- 26,898
- 383
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2005
LeBron is a great addition for Nike... But the brand doesn't rely just on him.
I don't see why LeBron would ever leave Nike...
I don't see why LeBron would ever leave Nike...
Would LeBron James leave Nike?
- Thread in 'Nike' Thread starter Started by nat turner,
- Start date
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
Where is the logic behind this? Why would a company pay anyone 100 mil, if they didn't need him nor his endorsement?
Does your comment even make sense to you?
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
Where is the logic behind this? Why would a company pay anyone 100 mil, if they didn't need him nor his endorsement?
Does your comment even make sense to you?
- 1,757
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
how many athletes receive 100 million dollar contracts sense you claim nike dont need lebron????
if they didnt need him he be kick off that roster just as quick as michael vick was
lebron needs 2 control his own destiny and be a leader
if they didnt need him he be kick off that roster just as quick as michael vick was
lebron needs 2 control his own destiny and be a leader
- 1,757
- 10
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2005
how many athletes receive 100 million dollar contracts sense you claim nike dont need lebron????
if they didnt need him he be kick off that roster just as quick as michael vick was
lebron needs 2 control his own destiny and be a leader
if they didnt need him he be kick off that roster just as quick as michael vick was
lebron needs 2 control his own destiny and be a leader
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
If I were LeBron, I'd look into getting controlling interest in a company, let's say a company like And 1. They already have a logo that even looks like 'Bron, then having a bit of street cred already built in, Lebron's ownership would push them over the edge. This would put him in direct comp with Nike's basketball market, possibly even beating them out. If he stayed in Cleveland then did this, he'd be the global influence that he wants to be right now. He'd have fan support, as all of Cleveland, especially the fans, would be buying those shoes, then like New Balance, even manufacturing those shoes right here in the US of A.
Being LeBron James in this position would automatically make him a major player, then leaving Nike in the dust.
Even now, he still has a chance to do that. he just needs to get some sharp people around him.
Being LeBron James in this position would automatically make him a major player, then leaving Nike in the dust.
Even now, he still has a chance to do that. he just needs to get some sharp people around him.
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
If I were LeBron, I'd look into getting controlling interest in a company, let's say a company like And 1. They already have a logo that even looks like 'Bron, then having a bit of street cred already built in, Lebron's ownership would push them over the edge. This would put him in direct comp with Nike's basketball market, possibly even beating them out. If he stayed in Cleveland then did this, he'd be the global influence that he wants to be right now. He'd have fan support, as all of Cleveland, especially the fans, would be buying those shoes, then like New Balance, even manufacturing those shoes right here in the US of A.
Being LeBron James in this position would automatically make him a major player, then leaving Nike in the dust.
Even now, he still has a chance to do that. he just needs to get some sharp people around him.
Being LeBron James in this position would automatically make him a major player, then leaving Nike in the dust.
Even now, he still has a chance to do that. he just needs to get some sharp people around him.
- 1,079
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
I absolutely agree Nike does not need Lebron. The Air Max above proves a shoe at that price point can sell. The original Shox R4 proved that. But you are looking at two very different markets and consumers. Lebrons are marketed at basketball players, and without getting too far into the racism thing, who traditionally has consumed basketball shoes? Compare that to who traditionally buys high-end running shoes. Nike needs Lebron to push $160 BASKETBALL shoes, just like they needed Jordan to push the first $100 shoe, Barkley's "I am not a role model" for his $120 Air Max, etc. The athletes in basketball speak to the consumer moreso than any other mainstream sport, because the players for the most part came from the same conditions as the consumer.
As for the low-top to push Kobe's for sales, let's wait and see how widely publicized Steve Nash's new shoes are. I thought the MVP's he wore were good shoes, this year's look to be solid, but I will bet you never see them in stores in a wide release. Why? Because they HAVE to SELL Kobe's to make some money back and keep his ego in tact. No knock on Kobe, because I would want to be #1 also. Besides, how many people on the street have dreams of playing like Nash, really? Nope, all want to be like Mike (or Kobe, or Lebron).
Kobe left adidas because he was unhappy with the 2, and the designs for the 3, and from what I was told at the time he was notoriously difficult to work with. This was around the same time he bagan having problems with Phil and Shaq also. He was a young man who was handed eveything at 17 and was going through some growing up.
I think it is funny that I think it was Crazy who brought up all of the Nike sigs looking the same with a big Swoosh on the side: That has been most people's problem with adidas for years.
Nike has always been about marketing - the first Air MAx commercials set to The Beatles "Revolution" were GENIUS. If you didn't know what Nike was then, you quickly found out. The Bo Knows, Mars Blackmon era can not be topped by anything, marketing-wise, today, because they spoke to people, not niche markets, but the general public. I think that is what Lebron;s new ad means to do, and I thought it was genius. Look at Jordans last few commercials when he was playing; they rarely showed more than a snip of the shoes, but you still wanted them.
As for the low-top to push Kobe's for sales, let's wait and see how widely publicized Steve Nash's new shoes are. I thought the MVP's he wore were good shoes, this year's look to be solid, but I will bet you never see them in stores in a wide release. Why? Because they HAVE to SELL Kobe's to make some money back and keep his ego in tact. No knock on Kobe, because I would want to be #1 also. Besides, how many people on the street have dreams of playing like Nash, really? Nope, all want to be like Mike (or Kobe, or Lebron).
Kobe left adidas because he was unhappy with the 2, and the designs for the 3, and from what I was told at the time he was notoriously difficult to work with. This was around the same time he bagan having problems with Phil and Shaq also. He was a young man who was handed eveything at 17 and was going through some growing up.
I think it is funny that I think it was Crazy who brought up all of the Nike sigs looking the same with a big Swoosh on the side: That has been most people's problem with adidas for years.
Nike has always been about marketing - the first Air MAx commercials set to The Beatles "Revolution" were GENIUS. If you didn't know what Nike was then, you quickly found out. The Bo Knows, Mars Blackmon era can not be topped by anything, marketing-wise, today, because they spoke to people, not niche markets, but the general public. I think that is what Lebron;s new ad means to do, and I thought it was genius. Look at Jordans last few commercials when he was playing; they rarely showed more than a snip of the shoes, but you still wanted them.
- 1,079
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
I absolutely agree Nike does not need Lebron. The Air Max above proves a shoe at that price point can sell. The original Shox R4 proved that. But you are looking at two very different markets and consumers. Lebrons are marketed at basketball players, and without getting too far into the racism thing, who traditionally has consumed basketball shoes? Compare that to who traditionally buys high-end running shoes. Nike needs Lebron to push $160 BASKETBALL shoes, just like they needed Jordan to push the first $100 shoe, Barkley's "I am not a role model" for his $120 Air Max, etc. The athletes in basketball speak to the consumer moreso than any other mainstream sport, because the players for the most part came from the same conditions as the consumer.
As for the low-top to push Kobe's for sales, let's wait and see how widely publicized Steve Nash's new shoes are. I thought the MVP's he wore were good shoes, this year's look to be solid, but I will bet you never see them in stores in a wide release. Why? Because they HAVE to SELL Kobe's to make some money back and keep his ego in tact. No knock on Kobe, because I would want to be #1 also. Besides, how many people on the street have dreams of playing like Nash, really? Nope, all want to be like Mike (or Kobe, or Lebron).
Kobe left adidas because he was unhappy with the 2, and the designs for the 3, and from what I was told at the time he was notoriously difficult to work with. This was around the same time he bagan having problems with Phil and Shaq also. He was a young man who was handed eveything at 17 and was going through some growing up.
I think it is funny that I think it was Crazy who brought up all of the Nike sigs looking the same with a big Swoosh on the side: That has been most people's problem with adidas for years.
Nike has always been about marketing - the first Air MAx commercials set to The Beatles "Revolution" were GENIUS. If you didn't know what Nike was then, you quickly found out. The Bo Knows, Mars Blackmon era can not be topped by anything, marketing-wise, today, because they spoke to people, not niche markets, but the general public. I think that is what Lebron;s new ad means to do, and I thought it was genius. Look at Jordans last few commercials when he was playing; they rarely showed more than a snip of the shoes, but you still wanted them.
As for the low-top to push Kobe's for sales, let's wait and see how widely publicized Steve Nash's new shoes are. I thought the MVP's he wore were good shoes, this year's look to be solid, but I will bet you never see them in stores in a wide release. Why? Because they HAVE to SELL Kobe's to make some money back and keep his ego in tact. No knock on Kobe, because I would want to be #1 also. Besides, how many people on the street have dreams of playing like Nash, really? Nope, all want to be like Mike (or Kobe, or Lebron).
Kobe left adidas because he was unhappy with the 2, and the designs for the 3, and from what I was told at the time he was notoriously difficult to work with. This was around the same time he bagan having problems with Phil and Shaq also. He was a young man who was handed eveything at 17 and was going through some growing up.
I think it is funny that I think it was Crazy who brought up all of the Nike sigs looking the same with a big Swoosh on the side: That has been most people's problem with adidas for years.
Nike has always been about marketing - the first Air MAx commercials set to The Beatles "Revolution" were GENIUS. If you didn't know what Nike was then, you quickly found out. The Bo Knows, Mars Blackmon era can not be topped by anything, marketing-wise, today, because they spoke to people, not niche markets, but the general public. I think that is what Lebron;s new ad means to do, and I thought it was genius. Look at Jordans last few commercials when he was playing; they rarely showed more than a snip of the shoes, but you still wanted them.
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
I will wear a Nike Steve Nash shoe over a Nike Kobe Bryant shoe in a HEARTBEAT! In fact, I already have! I like what Nash is about, bumped into him in Midtown and and SoHo NYC more than a few times and he is approachable, just an all around nice guy. The fact that Nike decided to promote Kobe as the innovator of the low top shoe is even more insulting to the demo that was targeted. Nash should have gotten that push, not Kobe Bryant.
So again I will say this, if Nike simply wants to throw around 100 mil to someone who they do not need, I know of many who are far more in need, than some hoops player who is already making 15 mil a year.
So again I will say this, if Nike simply wants to throw around 100 mil to someone who they do not need, I know of many who are far more in need, than some hoops player who is already making 15 mil a year.
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
I will wear a Nike Steve Nash shoe over a Nike Kobe Bryant shoe in a HEARTBEAT! In fact, I already have! I like what Nash is about, bumped into him in Midtown and and SoHo NYC more than a few times and he is approachable, just an all around nice guy. The fact that Nike decided to promote Kobe as the innovator of the low top shoe is even more insulting to the demo that was targeted. Nash should have gotten that push, not Kobe Bryant.
So again I will say this, if Nike simply wants to throw around 100 mil to someone who they do not need, I know of many who are far more in need, than some hoops player who is already making 15 mil a year.
So again I will say this, if Nike simply wants to throw around 100 mil to someone who they do not need, I know of many who are far more in need, than some hoops player who is already making 15 mil a year.
- 817
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2007
Aaron Goodwin and Sonny Vaccaro said once in an interview the way Lebron James became a Nike endorser.I don't find the article anymore, it was on a german site.
He was much more impressed with the Nike show in Beaverton than with what adidas came up but at the end of the day it was money.
adidas dropped out very soon because they wanted not to increase their 30 million $ offer (don't know the number of years) which left Reebok (50+10 signing fee I guess) and Nike.
He was ready to sign with Reebok until Nike came up via phone with a much better offer.It was definitely the money.
Btw, doesn't Nike/JB have a market share of more than 93% of the basketball market ? And 96% or 97& of the 100+$ market ? Why should they NEED him ?
He was much more impressed with the Nike show in Beaverton than with what adidas came up but at the end of the day it was money.
adidas dropped out very soon because they wanted not to increase their 30 million $ offer (don't know the number of years) which left Reebok (50+10 signing fee I guess) and Nike.
He was ready to sign with Reebok until Nike came up via phone with a much better offer.It was definitely the money.
Btw, doesn't Nike/JB have a market share of more than 93% of the basketball market ? And 96% or 97& of the 100+$ market ? Why should they NEED him ?
- 817
- 10
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2007
Aaron Goodwin and Sonny Vaccaro said once in an interview the way Lebron James became a Nike endorser.I don't find the article anymore, it was on a german site.
He was much more impressed with the Nike show in Beaverton than with what adidas came up but at the end of the day it was money.
adidas dropped out very soon because they wanted not to increase their 30 million $ offer (don't know the number of years) which left Reebok (50+10 signing fee I guess) and Nike.
He was ready to sign with Reebok until Nike came up via phone with a much better offer.It was definitely the money.
Btw, doesn't Nike/JB have a market share of more than 93% of the basketball market ? And 96% or 97& of the 100+$ market ? Why should they NEED him ?
He was much more impressed with the Nike show in Beaverton than with what adidas came up but at the end of the day it was money.
adidas dropped out very soon because they wanted not to increase their 30 million $ offer (don't know the number of years) which left Reebok (50+10 signing fee I guess) and Nike.
He was ready to sign with Reebok until Nike came up via phone with a much better offer.It was definitely the money.
Btw, doesn't Nike/JB have a market share of more than 93% of the basketball market ? And 96% or 97& of the 100+$ market ? Why should they NEED him ?
- 24,015
- 3,122
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2001
You act like having LeBron on the roster is the make or break for Nike. Sure having him is great but hes not why Nike is on top by ANY means. If you seriously think LeBron going to AND1 would take over Nike Basketball division than you need to ask yourself if that comment makes sense. I guess Nike footwear dominates the NBA's feet because of Bron.
- 24,015
- 3,122
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2001
You act like having LeBron on the roster is the make or break for Nike. Sure having him is great but hes not why Nike is on top by ANY means. If you seriously think LeBron going to AND1 would take over Nike Basketball division than you need to ask yourself if that comment makes sense. I guess Nike footwear dominates the NBA's feet because of Bron.
- 4,991
- 454
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
IF I was Nike why would I give Lebron $100 Mil if I don't need him? So no one else gets him. How would look if the company that prides it self on being the best when it comes to sports apparel couldn't land the worlds best athlete?
And "And 1" as a company is trash. They barely move units (shoes or apparel) and I know this because my wife worked for And 1. And 1 is sold to the Kohls and TJ maxx's of the worlds.
And "And 1" as a company is trash. They barely move units (shoes or apparel) and I know this because my wife worked for And 1. And 1 is sold to the Kohls and TJ maxx's of the worlds.
- 4,991
- 454
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2004
IF I was Nike why would I give Lebron $100 Mil if I don't need him? So no one else gets him. How would look if the company that prides it self on being the best when it comes to sports apparel couldn't land the worlds best athlete?
And "And 1" as a company is trash. They barely move units (shoes or apparel) and I know this because my wife worked for And 1. And 1 is sold to the Kohls and TJ maxx's of the worlds.
And "And 1" as a company is trash. They barely move units (shoes or apparel) and I know this because my wife worked for And 1. And 1 is sold to the Kohls and TJ maxx's of the worlds.
- 88,262
- 47,255
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
Originally Posted by ninjahood
they don't NEED anyone to push a 160 dollar shoe...
this shoe proved that.
anything else you wanna assume nike can't do?
god this colorway is sick in person. cant believe i passed on them smh
- 88,262
- 47,255
- Joined
- Feb 29, 2000
Originally Posted by ninjahood
they don't NEED anyone to push a 160 dollar shoe...
this shoe proved that.
anything else you wanna assume nike can't do?
god this colorway is sick in person. cant believe i passed on them smh
- 24,015
- 3,122
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2001
There's a difference between NEED and WANT.
- 24,015
- 3,122
- Joined
- Jul 2, 2001
There's a difference between NEED and WANT.
- 1,079
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
Same here Noble. I love the orange too.
- 1,079
- 10
- Joined
- Dec 8, 2005
Same here Noble. I love the orange too.
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
There is a reason that Nike pulled out all the stops in order to get LeBron James, and it wasn't because he did not have the ability to take the shine off of Nike Basketball by himself. The kid coming out of high school was a freak, then had a major following among young kids. Nike knew this, and any company that LeBron would have signed with would have gained a major boost, then taking the shine off of anyone Nike has on its roster.
So who on Nike's current roster, could push the sales of a 160 dollar basketball shoe?
Name one.
How would Nike differentiate themselves from other companies, without having a very expensive basketball shoe to point to? They cannot do it while showing a well built, then high quality shoe, that's for sure! They need a face to push then justify the crap they make, those that break down faster even than the cheaper models that they even produce.
Without LeBron, they do not have that face.
LeBron with any other company, would be the death knell for Nike's basketball division.
nat turner
Banned
- 1,879
- 10
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2010
There is a reason that Nike pulled out all the stops in order to get LeBron James, and it wasn't because he did not have the ability to take the shine off of Nike Basketball by himself. The kid coming out of high school was a freak, then had a major following among young kids. Nike knew this, and any company that LeBron would have signed with would have gained a major boost, then taking the shine off of anyone Nike has on its roster.
So who on Nike's current roster, could push the sales of a 160 dollar basketball shoe?
Name one.
How would Nike differentiate themselves from other companies, without having a very expensive basketball shoe to point to? They cannot do it while showing a well built, then high quality shoe, that's for sure! They need a face to push then justify the crap they make, those that break down faster even than the cheaper models that they even produce.
Without LeBron, they do not have that face.
LeBron with any other company, would be the death knell for Nike's basketball division.
