2 ms·
Well, Reebok was just an underperforming subsidiary of Adidas, a company that's currently worth ~$70bn. So I don't think it's fair to just compare the 2. What
by antisthenes 5y ago
Well, Reebok was just an underperforming subsidiary of Adidas, a company that's currently worth ~$70bn. So I don't think it's fair to just compare the 2.
What Nike did right, though, is fully embrace the influencer culture, I think. That, and actually having some cool and unique designs.
Reebok always felt like "just another shoewear brand" and their clothing lines were completely generic and uninspired.
- majormajor 5y ago"Where did Reebok go wrong" goes back long before Adidas bought them in the first place. Nike had won that battle before many influencers were even born.
- HeyLaughingBoy 5y agoWasn't Reebok, "the physics behind the physiques" way back when?
- antisthenes 5y agoAdidas bought them for more in 2005 than they sold them for today. Accounting for inflation, that's one hell of a discount. Which means that wherever they went wrong before 2005, Adidas didn't really do anything to stop them from a downward trajectory. > Nike had won that battle before many influencers were even born. I wish I had your superpower of determining causality going back 30 years. Must be a hoot.