Federer Shanghai Uniqlo 2019

tyu1314

Semi-Pro
They are available on the Uniqlo CN site. Price for the match shirt and shorts are both $27.84 USD(199RMB).
 
Last edited:

Bartelby

Talk Tennis Guru
It's very good and it's very red because we are in China.

I'm only really hoping for the t-shirt, however, as it's clever.

GO seems the replacement for RF in Uniqlo branding of Roger or REGOR
 

jmacdaununder2

Hall of Fame
Plastic studs and logo 'patches' reflect the low asking price; should sell well on the 'mainland', off shore not so much...
 

Subway Tennis

Hall of Fame
The Dijon mustard colored culottes are just too much.

Just when you thought Uniqlo couldn't screw the pooch any more.

Roger could assimilate pretty handily in a McDonald's food process line with this garb.

Uniqlo has managed to go incredibly "safe" (red color for China) and still create an incredibly garish line.

Doubly disappointing given that his kit for the Asian swing last year was arguably the best so far of the Federer x Uniqlo contract.
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
They are available on the Uniqlo CN site. Price for the match shirt and shorts are both $27.84 USD(199RMB).
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.
 

kimguroo

Legend
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.
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.
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
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.
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.
 

kimguroo

Legend
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.
Bring 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.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
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.

:cool:
 

ChrisG

New User
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.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
Jordan played in a sport that is both much more played and popular, and also can be put in a context that allows companies with relatively cheap products to sell their stuff. Federer has a completely different starting point, so the parallels are not there. What is the social context of tennis? A sport for the middle class with a lot of disposable income. To people that are part of that group selling brands with relatively ubiquitous products with low inherent value is not a major point. To the ordinary folk (which is BB's major target group) selling brands with low inherent value is much more fitting.

:cool:
 
Last edited:

ChrisG

New User
For sure, the target is not the same but the model, in some aspects could be the same. Building around a sport figure that has GOAT status that transcends his own environment so people with zero knowledge about tennis still can relate to the core values of the RF brand: elegance, excellence, work/life ethic etc... the product should definitely be more premium but the market for this premium/sport inspired lifestyle gear is real (at least in Europe or FRance where I live). If you can trigger this market with a figure as RF that embodies it so well, it’s a win/win situation
 
I posted this in another thread but thought it would make sense here too.

I can see how folks can get frustrated with the availability of Fed and Nishikori's items. But I think most are missing the point of Uniqlo signing Fed. It wasn't solely to sell tennis clothes. In fact, tennis clothes are likely not far up the priority list. His celebrity and popularity is being used to promote Uniqlo as a whole, for all their items, specifically in their Global Brands section. If new customers are coming in to buy the tennis gear that's great, but Uniqlo is aiming to draw in more people to buy things from their full range of offerings, e.g. lifewear/lifestyle or whatever they're calling that line. Tennis-related items are only ancillary to attracting people to their overall catalog.

For those that want all of the polos that Fed wears, including those outside the grand slams, their availability probably won't happen on a consistent basis, if at all. It's simply not in Uniqlo's primary interest.

While it apparently is upsetting to all the hardcore Federer fans, it's just a new day - Uniqlo's promotional usage of Fed's celebrity has a different business goal than Nike's. I might be a bit off but didn't Nike only use Fed to sell tennis gear - polos, shorts, shoes etc? Of course Nike is mostly just a sports gear company anyway, but I'm not sure Federer's image was used beyond promoting stuff outside the tennis world. But even if it was, it was likely for other "sports" items.

That is just not Uniqlo's only goal. In fact, sports items are a small part of what they sell. So all the criticism of Uniqlo's marketing acumen seems to be off-base or ill-informed. Out of their approximately 1250 international stores, only 100 are in the US/Europe. That should show you where there main focus is - Asia. And of course they are trying to increase the viability of their "Global Brands" segment.

(Maybe TMI, and just to be clear, Uniqlo has four segments - Uniqlo Japan, Uniqlo International, GU and Global Brands.) Out of all four of these segments, Global Brands is the only one not to have had an operating profit in FY 2018. And that is where Federer comes in - to help increase the profitability of this segment. Their Global Brands line is not just tennis stuff, it's a whole range of clothes/accessories. Tennis is just a small part of this collection

So expecting Uniqlo to put a high priority on their tennis line is simply not understanding their overall business goal in signing Federer.
 

BH40love

Rookie
The white and red outfit Federer wore vs Goffin looked extremely sharp. I liked the outfit more than his Nike stuff he was wearing towards end. Simple and clean
 

deaner2211

Semi-Pro
Bring 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.
So it is about making money
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
Apparently you dont understand what was said.
I 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).

:cool:
 

Nicholo

Rookie
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
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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
There are people around here that are busy with doing just that on purpose at every opportunity. They think that badmouthing Uniqlo and Federer elevates their competition, lol.

:cool:
 

Dim Sim

Rookie
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.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
There are ads with him, there are video reports of him visiting Uniqlo stores or doing other promotional activities and there are articles about him and Uniqlo and his mega-contract. Also, there are all the spectators all over the world that see him wearing Uniqlo whenever he goes on court. Last time I checked that also counts as exposure.

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).
I am constantly surprised by such comments. Are you a Uniqlo investor? What do you care what their financial gain is?

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.
Meh. Uniqlo tennis apparel is every bit as good as anything from the top range of Nike. You like your RF shorts better. Good for you. By all means, buy whatever you feel you like best.

:cool:
 

Dim Sim

Rookie
There are ads with him, there are video reports of him visiting Uniqlo stores or doing other promotional activities and there are articles about him and Uniqlo and his mega-contract. Also, there are all the spectators all over the world that see him wearing Uniqlo whenever he goes on court. Last time I checked that also counts as exposure.



I am constantly surprised by such comments. Are you a Uniqlo investor? What do you care what their financial gain is?



Meh. Uniqlo tennis apparel is every bit as good as anything from the top range of Nike. You like your RF shorts better. Good for you. By all means, buy whatever you feel you like best.

:cool:
I work in media, it’s all about ROI. Do you put salt on your sark? Umami!
 

Dim Sim

Rookie
There are ads with him, there are video reports of him visiting Uniqlo stores or doing other promotional activities and there are articles about him and Uniqlo and his mega-contract. Also, there are all the spectators all over the world that see him wearing Uniqlo whenever he goes on court. Last time I checked that also counts as exposure.



I am constantly surprised by such comments. Are you a Uniqlo investor? What do you care what their financial gain is?



Meh. Uniqlo tennis apparel is every bit as good as anything from the top range of Nike. You like your RF shorts better. Good for you. By all means, buy whatever you feel you like best.

:cool:
For the avoidance of doubt Hands, I mean the rf uniqlo shorts are better than the standard uniqlo range. Apols for the confusion.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
I work in media, it’s all about ROI.
No, it is not. Normal tennis fans are not concerned about what a particular company makes from its apparel division even if they have a passing interest in how the prices are formed due to having to pay about the things they use. Also, you are not getting any information about the ROI, you are expressing an opinion about their ROI, and one that is not supported by any figures at that.

Comparing a top of the line product with a basic product is just that: comparing apples to oranges. It is misleading.

Anyway, I don't think that there is a particular point in this here conversation.

:cool:
 

Dim Sim

Rookie
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 but only wanna hit the player.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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
You don't present anything that constitutes an informed opinion. Just a bunch of "this can't be" type of comments that don't mean anything without facts behind them, so, despite your declared readiness to "play the points", you are doing exactly the opposite. Guesswork is not "playing the points", but it wonderfully achieves the goal of making unproven implications.

The materials used on the Federer tennis line are different than the basic lines (in case you say that only Federer personally gets special materials). Also, these materials (used in the Federer's tennis line) have been used before his deal became a fact, so that has nothing to do with him having "special requirements". Whatever Uniqlo sells, they didn't start introducing high quality materials in their tennis lines after/with the Federer deal, so that is another misleading comment.

:cool:
 
Last edited:

Dim Sim

Rookie
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.
 

Tennis_Hands

Talk Tennis Guru
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.
It doesn't work like that. You came in with the talk about ROI, so the onus to provide the data that supports your claims is on you. I actually said that it is completely pointless to make such speculations without having the information, and invited you to present it, if you are making such claims. I also said that barely anyone is interested in ROI as a normal tennis fan, which you rejected, so, again, if you chose to stay by that point, you should make a case for it (however unimportant such point might be to the people interested in Federer's gear). Anecdotal "proofs" like "I haven't seen ads, so it means that their ROI is bad" are pointless.

:cool:
 

brinkeguthrie

Professional
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.
 
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.
A marketer who has more in mind than just a very, very, very small section of their overall collection.
 
Top