Brooks CEO: “Running’s not really a sport....Nobody remembers who won the Olympic marathon and what shoe they were wearing”

DontFeedTheTroll wrote:

weird wrote:

hes factually wrong lots of people know who won the olympic marathon and what he wore i assume hes saying that because an athlete wearing brooks has never won olympic gold

Lots of serious runners do, but non-runners? I just asked half a dozen people at work. No one knew. I then asked them to name a distance runner. Any distance runner. Two of them came up with Usain Bolt and then rest came up empty.

ask them to take a guess at what shoe he was wearing id assume nike would be the first guess many people would say and sponsoring elite athletes dose not do Nike much harm in the recreational jogger market.

Jim Weber comes across as a total d-bag that has simply gotten bored and wants a new personal challenge. When being a billion dollar company is more important than making a good product, you know you've lost touch.

Their shoes always seemed overweight, overly voluminous, too stiff and an aesthetic disaster anyway, so I hardly see this having much of an effect on actual runners, although according to Weber actual runners might not exist.

jenapharm wrote:

Gonna say more people in the world know who won the 2016 Olympic marathon than even know Brooks even makes shoes

And you'd be wrong.

fallallacious wrote:

jenapharm wrote:

Gonna say more people in the world know who won the 2016 Olympic marathon than even know Brooks even makes shoes

And you'd be wrong.

+1

Hip to the hop wrote:

I've probably gotten 20 pairs of brooks. But now I am looking for a new brand after these ceo comments. I would also recommend them to people cause I believed they supported the sport of running. However, that is no longer the case. Brooks is about to lose a lot of money over this :(

You seem to rattle much too easily. If you like Brooks shoes who cares what the guy said? Gawd!

I can hear so many thin-skinned insecurities screaming through in a lot of the responses on this thread. It's nauseating.

The CEO chose his "Running isn't a sport" words poorly but his point in the article about targeting recreational runners to maximize Brooks' profitability is correct and frankly pretty obvious.

After reading that I dont know if I'm a runner or if what I do is considered a sport.

...and frankly I dont give a rats arse. I'm gonna keep doing it anyway.

The only thing that Brooks do that concerns me is make shoes, which I will continue to buy or not buy based purely on whether or not they suit me and for no other reason.

Without going to press with statements like this... this is actually how Reebok got going.

They marketed to non athletes.

They had casual shoes, walking shoes, recreation shoes. Very little in specialization.

But. they were good looking and comfortable.

Then they grew into actual sports markets.

They join Nike in shoes I won't buy.

Adidas make the best shoes at the moment anyway

mary jane rottencrotch wrote:

After reading that I dont know if I'm a runner or if what I do is considered a sport.

...and frankly I dont give a rats arse. I'm gonna keep doing it anyway.

The only thing that Brooks do that concerns me is make shoes, which I will continue to buy or not buy based purely on whether or not they suit me and for no other reason.

Finally. A reasoned reply.

Talk about foot in mouth. No way that helps the business. This story is going viral and runners are upset.

Whoever said the Glycerin would be popular if Nike made it is dead wrong. That shoe is an aesthetic nightmare. Much like the entirety of the Brooks line.

adidas currently makes 2 models worth running in. The adios and Boston (I love these BTW). All their other running shoes are turds. They make some great skate shoes.

The Brooks guy is prattling on to appeal to the brand’s demographic of non-competitive, participant-minded fanny packers. Who cares what he says. The people Brooks sponsors are the “elite” version of that demographic. And why would I support a company that gave Warren Buffet a shoe?

http://static6.businessinsider.com/image/4f9af2cfecad04616c000005/waren-buffett-shoe.jpg

I think the only people who know the top 3 in the 26.2-athon are also the people who know what “spikes” are.

The tag line “running is not really a sport” is something I used to get from the football, baseball, basketball crowd in HS. It was a tired refrain then but, coming from the CEO of a running shoe company, is blasphemy.

The only way to deal with it is to ignore it, infer his intentions, or steer everyone one I come across to avoid Brooks at all cost...I’ll choose the later.

Brooks is meh wrote:

I really just want to know who tf is out there that runs a half under 90 minutes and is spending $150 on Brooks Levitate over Nike Zoom Fly.

Brooks' prices are inflating faster than their competitors, and now they're hawking an inferior product to Nike and asking for the same price. Not sure why people would go that direction if they're buying a $150 shoe.

Especially when I just paid $US50 for a pair of Boston Boosts.

redux wrote:

adidas currently makes 2 models worth running in. The adios and Boston (I love these BTW). All their other running shoes are turds. They make some great skate shoes.

What? Adidas is the only company with a proper range. The Vaporfly and Fly are their only road shoes I hear about. As for their track spikes, they have bits of string on the outside holding them together and a hole in the heel.

I found Jim Weber’s comments disrespectful and personally I think it would be reasonable for him to be fired. Just because the Brooks CEO makes lots of money does not mean he is successful, and his great lest success may be in helping ruining the brand’s reputation. Given the Nike Oregon Projects questionable practices, I wish there were more alternatives to buying Nike. Jim helped put a black mark through me even considering Brooks. Good work, Jim! You are a success.

Mr. Weber,

Please come forward and put this article in context. Brooks is a wonderful company that has done some remarkable things during your tenure. Just leaving this article out there to have people interpret things in their own way is hurting your company. Some people haven't even read the article and have formed a negative opinion. I understand that that is not fair, but it is a reality. The only way to fix this is for you to make a public statement. It will not go away on its own. Just the opposite. It is gaining steam. You need to get out in front of it. Please. I want to be a fan.

"I can’t name the past NBA, NHL, or MLB champs and I casually follow sports."

Even the most casual sports fan would be able to name the MLB or NBA champs. NHL not so much.

Never buying brooks again. New Balance is better anyways.