Not that I know of... I really wanted to like these shoes but a 10mm drop is insane unless I'm running a 10k.

Also.. really wish NB would make a fresh foam around 9oz that has minimal/moderate stability. Something like the 1500. That's the one shoe they are missing in their lineup.

You definitely hit it on the head. I remember first hearing about Newton and it was like maybe 4 models (Distance, Gravity, Motion, and those original clunky ones). The company had a nice Niche, but tried to expand so quickly. It'll be a missed entity, their Newton store in Boulder is amazing. I hope they find their footing, it seems like there is a space for them in this market.

---

Team Zoot 2023

I don't know anything about the financial agree between them and IM, but I remember doing body marking at the first IM Chattanooga and commenting to someone that Newton must be giving out free shoes before they got to us because it seemed like nearly everyone was wearing them. It was crazy.

I've heard the figure was around 500k for the sponsorship, which could be pretty catastrophic if it didn't yield increased sales.

---

Team Zoot 2023

Newton took a shoe that lots of people liked, tried to turn it into a shoe that everybody liked, and wound up with a shoe that nobody likes.

Stupid expensive. Why would anyone pay $170-200 for a shoe when I can buy any other pair of shoes for close to $100? makes no sense. I didn't mind them when I tried a pair, but wouldn't say they were anything special.

---

OlympicHopeful.com - Interviews with aspiring Olympians | Strava
Supported by: Skechers|Zwift|Squirt Lube|TYR|Rubber Ducky Sunscreen|Riplaces|MultiSport Canada|Joshus Bikes
“More often than not bad luck meant bad plans” -Joe Abercrombie

500K cash without increased sales shouldn't have hurt them. There were a lot of other large-scale marketing operations that they were attempting at the same time (Boston expo activations, for instance). But, IMO, the big hit was the cost of development and outlay on all of the new models.

They went, in a short period of time, from a core model line-up of 5 shoes per gender to now, looking at the site, it's roughly 12. That's a massive expansion. Especially when you go from essentially four out of those five shoes being built on the same tooling with just different adds of blown/carbon rubber to the mix, to now a whole range of "POP" where you don't see the same economies of scale at play.

IMO it's too late for them to try and go back to the original model, but I'd start by pairing down on the special editions, the All-Weather editions, and eliminating 3-4 "core" shoes to get the line back to something manageable.

I'd then be looking at how you could possibly integrate TPU (Boost/EverRun for those not speaking shoe foam-ese) into your top-end of the line-up; it's allowing Adidas and Saucony to get at your longevity case. Beat them back at it.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

K-Swiss too, they've pretty much given-up on running shoes.

---

29 years and counting

If you are looking for a comparable Boost relative to FF Zante i'd go with the Boston

---

-------------------------
Dave Latourette
http://www.TTENation.com

100%.

The four-lug models were fantastic. The five-lug models feel like a lot of other shoes. When that happened, I didn't need to keep paying $175 when a shoe with a comparable feel could be had for $130 at the most, and usually much less.

If they bring back the 2012-2013 four-lug model Gravity, I'm all in.

Despite the changes, I don't understand why they keep charging $175 for the Gravity. I understood it when the shoes were new technology and seemed novel. Now I don't see any justification for that price.

100% to this, any Gravity model & Distance from 2010 - 2013 & I am back with the 5 lugs just sucks !! bad

I have always wanted to try newton, but since they have models that to my eye and short reading of the shoe info can't tell them apart. Also they never did much on the color part and gave many options. I still wouldn't mind trying them one day, but they need to do a better job in my eye differentiating which shoe is used for what. Then again I haven't seen them much in person so trusting online is also risky on a technology.

Regardless we have seen it time and time again, not just in shoes. Company makes a huge investment with Ironman, sales and brand awareness rise rapidly. Company tries to dial back on the *advertising dollars* thinking they have *won* their core audience and company dies a slow death. It is a lesson in the power of the Ironman brand and how fickle customers can be.

---

---

Save: $50 on Speed Hound Recovery Boots | $20 on Air Relax| $100 on Normatec| 15% on Most Absorbable Magnesium

Blogs: Best CHEAP Zwift / Bike Trainer Desk | Theragun G3 vs $140 Bivi Percussive Massager | Normatec Pulse 2.0 vs Normatec Pulse | Speed Hound vs Normatec | Air Relax vs Normatec | Q1 2018 Blood Test Results | | Why HED JET+ Is The BEST value wheelset

It would be interesting to see someone from Newton actually chime in here and I am probably totally being "snowed" but I spoke with someone at Newton who claims that they will be around for a long time to come ......................... ???
Guess there's a sucker born every minute 'ey?

You either have inside information or a good insight because the 2017 models of newton, if they make it to the shelves, feature a layer of that TPU underneath the insole.

---

Owner at TRIPRO, The Netherlands

All educated guesswork.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

Again ............ maybe I'm just gullible but I am being told that 2018 models are already being designed and tested as we discuss their demise so ........................... ???
Guessing / hoping someone got some bad info. and it's not me ! ;-)

The gestation period for a pair of shoes is roughly 18 months. So yeah, early testing should be happening right about now for SP18. That way they can start pre-booking mid-June thru Aug 1.

There's zero chance they go back to four lugs, guys. It's viewed as inferior. And, well, I'm inclined to agree with that stance. There's other ways to get the feel of the original line-up back without going backwards on that front.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter

500K cash without increased sales shouldn't have hurt them. There were a lot of other large-scale marketing operations that they were attempting at the same time (Boston expo activations, for instance). But, IMO, the big hit was the cost of development and outlay on all of the new models.


Ryan,

What about the timing of it all? Was Newton just a bit off with their timing? They first had a run at the tri market, because of their roots and some sponsored athletes (Alexander) and I sensed they did reasonably well out of the gate.

But then A LOT happened in the running shoe business in general, while Newton was focusing heavily on the triathlon market. Having success for a brand in triathlon does not mean success outside of triathlon, and that was another challenge that Newton faced and bad timing - just as all the trail show companies and a bunch of other brands all jumped into running, it was suddenly a VERY busy and complicated business. REALLY hard to make some headway. The reality is the tri market is VERY small compared to the overall size of the specialty run market.

And now, more bad timing, as triathlon is down, and running is flat! Hard to make inroads and increase sales, anywhere!

---

---

Steve Fleck @stevefleck | Blog

High price is their selling point.

Although triathletes adopted Newton, one of the biggest things that helped Newton out at the start was distributing exclusively through run specialty/specialty sporting good dealers (I say this because we at City Sports landed exclusivity out of the gate versus Marathon Sports...a bit of a coup at the time!) We were able to help tell the story of the brand a fair bit.

As they continued to develop and refine the original product line-up, they sustained controlled growth through steady futures and limited at-once availability. It helped keep their pricing high; they never had to slash pricing to move inventory at any point.

Right around 2013/2014, when they moved to the Pop 1/2/3 model, is when it all really fell apart. Massive investment in product, sponsorship, and starting the flatter trends in the run/tri industry. I don't think it was so much related to the marketing end of the spectrum, but overly ambitious product line expansion to compete with the Asics/Brooks/Saucony's of the world. And I think that was all driven out of the Fireman Capital investment; they wanted to have a success story similar to the Deckers/Hoka relationship (which has been fantastic for all parties involved.)

Had they maintained existing product lines (and yes, I do think the 5-lug move was right), and maybe introduced just the Kismet/Fate/Boco...they'd have had a more sustainable long-term line-up.

I also don't think it helps them out retaining the Distance Elite in the line-up. Make a lighter 5-lug Distance that retains the rear tooling of the four-lug model. Solves the issue for 80% of folks.

---

----------------------------------
Editor-in-Chief, Slowtwitch.com | Twitter