My opinion, based on nothing solid, is that it is unlikely that it will succeed. And if it does, it will mean (to me) the shoes had something to do with it. And then I'll ask if that is cheating?

I think they use a curved plate in the sole that will (or is supposed to) act as a spring. If it works, ok maybe not cheating, but an unfair advantage against others not wearing a similar technology.

How would anything relating to shoes be cheating? I don't think there are any shoe regulations in competitive running, nor can I imagine what radical changes would improve performance so dramatically.

I don't know what there may be in terms of specific rules, but equipment, including shoes may be ruled illegal. One of the considerations is whether the technology is readily available to all competitors. That could become an issue with specially designed shoes with all the different shoes contracts pro runners have. Remember the controversy about Pistorious' blades, strange as this may seem, as possibly giving him an advantage over non-handicapped athletes.

Nike Zoom Vaporfly Elite

I predict they will pull a Ryan Hall and quit midway through when they realize sub-2 ain't gonna happen.  I would like to see them at least complete the run if the sub-2:00 goal goes out the window.

I was wondering if the race would be WR-eligible - apparently not likely (see below for results of googling). In which case I'd think people would bail if they were not on pace, unless Nike has financially incentivized them to finish. Which seems a distinct possibility because it's probably bad PR otherwise.

If the Nike project succeeds, will the record be ratified?

Given what is currently known about it, most likely not. Nike has strongly indicated that its attempt is focused on producing a sub-two under parameters of its own choosing. One or more aspects of what’s required for a performance to be ratified as a world record are likely to be circumvented.

The course used for the attempt will be certified in accordance with rules for record eligibility. In the case of the Formula One oval, that means that the distance will be accurately measured. Because the attempt will occur on a loop course, the other aspects of course eligibility (the separation between the start and finish lines being less than 50 percent of the race distance, and the net elevation drop being less than one meter per kilometer) are automatically met.

However, if the runners were to be led the whole way by an ever-changing roster of pacers, or if they drafted off a phalanx of vehicles for 26.2 miles, or if they could receive fluids and other aids on demand, such features would violate current rules of competition. During the March 7 test half marathon, there was a rotating cast of pacers, and the runners were handed fluids every lap from someone on a moped, so that the runners could maintain their pace.

Would a shoe with a spring in the sole count for record purposes?

The relevant International Association of Athletics Federations rule, #143.2, states:

Athletes may compete barefoot or with footwear on one or both feet. The purpose of shoes for competition is to give protection and stability to the feet and a firm grip on the ground. Such shoes, however, must not be constructed so as to give an athlete any unfair additional assistance, including by the incorporation of any technology which will give the wearer any unfair advantage. A shoe strap over the instep is permitted. All types of competition shoes must be approved by IAAF.

The key phrase pertaining to a shoe with a spring is “no unfair additional assistance.” Adidas’s Boost foam, which was in the shoes used to set the current world record, boasts “the highest energy return in the running industry” and has been shown in peer-reviewed studies to boost running economy. Whether Nike’s hypothetical carbon plate would constitute “unfair additional assistance” while Adidas’s Boost foam doesn’t could be a source of great debate.

I don't know if it can ever be done or not, but the entire premise is based on the assumption that the 8 or so runners who have run a 2:03, did so clean. Given what we know about the sport, that is a limb I am not willing to go out on. lol

Right. The article I saw did say: "None of the three runners are known to have missed or failed a drug test, and none have been closely associated with known dopers." It neglected to say "Yet". I saw a different article indicating that all the factors they are looking may combine for a total 1% improvement, while the right PEDs will give you 4%. So maybe they should redirect the project. Anyone remember the (very) old SNL sketch about the "All-Drug Olympics"?

I wear Adidas shoes, and I also wear Saucony, Mizuno, NB, ...

If the Boost foam is an advantage, I don't feel it. It is certainly not unfair. We'll see about the curved carbon plates.

PEDs? For some reason I don't care. It seems like all top athletes have been doing them in the past years, and it is what it is. It's not like if I were biting my nails hoping nobody would beat MY WR? Then I'd want to make sure everybody is clean.