Adidas and Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment Announces Multi-Year Partnership

[LeafsNation75]

adidas and Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment Announces Multi-Year Partnership

Click to read more...

 

[BM14]

Awesome.

If it was Nike, we'd have a problem.

 

[Acesolid]

Awesome.

If it was Nike, we'd have a problem.

The Leafs aren't controversial enough for Nike. Nike's marketing strategy is pretty much to "troll" people now.

I fully expect Don Cherry to sign a contract with Nike soon. Or maybe Nike will sign a contract will Eugene Melnyk.

 

[Jozay]

The Leafs aren't controversial enough for Nike. Nike's marketing strategy is pretty much to "troll" people now.

I fully expect Don Cherry to sign a contract with Nike soon. Or maybe Nike will sign a contract will Eugene Melnyk.

Very awful take. Do better.

 

[Acesolid]

Very awful take. Do better.

Is it?

Can you honestly tell me that the goal of Nike's latest ad campaign isn't to create as much controvercy as humanly possible in order to attract attention (especially online) and create buzz?

It quite obviously is.

And they are not the only ones. "Viral" marketing that tries to be as "edgy" and controversial as possible to get "free publicity" is more and more popular with companies. Especially since regular endorsment deals or old school ad campaigns are so expensive now and reach younger people less and less.

Adidas is running the normal playbook. Signing the Leafs, and the latest Tennis US Open winner to a massive (ridiculously expensive) deals.

Meanwhile, Nike just throws a "culture war" live grenade in the public discourse. And for the last couple of weeks seemingly everyone on both sides of the American Culture war are foaming at the mouth talking about Nike.

That's a massive amount of free publicity. And that's obviously why they did what they did. (If you believe these old ultra-mega-corporations ever do anything for ideological or impulsive reasons, you are quite naive)

Now is Adidas still doing the "wise" thing long term? Signing safe un-controversial brands like the Leafs in order to sell products?

Or is Nike's agressive and controversial methods to create "free publicity" win the day? Or does it risk alienating too many people in the long run?

We wont know for a while.

 

[Jozay]

Is it?

Can you honestly tell me that the goal of Nike's latest ad campaign isn't to create as much controvercy as humanly possible in order to attract attention (especially online) and create buzz?

It quite obviously is.

And they are not the only ones. "Viral" marketing that tries to be as "edgy" and controversial as possible to get "free publicity" is more and more popular with companies. Especially since regular endorsment deals or old school ad campaigns are so expensive now and reach younger people less and less.

Adidas is running the normal playbook. Signing the Leafs, and the latest Tennis US Open winner to a massive (ridiculously expensive) deals.

Meanwhile, Nike just throws a "culture war" live grenade in the public discourse. And for the last couple of weeks seemingly everyone on both sides of the American Culture war are foaming at the mouth talking about Nike.

That's a massive amount of free publicity. And that's obviously why they did what they did.

Now is Adidas still doing the "wise" thing long term? Signing safe un-controversial brands like the Leafs in order to sell products?

Or is Nike's agressive and controversial methods to create "free publicity" win the day? Or does it risk alienating too many people in the long run?

We wont know for a while.

I'm failing to see whats wrong with that. Getting attention is the point of having ads, and this last batch has been effective for them. Obviously thats what they set out do, I cant deny that. But where I think our disconnect is that I wouldnt call it trolling, though I could see why someone would say it is trolling.

They're completely OK with alienating the people that would feel alienated by them supporting kaepernick.

 

[Burke the Legend]

I'm failing to see whats wrong with that. Getting attention is the point of having ads, and this last batch has been effective for them. Obviously thats what they set out do, I cant deny that. But where I think our disconnect is that I wouldnt call it trolling, though I could see why someone would say it is trolling.

They're completely OK with alienating the people that would feel alienated by them supporting kaepernick.

Well like he said, we'll see how it works out long term. It's one helluva marketing experiment for an $100+ billion dollar company to take on. Companies that big usually take pains to avoid wading into divisive politics.

 

[Jozay]

Well like he said, we'll see how it works out long term. It's one helluva marketing experiment for an $100+ billion dollar company to take on. Companies that big usually take pains to avoid wading into divisive politics.

Which is why I respect it.

But yeah, we'll see what happens in the long term.

 

[Kane One]

Is it?

Can you honestly tell me that the goal of Nike's latest ad campaign isn't to create as much controvercy as humanly possible in order to attract attention (especially online) and create buzz?

It quite obviously is.

And they are not the only ones. "Viral" marketing that tries to be as "edgy" and controversial as possible to get "free publicity" is more and more popular with companies. Especially since regular endorsment deals or old school ad campaigns are so expensive now and reach younger people less and less.

Adidas is running the normal playbook. Signing the Leafs, and the latest Tennis US Open winner to a massive (ridiculously expensive) deals.

Meanwhile, Nike just throws a "culture war" live grenade in the public discourse. And for the last couple of weeks seemingly everyone on both sides of the American Culture war are foaming at the mouth talking about Nike.

That's a massive amount of free publicity. And that's obviously why they did what they did. (If you believe these old ultra-mega-corporations ever do anything for ideological or impulsive reasons, you are quite naive)

Now is Adidas still doing the "wise" thing long term? Signing safe un-controversial brands like the Leafs in order to sell products?

Or is Nike's agressive and controversial methods to create "free publicity" win the day? Or does it risk alienating too many people in the long run?

We wont know for a while.

This is the same thing as the Coca Cola commercial during the Super Bowl a few years ago where the Star Spangled Banner was sung in a bunch of languages that aren’t English.

They obviously knew that having Mexicans sing it in Spanish would piss people off.