Boycott Under Armour

Think I saw their shoes wrote:

Also, for the first time, I saw some Pearl Izumi running shoes, like isn't that a bicycling clothing/shoe kind of company too? But what can I say, they were the same kind of runners like my own, established brand shoes.

PI has been making running shoes for several years now.

Brand name does tend to matter in clothing, which is much less individual than shoe fit and comfort. Nike crap tends to fall apart relatively easily, in my experience, and the quality of the UA stuff I have inspected is visibly worse than Nike's. I've found good quality brand name running duds at places like Marshall's, TJ Maxx, Ross, etc. No need to be swayed by the lower price of UA's lower quality gear when you can get better gear for even less.

[quote]I run a ton wrote:

To put it simply, the best running gear I have ever owned comes from UA. It gives the same quality as Nike gear for about $10 - $15 less cost. Why wouldn't everyone wear it?"

Remember, ton, you look ridiculous in your Under Armour.

"Also, Asics does pretty well in the running market for a company that started exclusively for wrestling... talk about as far from running shoes as you can get"

Asics started in Japan as a running shoe company.

not sure wrote:

or lacrosse, where they started.

There is lot of ignorance in this thread such as the statement above. UA was started by former UMD football player, Kevin Plank, who is a pretty nice guy from the couple of times I have met him. The company has never really had much of an association with lax.

I don't see why anyone would boycott them simply due to the lack of support of running. They sponsor two fairly well known marathons as well as a lot of other smaller races.

I don't purchase under-armour because they sponsor Ray Lewis who is nothing but a thug gang banger who should be in prison for accessory to murder. Companies have to realize that they shouldn't sponsor these thugs. It sends the message to kids that if you're a great athlete you can get away with murder...oh wait...too late...

The problem with UA is the way they deal with vendors. Most running stores are small, local shops. UA requires you to sign dealer agreements and purchase very large minimums. They also will ship orders incomplete and strand you with random sizes of items that they have no intention of shipping the rest of. The other companies (Asics, NB, Saucony, Brooks... etc.) will work with running shops to keep inventory at proper levels and provide

The problem with UA is the way they deal with vendors. Most running stores are small, local shops. UA requires you to sign dealer agreements and purchase very large minimums. They also will ship orders incomplete and strand you with random sizes of items that they have no intention of shipping the rest of. They basically treat you like you are a tiny drop in the bucket to them (which, of course, you are)

The other companies (Asics, NB, Saucony, Brooks... etc.) will work with running shops to keep inventory at proper levels and listen to feedback. They treat you like you matter, even if you are just a drop in the bucket.

Think I saw their shoes wrote:

Their shoes are out there already. It's up to everyone to get the product they want. I think there is probably room for another supplier after all; I didn't get them. Also, for the first time, I saw some Pearl Izumi running shoes, like isn't that a bicycling clothing/shoe kind of company too? But what can I say, they were the same kind of runners like my own, established brand shoes.

Pearl Izumi has been making and selling running shoes since 2002. Not exactly new.

Now that they are out, any thoughts? Chris Brewer did a great job at Mizuno and Fila (no backing at Fila), wonder what UA's $ and his ideas will lead to?

someone who knows wrote:

The problem with UA is the way they deal with vendors. Most running stores are small, local shops. UA requires you to sign dealer agreements and purchase very large minimums. They also will ship orders incomplete and strand you with random sizes of items that they have no intention of shipping the rest of. The other companies (Asics, NB, Saucony, Brooks... etc.) will work with running shops to keep inventory at proper levels and provide

Uh, no they don't. They have very small minimum orders necessary for a running specialty store.

How would any of us know?

I'll stick with the quality shoes made by companies that have a track record in the sport, like Brooks, Asics, Mizuno, Saucony. What do UA shoes really offer if they are the same price or more than similar models from established competitors? Does UA even make racing flats and racing gear? Summation: fitness jogger shoes.

And Asics, Brooks, et al are NOT fitness jogger shoes? That's who supports these companies. They're the ones buying most of the shoes. Sure those companies may throw a couple bucks at a pro runner once in a while, but don't pretend that they're any more noble than Under Armour.

I'll try a pair of UA shoes since I have a gift card for a local running store. They might work, they might not. If they don't, I won't buy them again, but I won't write them off without a trial.

Why boycott a company GETTING INTO the running business. The more companies the better. Maybe UA will start to sponsor runners and take up some of the slack of Reebok.

There are ways to help athletes without sponsoring them directly such as being the title sponsor of a race with prize money. Maybe UA will step that up. Makes sense. I like their clothes in general. Overpriced for my taste, but I was given a shirt 2 years ago (it was a little big so I gave it to someone else) and liked it.

The point is that there is little reason to take a flier on them over established brands and shoe lines. UA clearly isn't taking a run at it from the sport side of things, hence no racing gear, period. UA clearly isn't trying to offer a low-price alternative to the solid brands and models that were already available, either.

Another point is that UA is obviously only interested in the fitness jogger market, not the "running as sport" market. It is what it is. You're the one throwing out ridiculous illusions of nobility here, I never did. That's all in your head. However, you do understand that these other companies provide useful product to people who race, don't you? Of course fitness joggers have and will continue to run in Asics, Brooks, et al but those who compete still can, too. I doubt we'll see very many going <17 in a 5K or <2:30 in a marathon in UA shoes.

When I was working at a running store back in the late 1990s, Mizuno made a very big push to get into the running specialty market, much like UA is today. They didn't have a strong running line at all, and they were mostly known in the States for their baseball and gold gear. They were nearly a complete unknown in the running world.

Stores took a chance, and over time their product line dramatically improved. Now, they have many of the top selling shoes in specialty running (Rider, Inspire, etc.). And over time they were able to expand their line to include spikes, flats, and more.

The more players in the running market, the better. I welcome them all: from the big guys like Asics to the little guys like Spira and Loco.

UA doesn't have racing shoes right now. Maybe they will in the future, or maybe they'll decide it's a niche they don't need to entertain. I don't see how that necessitates a boycott.

Then I'll wait and see. Until then, I have great options that don't include UA. It's not so much a boycott for me as it is choosing from among better options at present, especially given that UA does not even offer me a better price for shoes that are supposed to compete with offerings from 'traditional' running companies and offers nothing in the way of a racing or 'minimalist' flat. UA eliminated themselves from my decision-making process by overpricing their product and offering only a limited product line aimed squarely at the fitness jogger market.

Their line is competitively priced with current offerings. And just because you wear flats doesn't mean all competitive runners do. In fact, I would bet the majority (probably close to 95%) wear traditional trainers. Which UA makes.

I understand wanting to stick with a known brand. But if all you've eaten is hamburger, you'll never know how good steak tastes until you try it.

mayor mccheese wrote:

Their line is competitively priced with current offerings. And just because you wear flats doesn't mean all competitive runners do. In fact, I would bet the majority (probably close to 95%) wear traditional trainers. Which UA makes.

I understand wanting to stick with a known brand. But if all you've eaten is hamburger, you'll never know how good steak tastes until you try it.

Haha are you saying all the shoes on the market are hamburger and UA is "good steak"? Pure comedy. We shall see son.

Personally I think UA is going to shit the bed. Their main clientele will be fat football coaches.