RF logo is back !

norcal

Hall of Fame
Ha I still have a Nike RF hat still in the box...if Uniqlo has a good fit and utility I shall buy it.

Fwiw I have two Rafa hats (great for tennis!) but no Djoko ones (no offense Nole fans, but his logo looks like a mutant spermatozoa).
 
On that 'peRFect' shirt they should put in tiny letters underneath

'except when facing Djokovic or Nadal'
Indeed; it's definitely worth elucidating that when the greatest warrior the sport has ever seen succumbed to the insurmountable task of defeating a matchup-disadvantaged dinosaur with back problems at tennis in 6 out of the last 7 attempts, it was against one that didn't play as well as he could have.
 

Karma Tennis

Hall of Fame
From a marketing and sales point of view i'd love to know how much him and his team paid to get the logo.
They should have put that logo to rest and come up with a fresh one. It would have increased the value of the existing logo stuff for people who had already purchased it and wanted to sell in the second hand market.

A new logo would haved made the original logo much less valuable to those who currently own the original logo.

Rebranding happens all the time. Surprised Federer didn't do that. Perhaps he did the numbers and it was better to stick with the original one.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
It wasn't a question. It was a wish in the form of a question. The explanation is therefore redundant.

Aussie Darcy also works in this field so he has a professional curiosity, and knows all about commercial confidentiality.

To ask such a question you should be privy with who owned the logo and what were the contractual arrangements around it, and you are not.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
It wasn't a question. It was a wish in the form of a question. The explanation is therefore redundant.

Aussie Darcy also works in this field so he has a professional curiosity, and knows all about commercial confidentiality.
You have no idea what you are talking about. AD's "wish" is based on the presumption that the transfer of the logo happened as a result of a sale i.e. that Nike owned the logo and sold it to Federer. My remark was about that, so your N-th attempt to intervene just so that I notice you makes the situation even more hilarious.

:cool:
 

Aussie Darcy

Bionic Poster
You have no idea what you are talking about. AD's "wish" is based on the presumption that the transfer of the logo happened as a result of a sale i.e. that Nike owned the logo and sold it to Federer. My remark was about that, so your N-th attempt to intervene just so that I notice you makes the situation even more hilarious.

:cool:
Your remark was unneeded and rude when I just wanted to ask a simple question about the sale. It was uncalled for. I just wanted to post from a marketing perspective and make a comment but then you decided to be unnecessarily rude and point out that I’m not privy to that information. Like, I know I’m not I was just making a simple post that it would be cool to know and you chose to be rude.

Unneeded.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
Your remark was unneeded and rude when I just wanted to ask a simple question about the sale. It was uncalled for. I just wanted to post from a marketing perspective and make a comment but then you decided to be unnecessarily rude and point out that I’m not privy to that information. Like, I know I’m not I was just making a simple post that it would be cool to know and you chose to be rude.

Unneeded.
I just said that you are not privy with the information to make such a comment.

:cool:
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
As false a display of innocence as I have ever seen, but essentially you've sounded your retreat.

Federer hadn't been using the logo because he had no legal right to do so, now he has and the caps are on sale.

Questions of the precise nature of this issue are interesting but unknown, and no one ever suggested otherwise.

I just said that you are not privy with the information to make such a comment.
You have no idea what you are talking about. AD's "wish" is based on the presumption that the transfer of the logo happened as a result of a sale i.e. that Nike owned the logo and sold it to Federer. My remark was about that, so your N-th attempt to intervene just so that I notice you makes the situation even more hilarious.
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
To ask a question is to seek information, or in this case more probably to express a desire that one could get an answer.

To ask such a question you should be privy with who owned the logo and what were the contractual arrangements around it, and you are not.
 

Tennis_Hands

Bionic Poster
To ask a question is to seek information, or in this case more probably to express a desire that one could get an answer.
No question has been asked about the truthfulness of the claim that there was a sale of the logo to Federer, so you fail.

Questions of the precise nature of this issue are interesting but unknown, and no one ever suggested otherwise.
On the contrary. AD suggested that Federer bought the rights for the logo.

From a marketing and sales point of view i'd love to know how much him and his team paid to get the logo.
So, you are wrong about that too.

:cool:
 

Bartelby

Bionic Poster
I didn't say there was any sale of the logo.

This is all commercial-in-confidence so it's hard to know anything definitively.

Most people here speculated that the logo was owned by Federer but leased for Nike's exclusive use for a period of time.

Given the dearth of factual knowledge, your certainty demonstrates a certain thick-headedness that seems to be a trait of your comments.

No question has been asked about the truthfulness of the claim that there was a sale of the logo to Federer, so you fail.

On the contrary. AD suggested that Federer bought the rights for the logo.

So, you are wrong about that too.
 
Top