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

211–220 of 301 posts

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

#211

Post by sidewndr46 »

throwawayffffas wrote: post #190
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…

I went to one of Nike's flagship store in a major global city in a major retail street a few years ago. It was like a nightclub with very few shoes on a couple of walls and a couple on a pedestal. It was impossible to actually shop there. It was more akin to a branding showcase than an actual store.

I saw this too. It felt like where corporate would showcase their shoes to a potential corporate merger or acquisition. Real shoe stores have huge inventory across dozens of specific shoes.

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

#212

Post by jarym »

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…

We keep reading different variations of the same story over and over - different companies and industries but make the same fatal mistakes.

1) Let the 'spreadsheet people' take over, every decision is now allegedly based on 'data'

2) Kill the innovation because they can’t put a $ value on it

3) Rake in a few years of fast profits and soak in glory

4) Company implodes, CEO rides into the sunset, board that should have protected the company somehow largely intact.

Data wasn't the killer. Stupidity, greed and shortsightedness in roughly equal parts usually are.

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

#213

Post by DoneWithAllThat »

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…

Hoka is big in the running market but that’s basically all. Same with New Balance. I think where Hoka got lucky was with the explosion of popularity of running and Nike failing to understand their need to offer a fashion running product not just a performance running product. Hoka did and reaped massive rewards as a result.

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

#215

Post by kasey_junk »

globular-toast wrote: post #65
mamonster wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>until I read up about the whole "direct to consumer" fiasco it really helped me understand another trend I was a bit confused about. In Switzerland, every decent sports store now has a whole treadmill with some sort of gait analysis thing and a dedicated guy that is going to pick a shoe for you based on that + your running level. Anecdotal evidence, but 80% of the time I see someone buying running shoes in Ochsner t…

Couple that with the fact almost everyone seems to run now, and that running shoes/trainers have become acceptable fashion in all but the haughtiest of occasions. In the 90s, running wasn't even really a thing. A few people went "jogging" for exercise. Otherwise it was a proper sport in which very few partook. Trainers were predominantly worn by children. Adults wore "real" shoes. Something changed in the past ten ye…

Nike famously built there business on the back of the running trend of the late 70s and early 80s. It’s headquartered where it’s headquartered because of its association with a monster collegiate running program.

Before that they were known specifically for their innovation in serious running shoes.

If anything it’s that they abandoned that which caused their current downswing.

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

#216

Post by Frieren »

jarym wrote: post #212
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…

We keep reading different variations of the same story over and over - different companies and industries but make the same fatal mistakes. 1) Let the 'spreadsheet people' take over, every decision is now allegedly based on 'data' 2) Kill the innovation because they can’t put a $ value on it 3) Rake in a few years of fast profits and soak in glory 4) Company implodes, CEO rides into the sunset, board that should have…

> Data wasn't the killer.

"Past performance does not guarantee future results" and yet people treats data as a crystal ball that can predict the future.

Data can help a company to decide what to do next week with little though and great results.

It cannot set a long-term strategy without a lot of interpretation, guessing and adaptability. That same very good short-term decision may have been the first step towards destruction.

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

#218

Post by sushibowl »

jarym wrote: post #212
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…

We keep reading different variations of the same story over and over - different companies and industries but make the same fatal mistakes. 1) Let the 'spreadsheet people' take over, every decision is now allegedly based on 'data' 2) Kill the innovation because they can’t put a $ value on it 3) Rake in a few years of fast profits and soak in glory 4) Company implodes, CEO rides into the sunset, board that should have…

This is called The McNamara fallacy (if it can't be measured, it's not important).

This and Goodhart's law are the bane of pure data-driven decision making.

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

#219

Post by bellgrove »

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…

Hoka makes excellent running shoes. How they managed to convince people they’re great every day shoes is a bit of a mystery to me.

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

#220

Post by randusername »

boxed wrote: post #168

The article has one heading which is "Why is Nike dropping?" But to me when looking at that graph the question is: what in the world happened in 2020-2021 to make it go up that much? The graph looks like some kind of crypto scam or AI hype, but neither makes any sense for a shoe company. Can anyone explain the rise?

Stimulus checks?
Post reply on HN