It is always a battle between these two companies. Nike may sponsor the entire NFL now, but Adidas still has more individual sponsors worldwide, including most of the European futbol players and much of the most recent fifa world cup. In the financial battle right now, Nike is on top, but Adidas is a close second. Both companies have a huge industry with many workers and dedicated owners. Practically all professional players in the world now are sponsored by the or the other, so there is little variation between the two.
How can players decide which companies they want to sponsor, especially when it comes to the two highest profiting ones in the world? What is the criteria these players are looking for, especially with two companies that are so similar?
http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28791088
When I think of the biggest sponsorships in the United States, Nike is always the first to come to mind. The athletes that Nike recruits have always been the best. When I was a kid, I always looked up to the Nike athletes because they were the best. After researching Nike and their competition in the United States, Under Armour could be a major competitor in the years to come. They now have the NBA's MVP Stephen Curry, Tom Brady, and Jordan Spieth. Under Armour is now using an equity based approach for endorsements. This is very interesting and could appeal to up and coming sports stars. Attached is an article from the International Business Times, which explains the rise of Under Armour as a competitor of Nike.
ResponderEliminarhttp://www.ibtimes.com/how-under-armour-uses-equity-based-athlete-sponsorship-deals-catch-nike-2102141
- Justin Conway
Este comentario ha sido eliminado por el autor.
ResponderEliminarThat's and interest comment Justin but I believe the class is about business and sports in Europe not America. Under Armour unfortunately lacks international presence as compared to Nike and Adidas. Without a serious presence in Europe UA has no chance of overtaking Nike overall. Yes they may be gaining ground in America but will hit a ceiling if they can not tend to the european market.
ResponderEliminarhttp://marketrealist.com/2015/06/armour-needs-move-faster-europe/
To answer the question at hand I believe that players don't choose sponsors but sponsors make players offers and they decide based off that. I think the main criteria is the amount of money offered and the stipulations that come with the offer. In addition each player are brands themselves so they want to be represented by the top brands with the largest amount of brand recognition. When deciding between the two top brands such as Nike and Adidas I believe it comes down to amount of money offered and sporting wear preference for the player.
- Daniel Ehrlichman
At the end of the day, the ability to communicate the culture of your brand to the consumer is the most important. Adidas just recently made major changes within their organization because people do not think of them as cool anymore. The athletes, products, and marketing team all come together in order to create a depiction of the company that resonates with the consumer. Nike and under armour are very good at this right now in the US but Adidas is trying to change its image.
ResponderEliminarhttp://finance.yahoo.com/news/adidas-working-fix-huge-mistake-161301922.html;_ylt=AwrC1CniMM9W2hcAl1TQtDMD;_ylu=X3oDMTBybGY3bmpvBGNvbG8DYmYxBHBvcwMyBHZ0aWQDBHNlYwNzcg--
I agree with Daniel's comment that sponsors are chosen based off of the offers they provide. Recently, at school I did a project analyzing Gatorade and their sponsorship of the NFL. They clearly made the best offer to the NFL which is why they were chosen. It is also interesting to consider when having sport sponsorships to consider the product placement each sponsor has within he given organization. With Gatorade in particular, the biggest placement of their product occurs when the jug of gatorade is dumped on the winning coach. This is seen across televisions nationwide so I think it would also be interesting to see where Nike and Adidas make their sponsorship known with their given organizations. Comment made by Ali Cohen
ResponderEliminarChoosing between these two companies I feel like would be fairly similar and would just come down to your personal preference or what your friend or team decided on could also influence your decision. The main factors obviously would be how much money they are offering along with certain benefits they could offer the athlete. In America like stated in a previous comment, I feel like Nike is way bigger than Adidas but in Europe it is the opposite so depending on where these athletes play and what sport would also have a determining factor in their decision as well. -Connor Butler
ResponderEliminarDaniel,
ResponderEliminarI believe that what is happening in America has a big impact in what is happening in Europe. If Under Armour is able to compete with Nike in the upcoming years, they could complete with Nike's position globally. With their new business model and star athletes, they will have a global presence very soon. Adidas should look at both Nike and Under Armour because I believe that they will both give sponsorship offers to the best athletes in Europe.
Justin Conway
Daniel,
ResponderEliminarI believe that what is happening in America has a big impact in what is happening in Europe. If Under Armour is able to compete with Nike in the upcoming years, they could complete with Nike's position globally. With their new business model and star athletes, they will have a global presence very soon. Adidas should look at both Nike and Under Armour because I believe that they will both give sponsorship offers to the best athletes in Europe.
Justin Conway
I agree that what happens in America has a big impact in Europe but that does not universally hold true. Nike has a competitive advantage over Under Armour accordingly due to their position in European Football which is the key to the European market. As we can see from other companies it is not easy to break into the Football market that other companies have already established their footing. For example if we look at Warrior, New balances privately held company, they have held little success trying to penetrate the European market and plan to discontinue their Football products soon. For those who aren't familiar with Warrior they are one of the top brands for Lacrosse and Ice hockey. In addition, Under Armour has already tried to penetrate the soccer market in the United States with cleats but has little success which leads me to believe that if they can't succeed in the United States with soccer how will they be able to in Europe.
ResponderEliminarDaniel,
ResponderEliminarAlthough Under Armour has already tried to penetrate the European market, this does not mean that they will not be able to penetrate with their recent success. Also, if you look at Under Armour's stock price in 2011 was $16 and now is $84. If Under Armour tries to penetrate now, players will see how the company is valued much higher with star athletes and might want to take an endorsement from Under Armour. Although they have tried, their innovative equity based approach will revolutionize the market.
- Justin Conway
Daniel,
ResponderEliminarAlthough Under Armour has already tried to penetrate the European market, this does not mean that they will not be able to penetrate with their recent success. Also, if you look at Under Armour's stock price in 2011 was $16 and now is $84. If Under Armour tries to penetrate now, players will see how the company is valued much higher with star athletes and might want to take an endorsement from Under Armour. Although they have tried, their innovative equity based approach will revolutionize the market.
- Justin Conway
I think the sport has a great deal to do with what company a player wants to sign to. For example in basketball, Nike completely dominates the market with Under Armour having more of a market share than Adidas. However in other sports like football, Adidas is clearly the cleat of choice for most players however secondary companies like Puma are competing for top players as well. In general, different sportswear companies are better at producing equipment for certain sports and players sign with whatever companies are successful in their sport.
ResponderEliminarJustin Michael Conway, if Under Armour can't penetrate the soccer market they simply have no shot of entering the European market which consists mainly of soccer. Yes Under Armour is seeing a increase in stock price but this doesn't mean they can attract players. The only way they can get a footing into the European market is large investments into their soccer products and large investments into star soccer players. Looking from Under Armour's perspective this seems like a risky investment with top companies like Nike and Adidas already firmly controlling the market.
ResponderEliminarJustin Michael Conway, if Under Armour can't penetrate the soccer market they simply have no shot of entering the European market which consists mainly of soccer. Yes Under Armour is seeing a increase in stock price but this doesn't mean they can attract players. The only way they can get a footing into the European market is large investments into their soccer products and large investments into star soccer players. Looking from Under Armour's perspective this seems like a risky investment with top companies like Nike and Adidas already firmly controlling the market.
ResponderEliminarDaniel,
ResponderEliminarYou bring up valid points, but Under Armour just launched a campaign in September "Slay Your Next Giant", a campaign designated to uplift Under Armour's presence in soccer and represent the future of brand marketing for the sport. The campaign stars Under Armour athletes Memphis Depay, of Manchester United, and Cameron Carter-Vickers, of the Tottenham Hotspur Academy, and their boot laces, which Under Armour has engraved with the players' personal goals. The ads also feature young players from around the globe from Brazil, Chile, Mexico and the UK.
In an ad launched, Manchester United's Memphis Depay, dressed in a red Under Armour shirt and Under Armour cleats, walks into a locker room after a game, the roar of the crowd behind him.
Under Armour represents the future of soccer and marketing, and will be the main competitor for Adidas in the upcoming years with their young stars.
http://www.baltimoresun.com/business/under-armour-blog/bal-armoury-under-armour-launches-slay-your-next-giant-global-soccer-campaign-20150922-story.html
JMC,
ResponderEliminarI guess we will just have to wait and see.
- Daniel Ehrlichman
This is a tough question. I think the biggest influencer obviously is money! Whichever brand offers the most money in most cases wins the race, but when it is a superstar like Messi, it is different. What else does the brand have to offer. Can it expose them in more appealing places than the other company. How are the people in the company. What is their brand personality. What other relationships does the company have with other players. Are they flexible. These are all important questions that the player considers. Ultimately, if all is the same with little difference between the two, it is just personal preference and up to the player i think.
ResponderEliminarUltimately, I believe that players and their sponsorship deals can be broken down into two categories: money and culture. As the best players in each respective sport is ready for a new sponsorship deal, it is obvious that both companies want the biggest names. Each company has their own limit on how much money they should pay each individual player and if the player wants the money, they will go to whoever offers a bigger deal. With regards to culture, some players realize that they will be making so much money from either, that they choose the company that lines up with their personality or personal values.
ResponderEliminar