What is Sally Bergesen (Oiselle) babbling about?

What a horrible read.

I would never want to learn anything from Michael Jordan. It's unanimous that he is a horrible person.

Hilarious that you criticize her for complaining when there is nothing to complain about...and yet you started this thread!

JMS3 wrote:

Hilarious that you criticize her for complaining when there is nothing to complain about...and yet you started this thread!

Sorry, I guess I'm complaining about her (and Oiselle's) overall tendency to start drama and create controversy where none would exist otherwise.

I'm no Nike fan, but these women just seem over the top in their hatred for the company. Even the non-Pro Oiselle followers (the ones who pay I guess?) are extremely anti-Nike/big shoe company on Twitter.

A rumor is that some Nike athletes got in trouble for attending the opening of the flagship Oiselle store.

I think Sally's argument is that although Nike and Oiselle are competing brands, and Sally and other Oiselle are publically critical of Nike, it is improper for Nike to compete and take actions that could have a negative impact on Oiselle. Although I don't think she has a valid argument (Nike's actions toward Oiselle are not unethical or immoral, and are standard acceptable business practices), it does have appeal to many because of the framing: Nike as the big, bad, corporation and Oiselle as the pure upstart.

That is the key to Oiselle's defense of repeatedly attacking Nike; it is fine to punch up, but it is sleazy to punch down.

Phil Fondacaro wrote:

A rumor is that some Nike athletes got in trouble for attending the opening of the flagship Oiselle store.

I think Sally's argument is that although Nike and Oiselle are competing brands, and Sally and other Oiselle are publically critical of Nike, it is improper for Nike to compete and take actions that could have a negative impact on Oiselle. Although I don't think she has a valid argument (Nike's actions toward Oiselle are not unethical or immoral, and are standard acceptable business practices), it does have appeal to many because of the framing: Nike as the big, bad, corporation and Oiselle as the pure upstart.

That is the key to Oiselle's defense of repeatedly attacking Nike; it is fine to punch up, but it is sleazy to punch down.

Didn't know about the Oiselle opening store issue with Nike athletes. I guess that'd be the basis for this blog and I was wrong when I said she had "nothing to complain about".

But your summation of the situation is perfect and I guess my issue with Oiselle. They seem hypocritical; they take way more jabs at Nike than Nike takes at them (didn't they fire a PVer or something because she had Nike spikes?)

Again, I think Nike does a lot wrong, but the bickering is making me not like Oiselle either.

For whatever reason I like Brooks. They seem much more chill, keep their athletes happy, and when they uppercut Nike they do it in a way that makes me laugh rather than roll my eyes. ... Although doesn't make me buy their stuff. I wear Asics/adidas.

Leirbag wrote:

What a horrible read.

I would never want to learn anything from Michael Jordan. It's unanimous that he is a horrible person.

Agreed. No track athletes should be aspiring to be like Jordan ... well, other than the fame, wealth and glory.

We already know about leirbag, and no doubt OP is just another crony.

Nothing wrong with Sally Bergesen's blog post. So lighten up Franceses.

She fails to understand that Michael Jordan NEEDED that clause in his contract because he was the most vile teammate on the planet. He never cheered for anyone other than himself and this is well documented. The GMs did a good job of working that clause into the contract to protect Jordan from himself and protect his image.

Her argument is sound, but poor example. It's like telling a prisoner he needs to show good behavior to have a chance at early parole.

And success in his sport.

Phil Fondacaro wrote:

A rumor is that some Nike athletes got in trouble for attending the opening of the flagship Oiselle store.

I think Sally's argument is that although Nike and Oiselle are competing brands, and Sally and other Oiselle are publically critical of Nike, it is improper for Nike to compete and take actions that could have a negative impact on Oiselle. Although I don't think she has a valid argument (Nike's actions toward Oiselle are not unethical or immoral, and are standard acceptable business practices), it does have appeal to many because of the framing: Nike as the big, bad, corporation and Oiselle as the pure upstart.

That is the key to Oiselle's defense of repeatedly attacking Nike; it is fine to punch up, but it is sleazy to punch down.

+1

nice

If nike insulted Oiselle 1/10th as much as it goes the other way I'd be surprised.

that said, if flanagan wants to go for a run with kara and talk about old times I'm sure Nike wouldn't have a problem with it.

Maybe Sally could write a blog about the backbiting amongst their "flock" of sponsored developmental elites and potential sponsored (or should I say "chosen")? Is being on a developmental list of "sponsored" runners so valuable that making up lies about another runner in ones area a good thing? Well sadly is seems more and more this group of development athletes are pissy about any other runner in their local running community actually getting faster.

Sally just wants her son to grow up with fairness and integrity. Oh wait, that was Kara inserting that into the mix. Never mind.

Actually, I'm not sure why we're being so open about big company small company relationships.

So what Sally is saying is her essentially non competing company (comprised of several ex nike athletes) should be endorsed by Nike too?

This isn't a give everyone a fair chance at capitalism company and in the spirit of the law of perfect competition, they need to actually compete.

Maybe Sally observed a spike in supporters over Karas outcry in the media the past month. Now the company wants seconds and is stirring the pot again.

Edit: I hope it's Karas fault for everything, Nike doesn't get busted and Oiselle has a very sudden death in the marketplace. There's no whining in competition.

think about it ...

the "NIKE" who is so annoyed and angry that NIKE athletes have the gall to be friendly with athletes who don't wear the swoosh is CAPRIOTTI.

Oiselle are very proud of the athletes they sponsored .... it think. I remember one of them running in a USATF team kit, and Oiselle airbrushed the nike logo off, and they photoshopped in an Oiselle Logo, and Sally posted this on Instagram. You would think Oiselle would be happy and proud of their athlete making National status, but all Fleshman and Sally could think off was to airbrush off the Nike swoosh.

Phil Fondacaro wrote:

A rumor is that some Nike athletes got in trouble for attending the opening of the flagship Oiselle store.

I think Sally's argument is that although Nike and Oiselle are competing brands, and Sally and other Oiselle are publically critical of Nike, it is improper for Nike to compete and take actions that could have a negative impact on Oiselle. Although I don't think she has a valid argument (Nike's actions toward Oiselle are not unethical or immoral, and are standard acceptable business practices), it does have appeal to many because of the framing: Nike as the big, bad, corporation and Oiselle as the pure upstart.

That is the key to Oiselle's defense of repeatedly attacking Nike; it is fine to punch up, but it is sleazy to punch down.

I like Sally, she is very charming in person, as are her lady execs.

I think the David and Goliath thing is a bit too far tho, she'd have Oiselle as big as Lulumon, in a snap if she could.

As for the Nike athletes at Oiselle event. That was just plain pour choices on their part -- their contracts in the business, and their fame in the sport-business, such as it is, is what they are paid for. Going to a competitors grand opening flagship store is a no brainer no-no.

The athletes that did so, used poor logical brand ambassador judgement.

If you're Frank Shorter, running for Tiger, you don't go to the Athletic Dept. grand opening just because Pre is your best friend and working the event.

Phil Fondacaro wrote:

A rumor is that some Nike athletes got in trouble for attending the opening of the flagship Oiselle store.

I think Sally's argument is that although Nike and Oiselle are competing brands, and Sally and other Oiselle are publically critical of Nike, it is improper for Nike to compete and take actions that could have a negative impact on Oiselle. Although I don't think she has a valid argument (Nike's actions toward Oiselle are not unethical or immoral, and are standard acceptable business practices), it does have appeal to many because of the framing: Nike as the big, bad, corporation and Oiselle as the pure upstart.

That is the key to Oiselle's defense of repeatedly attacking Nike; it is fine to punch up, but it is sleazy to punch down.

PS, smartest choice, tell Sally: "I'd love to come, but it wouldn't look right and might violate my contract, if you have a low key afterparty with a request for no pictures on social media, I would consider showing up.

Here's another aspect: You're a single male athlete, and Oiselle is a next of runner girl hotties (many), that's going to attract the boys.

That post based around a stupid fallacy.

Ok so Jordan had a love of the game clause that allowed him to play pickup basketball with whoever he wanted... that's great. It has nothing to do with Nike athletes getting in trouble for showing up to an Oiselle store OPENING.

I'm sure if Michael Jordan showed up to an Adidas store opening Nike wouldn't have been too happy about it.

Mary Saxer, looking at photos from Millrose she was jumping in a top that had the Oiselle logo on it, a NYAC logo and a Nike swoosh on it.

Guess the ladies of Oiselle did not like that. Fleshman fired her within days.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6356807

Don't do Dat Mary Saxer wrote:

Mary Saxer, looking at photos from Millrose she was jumping in a top that had the Oiselle logo on it, a NYAC logo and a Nike swoosh on it.

Guess the ladies of Oiselle did not like that. Fleshman fired her within days.

http://www.letsrun.com/forum/flat_read.php?thread=6356807

So they are all for multi-sponsored athletes as long as it doesn't include Nike.

Their grudge with Nike is getting tired.