We took a look a who sponsored the top 3 finishers in all of the track events at USAs. Nike sponsored 71.67% of them to take home the title in dominating fashion. In you only look at the mid-d and distance events, Nike sponsored 70% of the top 3 but an amazing 93.33% of the top 3 for the men.
Sponsor of Men's Top 3 Mid-D and Distance
800: Nike, Nike, University of Kansas (an adidas school)
1500: Nike, Nike, Nike
Steeple: Nike (WCAP sponsor), Nike, Nike
5000: Nike, Nike, Nike
10,000: Nike, Nike, Nike (WCAP sponsor)
Nike total: 93.33% (14/15)
adidas total: 6.67% (1/15)
Sponsor of Women's Top 3 Mid-D and Distance
800: adidas, Nike, Nike
1500: Nike, New Balance, adidas
Steeple: New Balance, Nike, Nike
5000: Nike, Nike, New Balance
10k: Saucony, New Balance, Hoka
Nike total: 46.67% (7/15)
New Balance total: 26.67% (4/15)
adidas total: 13.33% (2/15)
HOKA total: 6.67% (1/15)
Saucony total: 6.67% (1/15)
Combined Men’s/Women’s Mid-D/Distance Top-3 Sponsorship at USAs
Nike: 70% (21/30)
New Balance 13.33% (4/30)
adidas 10% (3/30)
HOKA 3.33% (1/30)
Saucony 3.33% (1/30)
Now we note in the article below, it's not a surprise that Nike came out on top as they are way bigger than the all of the other companies. If you adjust top 3 spots per dollar of revenue, Nike is not the winner. For example, a company like HOKA is miniscule in size compared to Nike. For the 2018 fiscal year, Hoka’s sales increased 45.4%, but they only totaled $223.1 million so they produced one top-3 finisher for every $223 million in revenue whereas Nike had one top 3 finish for every $846.5 million in revenue as they had more than $36 billion in revenue last year.
Details below.
https://www.letsrun.com/news/2019/07/nike-sponsored-athletes-dominate-2019-usatf-outdoor-championships-take-home-71-67-of-top-3-finishes-in-track-events/
Nike CRUSHES competition in sponsorship war at 2019 USAs. The swoosh sponsored 71.68% of top 3 finishers in track events.
Report Thread
-
-
Interesting analysis, not exactly apples to oranges as they say.
You would have to dig a little deeper and actually compare Nike running shoe sale numbers not the company as a whole across all categories. Hoka is just running shoes. Same for Adidas a large multi-category company just pull running shoe sales.
Return on investment you might set off a great debate, do these athletes really sell shoes? I think if you did a survey at speciality running shoe stores I think most would agree Nike running shoe sales specific to running are not at the top of the list.
Hoka is crushing it at specialty running, just reporting a 69% increase this last quarter.
Saucony, NB, Brooks are selling a lot of running shoes to runners, all have sponsored runners ,but I would venture to say few elites have a real impact on sales. Its charity sponsorship at its best.
Nike is doing big build of athletes as we head towards Tokyo, more sponsored athletes give better odds at putting more people on the team.
This may make executives happy at Nike with lots of medals and yes nice ads for all to see, but most will lace up one of the other brands as they head out the door for a run. -
How many of those were actually on contracts? Because they did force people who aren't on contracts to wear NIKE merch because they send them free gear or have teammates that are on NIKE contracts.
I could name some athletes but I'll name some people I don't know. Why did that 800 HS phenom girl wear that frog looking shirt in the semis but was in a Nike TEAM USA kit for the finals? -
Not impressed wrote:
How many of those were actually on contracts? Because they did force people who aren't on contracts to wear NIKE merch because they send them free gear or have teammates that are on NIKE contracts.
I could name some athletes but I'll name some people I don't know. Why did that 800 HS phenom girl wear that frog looking shirt in the semis but was in a Nike TEAM USA kit for the finals?
Because she likes that frog shirt and she just came back from U20s and likes the USA kit. She’s not a pro, thus unsponsored so she can wear whatever she wants. -
How many were wearing the new double plate spikes that have now been deleted all over social media?
-
Not impressed wrote:
How many of those were actually on contracts? Because they did force people who aren't on contracts to wear NIKE merch because they send them free gear or have teammates that are on NIKE contracts.
I could name some athletes but I'll name some people I don't know. Why did that 800 HS phenom girl wear that frog looking shirt in the semis but was in a Nike TEAM USA kit for the finals?
Except for the college kids I'd assume nearly everyone in the top 3 on the track was under contract but I didn't write the article.
Boring boing wrote:
How many were wearing the new double plate spikes that have now been deleted all over social media?
What do you mean by that? It's not like the photos from USAs will disappear off the internet. -
My takeaways:
1) It pays to be big. Nike and adidas are way bigger than everyone else and should dominate.
2) adidas doesn't do as well as they should relative to Nike when looking at market cap, but adidas doesn't invest very much relatively in the US in sponsoring runners.
3) I'm amazed Under Armour doesn't do better. Easiest way for them to be a factor in running would be to start with the endemic running market, win them over,and grow from there. They are a non-factor in running despite being a much bigger company than many that are. But they haven't even tried this approach which is what Brooks did.
4) New Balance is all about women. -
Shoe sites like Rolows13 had in depth engineering drawings of the new track spike with two plates and two sandwiched air bags. As well as the new Kipchoge shoe with 3 plates and two airbags. They have all been removed. The spikes have a weird taping up round the forefoot to disguise the canteliever nature of the plate.
-
wejo wrote:
4) New Balance is all about women.
Like Hoka, I think New Balance deserves recognition for their relative outperformance. One-fifth the productivity of Nike with 1/10th the annual revenue. They have picked wisely.
Great info, wejo. Thanks. -
Doesn't Nike pretty much own USATF?
-
*stipe wrote:
Doesn't Nike pretty much own USATF?
Yes, they do.
This matters in the following situations:
There is some subjectivity when allowing athletes into the meet in the first place. Remember a couple years ago in the men's 10k when the standard was stretched by a couple 10/ths for some Nike guys but not Estrada? Filling the field from a descending order list, it was called, but the list didn't include anyone not in Nike.
There is some subjectivity in a ruling on the track. We all remember AL Sal ducking into the official's tent at US indoor Champs. We also remember that when he came out, the ruling on the track was changed. Somehow this trickled up to the IAAF when Mo cheated (some would say 'broke a rule' I like 'cheated') by stepping on the inside of the curb in London. I don't believe the IAAF is beholden to Nike but Coe personally is. Anyway, London WC is off topic but anything like that at USATF goes the same way.
Relay team selection. It was hard to keep Wariner during his prime off, but it will be easy to keep Lyles off. He's not an individual medalist at USATF in the 100 or 400. The idea, obviously, is to have all 4 in Nike for each relay and they will succeed at that this year. Remember when Felix crossed the line as an afterthought in 6th? Well, the rule suddenly became: top 6 qualify for the relay pool. Never heard that mentioned before, as in before or after any of the other events from which relay athletes are chosen (M 100, M 400, W 100). If she was dead last, the rule Bolton would have been screaming into the mic would have been, "all finalists in the individual event qualify for the relay pool." She also enters the 4x100 pool, and of course will be on that team as well. -
Not necessarily a revelation here. The biggest, most successful company employs/attracts the best athletes..
-
Boing boing wrote:
Shoe sites like Rolows13 had in depth engineering drawings of the new track spike with two plates and two sandwiched air bags. As well as the new Kipchoge shoe with 3 plates and two airbags. They have all been removed. The spikes have a weird taping up round the forefoot to disguise the canteliever nature of the plate.
Any of this cached? -
What’s interesting here is the disparity in men vs women. Sure looks like the other companies market more heavily to the female demographic. Not saying that’s good or bad, it just is what it is.
-
Could you also look at what percentage of athletes for each placed top 3? While Nike had a ton of the top 3, I also noticed that they had a ton not making the top 3. For example they might have 8 sponsored athletes in the event and 2 of them finish top 3, while another company might only have 2 sponsored athletes in the event and one of them was top 3.
-
Women definitely have more influence and presence on social media. Way better marketing reach.
-
Nike is an American company so that doesn't surprise me.
-
Maybe Nike could actually do something about getting track on TV.
Who cares if these "stars" are wearing Nike. ESPN would rather show motocross stunt jumping then track and field -
What about people that actually made the team for World's?
