https://www.aol.com/article/finance...nsor-to-take-a-side-in-trump-vs-nfl/23222453/ Nike becomes first NFL sponsor to take a side in Trump vs NFL Daniel Roberts Sep 25th 2017 After President Trump unleashed a verbal tirade on the NFL at a rally in Alabama on Friday night and NFL owners and players responded on Saturday, many wondered how NFL sponsors would respond to the controversy. On Monday, Nike became the first to take a clear position. In a statement sent to the media, the company said: “Nike supports athletes and their right to freedom of expression on issues that are of great importance to our society.” It’s a short statement, but it speaks volumes. Nike came out in support of the players’ right to protest. That’s not the same as saying Nike supports the protests themselves, but even supporting the players’ rights to protest represents a big risk for the brand. Another NFL sponsor, Under Armour, sent out a tweet on Saturday about Trump’s comments, but the statement very carefully avoided taking a side. The company said it “stands for the flag and by our Athletes for free speech, expression and a unified America.” It is a good example of the cautious, sit-on-the-fence approach NFL sponsors typically take amidst scandals. Nike, on the other hand, took a side. The NFL’s official sponsors include mostly big consumer-facing brands like Anheuser-Busch InBev, Barclays, Bose, Bridgestone, Campbell’s, FedEx, McDonald’s, Microsoft, Nationwide, Nike, PepsiCo, Ticketmaster, Under Armour, and Visa. And $1.25 billion of the NFL’s revenue last year came from those sponsors. Nike has led the way by issuing a statement on the Trump vs NFL controversy, a story that is unlikely to go away in the coming weeks. For now, Nike stands alone. But other sponsors may be studying the response to Nike’s statement for an indicator of what they should do. And the response has already begun. On social media, search “Nike NFL” and you’ll find Twitter users claiming they will boycott or stop purchasing Nike products because of Nike’s implicit support of the player protests.
Another idiot consumer products company ignores their only responsibility (to shareholders) and wades into a charged political stance. And like almost all other companies, they will reap what they sow.
I agree that it is poor judgement for any company to wade into the middle of this. Either way you are making about half your customers upset.
The big four sportswear companies all sponsor The NFL and NBA, and both The NFL and NBA support the right to kneel and and give The F U to Trump.If you want a nice pair of sports shoes or clothing you don't have many choices other than an NBA or NFL sponsor thats why Nike can take this position imo.Same with Hollywood.Hollywood doesn't give a shit about attacking the right because they know if you want to watch movies or TV there aren't many right wing choices.I'm guessing right wingers get tired of listening to ted nugent and watching re runs of charles in charge after awhile.
No, it doesn't. What is the upside in wading into a politically charged topic? Don't think from the vantage point of a social justice warrior. Think from an officer of a company. Sure, you might get some folks to agree with you. But which is more likely? Nike will get more customers that previously did not buy Nike sportswear. Nike will lose customers it had that suddenly are pissed off. Anyone who understands customer service at consumer goods companies knows that negative impulses from consumers are always 10x louder than positive impulses from consumers. Kelloggs - fail. Starbucks - fail. Target - fail. Show me an example where a company made a politically charged position known, and it worked out to there advantage.
UnderArmour down 12% in the last 5 days. NKE tanked after hours. Ya know Tony....I know you don't trade....but you should pull up a chart of Target when they got on that whole transgender bathroom thing. Somewhere on ET I have a whole thread about it. 100% right as usual too. The stock has never recovered. Albeit there's more there than bathrooms., but that didn't help. Nugent...... hmmmm..... no comment there. Gotta pay the bills. Album sales ain't what they used to be.
UnderArmour has been tanking https://www.thestreet.com/story/143...alls-wells-fargo-sees-continued-downside.html Under Armour's Future Is Bleak for Right Now Analysts at Wells Fargo have downgraded Under Armour's stock based on a lack of future growth drivers. Giovanni Bruno Follow Sep19,2017 Shares of Under Armour (UA) were fell over 1.5% in trading on Tuesday after analysts at Wells Fargo downgraded the athletic apparel retailer's stock to "Underperform" from "Market Perform" with a $13 price target. "The industry has had a remarkable track record of success over the long-term, but with consumers having filled their closets with athleticwear over the past 6-7 years, meaningful distribution issues (bankruptcies, store closures, etc.) and a current 'lull' in product innovation, the category appears poised to take a breather for now," Wells Fargo analyst Tom Nikic noted. Those concerning factors will limit future growth opportunities for Under Armour, whose stock is lower over 40% year-to-date.
Think its bad now.... wait till all the Trumpys put their kids in Converse. Remember Tony....50% of the U.S. population. Won't take too many to skew next Q's top line.