Brooks
Desiree Davila, Melissa White, Yolanda Flamino, Carol Jefferson, Dot McMahan, Nick Arciniaga, Bob Busquaret, Luke Humphrey, Brian Sell, David Jankowski, Paul Jellema, Chad Johnson, Fred Joslyn, Mike Kilburg, Mike Morgan, Kyle O'Brien, Michael Reneau, Pat Rizzo, Ryan Sheehan, Todd Snyder, Scott Jurek
The only Reebok shoe I used to wear were the Harrier XC flats from 92-94. They were the best...
ekon wrote:
Brooks
Desiree Davila, Melissa White, Yolanda Flamino, Carol Jefferson, Dot McMahan, Nick Arciniaga, Bob Busquaret, Luke Humphrey, Brian Sell, David Jankowski, Paul Jellema, Chad Johnson, Fred Joslyn, Mike Kilburg, Mike Morgan, Kyle O'Brien, Michael Reneau, Pat Rizzo, Ryan Sheehan, Todd Snyder, Scott Jurek
Haha, yup they are all women
...none of whom have a prayer of making the podium at a world or Olympic level competition.
chix with dix wrote:
ekon wrote:Brooks
Desiree Davila, Melissa White, Yolanda Flamino, Carol Jefferson, Dot McMahan, Nick Arciniaga, Bob Busquaret, Luke Humphrey, Brian Sell, David Jankowski, Paul Jellema, Chad Johnson, Fred Joslyn, Mike Kilburg, Mike Morgan, Kyle O'Brien, Michael Reneau, Pat Rizzo, Ryan Sheehan, Todd Snyder, Scott Jurek
Haha, yup they are all women
Do you have any clue about how branding works? Very little of the audience for high profile sporting events involving professional athletes will ever be in the market for "performance running shoes."
~~~~~~~~ wrote:
run47 wrote:It appears that Reebok sponsors more top US based female distance runners than any shoe company -- except for Nike.
edited.
Reebok:
Kim Smith, Blake Russell, Katie McGreggor, Jenelle Deatherage, Marie Davenport, Mary Cullen, Missy Buttry, Julia Lucas, Samia Akbar, Sarah Jamieson (Australia) and Monique Henderson (200m/400m sprinter).
Tiffany Ross-Williams would be another to add to the list.
The thing I'm wondering is, if it's true that Reebok are no longer focusing on promoting performance running shoes...
former employee7 wrote:
- all run specialty reps are gone
- 2009 events sponsored by Reebok are still a go
- 2009 athlete contracts are still a go
- selling into performance running channels is not a priority for Reebok (sporting goods and the mall)
Then why does it need to be supporting so many professional athletes and high profile sporting events?
It sounds to me that they are just going to fulfil their 2009 contractual obligations and then these athletes and events are going to be looking for a new sponsor for 2010.
that's only the start. northern telecomm, flying-j truck stops, etc. went bankrupt. hsbc, deutschebank, bank of america, citicorp, etc. are on the verge of bankruptcy. another shoe will drop soon.
Todd Klein, Mark Bossardet...where does this leave these two. Klein left adidas to Reebok to do great things. Bossardet seemed like a good guy. Best guy Reebok ever had was a guy name Ryan...? Can't recall his last name. He was there when Meyer was heading up running. Damn good group, this was begining of the slippery slope.
...and Morgan Uceny..one of the best female mid d runners right now in the US?
Did Brooks really let 25 people go?? Can anyone confirm this??
sjc wrote:
the torres brothers are reebok, so is fernando cabada (same training group). i wonder what will happen to that group, i think reebok might be their main sponsor. zap fitness was also sponsored by reebok, its going to be tough for them to keep going.
What is going to happen to the Reebok Enclave training group?
Also, the Torres brothers may be signing with LA Gear or Capezio this weekend. Both companies are in a heated bidding war.
FredEx wrote:
Did Brooks really let 25 people go?? Can anyone confirm this??
I heard 15, including 3 VPs. Mostly product people.
with rbk going down who will be next?
how can avia, etonic, karhu and newtons with their expensive shoes stay in the game with this tough economic atmosphere?
Bossardet has not worked for Reebok for about a year and Todd Klein is still heading up Sports Marketing. As someone else mentioned, remember that events and athletes are not necessarily there to sell performance shoes. It is a way to have the logo in newspapers, on billboards, on online forums, on tv, etc. Those are important for brand awareness/image to all that see it, which is likely more than the performance runner.
The Reebok Enclave dissolved quite a few years ago. Gags left and is the coach up at OTC. Not sure where you have been!
I didn't even know Brooks was big enough to have 3 VPs. I also heard that the two product people that left did so on their own.
How important is a title?
Good point.
brookentime wrote:
with rbk going down who will be next?
how can avia, etonic, karhu and newtons with their expensive shoes stay in the game with this tough economic atmosphere?
I agree with Avia and Etonic.
Karhu is owned by Craft, which is a very reputable and (last I checked) stable company. Karhu might scale back a bit (is it possible to scale back from next to nothing?)
Newtons are an extreme specialty shoe. They're carried in... what 3 stores nationally? They might have a problem acquiring new customers, but Newton people are Newton people and only one company makes them.
Karhu hasn't expanded aggressively, they offer a modest product line and should do fine as their market (people willing to pay $100+ for running shoes) isn't really going anywhere and Craft-Karhu does well enough in other segments (ski, cycle) to continue to support the running segment.
As others have indicated, it's the smaller independents like Brooks, Etonic, and Saucony that have little other diversity in the sporting goods market who will hurt the most first. People switching from buying $80+ Brooks, Etonic, or Saucony shoes at speciality stores to lower profit-margin $40-60 Nike and Reebok shoes at discount chain stores will probably be the thing that hits them hardest. Companies like Newton and Zoot might indeed be hosed. Among running shoe companies, Mizuno, New Balance, Adidas, and Asics are much better-insulated with a diversified product line. I was actually surprised to see college football teams in televised games with New Balance apparel this past season.
You think Brooks and Saucony are "independent" companies? I guess you've never heard of Stride Rite (Saucony's owner) or Berkshire Hathaway (Brooks' owner).
I do in the sense that the product lines under their brand names aren't diversified like even competitors such as Mizuno, New Balance, and Asics, let alone Nike and Adidas. There are no other segments under their branded logo umbrella to help offset losses in the running segment. I didn't say they weren't part of any conglomerate, just that as brands they are independent and undiversified and as such will have a tough time competing in a shrinking economy with brands that aren't as singular in their product lines.