Comments on: Shoe Blues

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:49:40 +0000

Not likely. Looks like UA is talking to most draft prospects about future deals, but will not spend any money on this particular draft. Their basketball line is not out yet.

By: Kenji Summers

Kenji Summers — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:48:20 +0000

For the sake of my Under Armour shares I hope they win the bidding war for Derrick Rose

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 16:10:12 +0000

I’d want the best of both worlds. Derrick Rose endorsing my product in a prominent ad on MySpace.

By: chris

chris — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 15:47:58 +0000

i think in general all shoe deals are going down, in all sports. the world has changed so much, in my opinion, if you were going to market shoes to the 13-24 demographic or whatever, would you rather drop millions on a derrick rose, or put together a nice marketing plan around say myspace?

By: Darren Heitner

Darren Heitner — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:36:49 +0000

I believe that shoe companies will spend less money this year because the top names are less “sexy” as the top of the classes in past years. Attributing the decrease in money to companies not being as willing to endorse athletes is a complete mistake. Companies still realize the potential gain of having a celebrity endorse their products. In fact, I would argue the fact that since everything athletes do and say shoes up in the media, marketers would be more willing to shell out money. Increased exposure is a good thing. Not everybody is a Pacman Jones.

By: Jason Peck

Jason Peck — Wed, 25 Jun 2008 13:21:08 +0000

Do you think that companies may be less willing than in the past to endorse athletes? Or at least more careful? Since everything athletes do and say shows up in the media, have you found that marketers are more cautious in seeking athletes out for endorsements due to the risk of being associated with an athlete who misbehaves?