Nike chooses Kapaernick for Just Do It...

[AUFAN78 3,910]

11 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Not quite getting why we're bringing up Farrakhan, whom I've made clear in the past that I view as little more than a pallette swap of David Duke. 

Swab. I get it and agree. Rad nuts.

[AUDub 11,149]

2 minutes ago, AUFAN78 said:

Swab. I get it and agree. Rad nuts.

It’s a legitimate term of art. An old trick in video games. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palette_swap

[AUFAN78 3,910]

2 minutes ago, AUDub said:

It’s a legitimate term of art. An old trick in video games. 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palette_swap

Ok, school me. Its all good. I quit at Nintendo. 

[japantiger 4,051]

3 hours ago, TitanTiger said:

Will be interesting to see how many of the MAGA hat wearing redneck bammers choose to burn their game-official Nike-made Bama jerseys.

Someone will have to spell "N I K E" out loud for them to know what's going on...

[AUFAN78 3,910]

1 hour ago, AUFAN78 said:

.00001 equates to nearly nothing. Just a math lesson. Carry on.

Ha! And I left off a zero. 

[japantiger 4,051]

 

[gr82be 14,425]

Maybe just have him wear these in his ad. More appropriate and likely that he has use for it than a pair of athletic shoes at this point. 

[Proud Tiger 4,261]

Nike getting blowback and stock down over 2 points today. Good.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/09/04/as-nfl-offers-measured-response-to-nike-s-kaepernick-ad-other-reactions-range-from-support-to-outrage.html

 

[TitanTiger 20,483]

3 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

But you should know their golf line sucks. IIWII.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.  It's not the point though.  The point is, the folks getting their knickers in a twist over this don't affect Nike's bottom line.  They aren't their target market.

[TitanTiger 20,483]

3 hours ago, AUDub said:

My only pair of Nike's have been relegated to lawn mowing. Everyday walkers are NB, golf shirts and the like are all UA. 

I'm rather brand agnostic.  Currently own Nike's.  Previous pair was adidas.   Nike's before that and New Balance prior to that.

[TitanTiger 20,483]

3 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

It would be zero 50 year old white guys, period. 

Exactly.  Which supports the notion that they really don't care what that segment of the population thinks about it.

[TitanTiger 20,483]

3 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

.00001 equates to nearly nothing. Just a math lesson. Carry on.

Are you trying to hit some quota on irrelevant responses and missing the point?

[TitanTiger 20,483]

29 minutes ago, Proud Tiger said:

Nike getting blowback and stock down over 2 points today. Good.

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2018/09/04/as-nfl-offers-measured-response-to-nike-s-kaepernick-ad-other-reactions-range-from-support-to-outrage.html

Adidas stock was down 2.41% today.  But I'd hardly expect you or Fox to bother with basic research.  Much better to imply it's because of some boycott that's a tempest in a teapot.

[AUDub 11,149]

35 minutes ago, TitanTiger said:

I'm rather brand agnostic.  Currently own Nike's.  Previous pair was adidas.   Nike's before that and New Balance prior to that.

Me too. I’ll buy what feels comfortable. My wife actually dresses me more than I do lol.

The UA polos are a definite personal preference, though. Comfy as hell. 

[ShocksMyBrain 9,366]

I don’t wear tennis shoes except for work. And they’re New Balances because they offer a wide width and don’t fall apart easily. Haven’t owned a pair of Nikes in probably 15 or 20 years. I don’t like to wear tennis shoes outside of work, give me a comfortable pair of boots, casual dress shoes, or Chacos.

My buddy(A)went to Academy today to get some new shoes. He grabbed a pair of NB and a pair of Nikes and was headed up to the counter and another customer(B)stopped him and the exchange went something like this according to my buddy. 

B: I hope you’re not buying those Nikes. 

A: Why?

B: Because of Kapernick. I ripped up and threw my Nike stuff away. 

A: Well, that was stupid. 

B: Yeah...so I’m back here buying new shoes because my wife made me. 

You already own the stuff. Destroying and throwing away your apparel instead of donating them makes you look like a selfish moron. Same thing with all the Yeti owners who destroyed their overpriced coolers. 

[AUDub 11,149]

Don't forget Keurig coffee makers. 

[ShocksMyBrain 9,366]

20 minutes ago, AUDub said:

Don't forget Keurig coffee makers. 

Should be making French press anyway.

[ShocksMyBrain 9,366]

https://babylonbee.com/news/man-who-exclusively-buys-13-velcro-shoes-from-walmart-threatens-nike-boycott/

[TitanTiger 20,483]

Twitter thread:  Soldiers posting themselves wearing their Nike Army boots in support of Kaepernick:

 

 

[Mikey 16,605]

23 hours ago, alexava said:

Still amazes me that people are so divided on this that they buy shoes or not based on butt hurt. 

People should support their convictions with their purchasing actions. If they aren't willing to follow their convictions with actions how do they even deserve to have a conviction?

Nike won't miss my business because I don't think I've ever bought any of their items anyway. Now I for sure won't be buying any in the future. Dick's Sporting Goods is a place I have spent some serious change in the past, but never again because of their anti- 2nd amendment stance. A local auto repair shop hangs a UAT flag out front. I don't go there either. There's so much commercial competition these days that it's rather simple and easy to not hand your money to people you don't agree with.

[RunInRed 16,411]

[TitanTiger 20,483]

28 minutes ago, Mikey said:

People should support their convictions with their purchasing actions. If they aren't willing to follow their convictions with actions how do they even deserve to have a conviction?

Because no one is truly consistent on this.  And everyone screams for boycotts at the drop of a hat these days to the point where they are largely meaningless as a form of protest.  Several of the major sports apparel brands are tied up in this in one way or another.  You have Nike using Kaepernick in an ad.  The face of Under Armour (Steph Curry) told the POTUS he’s not visiting the White House.  Puma's brand ambassador is Jay-Z, who has very publicly and vocally supported Kaepernick.  adidas has rappers on the payroll that they use in their ads who have publicly and openly supported Kaepernick.

 

28 minutes ago, Mikey said:

Nike won't miss my business because I don't think I've ever bought any of their items anyway. Now I for sure won't be buying any in the future. Dick's Sporting Goods is a place I have spent some serious change in the past, but never again because of their anti- 2nd amendment stance. A local auto repair shop hangs a UAT flag out front. I don't go there either. There's so much commercial competition these days that it's rather simple and easy to not hand your money to people you don't agree with.

I just think the bar ought to be a good bit higher for trying to coerce or manipulate others into changing their views or their expressions of them.  Going around perpetually frustrated or offended is no way to live life.

[aubearcat 2,137]

15 hours ago, AUFAN78 said:

I use Under Armour SpeedForm for running. Switched from Brooks. Both excellent. 

I haven’t tried the Under Armour shoes. I’m wearing Brooks Cadence for extra support. If I’m wearing less support I want the Pure Flow or Asics Gel Nimbus (or Nike Free RN). 

[gr82be 14,425]

Nike is getting plenty of free airtime and publicity from this decision. Not sure what commercials cost but I'm sure they weighed the pros and cons of this ad campaign. They are getting more exposure than they paid for. Many will not care and buy their stuff anyway. Some that care will forget and eventually buy again. I will be surprised if Nike gets hurt out of this deal. I'm with @Mikey in that they won't miss my dollars because I don't buy from them anyway. This certainly won't change my mind. 

[AUDub 11,149]

5 minutes ago, gr82be said:

Nike is getting plenty of free airtime and publicity from this decision. Not sure what commercials cost but I'm sure they weighed the pros and cons of this ad campaign. They are getting more exposure than they paid for. Many will not care and buy their stuff anyway. Some that care will forget and eventually buy again. I will be surprised if Nike gets hurt out of this deal. I'm with @Mikey in that they won't miss my dollars because I don't buy from them anyway. This certainly won't change my mind. 

Another thing, I'm glad no one here is assigning any sort of benevolent motive to Nike, a global brand if there ever was one. Sure, the ad may be slick marketing, but their motive is profit, not social change. We would do well not to forget that.