(09-04-2018 02:02 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:52 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:48 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:37 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  What is Nike really up to? They know this is going to hurt sales. So why do it? You got folks burning their product and saying they will not buy anything else. So whats up?

Do they?

They are either brainwashed to the point of thinking it was a good idea, or care more about virtue signaling than $$$.

Nobody is that brainwashed. They have been making money for to long to care about virtue signaling. Almost every professional/collegiate sport has had some type of connection with Nike. They are not going to throw that all away for thinking this is a good idea.

Tell that to Starbucks, Burger King, Airbnb, Target, T-Mobile, etc. That's just off the top of my head, the list is endless.

those companies seem to still be around.

Well, you have a point if their goal is to "just be around". Pretty sure WS doesn't look at it that way.

(09-04-2018 01:44 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:18 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 12:42 PM)tigergreen Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 12:20 PM)shere khan Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 12:18 PM)Eldonabe Wrote:  I think most people could give a rat's arse about this either way actually...... This is the essence of marketing - Any Publicity is Good Publicity. More people talking about Nike today than in the last 12 months combined. Probably a Zero Sum Game after all the hub-bub settles down.

MARKETING 101 BABY!!!!

Marketing 4201. Don't piss off half of your customers

Again - where is this idea coming from that "half" of Nike's customers are pissed about this?

At the most, I'd guess that around 3-5% of their customer base are actually going to still be pissed off about this the next time they need to buy some shoes or athletic gear enough to choose another brand. The numbers they'll pick up during that time will likely vastly outweigh that.

You are willing to admit 3 to 5% of their base will not buy. So now tell me how you came to the conclusion they will gain that many new buyers off this ad?

I dont see their hardcore base buying more and with the price of Nike's compared to a comparable off brand (in off brand I'm taking well known but at a lot lower cost) I dont see 5% of middle America spending $50 to $100 more on a shoe for little Judy or Johnny just because of this ad.


So where is that 5% coming from? And a 3 to 5% drop is a huge hit to the bottom line. Especially when you could have spent that money on a athlete that people other than your hardcore base might like.

I'm going to edit my statement to say I think that a 3-5% loss of existing market would be extreme. I think that's more than would actually follow through.

I also posted another link regarding 12 target cities worldwide that they believe are going to be representative of 80% of their growth for the next several years - using the figure I said before, the potential 3-5% of current market lost in protests will be outweighed by increase in sales in those markets, regardless of who's on the ad, or who isn't.

As far as price point goes, their tennis shoes are comparable in price to other similar brands (I'm talking about my experience with buying kids' athletic shoes - I'm not talking about the high-end Jordans, Pennys, etc.) I don't think much of middle America is going to pay more for shoes for little Judy or Johnny to NOT buy Nike.

You are correct most of middle America is buying the lower end of the Nike brand. At least in my opinion I think they are. Their child still gets to wear the brand and not feel the peer pressure from friends that are into brands. I noticed another thing about the drop in Nike stock price.....

Shoe Carnival also took a hit along with Nike. My personal opinion, stores like Shoe Carnival are the places "Middle America" are looking to buy from to get that cheaper discounted Nike brand. That way little Johnny or Judy can still be cool but at a much lower price.

When I switched (long ago) from Nike I did so because of price and found a shoe that was a better fit for my foot. I started buying FIBA. My youngest son still wanted his Jordan's (lower end) so that's what he got. One day his shoes got wet so he wore a extra pair of my FIBA. To this day, he's still wearing the FIBA brand......

they fit his foot so much better


I know that's a long story just to make a quick point. That point is, sometimes once a customer switches. No matter what the reason.... they dont go back. I found a shoe at half (sometimes a 3rd) the cost that fit better and so did my son who was strictly Jordan's since his middle school years (he's 24 today). I dont think I'm too much different than "Middle America".


So I believe Nike is taking a huge gamble and one they didn't have to take

(09-04-2018 02:02 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:52 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:48 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:37 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  What is Nike really up to? They know this is going to hurt sales. So why do it? You got folks burning their product and saying they will not buy anything else. So whats up?

Do they?

They are either brainwashed to the point of thinking it was a good idea, or care more about virtue signaling than $$$.

Nobody is that brainwashed. They have been making money for to long to care about virtue signaling. Almost every professional/collegiate sport has had some type of connection with Nike. They are not going to throw that all away for thinking this is a good idea.

Tell that to Starbucks, Burger King, Airbnb, Target, T-Mobile, etc. That's just off the top of my head, the list is endless.

those companies seem to still be around.

No one said corporate virtue signaling would put them out of business, the question was if the decision to do so was a net positive.

For Starbucks and Target, the answer was a definitive 'No'. The jury is still out on Nike, but it's telling that they are down nearly 3% today on a day when the Dow is mostly flat.

Another obvious example is the NFL, and just look at their ratings.

(09-04-2018 01:31 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:09 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  Well this stunt is going to cost Nike at least a couple thousand dollars I know of right now. A good friend of mine who used to coach HS baseball and went into real estate runs a four team travel ball program. They used Nike as their uniform supplier for the past few years because that's who he had dealt with when he was coaching school ball. He posted on Facebook last night asking for uniform info from any of his friends who didn't use Nike. He said that none of his program's teams will be wearing Nike next season. Four teams of fifteen players and three uniform sets per player is 180 uniforms plus the associated coaching shirts, hats, bags, etc.

I guess it doesn't pay to piss off the son of a retire SC State Trooper and grandson of a Sheriff.

He should have been getting that stuff comped in the first place.

Meh. I doubt he's large enough for them to worry about. Plus when you get into the comped stuff you typically have to use everything they produce for your sport. It's been a while since I have personally used them but Nike baseball gloves used to be absolute crap, and the Nike catchers helmet we had didn't last a season before it broke.

TBH when I was coaching I wasn't a big Nike fan because their stuff is expensive and it's offerings for uniforms weren't anywhere close to the quality of what we got from other suppliers.

What all this companies fail to see is that they are not Tweeter or Facebook where the people using these two products are hooked on them. That's why those two don't care who knows it that they are Left Leaning Extraordinaires and nothing will come of it. Look at Trump who knows where the owners of these companies lean and yet he still tweets because like I said, they're hooked, like a drug. These other companies that were mentioned people only use them when they HAVE to and that's where it hurts them. That is, if those people don't visit them they're cutting their nose to spite the Conservatives and get their just rewards.

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

Again some on the left just dont get it....


have to bring "color" into it. I dont think the color of skin is the reason because each person in that picture chose to buy Nike when most of their ads have a black athlete in them. So why did you decide to go there? Before saying you just posted a tweet....

you chose to post this tweet

(09-04-2018 01:37 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  What is Nike really up to? They know this is going to hurt sales. So why do it? You got folks burning their product and saying they will not buy anything else. So whats up? Whats the end game? They got to know the backlash of this.

Because you have too many martyrs - err I mean liberals - who will go buy an extra pair of shoes whether then can afford them or not, to counter balance those who choose to no longer support the brand.

The math goes sour quickly however after the second pair of shoes do not get bought.... there will be no second trip made by the martyrs as they will have moved on to a new dumb idea to support.

Then you will see if Nike's experiment failed.

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

#fakenews

Kaepernick is a social justice warrior pushing a false narrative. He hasn't been an athlete for several years now because he simply wasn't good enough.

(09-03-2018 05:11 PM)UofMTigerTim Wrote:  https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/nik...d-campaign

This should be interesting...

Did you notice the theme of the campaign was *not*:

*Stand up* for what you believe in.

It would have been horribly rich if they have any mention of the verb 'stand up' associated anywhere within a million miles of Colin,

Yeah. I didn’t even know he was “black” when he was in college at Nevada. He has one white parent. Race has nothing to do with it. You would get a huge negative if it were Jane fonda

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

That's like saying people protested the Aretha Franklin funeral because of the presence of a *Black* cleric.

One day the progressives will be able to figure out how stupid they look in how they stretch everything into a race issue. And maybe that might be the day when they realize context is important when screeching about racial matters.

How can anyone bring race into this when black athletes are the most common ad shown by Nike......

yet those people who are destroying the things they bought.....bought them.

(09-04-2018 02:53 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

Again some on the left just dont get it....


have to bring "color" into it. I dont think the color of skin is the reason because each person in that picture chose to buy Nike when most of their ads have a black athlete in them. So why did you decide to go there? Before saying you just posted a tweet....

you chose to post this tweet

They'll try and make EVERYTHING about race.

(09-04-2018 02:07 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:02 PM)fsquid Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:52 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:48 PM)pcm0103 Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 01:41 PM)Kronke Wrote:  Do they?

They are either brainwashed to the point of thinking it was a good idea, or care more about virtue signaling than $$$.

Nobody is that brainwashed. They have been making money for to long to care about virtue signaling. Almost every professional/collegiate sport has had some type of connection with Nike. They are not going to throw that all away for thinking this is a good idea.

Tell that to Starbucks, Burger King, Airbnb, Target, T-Mobile, etc. That's just off the top of my head, the list is endless.

those companies seem to still be around.

No one said corporate virtue signaling would put them out of business, the question was if the decision to do so was a net positive.

For Starbucks and Target, the answer was a definitive 'No'. The jury is still out on Nike, but it's telling that they are down nearly 3% today on a day when the Dow is mostly flat.

As long as we are speaking of Starbucks....

https://pjmedia.com/trending/ex-muslim-c...-t-shirts/

Oh my god, y'all's meltdown is hilarious

(09-04-2018 03:01 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:53 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

Again some on the left just dont get it....


have to bring "color" into it. I dont think the color of skin is the reason because each person in that picture chose to buy Nike when most of their ads have a black athlete in them. So why did you decide to go there? Before saying you just posted a tweet....

you chose to post this tweet

They'll try and make EVERYTHING about race.

So what were y'all doing when that girl was killed by the Mexican immigrant?

(09-04-2018 03:01 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  Oh my god, y'all's meltdown is hilarious

not as hilarious as the meltdown that nike is having with their stock...

(09-04-2018 03:03 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 03:01 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:53 PM)WKUYG Wrote:  

(09-04-2018 02:48 PM)TrueBlueDrew Wrote:  

Again some on the left just dont get it....


have to bring "color" into it. I dont think the color of skin is the reason because each person in that picture chose to buy Nike when most of their ads have a black athlete in them. So why did you decide to go there? Before saying you just posted a tweet....

you chose to post this tweet

They'll try and make EVERYTHING about race.

So what were y'all doing when that girl was killed by the Mexican immigrant?

so now illegal immigrant is a race?