Look what to know wrote:
Zap has a 13:20 runner?
Zap is however the only group with any business sense in that at least the athletes they fund work the camps they host and they make money off those camps.
Ritz, Rupp, Jager, etc. do not in any way influence sales of shoes or buying of gear. The whole business model is complete charity. Period.
False. Nike doesn't pay runners out of a sense of charity. They pay them because they believe it ultimately increases brand awareness and influences sales, thus resulting in profit. But a guy like Galen Rupp doesn't have the same influence on sales as a guy like Lebron James, which is why Rupp gets paid far less than James. Nike knows what they're doing.
People may not consciously think, "Man, that Galen Rupp sure is great. I wonder what kind of shoes he wears? I'm gonna buy those." It's more of a subconscious thing usually. Top runners are wearing Nike gear, and so their brand becomes burned into our subconscious. Pro running doesn't have a huge fanbase compared to NFL, NBA, etc. But it does have a fanbase. What do you think would happen if Nike stopped paying runners to wear their gear? Another big company, like New Balance, would hire all those athletes and suddenly all the pros are wearing New Balance. This might not have such a devasting impact on Nike's sales this year. Maybe not even next year. After all, Nike is a very popular brand with a lot of history. But as the younger generations come up through high school and college, you better believe there would be a major swing in sales favoring New Balance and Nike would take a big hit. Competitive running might not be popular among most adults. But there are a TON of teenagers out there whose parents are buying them shoes and spikes for the XC and track seasons.