forums

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

wspcane said:
Why is it hard to understand an incentive laden contract that could pay more vs a risk averse lump sum contract? If Nike’s deal was based off of sales amounts, the more UM product sold, the more money for Miami and more money for Nike. Adidas had less upside but more guaranteed money. This is not difficult to understand on any level.
Click to expand...
Who is struggling to understand that? lol
 
Advertisement
wspcane said:
Well one of them is the most condescending *** on the board, so by process of elimination..,
Click to expand...
h4819832B.jpg
 
Pearson704 said:
Frenk had his head in the sand about athletics before and (to a degree) still does now. He told Blake 'it's on you'; so yea...there was no oversight for Blake.

"Many times more" is vague and doesn't delineate between up-front monies vs percentage of sales over the life of the contract. My understanding is Adidas gave more up-front money and said we'd be a flagship program in CFB for the brand; several years later our contract was surpassed by multiple programs and our equipment disbursement was inferior.

If a school sucks in football the up-front money may be enticing, but if you're the merch. marketing pioneer of CFB with a world-wide brand and any measure of success, the back-end percentage of sales is where the value is.
Click to expand...
Aye, there’s the rub!
 
I really don't understand what @Canedude08 and @calinative umstudent don't understand.

Multi-year guaranteed contracts always seem great in Year 1. But invariably, by the time that you reach the end of a multi-year guaranteed contract, it is paying below market. Then you get a new bump to "exceed" market, and then the market outpaces your deal sometime during the course of the contract.

Of course...a royalty deal is more flexible, and reflects what is actually happening. And if you set a fair royalty rate, then nothing needs to be adjusted over time. You actually make more money over time simply because shirts and shoes and hats become more expensive.

But we have two yahoos acting like a royalty deal is somehow an insult. Even if the insult is richly-deserved for an AD who kept stealing equipment and gear from his teams in order to put more money into his budget. And then blaming the apparel company for his own shenanigans.

And all of the relevant facts have already been acknowledged.

Yes, the NEW adidas deal paid a higher guarantee than the OLD Nike deal. And you can't even compare the "NEW" Nike deal, since they didn't offer a big guarantee.

Yes, the NEW adidas deal was, AT THE TIME, above market. Doesn't mean it's still above market (see earlier discussion).

Yes, we currently sell less adidas merch TODAY than what we sold with Nike from 2005-2015 (a period where we won zero-point-zero national championships).

Yes, under a royalty deal SELLING ADIDAS, we would have made less money.

But here's the thing. Nike knew what Miami had sold during the non-championship period from 2005-2015. And even so, they still wanted to be in business with Miami. Nike still wanted to pay Miami (potentially) a lot of money if Miami sold a lot of merch. Nike just wanted to make sure that the "old deal" of converting equipment/gear into money was no longer the way that Beta Blake could enrich the deal.

And what is important to remember is how the market was changing. From 2005 to 2015, Miami relied on Harry at AllCanes and Ken at CanesWear to sell a ton of UM merch. But with the rise of Fanatics, and the trend of Nike taking more retail to its online store, you have the potential to sell a LOT more merchandise across the country, not just in SoFla.

I realize that the two adidas-loving, Beta-Blake-supporting yahoos are going to poormouth Miami's merch sales over the past 8 years and try to blame it on "team performance". Which, of course, never stopped us from selling merch in the prior decade. But what they refuse to acknowledge is that the new online sales model expands the market from coast-to-coast. I see a ton of UM gear in Atlanta, and I know they didn't buy it all from CanesWear. So regardless of the W-L records since 2015, I have no doubts that UM would have sold more Nike merch in this new market than we were selling from 2005-2015 under the brick-and-mortar approach.

And under a royalty-heavy deal, we would have made a lot more, selling Nike merch, since 2015.

Let's not forget, Beta Blake was fired for this. For mismanaging the Nike and adidas deals. Those are facts which were quickly discovered by Joe Echevarria and Rudy Fernandez.

So let's stop yapping about the guarantee that adidas offered back in 2015.
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
This isn’t an Adidas thread. You’re kidding me, right? This is a Nike ****riding thread.
Click to expand...
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
This isn’t an Adidas thread. You’re kidding me, right? This is a Nike ****riding thread.
Click to expand...

👇🏾👇🏾

www.canesinsight.com

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

Why is it hard to understand an incentive laden contract that could pay more vs a risk averse lump sum contract? If Nike’s deal was based off of sales amounts, the more UM product sold, the more money for Miami and more money for Nike. Adidas had less upside but more guaranteed money. This is...
www.canesinsight.com www.canesinsight.com
 
Rellyrell said:
👇🏾👇🏾

www.canesinsight.com

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

Why is it hard to understand an incentive laden contract that could pay more vs a risk averse lump sum contract? If Nike’s deal was based off of sales amounts, the more UM product sold, the more money for Miami and more money for Nike. Adidas had less upside but more guaranteed money. This is...
www.canesinsight.com www.canesinsight.com
Click to expand...

The title is irrelevant and you know it. This is a Nike ****riding thread by content.

That spokesman that Nike is pimping, can call himself a chick, but he’s a dude. This thread can have the title of Adidas, but it’s a Nike thread. Check the majority of the porsts - ****riding Nike.

That’s just reality.
 
Advertisement
OriginalCanesCanesCanes said:
The title is irrelevant and you know it. This is a Nike ****riding thread by content.

That spokesman that Nike is pimping, can call himself a chick, but he’s a dude. This thread can have the title of Adidas, but it’s a Nike thread. Check the majority of the porsts - ****riding Nike.

That’s just reality.
Click to expand...

Siiigh; I understand it may have flew over ur head since u have these soap box tendencies, BUT no one said YOU were Nike or Adidas **** riding. WHAT I ACTUALLY explained was this is something that ALL these companies are doing, & it started w/ Adidas. Nothing more nothing less. If u have issues w/ it, express urself on Twitter or don’t, idgaf.
 
Rellyrell said:
Siiigh; I understand it may have flew over ur head since u have these soap box tendencies, BUT no one said YOU were Nike or Adidas **** riding. WHAT I ACTUALLY explained was this is something that ALL these companies are doing, & it started w/ Adidas. Nothing more nothing less. If u have issues w/ it, express urself on Twitter or don’t, idgaf.
Click to expand...

Or I can express myself here like everybody else does. And maybe I have soap box tendencies, but a lot of people here having Nike ****riding tendencies. So it’s all good.
 
Back
Top