Under Armour drops Cincy.

DTP

Section 102
Joined
Dec 30, 2015
Messages
7,810
I’m sure @Rellyrell knows the details better but I remember reading and article about UA’s failing a while back and their biggest issue was they didn’t account for street wear making such a comeback. Adidas has always been popular with the “non athletic shoe” sneakers and Nike’s throwbacks are pretty much just for style now. Under Armor was stuck making shoes you’d only wear on the basketball court
 

Madabs

Freshman
Joined
Dec 29, 2018
Messages
306
Under Armor is big with elementary school kids because of the wild colors. I think they’re ugly but my children and all their friends be running around the black top with them all decked out.
 

MISTER OWL

Senior
Joined
Nov 20, 2018
Messages
2,747
So now that I'm gonna be working remote for another 6 months, who makes the best basketball shorts? I'm running out of work clothes?
Nike.

Nike Dri-Fit DNA is my go to. High quality double mesh - I have a half a dozen and never seen a rip or any imperfections. Comfy, loose but not flappy, breathable, great pockets, and a secret zipper pocket. Also great for playing ball or working out or whatever.

 

gabedm

Redshirt Freshman
Joined
Nov 7, 2011
Messages
1,736
I like UA clothes and accessories but their sneakers have always been garbage.

They make plenty of money - they are just poorly run. You can't be in business for 10 years and think you're Nike/Adidas then panic and sell everything at discount stores and half price online hurting your brand.
10 years? Willie beamen was wearing under armor. That founder guy just an idiot.
 

5ringshowboutu

"Wynwood dick sucking short bus faqqit"
Joined
Jan 2, 2014
Messages
1,305
I’m sure @Rellyrell knows the details better but I remember reading and article about UA’s failing a while back and their biggest issue was they didn’t account for street wear making such a comeback. Adidas has always been popular with the “non athletic shoe” sneakers and Nike’s throwbacks are pretty much just for style now. Under Armor was stuck making shoes you’d only wear on the basketball court
Vintage Nike and adidas are super hot right now. Basic white/red tag crews going for 100$ plus. Vintage "mids" are more popular than ultra high end streetwear. 90's marvel mega prints are going for more money than off white. And everybody wants dunks right now. I could see where it would be difficult dueling well established companies for a share if the market, especially when the tastes change so frequently. They (UA) should have stayed in there technical niche.
 

PSU Cane

Junior
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
3,806
10 years? Willie beamen was wearing under armor. That founder guy just an idiot.

The company was started in 1996 with the guy working out of his parent's house. That movie was in 1999 but the company didn't go public until 2005, when they really started really getting money to grow. They had 281M in sales in 2005. Before then i had read they had a $12M investment once but other than that it was peanuts.
 

Rellyrell

All American
Joined
Dec 19, 2013
Messages
17,015
I’m sure @Rellyrell knows the details better but I remember reading and article about UA’s failing a while back and their biggest issue was they didn’t account for street wear making such a comeback. Adidas has always been popular with the “non athletic shoe” sneakers and Nike’s throwbacks are pretty much just for style now. Under Armor was stuck making shoes you’d only wear on the basketball court
U r correct, my man. Adidas lifestyle wear took off; caught Nike w a crazy right hook too. The difference between Nike & UA was sustained reputation as a brand leader, & leadership at the top. Adidas was known for being apart of the community with collabs Run DMC, and their shell toes were infamous. Nike was always connected to the biggest, most popular athletes. Once Adidas reorganized itself, and got back to the lifestyle arena, namely Kanye West, they took off. Nike took a step back, and did the same thing, except their athletes’ shoes also became a lifestyle. So not only did they collab w actors & entertainers, but their athletes became lifestyles in their own right.

Then there’s UA, who was still holding on to an outdated concept, and refused to pivot. Steph Curry’s brand in itself was OK, but truth be told, a lot of ppl stop rocking w Steph, not b/c of him, but b/c ppl were annoyed w his wife. Shoot, til this day, she’s being considered one of the most annoying & hypocritical beings. UA tried to promote the family angle, that backfired like crazy, and they had an inability to create a lifestyle line for Steph (actually they looked like nursing home shoes). That, along w/ an inability to connect with stars to promote their product (yes, the Rock is a big part of UA, but he’s on the fitness side, not lifestyle), along w their basketball shoes receiving poor performance ratings = collapse in market & profits.

Nike tried to buy UA about 10 yrs ago & was going to keep Plank at CEO of the UA brand, & Plank bet on himself. Hindsight is 20/20, but I look at how Converse has significantly grown since Nike took over or how Reebok has been rebooted since Adidas took over. It might not have been a bad idea for Plank to have taken that deal, b/c his vision was short sighted, w/ the inability to account for changing markets. Adidas been around forever, Nike been around for 50 yrs. They’ve both seen it all. UA & Plank have not & it may be too late for a recovery.
 
Top