Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

fortune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 405 posts

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#51

Post by branko_d »

Last month, I bought two pairs of sneakers: one was a full leather design made in Spain, the other was a leather/cloth combination (Italian design, I'm not sure where they are made). Both are comfortable, seem to be of very good quality and look premium. The price of these two pairs together was less then one Nike pair made of synthetic materials.

This was in Novi Sad, Serbia. I don't know what's going on around the world, but if this anecdote is of any indication, Nike is simply too expensive for the (lack of) quality they have.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#52

Post by omnimus »

harshalizee wrote: post #37
sph wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FWIW I have never heard or seen the Hoka brand in my life until now. I wouldn’t even try to google what On looks like. The first time I heard about Allbirds is when they pivoted to AI. We all live in our own bubbles.

Today, you're one of the lucky 10000![1] For me personally, On shoes are probably the most comfortable pairs I've ever owned. Their waterproof sneakers are the only ones I've ever had that's actually fully waterproof. If you're looking for a decent pair of sneakers you should at least take a look at their Cloud line. [1] https://xkcd.com/1053/

On shoes are also very ugly. I don't think they have a single pair that has any style. I would love to try them but it looks like shoes for retirees.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#53

Post by imp0cat »

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #36
sh-run wrote: post #16

As a trail runner it’s been weird to watch. Nike ACG has been putting out some seriously good, cutting edge equipment. Ultrafly is a great shoe, as is the Pegasus trail for road-to-trail they’ve also got some neat cooling tech that I don’t have personal experience with. Project Oregon left a bad taste in a lot of people’s mouth. It feels like right when they recovered their image with runners they are losing mass app…

Runners are not even like 20-30% of the buyers of such shoes I'd wager. Most people buying a cushioned On, Hoka, or Nike running shoe are just looking for a shoe that's comfortable and versatile

Exactly. And there is a lot of other alternatives in this space, check the guides at https://runrepeat.com/

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#54

Post by cadamsdotcom »

userbinator wrote: post #42
cadamsdotcom wrote: post #15

Personal anecdote I treated myself last year to some Nikes (Vaporflys) because they looked suave on a friend's feet.. Did 180km of training, maybe 5 weeks worth, and the soles utterly shredded. Couldn't put my foot down level, corners of the soles completely gone. Shoe store said that's what they're designed to do, no refund. Cost me about $2AUD per km. But it'll cost Nike a bit more than that.

You did the footwear equivalent of putting racing slicks on a daily driver.

I did, but it was because I'd had my expectations raised by Saucony's products (see my peer comment for more info)

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#55

Post by ikr678 »

morkalork wrote: post #13
andsoitis wrote: post #3

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> But also, people only have 2 feet. There's more to athletic wear than shoes. Competition like Lululemon, Vuori, Athleta, etc. suggest to me that Nike didn't expand their business broadly enough.

Lululemon is crashing out too tho, methinks consumers are having a hard time justifying the brand name markups for SEA clothing-slop these days.

Word is out and there are a number of well regarded amazon dupes (CRZ) for Lulu that are rumoured to be from the same manufacturing lines.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#56

Post by spiderice »

hyperlinerapp wrote: post #24

The marketing campaign they launched in April 2023 also deteriorated their brand position. It earned them woke coins, but the NPV of all those future woke coins flows was negative.

People on HN are, of course, going to pretend that moving from Michael Jordan to Dylan Mulvaney and whoever that overweight "Own The Floor" lady aren't a huge downgrade. Wearing Nike became kind of embarrassing.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#57

Post by deaux »

eastbound wrote: post #32
Alien1Being wrote: post #10

They are welcome to make stuff that nobody wants. Weird designs, made poorly and disintegrating in months. But then the share price drops. ie: the market capitalisation drops. They then have to pay more money to borrow. Fewer investors are interested in giving them money. The business spirals into irrelevance like Ken Olsen's Digital Equipment Corporation. Restructuring happens Employees lose jobs. Restructuring happ…

[flagged]

Talk about living in a bubble. Nike is an ultraglobal brand. The people who A. saw those ads and B. considered them negatively represent maybe 0.5% of global revenue. If even that. They sure weren't running "body-positive woman" ads in Tokyo and Zagreb.

It's time you get out there and meet some people from different backgrounds rather than something filtered down to like-minded people, and hopefully realize that your frame of reference is very limited.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#58

Post by tancop »

bawolff wrote: post #18
epsteingpt wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Slightly different take IMO. There's a niche market for certain player's sneakers. If Nike services them at a price point (e.g. $200 base) then people can keep buying from Nike and will buy the next version. If instead some sneakerbot takes ALL the consumer surplus (buys for $200, resells for $1000) yes that is the actual demand curve but it hurts NIKE'S business and the consumer.

>then people can keep buying from Nike and will buy the next version. But in this scenario people can't because if they are worth $1000 but selling for $200 then they will instantly sell out. why does it hurt consumers more to not be able to purchase due to the price point instead of due to being instantly sold out?

Nike can make them not worth $1000 and get more revenue by selling more shoes. They are actively shooting themselves in the foot by putting resellers over real customers.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#59

Post by dpark »

milchek wrote: post #46
nemothekid wrote: post #11

Nike's destruction over the past 5 years was really surprised and until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. About 2-3 years, it felt like, out of nowhere everyone was wearing Hoka and On brand sneakers. In my entire life it felt like the Nike/Adidas duopoly was unbreakable, and then it felt suddenly that Hoka was everywhere. Wh…

Is this a US thing? In Australia all sports/shoe retailers have been stocking Nike the whole time. If I understand correctly folks are saying in the US Nike gave up its retail shelf space in favour of their own stores and online?

Can’t speak for worldwide, but in the US Nike decided to aim for exclusivity and basically pulled their shoes from a ton of retailers. It went… not how they hoped.

Re: Nike exits the S&P 100 after 18 years and a $200B market-cap wipeout

#60

Post by anon48293 »

spiderice wrote: post #56
hyperlinerapp wrote: post #24

The marketing campaign they launched in April 2023 also deteriorated their brand position. It earned them woke coins, but the NPV of all those future woke coins flows was negative.

People on HN are, of course, going to pretend that moving from Michael Jordan to Dylan Mulvaney and whoever that overweight "Own The Floor" lady aren't a huge downgrade. Wearing Nike became kind of embarrassing.

I certainly won’t be wearing Nike anymore because of it. I’m clearly not the target audience.
Post reply on HN