I was reading the other day in an article by Advertising Age about how Nike, the unmistakable brand and once untouchable leader in sports apparel and footwear, is now…well…touchable. And interestingly enough, it’s my very own demographic which is the group that Nike is letting slip through their fingers. As I was reading the story, I couldn’t help but draw parallels to the stories of companies who either discredit the value of social media integration, or fail to harness the power of social media in their marketing, PR or crisis management strategies. Strange, I know. But stick with me.
“Unlike today’s toning products, we won’t ask the consumer to compromise on stability, flexibility or any other key performance characteristics as they train,” a company spokesman said in a statement.
The spokesman added that the company has a range of new women’s training products set for fall and winter release. And, speaking to investors last month, CEO Mark Parker promised “more compelling presentations at retail” aimed at women, calling the category “a massive opportunity” for the company.
Okay, so they have conceded two things. First, that they have fallen short in their presentations at retail. No kidding, that new Reebok ad quite literally kicked their but whether or not Nike had a product to compete with against Reebok. Second, they recognize “a massive opportunity” with the working woman’s demographic. Again, umm…no kidding? When was the last time there was a memorable product or ad targeted at the career woman demographic since, well, that imaginary campaign put together for the Mel Gibson and Helen Hunt movie, What Women Want? There very well may be campaigns in existence, but truthfully, I can’t remember one. And for someone who’s a self-proclaimed athlete, that’s kind of big. [Scratch that, I just remembered when the Shox came out. But admittedly I don't remember any campaigning, that was more that I and my friends thought they looked cool]. Either way, it seems like this explanation is a bit loaded for my liking “we won’t ask the consumer to compromise…”? So what, are you saying all of those women already giving the product line a try ARE compromising? Ouch. Them’s fighting words.
The footwear and apparel behemoth’s share of the U.S. women’s footwear market slipped to 29% last month, down from 36.5% in the year-earlier period, according to SportsOneSource. Its sales of women’s footwear, meanwhile, declined by mid-single digits even as the category grew in the teens.
It’s no mystery where they went: Sketchers and Reebok. Skechers tripled its share during the same period, climbing to 16.5% from 5.5%, and Reebok nearly did the same, jumping to 8% from 3.3%. Both of those marketers have invested heavily in the hugely popular segment of toning shoes, which artificially create additional resistance and turn a simple walk into more of a workout. Reebok is at work trying to widen its franchise with additional products including apparel under its Easy Tone brand.
  |
| THE SALES RACE: Change in U.S. market share of women’s footwear among leading brands, 2010 vs. 2009.
|
Okay, I get it. If Nike doesn’t agree with this line of product and it (somehow) violates their mission statement, or core mantra, or whatever else it is that they’re leaning on, then cool. But their problem lies in that you CAN’T deny the fact that if your target market is embracing a particular product (service, whatever) within your area of expertise, then you’d be a fool to not in the least try to provide a product that either would a) help explain why your competition is doing that target market a disservice by offering and marketing their said product or b) act as a viable alternative to the demand that’s been created by they competition in the meantime.
guess what? I like what you wrote, added you to my FeeBurner.