I don't want to get in the weeds of the Kapernick deal. One thing that is happening is that my social media is blowing up with mock Nike ads. I have heard it said sometimes even bad publicity is good because it keeps your name if people's faces and keeps people talking about you. Is this thing helping or hurting Nike? I honestly don't know.

too many other brands. I buy brooks running shoes and Adidas clothing.

Quote:

---

Fourth quarter revenue increased 13 percent to $9.8 billion driven by strong double-digit revenue growth in international markets and NIKE Direct globally, and a return to growth in North America. Diluted earnings per share for the fourth quarter rose 15 percent to $0.69, primarily due to strong revenue growth, gross margin expansion, a lower tax rate and a lower average share count, which were partially offset by higher selling and administrative expense.

---

It will depend on what affect it really has on the "growth in NA".

Note: the one with little girl making the shoes is completely savage.

diehard03 said:

---

It will depend on what affect it really has on the "growth in NA".

---

I am bullish on the outcome of the ad (and subsequent memes). Biased, but bullish. From my vantage point it appears to have been brilliant marketing - regardless of what side of the dialogue you align to.

Growth strategy wise, 80% of Nike's projected growth over next 2 years is in 12 key cities. New York, London, Shanghai, Beijing, Los Angeles, Tokyo, Paris, Berlin, Mexico City, Barcelona, Seoul, and Milan. My network is not huge in 10 of those cities, but social media circles in LA & NY are overwhelmingly favorable. My circles in TX... not so much. But are still circulating brilliant memes - many of which may live forever.

Brilliant marketing.

Right now, Kapernick is the biggest "fu" to authority there is.

The people that are all upset about the ads, probably aren't buying that many Nike's anyway.

People who want to rebel against THOSE PEOPLE probably view Nike as just a little more cool and anti-establishment than they did last week.

I don't necessarily agree with this.

https://morningconsult.com/form/nike-kaepernick-report/

Nike's favorability dropped by half after they announced the ad campaign.

Favorability among Generation Z (18-21 year olds surveyed, but really it's 8-21 year olds) dropped 30%.

These are the people Nike needs. Yeah Boomers, Gen X and Millennials favorability dropped and they have purchasing power, but they are likely buying for Gen Z. If Gen Z doesn't like your goods they aren't going to ask their parents or grandparents to buy Nike gear.

Gen Z are kids right now and the oldest are in high school/college and can influence their parents shopping patterns.

The other thing that doesn't get talked about much is that Generation Z on the whole are more conservative than the Boomers, Gen X and Millennials. They are risk averse, fiscally conservative, they drink, do drugs and have less sex than Millennials. They dislike tattoos and piercings. Yet they are diverse, support LBGT and other 'liberal' causes. Huff post seems to think that this means they are liberal. I tend to think that conservative values changed a bit with the Millennials and social causes don't mean as much anymore.

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/conservative-or-liberal-its-not-that-simple-with_us_59ea34f7e4b034105edd4e32

I hate HuffPo but reading their article it seems like the Gen Z are going to be conservative and when they are old enough in 5-10 years to get into politics the Dems better watch out because if they aren't dead by then, the new generation will kill them.

This all goes to say I think Nike majorly missed their mark. Their ad campaign might resonate with millennials, but that isn't the target audience of athletic apparel, it should be Gen Z if you want the kids to buy stuff all through K-12 and college.

I think next year's earnings in North America will be telling.

Yes they say any publicity is good publicity, but I think there is a line that Nike crossed with spending millions of dollars sticking their nose into politics.

any more demographics on respondents to the morning consult report? other than it was 8,000 Americans?

We will see if it affects North America earnings. I'll be staying long.

I had recently bought my first pair of Brooks instead of Nike. Prophetic.

The stock likely goes higher short term (after whatever is left of the correction) regardless. We're talking 1-2 quarters of earnings to see impact either way.

oldarmy1 said:

---

I had recently bought my first pair of Brooks instead of Nike. Prophetic.

The stock likely goes higher short term (after whatever is left of the correction) regardless. We're talking 1-2 quarters of earnings to see impact either way.

---

ghost 11 here

Brooks Glycerin - been buying 6-7 years now. Nike's are terrible for my feet.

Adrenalines and Hoka One Ones.

BP doesn't thing all publicity is good publicity

Ragoo said:

---

oldarmy1 said:

---

I had recently bought my first pair of Brooks instead of Nike. Prophetic.

The stock likely goes higher short term (after whatever is left of the correction) regardless. We're talking 1-2 quarters of earnings to see impact either way.

---

ghost 11 here

---

Ghost 10 here

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3388841-report-nikes-online-sales-rose-31-percent-unveiling-kaepernick-ad-campaign

I wonder how it impacts the NFL which is Nike's partner?

The more viewers turn off the NFL, it seems like that would hurt Nike, and it seemed like the NFL was catching as much backlash from this as anyone.

Although I suppose it is entirely possible that if someone was really upset about it to the point of no longer buying an NFL jersey, they are probably just buying a college jersey, and it is probably Nike.

Nike could look like big hypocrites if they lose their Equal Pay lawsuit.

I'm not sure that over time, it will make a huge difference either way.
Ditto with college Adidas basketball scandal.

chris1515 said:

---

Brilliant marketing.

Right now, Kapernick is the biggest "fu" to authority there is.

The people that are all upset about the ads, probably aren't buying that many Nike's anyway.

People who want to rebel against THOSE PEOPLE probably view Nike as just a little more cool and anti-establishment than they did last week.

---

That may be true overall, but I've probably dropped $400 on Nike gear this year prior to the Kapernick campaign and I can tell you I've spent my last dime with them.

The impact of this decision will play out over the long term, and I don't think it works out in Nike's favor.

I found the print/billboard ad fairly offensive.

I found the full commercial to be non-offensive. It is here if you haven't watched:


It's very on brand strategy.

I read Phil Knight's Shoe Dog recently. They are fiercely loyal to their athletes. So knowing their corporate culture, it doesn't surprise me they backed Colin.

I will buy Brooks shoes and Nike shirts/shorts because they are the best for me -

I will shop at Dicks because it's convenient -

I will vote Cruz and Trump because I support their agenda -

Premium said:

---

I will buy Brooks shoes and Nike shirts/shorts because they are the best for me -

I will shop at Dicks because it's convenient -

I will vote Cruz and Trump because I support their agenda -

---

I already didn't own and Nike shoes because they don't fit my lifestyle.

I don't shop at Dick's because there are none near me.


It is hard to boycott a business I was not patronizing in the first place.

I'm not gonna torch the nike apparel I have because dri fit is awesome in the gym and the cheap nike shoes I have for working out are not bad either, but when it comes time to replace them I'll be looking at other brands.