3 ms·
Your points seem mostly logically separate from those in the article. (You may have extrapolated too much from the title.) The author is arguing that Nike an
by jessriedel 9y ago
Your points seem mostly logically separate from those in the article. (You may have extrapolated too much from the title.)
The author is arguing that Nike and other high-profile brands will move to direct-to-consumer sales rather than using intermediate wholesalers. But he explicitly includes Nike-branded brick-and-mortar shops as an example of this shift. He's not arguing on brick-and-mortar vs. online.
- hosh 9y agoMore then that, there is an inversion: The experiential retailers are actually media channels and gets compensated with promoting the brand. That is, Nike shifts from being a vendor of the retailer to a client of the experiential retailer. That neatly addresses the growing practice where a brand consumer goes into a physical location and then purchases from online. In other words, the inversion makes the brick and mortar vs retailer dichotomy meaningless in terms of sales. It's kinda like what Tesla has already been doing. What is not said in the article: the role of Amazon in squeezing traditional retailers from the othet side; the continued erosion of broadcast advertising.