2012-13 soccer kits

[evanmaldonado]

New PSG kit. I like it a lot, though it doesn't really fit them. Not really PSG without the red stripe, though I still dig it. Looks fresh and clean.

I still like it, but yeah needs more PSG

[andrewharrington]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Let's just give it a rest. I'm a respected member of this board, just as you are. There's a huge difference between ignorant bias and an honest critique of reality. I don't carry enough clout to be biased. I wish adidas had the marketing resources and corporate gumption that Nike has, but I sure as hell wouldn't want adidas to do business the same way that Nike does.

[gdu]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Let's just give it a rest. I'm a respected member of this board, just as you are. There's a huge difference between ignorant bias and an honest critique of reality. I don't carry enough clout to be biased. I wish adidas had the marketing resources and corporate gumption that Nike has, but I sure as hell wouldn't want adidas to do business the same way that Nike does.

Umbro has cost Nike money. Should they continue to hold onto them just because you think they should?

What were your thoughts about adidas selling off Greg Norman and Soloman?

[Gothamite]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

There's absolutely no reason for personal attacks, save the lack of a rational argument.

I hate Adidas design with a passion. Love Nike's products and am glad two of my favorite clubs now have Nike as a supplier. But this is a very sleazy business practice.

[gdu]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

There's absolutely no reason for personal attacks, save the lack of a rational argument.

I hate Adidas design with a passion. Love Nike's products and am glad two of my favorite clubs now have Nike as a supplier. But this is a very sleazy business practice.

Not meant as a personal attack. I think the fact that he derives some of his income from adidas absolutely colors his perception of these events, which is why I felt the need to bring that affiliation up. Companies acquire and divest themselves of other companies all the time. If City wants to wear Umbro, they can. If they can't, it's because they contracted the right away already. Nothing shady about it.

Bolton just moved from home-town mfg Reebok to adidas. If adidas sells Reebok, will we hear the same outcry from aw? I doubt it.

[spottedbadger]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Signed,

A resident Nike shill.

[gdu]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Signed,

A resident Nike shill.

"A shill, plant, or stooge is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that he has a close relationship with that person or organization."

What close relationship do I have with Nike?

[Gothamite]

Is Andrew failing to disclose something?

Regardless, the fact that you're trying to make this about him, without addressing the actual facts of the situation, doesn't speak well to whatever point you're trying to make.

[spottedbadger]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Signed,

A resident Nike shill.

"A shill, plant, or stooge is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that he has a close relationship with that person or organization."

What close relationship do I have with Nike?

I think he's been pretty clear that he works for Adidas...

And you might not have a working relationship with Nike, but you have a clear Nike bias and routinely make the same kind of comments when it comes to Adidas (i.e. neon uniforms, sublimated patterns).

[crashcarson15]

New PSG kit. I like it a lot, though it doesn't really fit them. Not really PSG without the red stripe, though I still dig it. Looks fresh and clean.

I still like it, but yeah needs more PSG

I've given it the day to sit and quite honestly, I hate it. Absolutely hate it. It's such a boring design and it looks like Nike just slapped on the stripes to kind of liven it up. Plus, it doesn't even look like PSG. The pinstriped shirts from a couple of years ago were better because they actually had some form of a legitimate design element in it. It just looks like Nike said "oh hey, we don't want a plain blue shirt for PSG, but we also don't want to go through the work of really making it look like PSG, so we're going to half-ass the idea of PSG's kits."

I had high hopes for the PSG shirt after seeing the Barça shirt. But whatever.

[andrewharrington]

Umbro has cost Nike money. Should they continue to hold onto them just because you think they should?

What were your thoughts about adidas selling off Greg Norman and Soloman?

To me, there is a difference in dropping something *because they are costing you money* and dropping something *because they are not making you enough money.* According to the article, Umbro is making money, and their revenues have increased steadily over the past few years. They just aren't making enough money for Nike. With that said, I don't find that aspect to be the sleazy part of the situation. Nike has every right to sell its assets, obviously, but there's something off-putting to me, and obviously to others as well, about taking said asset's contracts and slowly migrating them up the chain of ownership before deciding to sell the asset. Business is business, but it feels like this is how the drug business works:

Big Cartel A offers to absorb small Cartel B to help expand its operations, takes over over all its warehouses and product, then kills the leaders of Cartel B, leaving all the former Cartel B employees out to dry. Obviously an extreme example, and I could be wrong, but I don't feel like adidas really assumed control of the things that made Greg Norman and Salomon valuable before selling them.

Not meant as a personal attack. I think the fact that he derives some of his income from adidas absolutely colors his perception of these events, which is why I felt the need to bring that affiliation up. Companies acquire and divest themselves of other companies all the time. If City wants to wear Umbro, they can. If they can't, it's because they contracted the right away already. Nothing shady about it.

Bolton just moved from home-town mfg Reebok to adidas. If adidas sells Reebok, will we hear the same outcry from aw? I doubt it.

The difference is that Reebok is not really *in* the soccer business at this point. If adidas took over the NHL and CrossFit contracts and then sold Reebok, I'd think that was bogus for sure, because at that point the Reebok brand would be worth much less, and that puts a lot of jobs at risk.

[marble21]

The real question is why that brand new United top is marked at 30% off.

Probaby because it's in Sports Direct, they sell everything cheap. The motto is stack it high sell it low.

Ye, they usually put an RRP of like £60 on it, so with the "30% off" its around £40, which is what replicas usually selll for over here anyway. Also interesting to note that the current England away kit is on a massive sale right now. Does this mean a new away kit is imminent?

[evanmaldonado]

The real question is why that brand new United top is marked at 30% off.

Probaby because it's in Sports Direct, they sell everything cheap. The motto is stack it high sell it low.

Ye, they usually put an RRP of like £60 on it, so with the "30% off" its around £40, which is what replicas usually selll for over here anyway. Also interesting to note that the current England away kit is on a massive sale right now. Does this mean a new away kit is imminent?

Didn't England just put out their new kits for the year? The red kit and the white with red accents.

[Luigi]

West Ham's new away kit

I really like it, and it's a lot more wearable than our last away kit. Definitely considering buying one.

[Gothamite]

The real question is why that brand new United top is marked at 30% off.

Probaby because it's in Sports Direct, they sell everything cheap. The motto is stack it high sell it low.

Ye, they usually put an RRP of like £60 on it, so with the "30% off" its around £40, which is what replicas usually selll for over here anyway. Also interesting to note that the current England away kit is on a massive sale right now. Does this mean a new away kit is imminent?

Didn't England just put out their new kits for the year? The red kit and the white with red accents.

The red one is the keeper's kit. Current England change shirt is navy blue.

[gdu]

Is Andrew failing to disclose something?

In that post, yes.

Regardless, the fact that you're trying to make this about him, without addressing the actual facts of the situation, doesn't speak well to whatever point you're trying to make.

I am not making it about him at all. I made my point about his point of view and then I posted about the facts of the situation (which, conveniently, no one has responded to). Companies do this ALL THE TIME. Adidas has done it multiple times in recent memory and I don't remember him lashing out at them for doing so.

[gdu]

Darren Rovell reported Nike is selling Umbro and Cole Haan. This explains why they are moving Manchester City to Nike.

Here's a link:

My link

The person who commented on the bottom of the article about Nike gutting Umbro is spot on.

No doubt. That's shady to buy a company, strip it clean, and then dump it with a, "Well, yeah, you're making more money every year, just not enough for us." The 'profitability' of Umbro wouldn't be an issue if Nike didn't syphon all its major assets.

Wouldn't expect anything less from our resident adidas shill.

Signed,

A resident Nike shill.

"A shill, plant, or stooge is a person who publicly helps a person or organization without disclosing that he has a close relationship with that person or organization."

What close relationship do I have with Nike?

I think he's been pretty clear that he works for Adidas...

And you might not have a working relationship with Nike, but you have a clear Nike bias and routinely make the same kind of comments when it comes to Adidas (i.e. neon uniforms, sublimated patterns).

My problems with adidas are the same ones I have with Nike when they do it (it's jsut that adidas has done it a lot more recently). And I don't have a problem generally with neon uniforms and sublimated patters. I had a problem with adidas copying Nike on those ideas (and plenty others recently). I used to like adidas soccer uniforms much more than Nike, but recently Nike has been killing it and adidas hasn't IMO (which some notable exceptions like the new Germany kits, etc...).

[Foxxtrot44]

Didn't England just put out their new kits for the year? The red kit and the white with red accents.

Dat track jacket.....

[andrewharrington]

Is Andrew failing to disclose something?

In that post, yes.

Regardless, the fact that you're trying to make this about him, without addressing the actual facts of the situation, doesn't speak well to whatever point you're trying to make.

I am not making it about him at all. I made my point about his point of view and then I posted about the facts of the situation (which, conveniently, no one has responded to). Companies do this ALL THE TIME. Adidas has done it multiple times in recent memory and I don't remember him lashing out at them for doing so.

Can you think of any examples of this happening?

[gdu]

Is Andrew failing to disclose something?

In that post, yes.

Regardless, the fact that you're trying to make this about him, without addressing the actual facts of the situation, doesn't speak well to whatever point you're trying to make.

I am not making it about him at all. I made my point about his point of view and then I posted about the facts of the situation (which, conveniently, no one has responded to). Companies do this ALL THE TIME. Adidas has done it multiple times in recent memory and I don't remember him lashing out at them for doing so.

Can you think of any examples of this happening?

I already listd 2. Solomon and Greg Norman.