Nike resigns, then re-signs Mike Vick?
Please be kidding.
Don’t get me wrong. Throughout the whole MIke Vick controversy, I’ve ticked off plenty of people with my “he’s paid his debt to society, so let’s give him a chance — the same way we gave Teddy Kennedy a second chance after Chappaquidick.”
I’m not “all that” opposed to Mike being back in the NFL. But getting an endorsement deal? Are you kidding? One of the world’s biggest, most respected brands is re-signing Mike Vick?
Here’s one quote from the AP’s story about the re-signing. “It is quite evident that athletes that run afoul of the law are by no means relegated to obscurity when it comes to pitching products,” said David Carter, a professor of sports marketing at the University of Southern California. To Carter, Nike likely made a calculated business decision that the benefit of sales tied to Vick outweighed any potential public outrage.
Are you kidding? So this is about money, huh? Not brand values. Not what NIke stands for as a company. Not about the millions of kids who believe that the Nike brand is right up there with Jesus?
Vick’s primary agent, Joel Segal, confirmed the deal in a statement to Sports Business Daily: “Mike has had a great relationship with Nike and is excited to be part of the Nike team again. He has always been a fan of the brand and looks forward to the relationship,” Mr. Segal said. [Whatever! Mike. I suppose you ARE excited.]
Will Dick’s Sporting Goods cave next? Not too long ago, MyFoxPhilly ran an article announcing Dick’s wouldn’t be stocking or selling Vick’s No. 7 Eagle’s jersey. A spokesperson for the sporting goods retailer said the chain wouldn’t carry the Vick jerseys until it evaluated the reaction of Eagle fans.
I’m glad to say I bought a pair of Asics a week or so ago.
Am I wrong to be so disappointed?
P.S. Tiger, Roger, MJ, Serena — how does it feel to be on the same team?
Share this article | Permalink | 4 comments
October 1, 2009 at 10:18 am
I’m not really that surprised…Nike has/had no trouble with using sweat shops to produce garments, I doubt that they have an issue with using a controversial athlete to increase buzz about their products. I think that the #1 brand value at Nike is to keep the stockholders happy by whatever means necessary.
October 1, 2009 at 12:18 pm
UPDATE: October 1, 2009, 11:25 AM ET “Nike, Vick do not have agreement” from ESPN.
In a statement released Thursday morning, Nike said it has “agreed to supply product to Michael Vick as we do a number of athletes who are not under contract with Nike.”
–
But now that we’re on the subject of Nike. I really don’t care for their “Prepare for Combat” campaign. It gives me the creeps.
December 15, 2009 at 3:47 am
After reading this post word for word, my heart a long time can not be quiet, shake ah! Why is there such a good post!Why is there such a good post!I have many years of vertical and horizontal network of BBS ,Think that they no longer have any posts can move me.Did not expect to see this today, so a post’s exquisite!Lou Zhu, is that you let me a deep understanding of the “people beyond always other able men,” This sentence.If you can not post in such a wonderful behind the net to leave their name,Then I will not rest in peace in death! Be able to leave behind such a wonderful post your own network name is just how proud of one thing ah!
February 23, 2010 at 8:45 pm
This IS what Nike stands for as a company, I guess. The assumption that Americans will forget anything as long as they aren’t the ones with the cattle prod in the patootie.