A Puma out of it's own environment
Written: Jul 22 '02 (Updated Jul 24 '02)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Durability: |
 |
|
| Comfort: |
 |
|
|
Pros: They are used for bowling
Cons: They look like rental shoes and there aren't any womens shoes
The Bottom Line: I don't recommend Pumas. At least not yet. No history and they are but ugly.
|
|
|
| paulv's Full Review: Puma Alley Bowling Shoes 417470 |
The Puma Shoe company has made an ill-fated jump to a world of well known names such as Linds, Dexter and Brunswick. The competition for bowling shoes is basically a 3 horse race and companies like Puma should stick to what they know and are known for, running and other out door sports shoes.
The Puma bowling shoe is an ugly uncomfortable shoe which will never be a top seller. The shoe looks like a rental shoe and most bowlers I know would not be caught dead in rental shoes.
The price range I have seen is from $50.00 to $70.00 and you can buy a pair of rental shoes for under $20.00. Rental shoes wear out quickly on purpose, Pumas haven't been around long enough to know how long they will last.
Rental shoes are stiff until they fall apart. Pumas are uncomfortable out of the box and I wouldn't wear them long enough to find out if they ever loosen up or fall apart. To their credit Puma does use leather products and pig skin to make their shoes, not vinyl and plastics.
I'm convinced the people at Puma were just testing the waters to see if name recognition would be enough to break into the bowling market. I haven't seen any new styles and I haven't seen these shoes in any pro shop. The only places I've seen the Puma bowling shoe is a Dicks Sporting Goods and on the internet. If you want to develop new market why wouldn't you go where the customers are?
I think this was an ill-fated venture and bowlers will spend
less money for a brand name they are used to seeing or more money for a quality shoe with history.
Recommended:
No
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID: paulv
|
|
Location: Sayre, Pa.
Reviews written: 64
Trusted by: 40 members
|
|
|