Oiselle Tweet

passerby guy wrote:

Again, posters keep saying "the group" is known to do this. Isn't it just Fleshman? What other Oiselle athletes have taken a shot at others?

I actually don't mean Fleshman. I mean Sally- AKA the brand's founder & CEO. It's re big & little stuff- like Lauren or Kara will post a picture from a major win & Sally will say something disparaging about their Nike garb. Or Sally once posted some pic she secretly took of the Lululemon CEO at some conference & posted it with some snide remark. There are legit reasons to dislike Nike and Lululemon and the USATF etc, but when you go all mean girls/Internet bully about it I stop listening.

It seems like when Fleshman has offended or called out another athlete she has shortly thereafter apologized. For example: Hasay last year @ indoors, Martinez re: USATF commercial. Fleshman often gets in worthy disagreements over Twitter with or regarding the USATF & Sally or Bob (Lesko) chime in with cheap shots that change the goal/context of the conversation. To be fair Sally & Bob also will often make statements simply backing Fleshman, but even that changes the mood of the discussion & is part why "the flock" often feel like "the swarm" or like a clique.

In case it's not apparent, I think Oiselle has weakened Fleshman's brand/stance (even if Oiselle has made Fleshman more popular).

passerby guy wrote:

hags central wrote:

It leaks out like bile.... I would say the Oiselle posts are "catty", insecure, and are always behind the persons back.

From Steph Rothstein

https://twitter.com/Steph_Rothstein/status/567801005590474752

Men. That tweet definitely doesn't meet your description.

Yes, yes it does. After moving from the North to the South, one thing I've learned is "cute" is a backhanded comment. What a rude tweet. Looks like passive aggressive sub-tweets are a must have on the Oiselle application. If Steph R. had something to say, she could have said it without hiding behind "Cute". Were the Nike athletes "cute" when they made you drop out of the 2012 Olympic Trials? She sounds like she is trying too hard to get the flock to favorite her tweets.

passerby guy wrote:

hags central wrote:

It leaks out like bile.... I would say the Oiselle posts are "catty", insecure, and are always behind the persons back.

From Steph Rothstein

https://twitter.com/Steph_Rothstein/status/567801005590474752

Men. That tweet definitely doesn't meet your description.

So that wasn't a catty dig at the Nike group?You are saying Rothstein is using her social media position as an Oiselle rep, to help promote the Nike Group, where she has no interests. ya OK.

Seriously. Nike could buy and sell the sport of track and field. Some unpaid college intern at Nike probably gets a kick out of keeping tabs on Oiselle tweets. I suppose the pseudo rivalry is good for the promotion of the sport.

What Shelia Reed just posted in response to Rothstein's tweet:

.@Steph_Rothstein c'mon, we don't come to your work and knock those moon boots you call Hokas out of your hands. #playnice

I get that you don't like Oiselle,, Rothstein saddlebags -- the brand, the sponsored athletes, etc. You find Oiselle and its boosters to be annoying, petty, etc. No debate from me. I don't love the entire brand message, either.

That said, what I don't get is why you feel the need to use words like "hag" and "leather faced" to describe, oh, everyone affiliated with the company, it seems. Really? Is being CEO or chair of the board a beauty contest? Does the CEO's appearance have anything to do with the quality of decision-making? Even if the CEO were a "hag" -- and she obviously is not -- what would that have to do with anything? Do you think Nike cares what Phil Knight (board chair) looks like these days?

I want to be clear that I have no ties to Oiselle, Nike, etc., or the pro aspect of the sport generally. NONE at all. I am simply a fan and a hobby jogger. But, people like you, Rothstein saddlebags, who obviously love the sport -- and are passionate about it -- can do better than sexist name-calling.

I wear asics wrote:

If you look at Brooks Marketing, and how the Beast athletes presents themselves, and the Brooks product in social media, this is what works. Positive advertising. A big win for Brooks. When you see the Oiselle group tweets, is is alway some insecure crap or pure bitterness towards the big shoe companies.

Agree 100%. Oiselle could learn something.

I wish we could embed videos or gifs on this site. The link below is perfect for this entire thread.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RAA1xgTTw9w

An outfit with a 'flock' should be taken as seriously as a color run or yoga pants.

Does anyone see the parallels between the CEO of Oiselle and Lululemon?

What are the odds that she makes a massive error in judgment and is publicly excommunicated like the Lululemon CEO? I think the odds are high since they are cut from the same cloth.

Phil Knight looks like an absolute boss.

/thread

kdkl wrote:

Sally doesn't tweet. Lauren has full control of the Twitter account. She was talking about it all last week.

Umm you are no doubt wrong there.

Goucher is NOT going to be back with a major shoe/apparel before 2016. She's going where the money is, period, same for Lauren. Who would want her and IF, that's IF she left and Brooks or whoever picked her up, she would NOT be getting paid big bucks. Running in Skeechers??? Give me a break, it's all about money as are most things in life. Do you guys really have a hard time understanding that???Goucher can claim all she wants about leaving Nike for less money...yeah right:) She's there for MONEY, period. She's done as far as making the Olympics in 2016. She didn't leave Nike, Nike didn't want her anymore and if they did, it was NOT for more money...marketing 101 folks. Lauren is there for the same thing as well, and to promote her picky bars. Goucher likes Sally, remember, she wanted to be Kara's friend...laughable at best. Oiselle wanted to get the 20 to 50 year old women to buy their over-prized women's running apparel. Goucher "allegedly" has a long term financial interest based on profits. Again, it's ALL about the money for Lauren, Goucher, etc...I come on here once, I repeat once a month and I seriously wonder how good some of you guys and gals could be if you spent more time training versus reading tweets, blogs, forums, and garbage in general. Please, go out and run!

2nd Thoughts wrote:

road rashed wrote:

Sally has no chill. Her antics over the past year likely cost Wallace a post race interview.

I believe Kara Goucher will be back with a major shoe/apparel before 2016. This was a bad move for her to be associated with Sally B, and it seems like she is not in all those flock of hags pictures the past few months. Yet Sally B keeps putting her own picture in the centre of her group of current competing runners.

I wonder if that had to do with the USATF Elite Athlete Development grants? Mary Saxer received one, that happened on February 26.

I thought Fleshman was in charge of firing the girls who acquired Nike shoe deals?https://twitter.com/pmsprinter/status/571710483184672768

Jkltds wrote:

kdkl wrote:

Sally doesn't tweet. Lauren has full control of the Twitter account. She was talking about it all last week.

Umm you are no doubt wrong there.

kldo wrote:

...I think the odds are high since they are cut from the same piece of leather.

I fixed the end of your post for you.

Anon wrote:

That said, what I don't get is why you feel the need to use words like "hag" and "leather faced" to describe, oh, everyone affiliated with the company, it seems. Really? Is being CEO or chair of the board a beauty contest? Does the CEO's appearance have anything to do with the quality of decision-making? Even if the CEO were a "hag" -- and she obviously is not -- what would that have to do with anything? Do you think Nike cares what Phil Knight (board chair) looks like these days?

I was going to post some of this hostility is from people are totally sexist. The language and hostility wouldn't be there if they were talking about a man. Same way people go after Mary W.

I didn't realize most of the posts are from the same person. hags central, I wear Asics, 2nd Thoughts, and Rothstein saddlebags are all the same ip address.

The "Karma's a b&$#^" tweet I don't really get. I must say the "team rivalries" do make the sport more interesting.

Props wejo.

Anyway, there is clearly some bad blood among some of the members of each squad, but I don't think it's universal on either side. Sports aren't a separate society where everyone magically gets along.

Interesting indeed.