number one.” It was an incredible feeling, like being an Olympic athlete winning the gold. We had the gold medal that year.