Nike sales surge 31%-- report

[Madmick]

Nike definitely did this for good PR and it fits their targeted demographic. As much as people say that statues/flags don't have anything to do with supporting slavery, denouncing police brutality and a racist justice system doesn't have anything to do with sweat shops. This ad didn't create more sweat shops, but it did boost the awareness of the cause after kneeling was banned in the NFL. It's hard to blame anyone, outside of Nike's labor practices which are shit but are protected by the right because corporations are more people than actual people to the lawmakers.

It does when the ad campaign and its pay are conducted by a company that actively utilizes sweatshops, and exploits the more impoverished and less protected at every available opportunity for profit. That is the underlying foundation of his platform.

Defending confederate statues really has nothing to do with condoning slavery. I don't object to the ones erected as Jim Crow symbols being taken down, but we have lost the ability to wield a scalpel instead of a hammer in this nation, and I attribute this directly to our appalling deterioration of education.

 

[Slick_36]

It does when the ad campaign and its pay are conducted by a company that actively utilizes sweatshops, and exploits the more impoverished and less protected at every available opportunity for profit. That is the underlying foundation of his platform.

Defending confederate statues really has nothing to do with condoning slavery. I don't object to the ones erected as Jim Crow symbols being taken down, but we have lost the ability to wield a scalpel instead of a hammer in this nation, and I attribute this directly to our appalling deterioration of education.

Whose platform?

I agree we have lost nuance in public debate. I attribute that to the echo Chambers of the internet more than anything. We demand instant gratification as well that obstructs the legal process, largely because of corruption and bureaucratic red tape jading the people that the legal system even works at all.

 

[glenwo2]

1. They are the ones most singled out because they are the ones committing the most CRIMES. Funny how that works eh?

2. Yet Black, Asian and Latino cops also shoot black people and BLM says its still WHITE SUPREMACY.

3. How many more studies need to be done that proves that less than 5% of White people in America today have ancestors that owned slaves? How many more times does it need to be pointed out that White people also fought to end slavery? How many more times does it need to be pointed out that White people also led Civil Rights groups? How many more times does it need to be pointed out that the so called largest gathering of White Supremacists in decades drew less than 3,000 people and half of them yelling at the other half (the white supremacists) for hijacking their political rally that had nothing to do with fucking race?

4. Italians were LYNCHED more than Blacks from 1880 to 1920, in the south dark skinned Italians were also subjected to Jim Crow laws and counted as being "black"...do you see Italians chanting Italian Lives Matter every time one of them is killed? No. Italians say "Were you breaking the law and resisting arrest or posing a threat? Good, you deserved to get shot dumbass". Black people in America are victims because they keep drinking the Democrats Kool-Aid...this is why actual Africans are doing far better than they are in America...come on, explain why NIGERIANS are one of the most educated groups in America and doing as well as White people if America hates people with black skin today.

https://www.bloomberg.com/view/arti...t-just-asian-immigrants-who-excel-in-the-u-s-

5. So, saying Black Lives Matter doesnt mean they dont care about all lives, but saying All Lives Matter makes someone a racist...the magical stupidity of actual racists.

This always pisses me off and especially those that go after people on the 'net who state this FACT. Yes. FACT.

ALL LIVES DO MATTER. As far as I'm concerned, the African-American community is using BLM as an excuse to bash on Caucasians("White people", for those that don't know what the word means) in general. It's not limited to just the Police. Anyway, they also seem to have some kind of victim-complex (or is it persecution?) where they believe any black that gets shot and killed by Police is somehow innocent even if there's mountains of evidence (witnesses, video, etc.) showing otherwise.

Nevermind that Mexicans, Asians, Europeans, and Caucasians have their own troubles with the Police themselves. I'm Caucasian and have no love for the Police 'cause of the power they wield where they could charge you with whatever they want and if you try to challenge it in court, you'll lose 'cause you'll be up against their Blue Wall of Silence.

Apparently, what BLM is basically saying is that "Blacks are the only race being persecuted". What a Joke.


Oh and one more thing.....When a Black Police officer kills a Black person who committed a crime. We don't hear a peep out of BLM. None.

That's what really makes BLM a true joke. It's Blacks against Whites and everything else does not matter to them.

EDIT : BTW, #1 is spot on.

 

[mixcontactsport]

This dude is an obvious troll, but he's committed to the act or legitimately mentally handicapped himself. Even though I know he's trolling, I say give the benefit of the doubt. Plus I've never seen him before. There are a lot of threads I can predict to see Rip in the first 5 posts with a pathetically predictable response. Dude honestly pollutes this sub-forum.

who are you talking to weirdo?

 

[Lord Commander Palis]

Why is the national anthem even played at sporting events? Why is the military so interested in getting involved in sports?

Kneeling for the anthem for a good cause is no more disrespectful than wasting tax dollars on stupid fly overs

Apples to oranges sparky.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

As a far right Republican, I've always hated corporations and their thirst for profits.

Did you know that many of Nike's workers are working in sweatshops? I can't believe liberals love corporations so much. They're such hypocrites.

Hi just curious, i keep asking this on facebook with no answer. If you boycott/burn nike, what are you wearing instead to workout, because almost every major sports apparel brand is pro NFL boycott.

 

[Cake4Breakfast]

 

[Phlog]

Can anyone answer me this:

How is taking a knee not respectful? Surely the hierarchy of submission to an authority is sitting<standing<kneeling<prostrating yourself? You kneel to pray, as a show of respect, is America a godless country? Wtf? Seriously wtf?

When the athletes in question have been asked they've been real quick to say it's not a show of disrespect so how is it that it's portrayed as such by a bunch of mainly white and often southern people?

Sorry, letting my irritation about this matter spill over. You know my opinion, I'm asking for the naysayers.

 

[AgonyandIrony]

No, of course not, but he is representing a brand that is directly involved in widespread labor abuses, and has an appalling record for this.

Sure, plenty other athletes have shilled for Nike, too, and that is morally problematic, if we are strict enough, but none of them did so under the pretense of a moralistic campaign that is itself morally questionable and politically divisive. If he were raising autoimmune awareness it would be different because nobody is opposed to that message.

As long as Nike contributes some of the money it makes to devoting greater resources to actually doing something to help address the problem we will be getting somewhere, so that mitigates the unavoidable hypocrisy of profiting by this.

I don't want to remove statues of Confederates in many cases, and not because I support slavery. Those statutes contribute nothing, presently, to perpetuating slavery. This is another terrible false equivocation. If this is the best response you have to the criticism that Colin is shilling for a company that exploits those who aren't in control of the "institutions of power"...well, back to the drawing board.

Strong serve, weak return.

Ypu and I disagree on this old buddy. There was some nutjob sitting by the old Jefferson Davis monument that was removed with a big Trump flag shouting at people with a megaphone the other day and it got me thinking.

Jefferson Davis should forever be immortalized only as a traitor, a monument in his honor, especially in a majority black city has a subtle effect on the black residents.

I spoke with a black attorney friend about the subject and the topic moved to the Lee statue that was removed. I brought up that Lee had an important effect on preventing furthur uprisings and he agreed but pointed out that Lee also captured freed slaved and returned them to slavery and as a black man, he can see him as a sympathetic character but ultimately the enemy of his people.

 

[K1levelgrappler]

Holy shit look at all that economic anxiety

 

[WhiteMousse]

Don't see how this would surprise anyone. If you thought Nike was going to hurt by making this move you underestimate their ability to anticipate their consumers and the market itself.

The vast majority of their consumer base is african american, and the vast majority of that isn't going to care about the new campaign, in fact it will do the opposite. They'll buy more.

Add to that the fact that people on the right are so stupid they buy nikes to burn them, giving Nike revenue.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Can anyone answer me this:

How is taking a knee not respectful? Surely the hierarchy of submission to an authority is sitting<standing<kneeling<prostrating yourself? You kneel to pray, as a show of respect, is America a godless country? Wtf? Seriously wtf?

When the athletes in question have been asked they've been real quick to say it's not a show of disrespect so how is it that it's portrayed as such by a bunch of mainly white and often southern people?

Sorry, letting my irritation about this matter spill over. You know my opinion, I'm asking for the naysayers.

from what i see on social media they will quote the american flag code or whatever it is called. A good rebuttal I heard was, play the anthem at the end of the game, see how many people who are crying foul stay after the game ends to stand for the anthem. Anyone that has ever gone to a game knows that a good portion of the crowd is in the bathroom, buying food, fucking off on their phone during the anthem, but somehow it is worse for a guy who says it has nothing to do with veterans, gets all the shit.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Don't see how this would surprise anyone. If you thought Nike was going to hurt by making this move you underestimate their ability to anticipate their consumers and the market itself.

The vast majority of their consumer base is african american, and the vast majority of that isn't going to care about the new campaign, in fact it will do the opposite. They'll buy more.

Add to that the fact that people on the right are so stupid they buy nikes to burn them, giving Nike revenue.

vast majority of nike's base is african american? Source?

 

[sub_thug]

Well, the whole thing has been a business decision. That much is obvious, given that Nike is a huge multinational corporation. Regardless of what we each believe, this decision is about the money.

That said, the question remaining is this: Is this a good business move? Maybe. In the super short term, their stock dipped 3-4 points on the day that they announced the new ad campaign, so that was bad. If that were the unit of measurement, it would be a bad decision. However, several days later, their sales are up. Last year, during Labor Day, their sales only went up 17% during the weekend sales. This year, by comparison, they went up 31%, meaning that they saw a 14% sales increase. Using half a week as the unit of measurement, this has been a really good business decision. This is probably going to a great quarter for Nike, so shareholders will be pleased.

That said, we can't be too quick to call it a good business decision yet. So far, so good, but I think we are going to need to give it a full year to see what happens. No matter what you think about whether or not he should be, we should all agree that Kaep is a lightning rod. There's not a lot of middle ground here. You either love him or you hate him. In the spring and into the summer, you need to remember that high school booster clubs will be gearing up to spend their money on new stuff. School-purchased sports uniforms, athletes getting new cleats or running shoes, kids getting ready to go back to school. Do you think that booster clubs in Texas will be excited to run out and get stuff from Nike if they still associate the brand with Kaep's message? Do you think parents in the heartland will be going to Nike outlets to get their kids clothes for back to school? The politics surrounding the message will matter a lot over the next year, determining whether or not this was a good idea. If people become more sympathetic to Kaep, then yeah, this will pay off huge. If the outrage displayed by naysayers who control the purse strings of bigger booster club budgets cools, then this will be a great decision. If people become less sympathetic to his message and Nike keeps him around for the ad campaign, then this will have been very foolish.

Nike sold some apparel over the weekend and nearly doubled last year's sales. But it's still too early to tell if this was a good business decision or not.

 

[SaiWa]

Only the most idiotic of humankind can be led to believe kneeling at ANYTHING can be considered insulting...

 

[Tekk]

Nike closes at 82.10. I guess a boycott by people who never bought your stuff isnt that effective.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Well, the whole thing has been a business decision. That much is obvious, given that Nike is a huge multinational corporation. Regardless of what we each believe, this decision is about the money.

That said, the question remaining is this: Is this a good business move? Maybe. In the super short term, their stock dipped 3-4 points on the day that they announced the new ad campaign, so that was bad. If that were the unit of measurement, it would be a bad decision. However, several days later, their sales are up. Last year, during Labor Day, their sales only went up 17% during the weekend sales. This year, by comparison, they went up 31%, meaning that they saw a 14% sales increase. Using half a week as the unit of measurement, this has been a really good business decision. This is probably going to a great quarter for Nike, so shareholders will be pleased.

That said, we can't be too quick to call it a good business decision yet. So far, so good, but I think we are going to need to give it a full year to see what happens. No matter what you think about whether or not he should be, we should all agree that Kaep is a lightning rod. There's not a lot of middle ground here. You either love him or you hate him. In the spring and into the summer, you need to remember that high school booster clubs will be gearing up to spend their money on new stuff. School-purchased sports uniforms, athletes getting new cleats or running shoes, kids getting ready to go back to school. Do you think that booster clubs in Texas will be excited to run out and get stuff from Nike if they still associate the brand with Kaep's message? Do you think parents in the heartland will be going to Nike outlets to get their kids clothes for back to school? The politics surrounding the message will matter a lot over the next year, determining whether or not this was a good idea. If people become more sympathetic to Kaep, then yeah, this will pay off huge. If the outrage displayed by naysayers who control the purse strings of bigger booster club budgets cools, then this will be a great decision. If people become less sympathetic to his message and Nike keeps him around for the ad campaign, then this will have been very foolish.

Nike sold some apparel over the weekend and nearly doubled last year's sales. But it's still too early to tell if this was a good business decision or not.

what are those boosters or heartland kids going to buy instead? Under Armour is pro kneeling and had to back track on pro trump statements after the election. Adidas and Puma both tried to sign Kap before Nike did. (http://dailysnark.com/adidas-puma-reportedly-tried-signing-colin-kaepernick-before-nike-did/)

I mean look at morons like this

@reebok here we come? lol Reebok is a division of Adidas, which as I already showed, wanted to sign Kap.

So what sponsor are these schools going to get instead? Some shitty walmart athletic brand? wait nope, can't buy walmart brand they sold impeach45 shirts.

 

[sub_thug]

what are those boosters or heartland kids going to buy instead? Under Armour is pro kneeling and had to back track on pro trump statements after the election. Adidas and Puma both tried to sign Kap before Nike did. (http://dailysnark.com/adidas-puma-reportedly-tried-signing-colin-kaepernick-before-nike-did/)

I mean look at morons like this

@reebok here we come? lol Reebok is a division of Adidas, which as I already showed, wanted to sign Kap.

So what sponsor are these schools going to get instead? Some shitty walmart athletic brand? wait nope, can't buy walmart brand they sold impeach45 shirts.

Probably Adidas. It probably doesn't matter as much that they tried to sign Kaep. They didn't sign him, while Nike very publicly did. It's not about what people do, it's about the image associated with the brand. No one will punish Adidas if they don't know what happened there. We will see what occurs next fall.

 

[D 1 Wrestler]

Probably Adidas. It probably doesn't matter as much that they tried to sign Kaep. They didn't sign him, while Nike very publicly did. It's not about what people do, it's about the image associated with the brand. No one will punish Adidas if they don't know what happened there. We will see what occurs next fall.

Again, it does matter. They say fuck Nike but gladly go buy adidas who is upset they were unable to sign him and supports his message equally.

 

[sub_thug]

Again, it does matter. They say fuck Nike but gladly go buy adidas who is upset they were unable to sign him and supports his message equally.

Let's be clear about a few things: Nike and Adidas support making money. If they thought it would make them wealthier, I'm almost sure that these companies would say virtually anything. It's actually one of the reasons I like capitalism so much; it makes everyone a predictable rational actor.

Second, as I said, Adidas trying to sign Kaep only matters if people know about it. A few months back, people discussed boycotting Nestle because they had a public scandal involving child slavery in Africa. Deer Park Water is owned by Nestle. So if someone wants to boycott Nestle and doesn't know that fact, then they may continue purchasing Deer Park, acting against their own beliefs. Do you understand?