I
ik_ben_groot
Guest
Not watching the match, but is the Fed camp wearing anything Nike?
I totally get that but the context of his post was a bit confusing.H&M are Uniqlo's direct competition.
They are big in Europe.
Uniqlo is Japan's version of Zara, H&M. Low cost casual clothing.
We buy a lot of H&M for the kids.......as they tend to grow out their clothes. One season and it's gone.
FEDNIQLRER > NISHIQLORI + DJOQLOVIC??THIS IS TOTALLY AMAZING!! WOW!!!!!!!!
CONGRATS BABOLAST!!!
Good thing I had no life savings. As for the kidney, I'm a find ya one in chinatown this week.
CONGRATS AGAIN!!
FED-NIQLO! LOL
Wow! Triggered?
We can agree to disagree. Yes, when you leave a company that you’ve been with for 20 years for more money, one that isn’t interested in tennis, I’m more than justified to see that as greedy. If you don’t, that’s fine. His charity work is nice of course.
PS - he pulled the same stuff with the Basel tournament director. ‘Pay me what I think I’m worth or rlse’. They caved in; Nike didn’t.
Lacoste has Novak........you seem to forget.Now, I get your point and to be honest, I also wished he would have stayed with Nike. But it's more or less the same with all these sports superstars. They built a life style that to maintain even after the end of your sports career is costly (to say the least). They need a strong and steady cash flow to keep it up. Do I like that (this whole development in general)? No, not at all. But that's how the business is. I don't blame Fed and I don't see him differently. I always liked him as a player and person (as much as one can tell from his interviews). All in all, I think only very few people in his shoes would have turned down that deal. If UNIQLO offers they same to Rafa at the end of the year, than you will certainly see the two most iconic players of the last decade in gear from a non-sports comany ...
Wow! Triggered?
We can agree to disagree. Yes, when you leave a company that you’ve been with for 20 years for more money, one that isn’t interested in tennis, I’m more than justified to see that as greedy. If you don’t, that’s fine. His charity work is nice of course.
PS - he pulled the same stuff with the Basel tournament director. ‘Pay me what I think I’m worth or rlse’. They caved in; Nike didn’t.
Sorry, plenty of athletes take less in both salary (Brady and KD come immediately to mind - I could probably come up w many more) as a sign of loyalty. So I’ll agree to disagree w you too. Endorsement deals are usually private so we’ll probably never know.I’m not sure greedy is the right word for deals regarding sponsorship. A sponsorship is purely a business deal. It would be pretty silly for any athlete to just take whatever they were offered by a company and not push for more or test the market for what they could get.
Really, there’s a better case to be made that Nike was greedy. They’re a multi billion dollar company for whom Roger has created millions of dollars in revenue and they won’t match the offer of a comparitvely small company.
Well maybe, just maybe.......Federer was not selling as much as you think he was.I’m not sure greedy is the right word for deals regarding sponsorship. A sponsorship is purely a business deal. It would be pretty silly for any athlete to just take whatever they were offered by a company and not push for more or test the market for what they could get.
Really, there’s a better case to be made that Nike was greedy. They’re a multi billion dollar company for whom Roger has created millions of dollars in revenue and they won’t match the offer of a comparitvely small company.
Lacoste has Novak........you seem to forget.
Nadal will not be leaving Nike......be sure of it. He is nowhere near as high maintanance as Federer.
STOP THE NONSENSE!!!
Does anyone here really think he'll sign with them?! I'm willing to bet my life savings that he will not. Hell, I'll even throw in a kidney. Not sure what I'd do with an extra kidney though.
You seem to forget one thing.@Rafa - True, but that's because he won't be offered such a contract. He is marketing-wise not in the same league as Fed. But if for instance Adidas offers twice as much as Nike, then I won't be surprised to see him with 3 stripes on his shoulders. It's not about loyality, it's just business. They probably see their sponsors as some kind of - though to some extent they cherry-pick - employer that pays them. That's why they "need" to attend one or the other event, do some photos/video, and of course wear their stuff. I doubt that they feel that they owe their sponsors loyality as they probably see it that way that they "work" for their money. So if another "employer" offers more than the current, switch ...
PS: Though it's a worn-out phrase, but that's what happens every day. You would do the same job at another company if they pay you more. It's just the scale that is very different. How often do you think the discussions go on in football when one player leaves for another club. I am on a football forum as well and even though it happens every summer/winter, the discussion goes on and on. This is no different.
Sorry, plenty of athletes take less in both salary (Brady and KD come immediately to mind - I could probably come up w many more) as a sign of loyalty. So I’ll agree to disagree w you too. Endorsement deals are usually private so we’ll probably never know.
Well maybe, just maybe.......Federer was not selling as much as you think he was.
Same as Nadal, when there was talk of him going to Joma (I think he should have, with stock options).
Not watching the match, but is the Fed camp wearing anything Nike?
The problem was tjhat Feder thought he had the selling power of Ronaldo, and that tennis was a huge sport, when it ain't.I don’t really have an idea of how much he was selling. My point is just that it makes more sense to call the multi-billion dollar corporation greedy for choosing not to pay him than to call the athlete greedy for trying to get the best deal he can.
I wouldn’t really call either greedy though. Both sides had to act in what they believed was their best interest.
The problem was tjhat Feder thought he had the selling power of Ronaldo, and that tennis was a huge sport, when it ain't.
That was the problem.
It's called common sense. I mentioned earlier, that Fed, Nadal and Djokovic have approx 5m followers on their instagram account.Do you have the numbers on this? Kind of seems like you’re just speculating. Also seems a little off topic. I was pointing out how it’s odd that people tend to view an individual as greedy rather than a multi-billion dollar corporation.
Seems fine in the end. Nike is not paying more than they want and Federer got a better deal than Nike would offer.
Who???The problem was tjhat Feder thought he had the selling power of Ronaldo, and that tennis was a huge sport, when it ain't.
That was the problem.
Who???
Nike shoes.Not watching the match, but is the Fed camp wearing anything Nike?
Their stores have started to spring up. I go to Asia so I’ve known about them for a while.Uniqlo has a presence here in Australia too. Their clothes are miles ahead of Nike in terms of value for money.
I think it is just the American cohort who seem to not know what it is... or you guys do, and are just in denial about it lol.
Their stores have started to spring up. I go to Asia so I’ve known about them for a while.
Were you able to get every shirt/shorts that Nishikori or Djokovic wore? I’ve never had much luck in Asia - they usually have 1 or 2 of the plain shirts in a tiny area. I’ll be better with this if Uniqlo is actually going to go all in for tennis - competition is a good thing.
H and M are a fashion brand with minimal athlete legacy. Signs an ATP player [Berdych]. Has reasonable availability for a couple of seasons. Done for brand awareness rather than a push into tennis.What does Berdych’s H&M line have to do with uniqlo. Am I missing something?
BR
Uniqlo is hardly small; Nike was pragmatic - they went as high as they could justify (note: neith @joekapa or I ever said Nike is a perfect company - we’re just defending them for making the right call in this case). Blindly matching outrageous bids is a fools errand. Nike knows what Fed’s ability to move product is - at least when he’s playing. And Fed obviously chased the money; Uniqlo has no technology that is going to put Fed in better gear.Really, there’s a better case to be made that Nike was greedy. They’re a multi billion dollar company for whom Roger has created millions of dollars in revenue and they won’t match the offer of a comparitvely small company.
STOP THE NONSENSE!!!
Does anyone here really think he'll sign with them?! I'm willing to bet my life savings that he will not. Hell, I'll even throw in a kidney. Not sure what I'd do with an extra kidney though.
If OP has like tons of student loans his life savings could be negative, so he maybe made money. Shame about the kidney.I hope for your sake your life saving is only $1? And as for your kidney well if you’re donating it there are a lot of peeps out there on dialysis that will be happy to take it as long as it’s healthy.
Uniqlo is hardly small; Nike was pragmatic - they went as high as they could justify (note: neith @joekapa or I ever said Nike is a perfect company - we’re just defending them for making the right call in this case). Blindly matching outrageous bids is a fools errand. Nike knows what Fed’s ability to move product is - at least when he’s playing. And Fed obviously chased the money; Uniqlo has no technology that is going to put Fed in better gear.
but you did say YOUR life savings. But hey, we'll just assume you state that you didn't have much in there to begin withWho said anything about my kidney??
Their stores have started to spring up. I go to Asia so I’ve known about them for a while.
Were you able to get every shirt/shorts that Nishikori or Djokovic wore? I’ve never had much luck in Asia - they usually have 1 or 2 of the plain shirts in a tiny area. I’ll be better with this if Uniqlo is actually going to go all in for tennis - competition is a good thing.
Affiliations with a sports team/city are different to an endorsed brand. Brady/KD etc did so to win the biggest prizes by having the team, coaching team or prospects around them. A clothing sponsorship is neither here nor there for any properly represented athlete - as Federer certainly is. It is business - short term or long term considerations obviously apply depending on the deal but it's us, not the athletes, who care what they wear when it is their business to make hay while they have something valuable to sell to a brand.Sorry, plenty of athletes take less in both salary (Brady and KD come immediately to mind - I could probably come up w many more) as a sign of loyalty. So I’ll agree to disagree w you too. Endorsement deals are usually private so we’ll probably never know.
STOP THE NONSENSE!!!
Does anyone here really think he'll sign with them?! I'm willing to bet my life savings that he will not. Hell, I'll even throw in a kidney. Not sure what I'd do with an extra kidney though.
STOP THE NONSENSE!!!
Does anyone here really think he'll sign with them?! I'm willing to bet my life savings that he will not. Hell, I'll even throw in a kidney. Not sure what I'd do with an extra kidney though.
You can forget about them pushing a "Federer line". Federer's stuff will have similar distribution to what Novak, and Nishi have.Uniqlo was very ineffective when they had Djokovic. Very little money was spent on marketing and the shirts were often too generic. In the beginning the quantity they produced was also extremely low (were they trying hunger marketing?). It was a total waste on the deal. I hope they would design something cool with the Fed line. And yes, at least I think there will not be $90+ tennis shirts anymore.
And yes, at least I think there will not be $90+ tennis shirts anymore.
On the flipside, it is perfectly possible to live a normal life with just one kidney.