(09-04-2018 08:28 AM)fsquid Wrote: Unsure how sticking a middle finger up to half of your customer base is a good financial standpoint. But, I could be wrong.
I find it extremely hard to believe that half of Nike's customer base would oppose this campaign...much less oppose it enough to stop buying their items.
Nike and their marketing department are some of the best in the business. I have no doubt they did their research before letting this fly. I'm sure they expect to lose a small percentage of a portion of their current market, while picking up even more support in existing ones.
However, I agree with you that I'd like to see this campaign extended to other people than just Kaep. Aly Raisman is a no-brainer, IMO.
We realize you live in a bubble. But half the country was offended by Kapernick's actions, even if none of your friends were. How many will take action against Nike? Unclear. But some will. And it just creates negative goodwill around a very strong brand. Just dumb.
If you think 50% of Nike’s customer base are offended by this, you’re the one in a bubble.
Even at a measly 5 per cent or ten per cent, that is one huge frigging hit. Who cares if 50 per cent isnt the correct number. Or fixate on that. Whatever it is Nike will lose customers for life; and create anti-salesman out of a portion of those.
Sound smart to you?
It won’t be 10, or 5, or even 2 or 3%. The people who ban Nike “for life” are going to be so minuscule that it will be greatly outweighed by their increase in sales in their target markets.
Adidas, ASICS, etc., were all down today as well, so are you gonna blame that on Kaepernick too?
The people burning their shoes (which is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen - donate them to those who need shoes at least) will be on their kick for a little while, & then all will be forgotten.
The vast majority of them will buy their kids whatever brand of shoes they ask for next year, whether it’s Nike or something else.
(This post was last modified: 09-04-2018 11:02 PM by tigergreen.)
(09-05-2018 12:50 AM)georgia_tech_swagger Wrote: I'm much grumpier about ESPN shoving it in my face every 5 seconds then I am about Nike for being trying to make a buck by virtue signaling.
Sent from my ZTE A2017U using Tapatalk
Can't escape it, it's everywhere. But as shown in this forum, it moves the needle.
(09-04-2018 11:45 AM)tigergreen Wrote: I find it extremely hard to believe that half of Nike's customer base would oppose this campaign...much less oppose it enough to stop buying their items.
Nike and their marketing department are some of the best in the business. I have no doubt they did their research before letting this fly. I'm sure they expect to lose a small percentage of a portion of their current market, while picking up even more support in existing ones.
However, I agree with you that I'd like to see this campaign extended to other people than just Kaep. Aly Raisman is a no-brainer, IMO.
We realize you live in a bubble. But half the country was offended by Kapernick's actions, even if none of your friends were. How many will take action against Nike? Unclear. But some will. And it just creates negative goodwill around a very strong brand. Just dumb.
If you think 50% of Nike’s customer base are offended by this, you’re the one in a bubble.
Even at a measly 5 per cent or ten per cent, that is one huge frigging hit. Who cares if 50 per cent isnt the correct number. Or fixate on that. Whatever it is Nike will lose customers for life; and create anti-salesman out of a portion of those.
Sound smart to you?
It won’t be 10, or 5, or even 2 or 3%. The people who ban Nike “for life” are going to be so minuscule that it will be greatly outweighed by their increase in sales in their target markets.
Adidas, ASICS, etc., were all down today as well, so are you gonna blame that on Kaepernick too?
The people burning their shoes (which is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen - donate them to those who need shoes at least) will be on their kick for a little while, & then all will be forgotten.
The vast majority of them will buy their kids whatever brand of shoes they ask for next year, whether it’s Nike or something else.
Since you seemingly know precisely that number, perhaps you will share some more advice with us. I mean, when you have that level of precise insight into that number, I'm surprised you're not some mega-frigging billionaire stock savant, or some ESP savant. Either way, you should really use that super power for some worldly good.
(This post was last modified: 09-05-2018 07:33 AM by tanqtonic.)
(09-04-2018 04:12 PM)bullet Wrote: We realize you live in a bubble. But half the country was offended by Kapernick's actions, even if none of your friends were. How many will take action against Nike? Unclear. But some will. And it just creates negative goodwill around a very strong brand. Just dumb.
If you think 50% of Nike’s customer base are offended by this, you’re the one in a bubble.
Even at a measly 5 per cent or ten per cent, that is one huge frigging hit. Who cares if 50 per cent isnt the correct number. Or fixate on that. Whatever it is Nike will lose customers for life; and create anti-salesman out of a portion of those.
Sound smart to you?
It won’t be 10, or 5, or even 2 or 3%. The people who ban Nike “for life” are going to be so minuscule that it will be greatly outweighed by their increase in sales in their target markets.
Adidas, ASICS, etc., were all down today as well, so are you gonna blame that on Kaepernick too?
The people burning their shoes (which is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen - donate them to those who need shoes at least) will be on their kick for a little while, & then all will be forgotten.
The vast majority of them will buy their kids whatever brand of shoes they ask for next year, whether it’s Nike or something else.
Since you seemingly know precisely that number, perhaps you will share some more advice with us. I mean, when you have that level of precise insight into that number, I'm surprised you're not some mega-frigging billionaire stock savant, or some ESP savant. Either way, you should really use that super power for some worldly good.
It's not wrong at all - it's a statement from when you guys tried to prop Tillman up as the anti-Kaepernick last year, but that doesn't change the statement - she doesn't want his memory being used to further divide anyone.
(09-04-2018 04:12 PM)bullet Wrote: We realize you live in a bubble. But half the country was offended by Kapernick's actions, even if none of your friends were. How many will take action against Nike? Unclear. But some will. And it just creates negative goodwill around a very strong brand. Just dumb.
If you think 50% of Nike’s customer base are offended by this, you’re the one in a bubble.
Even at a measly 5 per cent or ten per cent, that is one huge frigging hit. Who cares if 50 per cent isnt the correct number. Or fixate on that. Whatever it is Nike will lose customers for life; and create anti-salesman out of a portion of those.
Sound smart to you?
It won’t be 10, or 5, or even 2 or 3%. The people who ban Nike “for life” are going to be so minuscule that it will be greatly outweighed by their increase in sales in their target markets.
Adidas, ASICS, etc., were all down today as well, so are you gonna blame that on Kaepernick too?
The people burning their shoes (which is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen - donate them to those who need shoes at least) will be on their kick for a little while, & then all will be forgotten.
The vast majority of them will buy their kids whatever brand of shoes they ask for next year, whether it’s Nike or something else.
Since you seemingly know precisely that number, perhaps you will share some more advice with us. I mean, when you have that level of precise insight into that number, I'm surprised you're not some mega-frigging billionaire stock savant, or some ESP savant. Either way, you should really use that super power for some worldly good.
It doesn't take a crystal ball to understand that there won't be that large of a hit, certainly not long-term like they're planning for.
People by & large are lazy, and have short memories. Two months from now if their kid needs shoes & Nike is $10-15 cheaper than Adidas, they're buying Nike.
(09-04-2018 04:12 PM)bullet Wrote: We realize you live in a bubble. But half the country was offended by Kapernick's actions, even if none of your friends were. How many will take action against Nike? Unclear. But some will. And it just creates negative goodwill around a very strong brand. Just dumb.
If you think 50% of Nike’s customer base are offended by this, you’re the one in a bubble.
Even at a measly 5 per cent or ten per cent, that is one huge frigging hit. Who cares if 50 per cent isnt the correct number. Or fixate on that. Whatever it is Nike will lose customers for life; and create anti-salesman out of a portion of those.
Sound smart to you?
It won’t be 10, or 5, or even 2 or 3%. The people who ban Nike “for life” are going to be so minuscule that it will be greatly outweighed by their increase in sales in their target markets.
Adidas, ASICS, etc., were all down today as well, so are you gonna blame that on Kaepernick too?
The people burning their shoes (which is the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever seen - donate them to those who need shoes at least) will be on their kick for a little while, & then all will be forgotten.
The vast majority of them will buy their kids whatever brand of shoes they ask for next year, whether it’s Nike or something else.
Since you seemingly know precisely that number, perhaps you will share some more advice with us. I mean, when you have that level of precise insight into that number, I'm surprised you're not some mega-frigging billionaire stock savant, or some ESP savant. Either way, you should really use that super power for some worldly good.
Curious, isn't it? Ridiculing posters who say that Nike is alienating half their customers while claiming with certainty that not even 5% are offended. I'm not sure where this particular poster is getting the 5% number but I suspect I know.
It's not wrong at all - it's a statement from when you guys tried to prop Tillman up as the anti-Kaepernick last year, but that doesn't change the statement - she doesn't want his memory being used to further divide anyone.
yeah, its pretty wrong. That statement was made over a year ago, not just days ago, yet you are saying that his family doesnt want his likeness used as an anti-ad against "this".
![[Image: 40883793_10160585377410212_5720429502312480768_n.jpg]](https://s33.postimg.cc/8f4kejr8f/40883793_10160585377410212_5720429502312480768_n.jpg)
