forums

WTF Adidas?

Im
pyhooya said:
I think we have a better chance of losing Adidas before getting out of the ACC
Click to expand...
Yes. We’re stuck until we are willing to pay the buyout when it reduces to a palatable amount. Unless we’re dumb enough to stay and re-up.
 
Advertisement
SgtBone said:
Wow. That's great insight. Appreciate the schooling. Hopefully we do get back to Nike, but the stuff I'd seen online suggested we're gonna re-up with Adidas for the money. 🤷‍♂️ learn some new **** everyday.
Click to expand...


We probably WILL re-sign with adidas, but it's not "superior money" that is at work. It's the Mas brothers getting constant love from adidas because of the Messi arrangement.

I'm not even sure if Nike will be invited to make a presentation. The fix is in.
 
RVACane said:
@Rellyrell


F Adidas

🤮

Who would actually want adidas over Nike??? Nike is worth more paying us less. Big boost in brand appeal, merchandising and recruiting. I literally will not buy a Toney jersey because I don’t want that 3 stripe logo.
Click to expand...


I already stopped buying adidas merch. I have plenty of non-adidas stuff that I wear to work every day.
 
Calinative said:
How much difference in millions per year do you think it’s worth taking Nike over Adidas?
$1M/yr? $10M yr? What number… that’s what’s important.
Click to expand...


Yeah, I'm not going to get sucked into another one of your fake comparisons again.

Having said that, the PURE CASH portion of the contract, above and beyond the "uniforms and equipment", and the "marketing activation" (and, ****, for that matter, above the royalty that ANY university would earn on the sale of ANY branded merch, even if that merch is made by Champion or Cutter & Buck or Columbia or Peter Millar or Tommy Bahama) is not as significant as you think it is.

****, we just made a TON more money from winning a couple of playoff games than we made for a whole year of selling merch.

So, if going back to Nike means an improvement in recruiting, more opportunities for our players to establish their personal brands, superior brand awareness, and greater sales and ACTUALLY WEARING the UM-branded gear, then I would say we should take a few million LESS in the "guarantee" to go back to Nike.

But of course that is based on factors that YOU PERSONALLY cannot prove, as you continue to feed us 12-year-old lies and justifications.
 
Advertisement
TheOriginalCane said:
Yeah, I'm not going to get sucked into another one of your fake comparisons again.

Having said that, the PURE CASH portion of the contract, above and beyond the "uniforms and equipment", and the "marketing activation" (and, ****, for that matter, above the royalty that ANY university would earn on the sale of ANY branded merch, even if that merch is made by Champion or Cutter & Buck or Columbia or Peter Millar or Tommy Bahama) is not as significant as you think it is.

****, we just made a TON more money from winning a couple of playoff games than we made for a whole year of selling merch.

So, if going back to Nike means an improvement in recruiting, more opportunities for our players to establish their personal brands, superior brand awareness, and greater sales and ACTUALLY WEARING the UM-branded gear, then I would say we should take a few million LESS in the "guarantee" to go back to Nike.

But of course that is based on factors that YOU PERSONALLY cannot prove, as you continue to feed us 12-year-old lies and justifications.
Click to expand...
Yes!!!!! I don’t have the energy to argue with him tonight. Do the lord’s work, TOC! Make him die on the hill (figuratively speaking of course. I wish only good things to Cali in real life lol)
 
TheOriginalCane said:
Yeah, I'm not going to get sucked into another one of your fake comparisons again.

Having said that, the PURE CASH portion of the contract, above and beyond the "uniforms and equipment", and the "marketing activation" (and, ****, for that matter, above the royalty that ANY university would earn on the sale of ANY branded merch, even if that merch is made by Champion or Cutter & Buck or Columbia or Peter Millar or Tommy Bahama) is not as significant as you think it is.

****, we just made a TON more money from winning a couple of playoff games than we made for a whole year of selling merch.

So, if going back to Nike means an improvement in recruiting, more opportunities for our players to establish their personal brands, superior brand awareness, and greater sales and ACTUALLY WEARING the UM-branded gear, then I would say we should take a few million LESS in the "guarantee" to go back to Nike.

But of course that is based on factors that YOU PERSONALLY cannot prove, as you continue to feed us 12-year-old lies and justifications.
Click to expand...
Every time you comment about This you act like it's literally impossible to estimate the expected TOTAL contract value from both sides. Lmao
It's honestly hilarious, and you continue to lie and act as if I'm only talking about Guaranteed money vs "Back-end" money or any bonuses or etc, etc, etc.

Literally I'm talking EVERYTHING $/value wise that would be transferring from Adidas to Us. What is the difference you'd be willing to accept for that to be Nike instead of Adidas purely for the brand. It's that simple if a question. Or instead of saying a dollar amount say what percentage. Are you willing to take 75% less from Nike? 50% less? 10%?... This is quite simple. If we were making $15M/yr from Adidas I'd probably say minimum id accept as the projection from Nike would be like $12M. That's about 20% less for the Brand Value and so you can stop *****ing about the fan gear. If Nike offers more than 20% less, and we stick with Adidas because of that, I'm good with it. I'm perfectly content with our uniforms as they are.
 
Advertisement
Fart Keyhole said:
Russell Athletics >>>
Click to expand...
Have you ever considered blouses, Private Pyle?

DlVXPIVO.gif
 
Back
Top