Lets Discuss The Industry

[kingjay718]

Is And1 dead? Aside from Monta Ellis and Steve Blake, what the hell happened? I always looked forward to their basketball items in the Fall. The And1Spree, KGII, and And1 Quest are one of my favorite shoes ever. I remember looking at the And1 Mad Game ad in the SLAM Mag hard body.

 

[rockdeep]

Originally Posted by the12the22the32the4

I remember the last Under Armour vs. Nike thread when Rock alluded to his feeling that moving to UA "might" be a good move for Lebron and then he and I went on a whole big back and forth that shut the thread down because people were too lazy to keep up. Ah, memories.
 

I can admit when Im wrong and I was dead wrong.  Back then I was under the well informed opinion that UA would do what it took to push the envelope on their performance Footwear for Basketball.  As you can see that wasn't and isn't the case.  Not for Lebron.. not for Brandon Jennings.. Not at all.  I still do think UA can be a player.... just not in Basketball Performance footwear.  They dont have the experience, they dont have the committment and they dont have the resources.

Again. I was wrong.  Throw tomatoes!

 

However For Lebron IF the Footwear could have been competitive the Marketing would have been easy.  UA is Team.  Bron could have easily had followers to the Brand to be on HIS Team.  As you stated they are whats new to Kids.. but having more than Sponsored All Star Events is going to be needed to be engrained.  You dont need to be just in for the up and coming generation , you need to be COOL.  In High Schools if Jocks wear UA gear... others follow suit.

Hence they should focus on Training performance footwear with their apparrel.

I think you made great points.  No arguing that.

 

[jmizzo]

I think Wade tried to be a big fish in a small pond with Converse and that totally failed....Lebron going to UA without a great product line would fail too....Name can only get you in te door...

As far as buying UA....might be a good option for Nike...UAs market capitialization is $1.3 billion.....Nike's is $31.45 billion....They should gobble them up, keep the good (including the logo and apparel) and then toss out the basketball shoes...

 

[rockdeep]

Theyd need to ditch more than the Basketball stuff.. lol

 

[jmizzo]

True, but it's a good start....LOL

 

[3onpar5]

I agree. If NIKE bought UA and thats a big IF, they should keep everything exactly the same, logo all that just like they did with Umbro converse etc. There is no denying that UA has created a brand. THey are like q-tips and kleenex, when you want base layer people say do you have any Under Armour? They dont always realize that UA is a different company, they just want the product.

 

[crazy ebw]

Originally Posted by KG21

For running, I have two pairs of Asics, Nimbus 9s and Kinetic 1s. Asics specializes in running shoes and has different models for all types of feet and runners. Nike just puts out generic running shoes at different price points. Why not buy a shoe that is specialized for the activity?

I used to think so, but not as much anymore. Nike has been trying to get back their core running customers and put out good shoes. They do have different models for feet/gaits but they aren't as readily available for some dumb reason. The lunarlite stuff has gotten pretty fair reviews from serious runners in the RW forums. I haven't seen as many people be excited about a Nike shoe since SHOX were put into shoes. The Lunarglide has been a good step in the right direction for Nike. So saying Nike puts out generic shoes for runners is unfair. They have shoes for every runner's needs. While they might not perform as well, they are out there.

PS. The Equalon is a DOPE shoe.

 

[rockdeep]

Originally Posted by 3onPar5

I agree. If NIKE bought UA and thats a big IF, they should keep everything exactly the same, logo all that just like they did with Umbro converse etc. There is no denying that UA has created a brand. THey are like q-tips and kleenex, when you want base layer people say do you have any Under Armour? They dont always realize that UA is a different company, they just want the product.

To piggy back on that comment.  UA has great branding because before Dri Fit... people used to call EVERYTHING Under Armour.  When someone would want Lycra Pants.. or a Football Undershirt.. Theyd say Under Armour no matter what brand it was.

UA should have capitalized from that.
  

 

[crazy ebw]

Side note: who agrees that the UA !$#!% Sporting Goods ads are just dumb? I can't stand them. The coldgear crap.

 

[3onpar5]

I agree. I kind of touched on it a little in a previous post. They really need to lighten up over there in Maryland. Relax have a good time, sports are fun. Quit walking around with a frown on your face.

 

[the12the22the32the4]

Originally Posted by RockDeep

Originally Posted by the12the22the32the4

I remember the last Under Armour vs. Nike thread when Rock alluded to his feeling that moving to UA "might" be a good move for Lebron and then he and I went on a whole big back and forth that shut the thread down because people were too lazy to keep up. Ah, memories.
 

I can admit when Im wrong and I was dead wrong.  Back then I was under the well informed opinion that UA would do what it took to push the envelope on their performance Footwear for Basketball.  As you can see that wasn't and isn't the case.  Not for Lebron.. not for Brandon Jennings.. Not at all.  I still do think UA can be a player.... just not in Basketball Performance footwear.  They dont have the experience, they dont have the committment and they dont have the resources.

Again. I was wrong.  Throw tomatoes!

 

However For Lebron IF the Footwear could have been competitive the Marketing would have been easy.  UA is Team.  Bron could have easily had followers to the Brand to be on HIS Team.  As you stated they are whats new to Kids.. but having more than Sponsored All Star Events is going to be needed to be engrained.  You dont need to be just in for the up and coming generation , you need to be COOL.  In High Schools if Jocks wear UA gear... others follow suit.

Hence they should focus on Training performance footwear with their apparrel.

I think you made great points.  No arguing that.

I wasn't ragging on you

. I merely meant that I was amazed that this thread was going strong and was so much better than that one, with people actually putting some thought into replies and not just "LAWLZ1!1!1!! CHEA MANE, DAT WOOD B DA GR8ST EVRRR!!111!!1!!!!" like in the old one.

I like you Rock

, I hope you didn't take my comments as implying otherwise or trying to show you up or something of that nature. I assure you wholeheartedly that was not my intent.

 

[rockdeep]

Oh no not at all my man. I wasnt firing back.. yet actually commending you on the fact that you were indeed right. lol

My bad if it came off like that. I think you made alot of good points. I too am amazed and glad that a thread can go 4 pages without running off course. All the comments have been great. No worries my man. All is good. Like I said. Im glad you brought that to light.

Cause I was indeed wrong... but wish I hadnt been.

UA really could have done some things with Bron.

 

[jmizzo]

based on the stability of the UA shoes that they made for "Young Buck" they don't have the ability to make a shoe for a basketball athlete of Lebron based on the amount of shear force that he places on them....I have seen pictures and the shoes just buckle under and Jennings only weighs 150lbs soaking wet....

 

[rockdeep]

I think Nike could make Bron a TRIPLE stack Zoom with a serious Outrigger to prevent tipping and it would still get serious force on it.

I dont really think UA is prepared to think outside the box on HOW it can produce footwear to do that, because they want to keep the performance based on the average person and you cant do that. You HAVE to take a tiered approach and service several types of players.

 

[rockdeep]

I think Nike could make Bron a TRIPLE stack Zoom with a serious Outrigger to prevent tipping and it would still get serious force on it.

I dont really think UA is prepared to think outside the box on HOW it can produce footwear to do that, because they want to keep the performance based on the average person and you cant do that. You HAVE to take a tiered approach and service several types of players.

 

[menoforegon]

RockDeep wrote:
UA really could have done some things with Bron.


Fortunately for us, we had the advantage of having an established relationship with his agent at the beginning of his career, Aaron Goodwin. He really helped to persuade Lebron into signing with us.

And we also had the appeal of this marketing campaign that helped to "wow" Lebron and win him over:

And a very, VERY special thanks to these guys, also known as "Team Lebron".

Not sure if Under Armour had this kind of firepower behind them.

 

[mp23]

As Rock said, UA had great branding with their compression apparel. However Nike had Dri-FIT apparel out in 1995 and people talked about that a lot. UA just got the "compression-fit" down pat, and then Nike followed suit with their Pro apparel and from there the battle continued in the moisture-wicking apparel. UA had a lot going for it in that market, but chose to over-saturate themselves with too many outreaches in too many sports.

 

[crazy ebw]

Damn that was 7 years ago, I feel so old...

 

[the12the22the32the4]

Originally Posted by MenofOregon

RockDeep wrote:
UA really could have done some things with Bron.

Fortunately for us, we had the advantage of having an established relationship with his agent at the beginning of his career, Aaron Goodwin. He really helped to persuade Lebron into signing with us.

And we also had the appeal of this marketing campaign that helped to "wow" Lebron and win him over:

And a very, VERY special thanks to these guys, also known as "Team Lebron".

Not sure if Under Armour had this kind of firepower behind them.


What does any of this have to do with anything going on in this thread? UA didn't start making shoes until 2006. In 2003 when Lebron signed his seven year $90 million contract the $110 million competition was from Reebok, not UA. Rock has said numerous times that (I'm paraphrasing here) "UA should look at making a play for Lebron when his contract is up" which would be this year. While it's clear in above posts that I didn't agree with the assertion, it was always about 2010, not 2003 like your post is in reference to.

Of course UA didn't have that kind of firepower behind them in 2003, nor did Bath and Body Works. But it's irrelevant because neither one of them made basketball shoes in 2003.

Plus, Aaron Goodwin was shown the door almost five years ago, but even he knew that 2010 was the biggest key to Nike's suggest with Lebron:

Says agent Aaron Goodwin: "Nike will let LeBron grow and kids aregoing to be patient with him. Guys like Kevin Garnett and Tracy McGradyhit their prime in the mid-20s and that means the height of LeBron'scareer could be six or seven years out."
Just about the time that James' endorsement deal with Nike should be up for renegotiation.
Rock saw all this, he just had/has more faith in UA than I, you, or most others.

Speaking of marketing, I like Nike, they are still the best brand out there, but let's face it: Goodwin's gone, the Lebron line peaked with the IV and the line's design has gone downhill ever since, Kobe is arguably the #1 guy at Nike (I stress arguably, but the fact that it's even debatable is astounding given the vastly greater resources Lebron gets over Kobe), and the latest marketing campaign with the puppets makes the Lebron puppet look like a stooge that the Kobe puppet appears superior to in the commercials.

If you're Lebron are you really "feeling the love" from Nike right now? Sure he's still cashing the checks, but is that enough for a guy who tattoos "Family" up the entire side of his body and wants to be respected as "The Man" worldwide when he's not even treated like "The Man" by his own shoe company? Might be enough to make him think twice about jumping into a new Nike contract without at least exploring his other options. It's just unfortunate for Lebron himself that UA isn't a true player and that Adidas can't get their act together.

Sometimes it's not about firepower; sometimes it's about respect. Which again is all the more reason Nike should buyout UA while they have the opportunity. Eliminate an option for "The Worldwide Icon" and insure that Nike locks Lebron back up for the rest of his career. 

 

[rockdeep]

lol^^ After I read MoO's response I too wondered what that had to do with what the discussion was about. MofO you went back in time before UA was even thought about in any comp for Nike to get Bron. They weren't even thinking about basketball back then and if so barely.

Maybe you meant something else with that diatribe. Please explain or something.

To your point the12the22 Bron IS in fact Priority #1 at Nike, BUT you have to understand. HE BETTER BE with all thats been invested. This shoe HAS to be the one to get back all thats been spent on him and resources. Kobe's MUCH easier because he has a following, he has his own PR, and many folks looking out for him this go round.

One Bonus. Kobe NOT Bron is King in Asia where Units moved mean alot. Kobe's moving units for a low cut performance shoe. THATS unreal. I'd even go as far as saying its without the use of the puppets or muppets or whatever they are. The IV was Gold Jerry Gold!!!! and I believe the IV made the V easy as pie.

Let me preface this all with I am no fan of the Kobe V or IV. Just not my cup of tea.

I'll say again as I did before. Adi really could be more of a player in the Market if they regrouped and shifted their design focus away from the integrated Three stripes and moreso on the Shoe Design itself. Let the Design be primary and stand alone and allow the three stripes to be secondary. Hell I'd even put the Adi stripes inside a crest and just stick it on a great design.

Nikes advantage as I said before is a REALLY bad design can be MUCH improved with a fat swooshed slapped on it. it is what it is.

But to the point of my Faith in UA.. ...? Only if they reshift their company Mission. If not.. they wont just fail in basketball ,but as a company and disappear should Nike decide NOT to purchase them. Adi would have been smarter maybe to try and assume them.

 

[crazy ebw]

Originally Posted by RockDeep

I'll say again as I did before. Adi really could be more of a player in the Market if they regrouped and shifted their design focus away from the integrated Three stripes and moreso on the Shoe Design itself. Let the Design be primary and stand alone and allow the three stripes to be secondary. Hell I'd even put the Adi stripes inside a crest and just stick it on a great design.

Exactly. The three stripes just always looks so forced into the design that it can automatically take away any design that may have been otherwise good.

 

[the12the22the32the4]

^Kobe also embodies a lot more of the ideals that Asian cultures stereotypically revere. Lebron is more "fun" while Kobe is more the "ruthless competitor." It's no secret Kobe sells more pairs over there, but he also makes more of an effort, perhaps due to "his" PR people, but Nike is definitely missing the boat on poorly marketing Lebron internationally.

"Faith in UA" was a bad choice of words; perhaps I should have said that you see more potential in what they can offer than I do. Financially Adidas can't make a move on them - they don't have the capital and the board would never sign off on it after the Reebok debacle.

Adidas trying to buy UA is Nike's dream - then both Adidas and UA go under and Nike never had to spend a dime.

Keep in mind though, the Kobe line was nothing special (sales wise) until the IV. I remember the Kobe I's sitting in the outlets for $34.99 and the II's and III's not even making it to a lot of areas outside of California. Lebron was doing pretty well with the III's and IV's, but then the V's and VI's were a downturn. VII's seem to be doing better, but haven't seen a lot of their numbers yet. Granted, the Soldier line plays a big part in cannibalizing sales from the Lebron signature line, but the signature line should still be the focus.

Point is, Lebron had a few good shoes but hasn't sustained it to the level you would expect a player of his marketing potential to be able to. Kobe just had his first good seller with the IV's. It will be interesting to see if Kobe is better able to sustain success than Lebron.

 

[rockdeep]

Lebron fighting Dragons didn't help Brons marketing at all in Asia..

Then word got out in circles that he was a bit of an A-Hole. That doesn't sit well with my boys over there.. lol.. Altho he still has alot of loyal followers Kobe IS King over there.

 

[3onpar5]

I think sometimes we get to caught up in the Lebron line or Kobe line selling more than the other. I think thats because most of here in this discussion lived during the Golden Era of basketballs shoes. I doubt any line will sell as well as Jordan ever! So its unfair of us to comapre. I think NIKE is trying to think different, like with the Lebron line sure the actual Lebron VI maybe didnt sell as many pairs but add those sales with the soliders and the VI lows and ALL the SMU that the VI had and I bet you have a pretty good number. It also benefits NIKE to pair Kobe and Lebron in advertising because I dont think one man can sell like before.

Its also a little tougher to market a "big mans shoe" which is essentially what Lebron needs. I know my son loves his and they look great on his feet.

Lets not get on MenofOregon too much, let him voice his opinion. We have gone 5 good pages with good banter, lets keep that going. I think he was saying that NIKE had a dream team of sorts to lure Lebron in the first place and when it came time that UA could not match that firepower.

 

[rockdeep]

I hope it didn't appear I was getting on Men Of O.. I was just wondering what that angle of explanation was. Since UA wasn't a real player back then.

I sort of disagree with one man not being able to sell a shoe because Kobe cant sell Brons shoe and vice versa and it could at some point bite Nike in the butt if people go against one or the other due to differences in type and cost if one is much more beneficial to the consumer in the end.

I do think the Playoff shoe was a GREAT move for Nike with the VII. I've seenthe VII low and altho it looks nothing like the VII in whole. It speaks to what a low should be. Not exact.. but a derivative of its original. You are right on the VI 3Par. With how they split the SMUs out from the GRs. They intentionally did NOT produce or OVER Produce the shoe and only allowed each store a few size runs of each IF that... to make that feeling of.. "better get it the first trip to the store"