forums

New Miami Adidas Ultraboost🔥

Advertisement
Cryptical Envelopment said:
There is zero chance Nike/Jordan would touch a program where they didn't have the whole AD enchilada.
Click to expand...
Granted, I used them as a hypothetical. Maybe Miami goes old school and merely purchases what they need until the new deal get done, who knows. It’s extremely unlikely that a breach situation happens, because it’s a lot easier to negotiate an exit than go scorched earth. I keep saying this but people have selective hearing: litigating for breach is the most extreme act, but it’s in the contract for a reason to be used if need be.

I think that Miami walks away from Adidas and hits the market looking for a new deal.
 
Canedude08 said:
Granted, I used them as a hypothetical. Maybe Miami goes old school and merely purchases what they need until the new deal get done, who knows. It’s extremely unlikely that a breach situation happens, because it’s a lot easier to negotiate an exit than go scorched earth. I keep saying this but people have selective hearing: litigating for breach is the most extreme act, but it’s in the contract for a reason to be used if need be.

I think that Miami walks away from Adidas and hits the market looking for a new deal.
Click to expand...

I hear you, but I highly doubt we would walk away from ADIDAS without knowing who our next deal is with and what the framework of it looks like in advance. We would have zero leverage and limited options. Let's be honest, is there really another direction we would want to go in besides Nike? With ADIDAS off the table, they would hold all the cards.
 
CANEMC said:
FtCbVbfaAAQTdJM
Click to expand...
Clean, what are they called?
 
Advertisement
Cryptical Envelopment said:
Agree 100%. But from the article I read, this is basically an influencer guy in drag who has changed their pronouns a few times. But ****, most of what's out there are attack pieces right now so who knows? I wasn't familiar with this person. I'm not even sure what to call them? him? her?, if I knew, I would. I really don't think it's too much to ask to change what you call someone by a word if it makes them happy. Him, her, they, whatever. Life is hard enough for many.
Click to expand...
taskmaster-doubling-down.gif
 
Cryptical Envelopment said:
There is zero chance Nike/Jordan would touch a program where they didn't have the whole AD enchilada.
Click to expand...

I just laugh sometimes at the reasoning on this board. U’re exactly right. There are some depts w/in a program who are allowed autonomy from the AD; TAMU T&F is one, where they have their own separate deals & dept. TAMU T&F have Nike & declined Adidas as a sponsor, even though Adidas sponsors TAMU’s other programs. Another example is BC Football; they have Adidas as their sponsor while New Balance sponsors other major sports, being NB doesn’t make football gear, yet.

99% of the time u’re not going to see some make shift, pieced together deals where Adidas sponsors this, Nike sponsors that, & UA sponsors this. These are competing entities. TAMU’s T&F is an exception b/c it’s world renown & they have several Nike sponsored Olympians who went or currently is on the team, but that’s an anomaly. Adidas is going to want the whole enchilada, Nike is going to want the whole enchilada, UA, Lululemon, NB, etc.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Look...

Setting aside the fact that @Canedude08 is the only porster who will like or agree with your porsts...

I will point out two things.

First, even in the face of the evidence that Beta Blake was fired for mismanaging the Nike/adidas contracts, you continue to overestimate the extent to which the "UM Administration" had early knowledge of, or oversight of, the analysis and decision-making process behind the dumping of Nike and the leap to adidas. But you just...keep...repeating it...even though it isn't true.

"I have no doubt the People at Nike and in our administration were more than capable of estimating."

Why do you say that, even when it has been explained that Beta Blake was hellbent to make his mark, that he was going to dump Nike no matter what? I'm trying to explain to you, that Beta Blake didn't do, or care about, any of the Excel-based modeling of numbers that he should have done. And I'm going to give you a 2-minute break here by not comparing you to Beta Blake, but all HE cared about was a one-slide PowerPoint presentation: "guaranteed money". There WAS NO comparison. You know why? Because Nike was not allowed to present its full royalty-heavy bid. As I have done for years, I have ACKNOWLEDGED that a straight comparison is difficult, or **** near impossible, because Beta Blake never allowed Nike the chance to full model out its pitch for comparison against adidas's Simple Jack numbers. That's why, when people like @Rellyrell and myself talk about the hypothetical Nike deal (based on what we know about comparable deals in the industry), we are HONEST in saying that our comparative is one that we cannot prove out on the same basis as the adidas guaranteed money is proven out.

Which, of course, leads me into my second point. You continually choose to UNDERESTIMATE the industry knowledge that people like @Rellyrell and myself have. Look, you are entitled to some skepticism. But we are real people who have had real experiences in life and in business, and we are not just making things up to win an argument. I am telling you straight-up, International Speedway Corporation and NASCAR (at that time, SEPARATE businesses, now since merged) were built on 5 and 10 year projections. There were practical reasons for this, as so much of our revenue was based on multi-year contracts, such as the TV contracts with Fox and ESPN (later NBC) and all of the sponsorship deals. But we had everything planned out for five to ten years, the only "variable" was ticket revenue, which is why we ran so many promotions.

And I am telling you FROM EXPERIENCE that I saw a company (50% owned by us) DESTROYED by promising "guaranteed" amounts instead of royalties. Lost over a half-billion (on the books) during the Great Recession. And if you want to be honest, the "guaranteed" amounts were never actually paid in full. We (and the other co-owner) stopped throwing money into a black hole. Thank goodness for legal entities and their legal protections.

But even then, I don't expect you to sign off JUST BECAUSE people like @Rellyrell and I have industry knowledge and experience. EVEN THEN, I can give you a half-credit for the fact that I understand you are attracted to bright/shiny things like "guaranteed money". What is less appreciated is the arrogance and dismissiveness that you display towards people who have more knowledge, and how you gloss over relevant facts that don't fit your narrative.

Or even your irrelevant examples. For instance, you want to compare the Nike/adidas deal offers to...contracts for football players...which is just ridiculous. Look, the reason why football players can't do deals like a Nike royalty-heavy deal is (a) risk of injury, and (b) the fact that the money does not become real each year until a player is on the roster on a certain date. Now, I know you're going to try to seize on the "non-guaranteed" nature of point (b), but the reality is that in baseball and basketball, players CAN accept more performance-based and incentive-based clauses BECAUSE the entirety of the contract is guaranteed on Day 1 AND there is a much lower risk of injury cutting short those contracts.

As for your question on whether "athletic success" equates to merch sales...good lord, I could write a book on that, but I won't. Miami is a top collegiate brand. With some creativity, you can sell a ton of UM merch regardless of W-L records...although winning more games would INCREASE those sales. The easiest comparison to make from my own background is to point out that Dale Earnhardt Jr. was the MOST popular driver and the NUMBER ONE seller of merchandise throughout his career, including the 9-year period from 2005-2013 when he only won THREE races. Out of 322 races.

Finally, I'll conclude on your nonsense about Nike "letting our AD be an idiot". Clearly, you have no experience in the sports industry. That is beyond obvious. Look, there are valid reasons to ALLOW a school to convert SOME of its equipment and gear into money...if they don't need brand new equipment and gear multiple times a year. If you take good care of helmets and pads and practice jerseys, you might not need brand new stuff immediately. BUT MULTIPLE TIMES IN A ROW? And you act as if the things that YOU CITED (waaaaah, waaaaah, the players had broken equipment, ripped jerseys, and not enough shoes) would somehow be things that Nike wouldn't notice, and should have had to just suck up and deal with, because Beta Blake.

The reality is that I've read many sports industry contracts which contain "quality" requirements, particularly when it comes to safety. NASCAR races can be pulled from racetracks if they don't maintain safety standards (almost happened to Pocono). NASCAR drivers can refuse to race if they are not provided with quality equipment, from the car itself to the safety equipment inside. And WITHOUT A DOUBT, drivers (individually), teams, and NASCAR itself can reject and prohibit the sale of any merchandise that they believe to be sub-standard. Outside of the TV contract, the NEXT-LARGEST revenue source for NASCAR was...ROYALTIES...they had a whole wing of the accounting department that did nothing but tracking royalties payments.

Ultimately, you can choose to snidely dismiss Nike's concerns in 2015. But they **** well knew that Beta Blake was routinely converting equipment into cash AND putting a shoddy product on the field (both in W-L terms AND in craptastic practice equipment/jerseys). WHY DO YOU THINK that Nike introduced a brand-new jersey with one year left on our contract? Do you think they did it for fun? Or maybe because of what they were seeing with Beta Blake's "equipment conversions" and the leaked rumors that he was spreading about "Nike quality"?

Finally, you can't escape the ultimate ending to this storyline. That Beta Blake was fired PRIMARILY for his mishandling of the Nike/adidas deals as soon as a Deloitte shark (Joe Echevarria) and a political shark (Rudy Fernandez) spent TWO WEEKS reviewing what Beta Blake had been allowed to do, unchecked, FOR YEARS. So, please, for the love of God, stop acting like there was some sort of effective oversight by UM at the time when Beta Blake dumped Nike and made the adidas deal. And DEFINITELY please stop acting like the primary enforcement of contractual rights should come from ATTORNEYS LITIGATING, rather than a contracting party living up to its own promises.

I don't care whether you agree with me or not, or whether you like me or not. I just tell the truth. I'm not saying any of this to win an argument with you, I can do that in my sleep. I'm telling the truth on what really happened because I want my alma mater to succeed, and I'm not happy that a carpetbagger piece of **** like Beta Blake burned a relationship with the #1 apparel provider IN THE WORLD so that he could create a fake "legacy accomplishment" for himself. A "legacy accomplishment" that fell apart under two weeks of audit.

Cut the crap.
Click to expand...
I ain’t reading all that!
 
Advertisement
Canedude08 said:
Miami gets their equipment from Adidas, doesn’t mean Miami can’t purchase equipment from somewhere else until a new deal gets done. Think baseball teams and bats. There are Adidas schools that had preexisting deals on bats, and those deals remain in place. Certain sports use equipment that isn’t made by either Nike or Adidas and are equipped accordingly.

I wouldn’t be shocked if some companies tried to get piecemeal deals in place, due to visibility. For example, a company like Jordan brand may want to outfit shoes for the basketball program, especially with the run L and Meier had, just because people see our program regularly. There are different ways to approach this situation if it came to that.

You’d think Rad and his staff would have contingencies in place if that had to happen, which as I said earlier is the most extreme remedy. Honestly, it would be easier to wind down the Adidas contract behind closed doors, and go back on the market. The largest obstacle is how long the contract runs, if you can get out from under that, it opens up possibilities.
Click to expand...


Look, I'm not even trying to argue with you. I'm sure that all sounded good as you typed it, but it's just not a reflection of reality.

COULD Miami "purchase equipment from somewhere else until a new deal gets done"? IN THEORY? Sure. In actuality/reality? No.

First, the UM Athletic Department is not owned by Jerry Jones. But also, go back to what I typed. I responded to YOU putting forth the "we have an immediate breach, stop all contact" idea with the currently-in-progress reality of "we are going to repair the damage with Nike and get to the point where they will bid on our deal". I was simply trying to explain why we are still with adidas and why your suggestions were never going to come to pass, but not to say they were IMPOSSIBLE. Just highly highly highly improbable. And I'm basing that on more than just guesswork.

As for Jordan (and even Nike generally), they are definitely only interested in "all-apparel" deals. They are not interested in piecemeal.

We will be out of the adidas deal soon. The Nijel Pack situation was just another brick in the wall.
 
Canedude08 said:
Granted, I used them as a hypothetical. Maybe Miami goes old school and merely purchases what they need until the new deal get done, who knows. It’s extremely unlikely that a breach situation happens, because it’s a lot easier to negotiate an exit than go scorched earth. I keep saying this but people have selective hearing: litigating for breach is the most extreme act, but it’s in the contract for a reason to be used if need be.

I think that Miami walks away from Adidas and hits the market looking for a new deal.
Click to expand...


I'm just a little unclear as to your differentiation between a "breach situation" and a "negotiated exit".

We are going to use adidas' multiple breaches of the contract as leverage for a negotiated early exit. But we also need a landing spot. So there will likely be multiple things happening at the same time. That last sentence of yours ain't happenin' cap'n.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
I'm just a little unclear as to your differentiation between a "breach situation" and a "negotiated exit".

We are going to use adidas' multiple breaches of the contract as leverage for a negotiated early exit. But we also need a landing spot. So there will likely be multiple things happening at the same time. That last sentence of yours ain't happenin' cap'n.
Click to expand...
Of course there will be multiple things happening at the same time. If Adidas is in breach, Miami can use the threat of litigation(and the negative PR that would likely result) as a way of negotiating an end to the deal. That’s a lot more likely that litigating, because that’s usually the last thing you’d want to do.

That said, there’s only so many options available, but if the Adidas deal is as awful as some believe it to be, then **** near any boilerplate deal Nike offers would be better. The point of the matter remains, Miami would need an apparel supplier and whether it’s Nike or Adidas, you have to get a deal done somehow.
 
Advertisement
Back
Top