Nike becomes first NFL sponsor to take a side in Trump vs NFL

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.

Any stock action for Target had nothing to do with the transgender story. This is just you projecting your own personal views on the world and selectively choosing data to fit that narrative.
 
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.
Chick-fil-a :thumbsup: :D
 
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.

I guess I just don't see the kneeling as some big deal that the internet's making it to be. I don't perceive BLM as being offensive to the average rational customer. On the upside, if their sales have shown substantial growth among the black community, then where's the downside in pandering?

The whole Chic filet, wedding cake, tranny bathroom is apples and oranges I think. Most people recognize blacks should be treated as equal, I don't know if most people feel the same about gays. Be it because half the US is religious, or they just find it icky.
 
I guess I just don't see the kneeling as some big deal that the internet's making it to be. I don't perceive BLM as being offensive to the average rational customer. On the upside, if their sales have shown substantial growth among the black community, then where's the downside in pandering?

The whole Chic filet, wedding cake, tranny bathroom is apples and oranges I think. Most people recognize blacks should be treated as equal, I don't know if most people feel the same about gays. Be it because half the US is religious, or they just find it icky.

I understand, but that's not the point. You and I may find it nothing to show concern or act about, but there are many who do. If you are running a company, your responsibility is to the primary shareholders of that company. Why would you ever risk the business to make a political point? You shouldn't.

There's no upside to the financial being of your company.
 
Any stock action for Target had nothing to do with the transgender story. This is just you projecting your own personal views on the world and selectively choosing data to fit that narrative.

Really? You have proof of this?

Target's sales dropped right after their April 2016 announcement. While it is technically impossible to say whether each customer who opted to shop someplace else did so because of the transgender bathroom policy, the facts are indisputable. Sales in Q3 and Q4 were much lower than expected. Sales loss and poor results led to the stock dropping. Prove otherwise.

At the end of the day, this policy change provided zero upside, and all risk. And that's the point.
 
Here is the smart way to answer the NFL controversy from a sponsor's point of view. Smart people work at these companies.

Ford told customers that they “respect individuals’ rights to express their views, even if they are not ones we share. That’s part of what makes America great.”

For its part, sports apparel giant Under Armour said it “stands for the flag and by our athletes for free speech, expression, and a unified America.”

Hyundai, for instance, said “We stand for and respect individuals’ freedoms to express their First Amendment rights in any peaceful manner in which they choose. We also stand for inclusion, freedom and all that represents those values.”
If you are responsible for the public message of one of these companies, you cannot not have a position, because you're going to be asked. The trick is to come up with a position that is neutral, saying something along the lines of "we respect and understand both points of views". That's how professionals respond.

Personally, I find myself on the side of those finding these athletes juvenile and disrespectful, but I would never make a public statement at my company stating this, even though my industry is overwhelmingly in support of my view. There's just no upside.

Idiots like Nine Ender and Tony don't understand that because they cannot overlook their personal views for the benefit of the organization they would be working for. It's about "me" not "us" with those two. That's how rabid they are.
 
Back
Top