for king and country
- Jan 20, 2007
This has done nothing to mitigate my huge Stan-boy complex for Nike's marketing department.I think it is great as well.
I will bet on Nike's marketing team over the NFLs every time, though I agree with you there's some complex math on how it will play out.
Did everyone see the Virgil Abloh tutu they made for Serena?
I put it at second behind J.J. Abrams trolling the GamerGater types by letting them get all worked up into a lather thinking the next Jedi was a black guy.This has to qualify as the single biggest troll advertising since Ginsu advertised in ancient Rome 43 BC. The owners have to be furious, which makes it quite delicious in my book.
I think this is correct, and if we apply the @Shelterdog Belichick Maxim to Nike and start with the assumption that they have a good business reason for this decision...I tend to agree with those who think that Nike has this figured out the right way and the NFL is stupid, all of the evidence points to both of those things being true. But Nike doesn’t just sell a pair of socks to someone and then sit back and count their money. They need the people who bought the pair of socks to buy a bunch more the next time he or she needs socks. So, yeah, tearing up the socks doesn’t hurt Nike in the moment, but if the person tearing up the socks also doesn’t buy Nike socks the next time he needs socks that’s a problem for Nike.
The same thing was true for the whole Keurig thing, and actually more acutely true since they make their money on the pods not the machines, so smashing the machines actually does hurt them if the person smashing the machine is no longer buying pods.
Now having said all of that I think Keurig is fine and I think Nike will be fine, but not because they already banked the money from these idiots, but because ultimately I think the MAGAs are are in the minority and also not very disciplined about this kind of thing, and there are a tremendous number of people who support what Kaepernick is doing and will flock to Nike as a result.
FOXNews succeeded by realizing that, if instead of fighting for the median viewer and the middle, if they moved to one side of the spectrum, they could capture that market segment and that was enough.
Nike may have developed a Southern Strategy.
Yup.Love this. Regardless of what one thinks their motive, Nike's going to be on the right side of history on this issue.
And in some circles, it's been noted that there is the potential for a huge windfall to a first mover advantage here on social justice if a corporation would be willing to make the move.
Justice and profit motives aligning seems like a good thing.
I think this is a very astute point.Unfortunately, the consensus is that Target suffered for its decision to take a stand on bathroom access for trans people. But I think the analogy to Nike is flawed in a number of ways. In particular, Target seemed to be caught off-guard by the vehemence of the backlash; Nike assuredly won’t be similarly surprised.
It's very different from the Target thing where they seemed to just be trying to move with history. This is... well--Nike is moving into an aggressive posture on this.
They just told America, among other things, that they've signed up to be Kaep's financial guardian angel. That is really going to piss some people off.
True. But if the soulless corporation moved, it's because the market voted for it to.I am happy to see Kaep rewarded for what in my opinion is the right thing. But as far as Nike goes, this is up there with the State Street girl stares down the bull statue in terms of people suddenly rooting for a soulless massive corporation.
As long as we need shoes, we're going to end up voting for one of these "people," yeah?