Under Armour out of the running; decision coming in June
per el twitter
Under Armour reportedly out of UM apparel race. Nike/Adidas will duke it out; Adidas still offering ~ $4M more annually. Decision late June
— Teddy Blanks (@MaizeAndBlue14) May 23, 2015
Also, Adidas' pitch reportedly includes proposal to dull their yellow—no more highlighter/neon. So there's that..
— Teddy Blanks (@MaizeAndBlue14) May 23, 2015
If Adidas dulls the highlighter maize, then I'm all for re-signing with them if they offer the most cash.
This pisses me off so much.
So, if we threaten to leave, THEN they'll attempt to get their shot together? They can go fuck themselves.
If we sign with Adidas again I will be so pissed. Their stuff sucks ass. I miss having the desire to buy michigan apparel and the reality is I haven't for a decade. The reason isn't that the product on the field has been bad, it's that the product made by Adidas is worse.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
Adidas.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
anything and everything attributed to Teddy Blanks get the immediate "DELETE" treatment from the mods.
He should get the Ace Williams Chat Sports treatment.
He should get the disloyal citizen/enemy of the state treatment. Ah, ha, haha, hahahaaha!
This is It, Kenny
Why can't Nike just match that $4m? I hate Adidas apparel.
And why is that? You don't think the hanging discussion with UM is that $4m extra? I mean, $4m extra will help pay Coach Harbaugh every year... seems like it would be a big talking point.
because they are Nike - the big dog of apparel.
Plus if they pay out of their norm for M they will open a can of worms with Bama, LSU, OSU etc that they pay less.
I'd personally be shocked if UM walked away from that kind of annual incremental revenue.
It isn't UM that would be walking away from money, it is that Nike doesn't have to offer UM $4M more than Adidas because they don't need the business like Adidas needs the business. There is a saying in the world of sales, "Anybody can sell on price point, it takes a salesman to sell the product." Evidently Nike doesn't believe they should be giving away their product so cheaply.
To put this in another perspective, how bad must Addidas be to be 4 Million Dollars higher than Nike . . . and yet Nike is still in the running?
Addidas is having to bribe their way into this arrangement. They could never compete straight up.
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
I have a feeling the answer might be, "they don't need to".
I just think that if Nike really wanted us, they could easily get $4m more a year for UM. Just sell like, 15 more pairs of Jordans a year. Problem solved. /s
You're probably right that they don't need to, in the sense that the lights will still be on and Harbaugh's paychecks aren't going to bounce if they leave money on the table. Still, they spent something like twelve million to get rid of the last staff and Brandon and bring in Harbaugh, the debt service alone hit $15mm last year, and they cut student ticket prices.
Michigan brings in a ton of dough, but on the tail end of a $750mm(!) spending campaign, the cash needs to come from somewhere, and I'm definitely in favor of getting it from Adidas as opposed to more expensive tickets, new ads, six dollar water, ect.
All makes sense. Hoping for Nike, but the brain says UM signs with Adidas again.
no ugly uni ever needs see the field with any of these corporate behemoths. Final responsibility ALWAYS lay with the Athletic Department. Go online and read more than superficially about the two companies and what you learn is that Nike probably makes the better expensive running shoe. After that there are more similarities than differences--they often use the same materials; designers move back and forth between the companies; they rip off one anothers' designs with desperate regularity; and they often produce stuff in the selfsame factories.
The mystagogy that attends conversations about this stuff here is embarrassing. Let's all get over ourselves and find some other minutiae to get lost in.
I, for one, shall delve into the minutiae of the etymology of "mystagogy". That should keep me busy through Memorial Day...thanks.
was up a buck from last year to $7. That is $2 more than at a Piston game for the same size drink.
It's $4mm per year for M plus similar bumps for 6-8 other schools that will demand to be at least close to M and subsequent bumps down the pecking order of schools. Do you think 'Bama or OSU is going to accept that much less than us? I would assume the M deal on the table is very comparable..maybe even slightly better.....than those schools.
Adidas has to overpay for M - particularly now that they lost ND - as we were/are the only premier school for football they have.
An extra $4 million in sales because its Nike may be true in year one/two, once everyone has replenished their game. I know I've been holding off dropping a couple hundred for replacement t-shirts/polos/hoodies/light jackets until the switch.
Even if in year 3 -> beyond, if sales come to an extra $2 mil. instead of the guranteed $4mil that adidas provides...Just Do It.
even if Michigan is #1 in apparel sales. You can't make up this much money in apparel sales and it has to be from somewhere else. People think you can make up the deficit in apparel sales, but that is a very, very tiny part of the revenue which is in the hundreds of thousands, not millions.
Actually... Licensing revenue is in the $6M range (http://www.regents.umich.edu/meetings/06-14/2014-06-X-14.pdf)
Sent from MGoBlog HD for iPhone & iPad
That number isn't all from Adidas. They have been paying $3,8M plus providing equipment.
I've seen lots of people here and elsewhere throwing out numbers about additional sales under Nike. I feel like those numbers have all just been plucked out of thin air. Does anyone even know if we get a cut of sales or just a guarantee? If so, what kind of numbers? All the articles I've seen only mentioned guaranteed money in the contracts for Michigan and other schools.
Michigan's cut of licensed apparel is 12% of wholesale. Most schools are 10%.
apparel sales. It's more about the brand M trademark than apparel. You're confusing the two of them.
Actually, I'm not. Quoting from the Budget I posted:
Licensing Royalties: Licensing royalties are primarily from apparel and product licenses that use the University's mark in merchandising operations....
Some, not all of that $6.3M is directly from the the cut Michigan gets for every t-shirt sold with the M on it.
difference anyway even with the cut from a massive Licensing contract.
Never said it would. I'm not trying to argue for or against Nike or Adidas. Just trying to present some real numbers/stats to help others put things in perspective.
where are you going to make up that $4mm?
If WD cuts out just one purchase a month, he could finance it himself.
Also, Adidas' pitch reportedly includes proposal to dull their yellow—no more highlighter/neon. So there's that..
— Teddy Blanks (@MaizeAndBlue14) May 23, 2015
how generous of them to do their f*cking jobs correctlyI kinda like the highlighter look for BBall...I can also see it at a reduced rate than now and would have no problem with that.
I hop they don't dull it too much. Michigan colors are unique. I don't want to be just another Cal / Navy / WVU / Toledo.