In November, we headed down to Melbourne to celebrate the Sneaker Freaker x G-Shock collaboration – a watch named ‘Nightowl’ that sold out within minutes. While we woke up rather dusty the next morning, we shook off our hangovers and headed over to Sneaker Freaker HQ in Fitzroy for a candid chat with head honcho Simon ‘Woody’ Wood.

Anybody with even a remote interest in sneakers knows that Sneaker Freaker is like a bible for footwear enthusiasts. That’s why I had high expectations for the amount of cool shit that would be housed within SF HQ, and I wasn’t disappointed. Heading to their office is a next-level experience in itself – there’s toys, gadgets and sneakers piled in every corner. A pair of Gucci X New Balance 574s crafted by Dapper Dan sit elegantly on the shelf. A framed, oversize Air Max poster leans against the opening wall. Adidas deck chairs give the interior an island vibe. I feel like a kid in a candy store.

After fiddling around with stuff and annoying everyone in the office for awhile, it’s time to knuckle down for a chat with Woody – the captain manning Sneaker Freaker since 2002. We sat down to talk about the ‘Nightowl’ watch and how it came into fruition:

How long has the G-Shock collaboration been in the pipeline?

It’s hard to say how long it’s been in the pipeline, but it’s something that I’ve wanted to do for a long time. Sneaker Freaker has collaborated with all the major sneaker brands and we’ve done other projects outside of just sneakers – but I’ve been a Casio and G-Shock fan for decades. Sneakers is my business, but when you turn a hobby into a business, you replace your hobby with something else… Collecting watches led into a relationship with Casio and G-Shock.  We’ve been working with them for awhile on general marketing stuff, but to get a collaboration with an Australian company has been a bit of a challenge. I think it took them a little while to understand how we were hooked into the global community. That’s the long answer, the short answer is five years.

I don’t think people understand that to make a product, it can take 18 months to two years. By the time you do some initial discussions, a drawing, make the product – I think it took twelve months. But yesterday, it finally released and you get to enjoy the hard work. The best part is seeing the reaction from people and making something that you know people love, that they want. It’s powerful stuff. To put my brand next to G-Shock – as a fan, that’s the ultimate. I never thought I’d be designing shoes and in control of that, so to branch into G-Shock has been a really good chance for us to show we are really good at making products that can make people go crazy.

You’ve stated your preference for bulkier G-Shocks. How do you think they’ve remained a staple in a time when sleek minimalism has dominated fashion for the past few years?

I find minimalism sort of boring to be honest. When it’s done really well, it has to be perfect, as soon as you have one thing out of place it disrupts the whole aesthetic. If you look at those periods where people did dress flamboyantly – the 70s or something – it’s funny to look back on those times. The thing with G-Shock is, the watches are big but they also have a 5600. They have a huge variety of watches. I think the King of G-Shock is their biggest one, and you have to have a serious wrist to pull that off. I like the bigger ones because they tend to have sensors in them… Form and function with G-Shock go together pretty tightly. I just appreciate the fact that it’s loud and proud. It’s trying to get a reaction from people – it doesn’t need to be that big necessarily.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBIfT9X387c

Where do you think technology is going to take G-Shock in the future, especially at a time when things keep moving from computers to laptops to tablets to watches?

I think G-Shock have an incredible archive of amazing designs and keep pulling them out all the time and retro-ing them. But the thing I admire about them is that they continually make more models, esepcially the past five years. I spend a lot of time thinking about how shoes and G-Shock relate. I’m sure Nike and a lot of other brands look at how G-Shock do things and have imitated their stuff. They were doing collaborations in the 90s, way before any of the other shoe brands. They continue to innovate, and I think that’s what’s great about a brand like Nike as well – they keep making stuff, and eventually you will like it. You might not understand it at first – too big, too crazy, too expensive – and five years down the track you finally get it. The fact is they’ve got watches from $100 to $3000 now, so they’ve developed their aesthetic from a rugged, indestructible, plastic watch to really high-end (for most people) that can be worn with a suit in a black tie sense… That’s the essence of the company, that commitment to innovation.

Technology wise, what they’ve done is still make a watch an essential part of your head-to-toe. Like I said before, you don’t need a watch these days, but if you’re gonna have one, why not have one with a bit of personality? With the minimalism, people want to be camouflaged, a lack of interest in a sense. No brand, no logo, no nothing. Casio has always been big, bold and brash.

A lot of collectors place a lot of emphasis on packaging. What’s your policy on that?

As a brand, we don’t want to take the opportunity lightly, and we don’t want to put out something that hasn’t had a lot of work put into it. In this case, there’s two versions of the packaging – there’s the basic box and the box set which has got the jacket. That was great from Casio’s point of view, to back us into making that stuff, because they’re expensive – there’s 100 of the box sets and they have to be flown in from Hong Kong. There’s a commitment to getting that stuff built, and they’re built beautifully. When you see the box, it’s solid as – you could probably sit on it. I don’t think we have to do that to appeal to the collector market or mentality, but there’s no doubt that when you pull of a really stunning execution, that that plus the product multiplies the hype behind it.

I do find it strange when someone says “I didn’t really like the shoe, but the packaging was nuts!” To me, that’s fucked up. That’s around the wrong way. Get the shoe right, then worry about what it comes in. Sometimes it’s definitely the case where the packaging overshadows the product, which is definitely around the wrong way. If you’re going to make something, take the extra time and care to present it and give it it’s full potential. The fact is that the watch is really small, it can come in a tiny box, but there’s nothing momentous about that.