🏀 KuBuckets Archive

In the one-eyed realm of global business, Puma appears to be being groomed to become the foot bridge spanning the high-glam worlds of high fashion, pro sports, music and film.

LA and Hollywood is the home of Big Agency.

Big Agency delivers the star talent needed to win big in the fields used to promote the products that dominate the world’s globalizing markets.

Lebron’s second Cleveland tenure apparently helped integrate a regional gaming biz with a credit system.

Now LeBron comes to LA—one of the world’s major centers for brand management and big agency at a high tide of the one-eyed, one-world private oligarchy’s tentacled reach.

A question arises: is Puma moving in for the kill in sports, or have the folks behind Puma allied with Nike?

Is Puma preying on the brand managing mecca’s high ground and getting ready to unveil LeBron as a new big cat?

Or is Nike defending that high ground by moving its big gun into place by the Hollywood sign?

@jaybate-1.0

Considering that LeBron signed a “lifetime” contract with Nike in 2016 considered to be the biggest ever awarded by Nike and worth over $1B, the answer is no...and you can do your own research.

@jaybate-1.0 Solid question but I agree with what that guy said, albeit in a less surly manor. Doubtful Lebron Puma.

@Lulufulu

As a matter of fact is is not a solid question. Nike has the NBA contract (took over Adidas who wanted out) and provides uniforms to all teams for the next 8 years. Teams can have individual sponsors and they are allowed to have a 2.5”x2.5” patch on the upper left portion as several teams do; however, Nike competitors are not allowed to sponsor/advertise. Individual players are free to sign with any shoeco they want and LeBron has a “lifetime” contract with Nike so no, he will not be changing sponsors...he really can’t. Anyone that follows the NBA knows this.

As far as my surly comment, you must not have been reading posts lately otherwise you would understand the comment.

@Lulufulu caught in the crossfire.

@JayHawkFanToo was just throwing @jaybate-1-0 own recent choice of words back at him.

@dylans will now duck out with his helmet on. 😆

I agree with @JayHawkFanToo , LeBron has a lifetime contract that probably has loyalty tied in with it. That doesn’t mean there is no way to get outta of it but reports said the deal was worth more than 1 billion dollars so I doubt Puma can keep up with Nike in a bidding war. Interesting enough I did read way back when LeBron signed with Nike that he liked Adidas better and would have signed if they matched Nike’s offer.

You all realize the title to this thread grabs the attention, and the post posed other questions, right? "Or is Nike defending that high ground by moving its big gun into place by the Hollywood sign?"

The question is whether Nike influenced the move to LA ... whether taking that big market with Lebron relates to Puma's insertion into the market.

@HighEliteMajor

The moment LeBron bought a second mansion in LA last December the writing was on the wall that he would end up with the Lakers. He wants the biggest stage to finish his career and wants to be a big shot in the entertainment business after his playing days are over and no place matches LA for that. At this time Puma has signed two (* Edit - make that four) athletes that have yet to play a minute in the NBA and they are nothing for Nike to worry about. James move to LA and Puma trying to get into basketball are completely unrelated.

From Wikipedia: In 2018 Puma announced its entrance back into basketball after a break of almost 20 years. The brand appointed Jay-Z as Creative Director of Puma basketball. Marvin Bagley, Deandre Ayton, Zhaire Smith, and Michael Porter Jr. are the first players to join PUMA’s basketball roster and play in performance PUMA basketball shoes]

@JayHawkFanToo Your right, it just seemed surly to me at first glance.

One thing about @jaybate-1-0 though, and this is a personal opinion of mine having been following his posts since before this site started, back when we were all happily anonymous on the "other" KU site. Its that Jaybate posts topics on purpose to make us think about the game in all its myriad facets. Now, it might be a bit controversial at times and even down right silly like the above. But I do not believe he just fires off random topics and random questions without thinking about it. He's too cerebral for that.

@jaybate-1-0 Could a day be coming where there is a shoe co team up? An agreement where it's Nike on court and Puma off for the fashionista stuff.

HighEliteMajor said:

You all realize the title to this thread grabs the attention, and the post posed other questions, right? "Or is Nike defending that high ground by moving its big gun into place by the Hollywood sign?"

The question is whether Nike influenced the move to LA ... whether taking that big market with Lebron relates to Puma's insertion into the market.

——————————

Some missed that last question.

Then when you called their attentions to it, insight did not follow as would be expected.

The question is why?

My post was not very long.

Nor was yours.

Fightsongwriter said:

@jaybate-1-0 Could a day be coming where there is a shoe co team up? An agreement where it's Nike on court and Puma off for the fashionista stuff.

———————

Interesting question.

In strategy, if you need an opponent and don’t have one, you create one.

And if you don’t have an ally, and need one, you create one.

Created Opponents and Created Allies are most often created on flanks desired to be taken and controlled in order to go after real enemies the newly controlled flank would contain.

Nike and Puma is conceivable.

But so is adidas and Puma.

And so is a Chinese brand (maybe not yet known to us) and Puma.

JayHawkFanToo said:

@jaybate-1.0

Considering that LeBron signed a “lifetime” contract with Nike in 2016 considered to be the biggest ever awarded by Nike and worth over $1B, the answer is no...and you can do your own research.

————————-

You aren’t serious about the lifetime contract being an impediment, are you?

You don’t seriously think $1B is a ceiling, do you?

jaybate 1.0 said:

HighEliteMajor said:

You all realize the title to this thread grabs the attention, and the post posed other questions, right? "Or is Nike defending that high ground by moving its big gun into place by the Hollywood sign?"

The question is whether Nike influenced the move to LA ... whether taking that big market with Lebron relates to Puma's insertion into the market.

——————————

Some missed that last question.

Then when you called their attentions to it, insight did not follow as would be expected.

The question is why?

My post was not very long.

Nor was yours.

Not very plausible. Thus not much interest.

jaybate 1.0 said:

JayHawkFanToo said:

@jaybate-1.0

Considering that LeBron signed a “lifetime” contract with Nike in 2016 considered to be the biggest ever awarded by Nike and worth over $1B, the answer is no...and you can do your own research.

————————-

You aren’t serious about the lifetime contract being an impediment, are you?

You don’t seriously think $1B is a ceiling, do you?

Considering LeBron has the biggest endorsement contract ever and Nike is about 10 times the size of Puma, yes. If you think otherwise you are seriously delusional.

What I want to know is with which team/players will Pony try to make a comeback?

Holy crap, I just looked them up ↗ and they still make the exact same shoes they did in the 70s! LOL.

@DanR oh really? I gotta find a puma store then! Best sports shoes I ever owned was a pair of Puma running shoes that served valiantly in cross country for a season in 1975 and then went on to be my goto casual and sports wear through a couple years of college. If they still make them I will consider myself lucky! Having the current style looses out to not having sore feet every time!

@DanR

Converse, now a division of Nike, still makes the versions of the original Chuck Taylor high tops including a somewhat high tech version of it.

LeBron's agent confirms ↗ what I posted above, his ultimate goal is to get in the entertainment business and the Lakers are preparing and saving cap money for a big rebuild in 2019.

@JayHawkFanToo

Lebron already has an entertainment company ↗. They have already had a few minor deals and productions. Lebron will eventually be one of the richest men in the world and will probably own a pro franchise one day. He's worth about $400 million right now, and that's with most of his business enterprises in their early stages. In 10 or 15 years, I could see that increasing, particularly since he will likely make $40M+ in each of the next 5-7 years just playing basketball without considering his endorsements. That should push his net worth well over half a billion dollars, and that's without knowing his investment portfolio.

It's rumored that his "lifetime" Nike deal also includes a large ownership package that could see his worth skyrocket once he retires and exercises that option.

But Lebron's business enterprise is entirely separate from what the Lakers do. Last year, they had a "wish" patch on their jersey. Every team in the NBA can have a jersey sponsor, so if Puma is that company, it won't be surprising.

justanotherfan said:

Lebron already has an entertainment company ↗. They have already had a few minor deals and productions.

The best location for LeBron's "entertainment business" is LA, the capital of the entertainment world and that, according to his agent, is one of the reasons he went with the Lakers. Akron just will not cut it...unless your business is making tires or rubber related products.

But Lebron's business enterprise is entirely separate from what the Lakers do. Last year, they had a "wish" patch on their jersey. Every team in the NBA can have a jersey sponsor, so if Puma is that company, it won't be surprising.

It would indeed be very surprising. Puma cannot have a patch in any NBA team uniform because competitors of Nike, the official NBA uniform provider, are explicitly banned from sponsoring any team's jersey patch. Nike's contract runs for 8 years and will likely be renewed since Adidas was no longer interested and voluntarily gave it up and Nike was the only other apparel maker interested and would have no problem outbidding Puma.

Semantics, but Nike bid $1B over 8 years to sponsor the NBA. For comparison, Adidas' deal was 11 years for $400M. Using the definition of the word "voluntarily" that Adidas is using, I also voluntarily give up things. All the time! Private jets, mansions, dating super models, etc.

@Kcmatt7

Adidas had the option to renew but chose not too at what appears to be a bargain cost of $400M and Nike blew $1B for something Adidas and Under Armour thought it was not worth it. ↗ but it does keep away all competitors from advertising on NBA uniforms. No way Puma has the money to outbid Nike.

@Kcmatt7

It sometimes appears no petroshoeco has the money to compete at current spending levels, unless the big three investment managers go to the untraceable Presidential Plunge Protection Team’s Fed Window; then even John Alden Shoes might!!! 😀

Just sayin’.