forums

MEGA New Miami Adidas Ultraboost🔥 - The Shoe and Nike/Adidas Thread.

ShadowSpring said:
I almost feel bad for you at this point. Why all this propaganda? Do you have some sort of malfunction?
Click to expand...


Shadow, you know I love ya. I've got nothing against you AT ALL.

But...yes...this is what happens when one brand ("adidas") has the "official" branding of the World Cup and/or game balls. You are not taking into account the spend that was necessary for one brand (adidas) to GET THAT DESIGNATION, and you are only analyzing the advertising budgets specifically, without a wider context. Not to mention the fact that another brand ("Nike") has to SPEND MORE to overcome the "official" designation that the other brand has purchased.

It's nothing personal, but this is not new and should not be shocking. When I was at NASCAR and first Nextel and then Sprint were the NAMED SPONSOR of the NASCAR Cup Series, we had to require various teams to dump any hood sponsors who were telecom companies. Because ON-TRACK we were only allowing one brand to be displayed. HOWEVER, if AT&T or Verizon wanted to buy ADVERTISING on the TV broadcasts, they were free to do so. OF COURSE Sprint had the upper hand, because they had purchased the naming rights. And if AT&T/Verizon wanted to cut into that advantage, they had to do so by purchasing a ****-TON of advertising on NASCAR broadcasts.

That's life in the sports industry. Some companies buy sponsorship and fewer ads, other companies don't buy sponsorship and pay for more ads.
 
Last edited:
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm gonna shoot my shot.

I've missed out on the prior 2 "Bin 23 releases" earlier this year. Hopefully, the third time is the charm.

If nothing else, you can sell at a healthy profit.


First release, Jordan 6, selling for close to $1000 for the larger sizes:
View attachment 367352


Most recent release, Jordan 3, selling for close to $1000 for the larger sizes:
View attachment 367351
Click to expand...

I don’t own The Bin’s, but what I’ve heard from multiple ppl is these r not everyday sneakers b/c of the material. They r literally meant for occasional usage or higher class, casual wear. Also, I know once upon a time a couple of pairs had bleed issue w the burgundy, so not sure if that’s been fixed….or I can just ask. Lol
 
RVACane said:
View attachment 367353
Click to expand...

You know what I absolutely love about A.I generated ?’s. It gives you the option to actually click on things. Lol.

So let’s see what it says:

Between May 1 and June 30, both brands deployed a combined $52.8 million in total measurable ad spend. Nike outspent its German counterpart by channeling its budget heavily into linear TV, successfully making up for the fact that it is not an official FIFA sponsor and legally cannot use official World Cup branding. Nike’s campaign, "Rip the Script," featured massive star power and reportedly generated nearly 80 million YouTube views. [1, 3, 4]

In contrast, Adidas relied heavily on its official FIFA sponsorship. Rather than matching Nike's paid media spend, Adidas leveraged its official status—kitting out 14 national teams and achieving a 58% share of team jersey sales compared to Nike's 36%.

WITF did I just say? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

The craziest part I didn’t even see any of this; I was literally going by conversations from different marketing guys in Vegas for Amazon. We talked about hurdles company’s face when trying to get attention when the sponsored brand is plastered. The conversation started w UA getting back to the NFL & how they had to use various means to commercialize their products, then we shifted to this yrs WC & the different strategies employed. All of this took place at The Aria Hotel’s lobby bar.

Like it amazes me this….

U know what, never mind. I’ll be the villain, the zealot or w/e else the righteous brothers on CIS wanna call me.
 
Rellyrell said:
You know I absolutely love about A.I generated ?’s

It gives you the option to actually click on things. Lol. So let’s see what it says:

Between May 1 and June 30, both brands deployed a combined $52.8 million in total measurable ad spend. Nike outspent its German counterpart by channeling its budget heavily into linear TV, successfully making up for the fact that it is not an official FIFA sponsor and legally cannot use official World Cup branding. Nike’s campaign, "Rip the Script," featured massive star power and reportedly generated nearly 80 million YouTube views. [1, 3, 4]

In contrast, Adidas relied heavily on its official FIFA sponsorship. Rather than matching Nike's paid media spend, Adidas leveraged its official status—kitting out 14 national teams and achieving a 58% share of team jersey sales compared to Nike's 36%.

WITF did I just say? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

The craziest part I didn’t even see any of this; I was literally going by conversations from different marketing guys in Vegas for Amazon. We talked about hurdles company’s face when trying to get attention when the sponsored brand is plastered. It started w UA getting back to the NFL & how they had to use various means to commercialize their products, then we shifted to this yrs WC & the different strategies employed.

Like it amazes me this….

U know what, never mind. I’ll be the villain, the zealot or w/e else the righteous brothers on CIS wanna call me.
Click to expand...
People really think looking up something on google and reading the 1 sentence AI summary (that is pretty much always inaccurate) is "research" and "hard data".
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Shadow, you know I love ya. I've got nothing against you AT ALL.

But...yes...this is what happens when one brand ("adidas") has the "official" branding of the World Cup and/or game balls. You are not taking into account the spend that was necessary for one brand (adidas) to GET THAT DESIGNATION, and you are only analyzing the advertising budgets alone. Not to mention the fact that another brand ("Nike") has to SPEND MORE to overcome the "official" designation that the other brand has purchased.

It's nothing personal, but this is not new and should not be shocking. When I was at NASCAR and first Nextel and then Sprint were the NAMED SPONSOR of the NASCAR Cup Series, we had to require various teams to dump any hood sponsors who were telecom companies. Because ON-TRACK we were only allowing one brand to be displayed. HOWEVER, if AT&T or Verizon wanted to buy ADVERTISING on the TV broadcasts, they were free to do so. OF COURSE Sprint had the upper hand, because they had purchased the naming rights. And if AT&T/Verizon wanted to cut into that advantage, they had to do so by purchasing a ****-TON of advertising on NASCAR broadcasts.

That's life in the sports industry. Some companies buy sponsorship and fewer ads, other companies don't buy sponsorship and pay for more ads.
Click to expand...
It's a little more nuanced here. I did actually watch a good video on this last week. Nike actually had Adidas beat by a good margin 4 years ago. They had significantly more teams and players wearing boots. This World Cup is a bit of a resurgence from Adidas to it's past soccer glory days. Puma is the new company making moves. You are right however Adidas has the ball, and has always had it. I don't care to find it, it's not that important. These things go in cycles.
 
dccane06 said:
People really think looking up something on google and reading the 1 sentence AI summary (that is pretty much always inaccurate) is "research" and "hard data".
Click to expand...
Bro there was a few articles I saw last week saying Nike was outspending Adidas. At this point I really don't care to push it more. It's not even that serious.
 
ShadowSpring said:
New Balance 574 da Gawd!!
Click to expand...
I hear they’re comfortable. I never liked the look of new balance. I have brooks and hoka like an old person. The hoka I bought have a very high arch which I need though I’m not sure I like them better than the lower arch brooks which are pretty good. I outgrew my last Nike somehow and went from an 11 to an 11 1/2.
 
The main thing I hate for those kids is that, Adidas don’t issue the flagship bball athlete’s shoes to them in a custom form like Nike does. It’s like they choose the ugliest trainers they have in the back of the warehouse and throw them at the school. Jordan brand comes correct every year for those schools.
 
Rellyrell said:
You know what I absolutely love about A.I generated ?’s. It gives you the option to actually click on things. Lol.

So let’s see what it says:

Between May 1 and June 30, both brands deployed a combined $52.8 million in total measurable ad spend. Nike outspent its German counterpart by channeling its budget heavily into linear TV, successfully making up for the fact that it is not an official FIFA sponsor and legally cannot use official World Cup branding. Nike’s campaign, "Rip the Script," featured massive star power and reportedly generated nearly 80 million YouTube views. [1, 3, 4]

In contrast, Adidas relied heavily on its official FIFA sponsorship. Rather than matching Nike's paid media spend, Adidas leveraged its official status—kitting out 14 national teams and achieving a 58% share of team jersey sales compared to Nike's 36%.

WITF did I just say? 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

The craziest part I didn’t even see any of this; I was literally going by conversations from different marketing guys in Vegas for Amazon. We talked about hurdles company’s face when trying to get attention when the sponsored brand is plastered. The conversation started w UA getting back to the NFL & how they had to use various means to commercialize their products, then we shifted to this yrs WC & the different strategies employed. All of this took place at The Aria Hotel’s lobby bar.

Like it amazes me this….

U know what, never mind. I’ll be the villain, the zealot or w/e else the righteous brothers on CIS wanna call me.
Click to expand...
YZDvLN7f.gif
 
RVACane said:
I hear they’re comfortable. I never liked the look of new balance. I have brooks and hoka like an old person. The hoka I bought have a very high arch which I need though I’m not sure I like them better than the lower arch brooks which are pretty good. I outgrew my last Nike somehow and went from an 11 to an 11 1/2.
Click to expand...
I like them. A lot of vintage sneakers are a bit narrow in the toebox and midfoot. At least for me. These are a bit on the wide side of normal. I don't have to order wide. I also like the Reebok Classic Nylon and leather, those are more narrow to be clear. I wear all kinds of brands and tend to try to support the off the beaten path brands. I may try a pair of Li Ning daily trainers. I have enjoyed every single pair of Brooks I've ever had. Fit is always great. Not always the most flashy or light, but they work. They are the #1 brand in specialty running stores for a reason.
 
Back
Top