It doesn't seem to be available in Australia also.Assuming this will not be available in the US?
Always uglier. The GOAT in ugliness.
Hopefully will be available in other countries soon.They are available on the Uniqlo CN site. Price for the match shirt and shorts are both $27.84 USD(199RMB).
Nishikori’s outfits this year have been much better than Roger’s, imoIts cool, I like Nishikori's better.
Has Kei's outfit for Shanghai been revealed yet?Its cool, I like Nishikori's better.
That is cheap. How can they make money at that price when they gave Roger 30 million? Nike would have sold them for 84 USD each.They are available on the Uniqlo CN site. Price for the match shirt and shorts are both $27.84 USD(199RMB).
Their revenue is over $2 billion dollar per a year. $30 mils are nothing for them.That is cheap. How can they make money at that price when they gave Roger 30 million? Nike would have sold them for 84 USD each.
Then why did they sign him? To get the RF brand? That is not going to happen. I have never heard of paying someone 30 million without trying to make a profit.Their revenue is over $2 billion dollar per a year. $30 mils are nothing for them.
Also it’s private company so owner can do whatever he wants to do with his money.
They did not sign Federer to sell tennis items in order to make money.
Bring people to their uniqlo stores and online stores in order to buy life style products.Then why did they sign him? To get the RF brand? That is not going to happen. I have never heard of paying someone 30 million without trying to make a profit.
Then why did they sign him? To get the RF brand? That is not going to happen. I have never heard of paying someone 30 million without trying to make a profit.
Uniqlo needed a stand out face for their company, and Roger is one rare combination of class, performance, work ethic and sportmanship.
So I believe that getting your company name related to this kind of unicorn public face is worth whatever you're paying as it simply doesn't exist from a RP perspective. Maybe David Beckham is in the same category. But most of the sport icons are cocky, rockstars usually lack the "family man" attribute etc...
That's also why I don't understand their lack of inspiration for his gear. Roger could be the next "Jordan Brand" if they wanted, a 360° lifestyle brand built around a Superstar status that goes further than the tennis world.
So it is about making moneyBring people to their uniqlo stores and online stores in order to buy life style products.
there are decent people who did not buy anything from Uniqlo then they started to buy T-shirts, casual pants etc.....
it’s a long term vision from Uniqlo whether it will pay off or not.
Honestly, Uniqlo owner just wants to show off his money in my opinion. Seems like the owner likes tennis.
It’s his money and he can do whatever he likes to do with his money.
They make 2 billion dollars per a year. Spending 30 mils per a year is nothing for them.
Apparently you dont understand what was said. I swear Fed fans are so tender.Do you have the figures about the revenue that Federer's presence generates? You are talking so confidently about these things, so you must have some info.
Apparently you dont understand what was said.
It's brand awareness.That is cheap. How can they make money at that price when they gave Roger 30 million? Nike would have sold them for 84 USD each.
I’m starting to believe it’s impossible to have a thread about RF / Uniqlo gear without it devolving into the same rehashed whining about why did he switch from Nike ?? Why did uniqlo do that ?? Do they know what they are doing with their money ?? It’s so bad, but at the same time I can’t buy it in stores — why the unfairness ??
Lollllll
More interestingly. Have you seen any uniqlo ads featuring Roger? I have not. Are they using him in social media? (I don’t know because I don’t use it other than a few platforms where uniqlo ads won’t appear.
I understand the positive association but can’t see how the investment generates any ROI unless he’s used in ads to sell stuff (whether the tennis range or the ordinary range).
On quality, the rf shorts I have are nice and better quality than the uniqlo ordinary range. I would expect his deal includes requirements that the marketed goods meet min quality specs.
I work in media, it’s all about ROI.
Eh? ROI = eyeballs = sales. No ads: ROI? In terms of your marketing budget is it all about ROI, however you choose to measure it (including positive association etc).
My point being, whether the intention is to push either the tennis range or the ordinary range I can’t see how they are getting a return on the investment at this stage (but I don’t have shares in uniqlo and they aren’t a client so I’m not fussed). Plus, I think the tennis range is nicer than the ordinary range: not a comparison seeking to denigrate one but merely an observation that Rog probably has quality requirements built into his deal.
Agreed ain’t not point in a conversation if you don’t wanna play the points
Goodness me. How many times have you seen uniqlo ads featuring Roger? Me? Never. The assessment is pretty simple: unless he’s being used in ads it’s hard to see how they are getting a return on investment unless they are measuring it on something other than eyeballs on ads. Have you got the uniqlo balance sheet and marketing budget? I don’t so I’m necessarily speculating. Care to share if you do? Why the contrariness? Jeez Louise.
We knew in July of 18 that UQ wouldn't have effective advertising or a distribution channel for his line (meager tho it is.) Nothing has changed in that thinking. Wanna buy a Fed jacket? Sorry. Didn't get those socks the first day? See you in January. What kind of marketer only makes stuff available around the Slams, and doesn't sell the rest of it to the public?
Uniqlo.
If you have read my very first post then you would have understood my last. You Fed fans always think someone is saying something negative against him. I only said that the price that Uniqlo was offering Roger's kits were much cheaper that Nike did and the other poster took it as negative and ranted about how much money the owner has and didnt sign Roger for profit reasons. That is when i replied "I have never heard paying someone 30 million with trying to make a profit. So understand the context. As far as the RF logo i know that Nike is not giving it to Uniqlo. https://hypebeast.com/2019/6/roger-federer-nike-rf-logo-ownership-conflictI understood perfectly well.
You said "without trying to make a profit", which suggests that you know how much profit they make and that none/or negligible part of it comes out of their Federer deal. To claim something like that you must have some pretty conclusive data, otherwise your statements are sitting up in the air with nothing to back them up. Same for the RF logo, which no one outside of the involved parties knows anything about (and by the looks of it you are more wrong than right).
So tender! I meant $30 million a yearIt's brand awareness.
They didn't bring Federer on board to shill tennis gear.
And it was $300M. At least get your figures straight.
That looks familiar hahahahahahaI saw a teenager wore this jacket at a USTA tournament last saturday and I asked him where he bought it. He said he doesn't know. His father got it for him. I've been trying to buy one but no luck so far . I would buy this Uniqlo jacket over Nike any days