orenmeetsworld

Nike is collapsing... and it's bigger than sneakers

2164 summary words 10 min summary Watch video

Start with the signal

10 min read

Summary

At-a-Glance

  • Verdict: Skim
  • Core thesis: Nike's deterioration is presented as an operating-model failure: mediocre product, legacy agency processes, scarcity-driven customer hostility, and slow centralized marketing have left it vulnerable to Adidas, niche brands, clubs, and independent creators that move faster and own specific communities.
  • Why it matters: The useful lesson extends beyond sneakers: cultural relevance now comes from distributed niche campaigns, rapid creative execution, direct relationships with event participants, and content designed to capture algorithmic attention rather than simply buying official sponsorship.
  • Best use: Use the World Cup case studies and three-part event-hijacking playbook as input for GTM and campaign design; treat the claims about Nike's inevitable collapse as opinion rather than a substantiated investment conclusion.

Executive Summary

The speaker contrasts Nike's historically cinematic, culturally urgent advertising with its current product and marketing output, which he considers mediocre. Signature shoes for Victor Wembanyama, Luka Dončić, Devin Booker, and much of Nike and Jordan's roster are offered as evidence that the company is failing to convert elite athlete IP into aspirational products.

His broader diagnosis is that sportswear culture has fragmented into communities that reward specificity. Fashion labels reinterpret soccer jerseys, running brands own distinct identities and rituals, clubs create their own desirable merchandise, and independent creators respond to cultural moments faster than Nike's established agencies. Nike retains enormous IP, but allegedly lacks the structure and talent system needed to activate it at internet speed.

Adidas is portrayed as better positioned for the 2026 World Cup because of its football heritage, roughly 40% share of the global football-boot market, 13 sponsored national teams, and an early campaign featuring Timothée Chalamet, Lionel Messi, and Bad Bunny. The strategic point is that timing and cultural resonance can matter more than official rights: Nike generated more World Cup brand conversation than official sponsor Adidas in 2010, while Beats outperformed official headphone sponsor Sony in cultural association in 2014.

The reusable playbook is to build relationships with participants rather than relying on event sponsorship, claim territory competitors do not control, and produce creative that deserves to be shared without the event context. The speaker's proposed Nike turnaround is much more radical: retire SNKRS, oppose reseller culture, increase availability, replace senior product and marketing leadership and legacy agencies, incubate design talent, rebuild women's product, and give many internal personalities direct social voices. He doubts Nike will execute this reset.

Key Takeaways

  • Claim: Nike's core problem is no longer a lack of famous athletes or brand IP; it is an inability to turn those assets into desirable products and contemporary cultural narratives. | Evidence: The speaker criticizes the current Wembanyama product, Jordan Luka 3, Devin Booker shoe, much of Ja Morant's line, and Nike's football-cleat assortment, contrasting them with earlier Nike work such as the Brazil airport campaign and Guy Ritchie's first-person Arsenal film. | Implication: For brand or investment diligence, possession of athletes, archives, and distribution should not be confused with execution quality; examine the product-development and creative systems that convert IP into demand. | Caveat: The product assessment is subjective, and the video provides no revenue, margin, inventory, consumer-survey, or category-level sales data proving that aesthetic weakness is causing company-wide collapse.
  • Claim: Sportswear demand is fragmenting into narrowly defined subcultures, leaving broad incumbents exposed to brands that own one identity, aesthetic, or community ritual. | Evidence: The running examples include District Vision for wellness, Satisfy for a fashion-forward aesthetic, Minted New York for personality-led independence, Bandit for the underdog narrative, Tracksmith for collegiate identity, and Hoka for trails; Tracksmith's stores and run clubs and a Bandit store in Tokyo show that these businesses are extending beyond DTC. | Implication: A smaller operator does not need to defeat an incumbent across an entire category; it can take share by becoming the most credible brand for one community and reinforcing that position through products, physical locations, events, and personalities. | Caveat: The examples demonstrate cultural differentiation but are not accompanied by comparable market-share, profitability, or customer-retention figures.
  • Claim: Independent creators now produce and distribute culturally responsive advertising faster than legacy brand-agency systems. | Evidence: The speaker cites Asher Hyde's rapid Wembanyama mock-ups using Spurs nun iconography, which he says generated hundreds of millions of views, and an AI-created Ja Morant advertisement that reportedly received more interaction than Nike's official output. | Implication: Modern campaign operations need rapid-response creative capacity, lightweight approvals, AI-enabled prototyping, and the ability to amplify emerging community concepts instead of relying only on long-cycle agency campaigns. | Caveat: Viral views and interactions do not necessarily translate into purchase intent, durable brand equity, or compliant use of athlete and league IP.
  • Claim: Adidas is entering the 2026 World Cup with stronger football positioning and an early-mover narrative advantage over Nike. | Evidence: The speaker says Adidas controls roughly 40% of the global football-boot market, launched individual stories and campaigns for 22 national home kits in 2025, and supplies 13 teams at the 2026 World Cup versus Nike's 12. Adidas also launched an early film featuring Timothée Chalamet, Lionel Messi, and Bad Bunny. | Implication: Scaled brands should behave like portfolios of regional and community-specific campaigns rather than force one global message; launching first can also constrain a slower rival by making similar creative appear derivative. | Caveat: The market-share forecasts and category figures are asserted without sources, and an early campaign lead does not establish eventual sales or tournament-long share of attention.
  • Claim: Official sponsorship purchases guaranteed exposure, but it does not guarantee cultural ownership of an event. | Evidence: For the 2010 World Cup, the speaker says nonsponsor Nike spent approximately $10 million to $25 million on a film featuring Kobe Bryant, Cristiano Ronaldo, and Roger Federer and achieved 30.2% of Nielsen-tracked brand conversation, versus 14% for official sponsor Adidas. In 2014, nonsponsor Beats generated 23 million views for a film featuring LeBron James, Nicki Minaj, and Lil Wayne and reportedly became more associated with the event than official sponsor Sony. | Implication: Campaign budgets should compare expensive rights packages with participant partnerships, product seeding, and culturally distinctive creative; challengers may achieve greater attention efficiency without owning official inventory. | Caveat: Conversation share and brand association are attention metrics, not direct measures of incremental revenue or campaign profitability.
  • Claim: The speaker's event-hijacking framework has three elements: relationships with principals, uncontested cultural territory, and content valuable enough to spread independently. | Evidence: Beats worked around FIFA by placing custom team-color headphones directly with players, occupied the tunnel and player-arrival context rather than broadcast inventory, and gave Germany's winners 24-karat-gold headphones delivered by Naomi Campbell. The Adidas film is presented as independently entertaining because it works as a funny, star-led short film without explicitly mentioning the World Cup. | Implication: For any major event, map the athletes, creators, attendees, adjacent behaviors, and underclaimed surfaces before considering formal sponsorship; then build an artifact or story that remains compelling after event branding is removed.
  • Claim: Nike would require a structural reset rather than another isolated collaboration or advertising campaign. | Evidence: The proposed changes include retiring SNKRS, increasing product availability, becoming explicitly anti-reseller, replacing current product and marketing leadership and legacy agencies, incubating designers, creating new silhouettes, rebuilding the women's business, and empowering dozens of identifiable internal social-media voices. | Implication: When cultural decline stems from incentives, approvals, talent, distribution, and customer experience, changing campaign creative alone is unlikely to work; the turnaround unit of analysis must be the operating system. | Caveat: This prescription is intentionally sweeping and does not address transition costs, channel relationships, scarcity economics, organizational continuity, or the feasibility of replacing leadership and agencies simultaneously.

Detailed Brief

Official merchandise is being squeezed by both poor fulfillment and better-designed alternatives

  • Claims: The speaker argues that low-quality official merchandise can damage the underlying sports brands and redirect customers toward independent labels that appear to care more about the product.; Teams themselves are becoming fashion and merchandise operators rather than depending entirely on major athletic brands.
  • Evidence: He recounts children and adults sharing complaints about Fanatics involving product quality, disappointment, and late or failed arrival.; House of Errors and KidSuper use soccer-jersey language as fashion rather than literal team fandom, while Umbro and Slam Jam's 2025 chainmail jersey shows how sporting artifacts can be abstracted into collectible design.; Several Italian clubs are described as producing merchandise that is more widely recognized than their on-field performance and is offered at better prices than major-brand alternatives.
  • Caveats: The Fanatics criticism is based on anecdote, and the Italian clubs are not named in the transcript.; The video does not quantify how much merchandise revenue or market share has shifted away from incumbents.
  • Implications: Customer experience failures by a licensed-commerce intermediary can contaminate every brand represented in the transaction.; Rights holders with strong identity may capture more economics and cultural value by developing direct design, storytelling, and commerce capabilities.

Sponsored Perplexity Computer workflow demonstrates rapid research-to-microsite production

  • Claims: The speaker presents a multi-model workflow for converting an existing research collection into a deployed, browsable design resource.; The workflow combines research, copy, graphics, coding, design, deployment, and iterative validation inside one interface.
  • Evidence: The resulting microsite reportedly contains 38 campaigns, 100 jerseys, 16 manufacturers, mood boards, and live links.; The speaker supplied seed links, had the system find additional material, accepted or rejected results, requested responsive desktop and mobile sections, and then validated images and previews.; He says the concept-to-site process took about 20 minutes.
  • Caveats: This portion is explicitly sponsored by Perplexity, and the transcript does not independently assess output quality, rights clearance, factual accuracy, or the amount of prior human research embedded in the result.
  • Implications: Agentic web-building tools can package internal research into a usable artifact quickly, but production claims should be evaluated against the hidden preparation time and a formal validation checklist.; A browsable resource may create more organizational leverage than leaving research in link collections, documents, or static mood boards.

Notable Concepts & Terms

  • Cultural urgency: The quality Nike historically created by combining elite athletes, cinematic storytelling, and memorable product into campaigns that became discussion events rather than ordinary advertisements.
  • Jersey abstraction: The shift from buying a jersey only to represent a real player or team toward treating its colors, materials, typography, and silhouette as a reusable fashion language.
  • Talent war: The competition to attract independent designers and creative directors who can sample, test, collaborate, and publish faster than established internal teams.
  • Distributed niche campaigns: Using corporate scale to run many regional, product-specific, and community-specific narratives, as illustrated by Adidas giving each of 22 national kits its own lore and campaign.
  • Relationships with principals: Partnering directly with athletes, competitors, creators, or attendees who embody an event instead of assuming that sponsorship of the event itself is the best route to attention.
  • Unclaimable territory: A campaign surface or cultural behavior that an official competitor does not control, such as Beats owning player headphones and tunnel visibility while Sony owned formal sponsorship rights.
  • Event algorithm: The temporary recommendation-system demand created when platforms detect concentrated interest in events such as the World Cup, Olympics, Coachella, or Boston Marathon and distribute related content more broadly.
  • Anti-reseller reset: The proposed strategy of increasing availability and ending customer experiences built around repeated scarcity and failed purchase attempts in order to repair Nike's relationship with younger consumers.

Operator Notes / Why Ken Should Care

  • Create a calendar of high-attention events relevant to each portfolio company or GTM motion, with planning windows for preemption, participant outreach, launch, rapid response, and post-event amplification.
  • Require campaign briefs to identify principals, underclaimed territory, the independently shareable artifact, and the expected algorithmic distribution mechanism before approving sponsorship spend.
  • Stand up a small rapid-creative pod with preapproved brand boundaries, rights checks, model access, and a same-day publishing path for live cultural moments.
  • Evaluate official sponsorship and media rights against an alternative budget containing direct participant deals, seeding, creator production, and distribution; compare attention efficiency and downstream conversion rather than impressions alone.
  • Pilot the research-to-microsite workflow on one internal market map, but log human preparation time, citation accuracy, broken assets, rights risks, and maintenance burden before adopting it as an operating standard.
  • For consumer-brand diligence, test whether a company owns a repeatable community ritual such as clubs, events, stores, or creator participation rather than relying solely on paid acquisition and aesthetic differentiation.
  • Monitor Nike's and Adidas's 2026 World Cup execution as a live test of whether early narrative capture persists through the tournament and whether social conversation produces measurable product demand.

Source/Metadata

  • Title: Nike is collapsing... and it's bigger than sneakers
  • Transcript words: 10354
  • Duration seconds: 1287
  • Timestamp note: No timestamps or chapters were provided. The supplied transcript contains substantial duplicated passages and extraction repetition, so the brief consolidates repeated material rather than treating it as separate evidence.
Full transcript 4946 words · 46 min read
0:00

SPEAKER_00

In this video, we are going to talk about Nike and their awkward current state, Adidas, and their cultural comeback, and the marketing around the World Cup. A lot on soccer, a little bit on basketball, but most importantly, the state of the world as cultural titans and smaller brands battle it out around the sporting zeitgeist. Look, I remember crystal clearly the moment my older brother showed me this, the Nike All-Stars vs. Devils ad. Nike entering the arena into soccer marketing in the most major of ways, right? Creating ads nothing like we'd ever seen before, pure cinema, drawing the absolute best out of the sport, marketing at its highest level. And when I was growing up, it seemed like they were on a run that would be completely unstoppable. I had branded posters hanging in my room. When they dropped an ad, it was a discussion point. You assumed the great athlete would be a Nike athlete. And this was their soccer strategy. Sign Brazilian athletes, make cinematic ads, and establish cultural urgency in the United States and globally around a sport that it didn't have deep roots in. Adidas was rooted and they were counter-positioning. And in their time, they dropped incredible ad after incredible ad. This one, World Cup 1998, Brazil at the airport, equally as important viewing, right? In a completely different flavor and way. All fun and skill and expertise and stardom while being distinctly Nike. Simple, fun. But perhaps my favorite ad is one that I bring up all the time when talking to brands now, and we talk about cinematic content, right? You see now streetwear brand, athletic brands, they're all doing real cinema. They're all putting together lookbooks, making their own movies, their own shows. And this Nike first-person POV directed by Guy Ritchie ad that puts you in the position of this player in this situation inside Arsenal was not just unique at the time, but is incredible for anyone who wants to immerse themselves inside a brand world. A truly masterful piece of advertising. But fast forward to today, that's not where Nike's at, and that's not what's happening in the culture. For most people, it's synonymous with mediocre. The shoes are okay. You wouldn't ever buy the clothes. Millennials have strong feelings about the brand. They grew up with it. They have hope for it. I have hope for it. But the reality of it with the consumer is something different. And to understand it, we should go away from soccer and into basketball, where they have one of the hottest athletes of the moment. If you look at the shoes they have, this is the shoe they have for Victor Wembenyama right now. They're simply bad. I had a moment with my son when Luka was traded to the Lakers from the Mavericks, when he was asking, does he have shoes? He was aware of the idea of the shoes and Jordan shoes. And I remember distinctly showing him the Luka shoes in all the styles and being, yeah, I'm cool, bro. And I'm trying to put that in perspective of people that grew up in the era I did, where it would just be them taking an L or doing that just seems not even comprehensible. But this is it. Look at the Jordan Luka 3. Look at this. Who is wearing this? How is this aspirational? How does one of the top athletes in one of the biggest markets get represented by Nike for something like this? And it's not just one athlete or two athletes. Everyone on the Jordan roster, everyone on the Nike roster, perhaps best exemplified by the honestly complacent trash of the Devin Booker shoe, trying to badly reinvent what came before it in a really unique market with a unique player who could have done so much more. One of the only players with a decent shoe in presentation, Ja Morant. But even then, they had to go through a sea of whack shoe after whack shoe to get to anything interesting and respectable. And to the point now, when you go on to the football cleats section of this, and you scroll through these now, there is very little here, if anything, that you'd want to wear, that you'd be excited about. And I find this interesting that this is where this brand is at. When we are in one of the most interesting times in design, possibly ever, where there's so much talent, there is so much high quality, and they choose again and again to put out stuff that is mediocre at best. So what happened? I'm going to talk for a bit about how jerseys began to take over culture and how that began to actually take share away from these big brands used to sell you athletics. We'll talk a bit about campaigns and relevancy in the modern era, the brands that are taking this share and the unique things that they're doing. And then go into the marketing behind the World Cup and why this is such an important and pivotal moment for both Nike and Adidas on the trajectories they're going, one up and one down. So the cultural cachet of sportswear is at an absolute all-time high. And the soccer jersey perhaps most exemplifies that. Brands like House of Errors that I'm wearing right now took that fandom that used to be expressed through a Nike garment and made it simply more interesting. And that became a major trend. It's gone all the way down into brands like PacSun. And you'll see lots of brands that are actually passionate about the jersey use it pretty extensively inside what they're doing. Kid Super, another example I frequently point to, where the founder is passionate about soccer. And you see it again and again as a motif inside the clothes that they put out. But all of this, this embracing of this, used to be traditionally focused on these major athletic brands. But now the symbol isn't the jersey of the player itself. It's it as a fashion concept. That's an arena that Nike doesn't play in at all. And it's not that other brands haven't noticed. One of my favorite stories of the last few years is Umbro taking a more fashion forward approach with the line they've done with Slam Jam, right. And they came out and they launched it in 2025 with this chainmail jersey, right, which is the perfect example of the abstraction we have of these artifacts we have around sports. We want to purchase. We want to remember. We want to represent us. And what can be done with a vision around that. And when you look at these, you go, OK, this creative director working on this gets taken by Umbro, but not Nike. And you can see this brand was able to get life breathed back into it by making really interesting sportswear. And if you just go through the Slam Jam collections, there is more interesting things happening here than across the entire Nike site. And I say this to highlight that it is a talent war that we are in right now. We have more independent talent than ever. Better designers, more creative directors, the ability to sample and test more things, more inspiration, more people working together. But since the Virgil Abloh era, none of that has landed at Nike. And at the same time, you have the fanatics world, right? The world of cheap jerseys. My only fanatics anecdote is that's one of the most despised brands by generations, right. You have, I remember at a Super Bowl party recently back in Feb, kids had angry fanatics stories and

0:04

SPEAKER_00

Through the Slam Jam collections, there is more interesting things happening here than across the entire Nike site. And I say this to highlight that it is a talent war that we are in right now. We have more independent talent than ever. Better designers, more creative directors, the ability to sample and test more things, more inspiration, more people working together. But since the Virgil Abloh era, none of that has landed at Nike. And at the same time, you have the fanatics world, right? The world of cheap jerseys. My only fanatics anecdote is that's one of the most despised brands by generations. Right. You have, I remember at a Super Bowl party recently back in Feb, kids had angry fanatic stories and adults had angry fanatic stories. How they'd gotten a bad quality or not arrived on time or they'd been disappointed. There's been this cheapening of the official merchandise significantly by how bad of a brand that is and how much they've tarnished the fan experience that it dirties the brands in the middle and has made people go to more of these independent people that obviously care about it. Well, at the same time, we've seen the teams themselves actually flourishing by embracing design. In Italy, multiple clubs are doing just an exceptional job. The merchandise performs and is more widely known than the teams in their actual games. And they're putting out better stuff at better prices than a lot of the actual brands. And both of these have done an excellent job with their releases. And perhaps most interestingly, the campaign has changed. All those big ads I showed you before were done by the same ad agencies that are still working on Nike campaigns. We still see that the last bastion of the millennial big catchy tagline, a key moment ad. They still operate in this more antiquated way. And what's happening is you are seeing the internet build around it faster. And a great example is this young guy, Asher Hyde, who after Wemby's games against OKC the other day, released mock-ups, right? It's just nano banana mock-ups of these ads are ruthlessly viral, hundreds of millions of views, where he's able to deploy a concept based on the nun iconography, the nuns that are at the sports games, at the Spurs games. But even that, just showcasing the size, showcasing him against other athletes. The creativity happens at a faster speed and done better by independents. And these brands are able to do with their own IP because they won't adapt their systems. They're locked in with these ad agencies that are antiquated, with these processes that are super behind. Those are the people that are desperately trying to catch up by watching the kind of videos, the stuff we have on our channel, and realizing they can't act like that. There's too much of a change. And you end up in this sea shift of brands that can act and brands that can't. But in the meantime, the campaigns are executed specifically by others. The personalities become the stars more than the brands behind them. How did we end up with a better Ja Morant ad from an AI creator, no matter how cursed you think that may be, than they got more interaction than anything the actual brand put out. And then we enter that relevancy moment too, with those athletes. Shohei Otani is with New Balance. Cooper Flagg is with New Balance. Anthony Edwards is with Adidas. There's more competition than ever, faster speed to move. And we have a company with incredible IP that is behind the ball constantly. Before we dive into the state of marketing, why the World Cup is so important, and what's happening as we speak, as we think about the soccer jersey as a pop culture item. As something fashion brands interpret, something where the elements are broken down and recreated and shared, where these lookbooks are looked at aspirationally from these teams and these releases, where brands are even creating fictional teams, the play with materials, the things I talked about. So last year, I'd worked on some concepts around this for some brand merchandise. And I pulled together dozens of vintage jersey designs, art direction, mood boards, and visual campaigns with football themes as part of the process, as well as a bunch of factories to make them. We ended up going with an alternative direction, this luxury collection you may have seen last summer. But I want to find a way to present this here and share a bunch of those resources. It's more than just a mood board or a link. So I went to Perplexity Computer and created a microsite from scratch that you can get here for free. It's a design resource, a factory resource. And so you'll see it has 38 campaigns, 100 jerseys, 16 manufacturers, mood boards, all live on this site with links you can use as a resource. If you ever wondered how it works to put something like this together, you can build that inside of Perplexity Computer. They have access to multiple different models for different functions. It can do deep research with one, it can compose copy with another, generate graphics, write, design, code, and deploy all in one interface you see here. So I gave computer the initial links and resources that I pulled. I asked it to pull a lot more. I could determine if I want to add or reject them. And then I asked it to build a complete browsable site with these different sections for mobile and desktop that I could present here as a design resource. In about 20 minutes, we went from concept to site. And you can see me asking it to change different specific things in here to go validate images and previews. I can just do this all inside the Perplexity Computer interface. If you've ever wanted any design inspiration around this niche now or for the future, you can check out the build in the description and you'll find the template and prompts I used you could use for compiling your own resource or building microsites with Perplexity Computer. All the links are in the description. I hope you find it super useful. And thank you so much to Perplexity for sponsoring this video. Before we get into this year's World Cup, I want to talk about running as an example of what's happening right now. Why this is such an important era to think about. So we have so many of these brands. If you look at why is Nike no longer the champion of running? Why are they not associated with running? Why have they even owned a fraction of the subculture the way they used to? And look at how specific these brands have gotten, right? So you have Satisfye and Satisfye is here collabing with Adidas. You have Minted New York dropping running shoes with Saucony and incredible gear. You have District Vision and all of these are niched in, right? District Vision owns the wellness end of it and they do it with New Balance. Satisfye has more of the Ed Hardy affliction vibe. Granted a little higher end because they're French. Minted is fiercely independent and personality driven. Bandit owns the underdog and the concept. They launched that unsponsored project went directly at something that felt very Nike saying, hey, we're going to give these athletes, these underdogs a chance. Tracksmith has collegiate. The casual user, the user just wants to have a shoe that looks good on, just took all of that, especially in the more suburban demographic. Hoka has the

0:09

SPEAKER_00

shoes with Saucony and incredible gear. You have District Vision and all of these are niched in, right? District Vision owns the wellness end of it and they do it with New Balance. Satisfye has more of the Ed Hardy affliction vibe. Granted a little higher end because they're French. Minted is fiercely independent and personality driven. Bandit owns the underdog and the concept. They launched that unsponsored project went directly at something that felt very Nike saying, hey, we're going to give these athletes, these underdogs a chance. Tracksmith has collegiate. The casual user, the user just wants to have a shoe that looks good on, just took all of that, especially in the more suburban demographic. Hoka has the trails. There is no subculture that Nike is able to own and the world is splintering into these subcultures. And so every one of these categories is up for grabs. Part of when I originally started this channel, it's giving away lots of factory links and how to build brand items because the opportunity is so large because every one of those big conglomerates is operating behind the ball. You are able to get market share from them. And it's not just DTC anymore. It's not just getting it online. You see more and more of these people opening up stores. Tracksmith has so many stores and doing run clubs in all these regions. I was in Tokyo. I wandered by a bandit store in Tokyo. The scale that these brands are able to operate at and a certain amount of speed is just extremely encouraging. When you look at the soccer landscape, this is where Adidas' advantage shows the most clearly. Adidas owns roughly 40% of the global football boot market. And with their actual kit deals, their relationships run extremely deep. They basically dominate that segment. And in 2025, they announced home kits for 22 nations simultaneously. They've splintered down as well. More and more smaller collabs, more and more regional. And each one of those 22 kits that they announced had its own design background, its own lore, its own campaign. That's what it means to operate in this modern landscape if you are one of those bigger brands, is to use your scale to operate lots of smaller campaigns the way the internet works in niches, in regionality, in algorithms. For the 2026 World Cup, Adidas has 13 nations, including Mexico and Argentina. Nike has 12, two of them being the host countries, which is why this lines up to be one of the more competitive moments of this. And this comes at a peak moment, right? Adidas has been football-adjacent fashion culture in a much stronger way than Nike. The Samba, the Gazelle, the Copa, those are all also related to the football world. And the way that any of Nike's dominance is more SBs, basketball, their newfound growth and success is attached to a cultural memory of the game in a way Nike's never really was. And so globally, Nike's market share is set to decline, not a huge amount, but a minor amount. And Adidas is set to rise, a small amount as well. But this World Cup is particularly important because it is Nike's backyard, U.S. and Canada. And with them set to own the host countries, you see Adidas came in with the strongest campaign possible from the start. So before Nike was even able to announce what they're doing with their campaigns, we got Timothee Chalamet at the peak of his moments, Messy, Bad Bunny, in a film that was, for the first time, something watched at the breakfast table with my family. Something on the par of what we saw in those Nike examples we had originally. And now whatever Nike does, as good as it is, and bringing out that star power, it's secondary to what they rolled out. I think it's worth talking about how this actually works. Why is this such an important moment? How brands that are both actually involved and involved on the side can hijack these big moments like the World Cup. So FIFA does a billion, 1.1 billion in sponsorships from this 2026 World Cup. Adidas pays for the tournament rights, Visa pays, Coca-Cola pays. Coca-Cola has been paying since 1976. So these are the official partners. Their logos appear on the broadcasts, corner flags, the match balls. They've bought the real estate around this. But that's not always the brand that walks away with the actual cultural resonance from the event. That just sets you up to make sure you have some guaranteed impressions. So in 2010 in South Africa, Adidas is the big FIFA sponsor, same way they are this year. And Nike is not an official sponsor. They never are. So they launched a film then with Kobe Bryant, Ronaldo, Federer. That went ultra viral, especially for that time, 7 million views or something. And they ended up with a Nielsen tracked buzz of 30.2% of the brand conversation around the World Cup. Adidas only had 14, even though they weren't the official sponsor. And they did that for maybe 10, 25 million on the campaign versus the hundreds of millions Adidas spent to sponsor the whole thing. Because there is so much attention and conversation around the few monoculture moments that we have left. It's why a Super Bowl ad is still worth the money for a lot of brands. It's so hard to get that many targeted eyeballs at one time. They have the ability to potentially spur a bigger conversation. Now, this isn't always just the big brands like this, right? So in 2014 in Brazil, Beats by Dre had a moment. They weren't a sponsor. They're not even a sports brand. And they'd actually just been banned by FIFA. Players could not wear those headphones because Sony was the official sponsor. So Beats launched a film during the pregame. LeBron, Nicki Minaj, Lil Wayne. Doesn't even mention the World Cup. Gets 23 million views. And the same rating system basically shows that Beats has more of an association with the World Cup than Sony, the actual sponsor. This is the virality move that we played. They also sent custom Beats in team colors to all the top squads in the tournament. And players kept wearing them despite the ban because they were hot. And then when Germany won the final, they gave the players 24 karat gold headphones delivered by Naomi Campbell, right? This is someone going for the jugular in a cultural moment. This is why, as we lead up to this, there's so much brand planning that goes into it. Because these official sponsorships only buy you access to the surface, right? The moment itself is just about who can direct human attention. And that's done through careful planning and thought and timing. Just like we saw with the Adidas. The Adidas fired early, knowing they could get ahead of the conversation, potentially be the first to dominate it. Anything Nike does now is in response to Adidas. Now, maybe they can blow it out of the water, but because it came out so strong, anything similar is another bunch of star power looks like a copy. They're preemptively getting ahead, knowing their competitor is down bad. Because guess what? Judging by Nike's recent track record, they probably don't have anything sick lined up. It's probably okay. And so the playbook for this,

0:14

SPEAKER_00

itself is just about who can direct human attention. And that's done through careful planning and thought and timing. Just like we saw with the Adidas. The Adidas fired early, knowing they could get ahead of the conversation, potentially be the first to dominate it. Anything Nike does now is in response to Adidas. Now, maybe they can blow it out of the water, but because it came out so strong, anything similar is another bunch of star power looks like a copy. They're preemptively getting ahead, knowing their competitor is down bad. Because guess what? Judging by Nike's recent track record, they probably don't have anything sick lined up. It's probably okay. And so the playbook for this, if you're actually looking at implementing this as a brand, because this goes to any event, goes to any new thing. If you want to think about how do you hijack something, the Boston Marathon, if you're a running company, if you see Bandit do this, a grip, CrossFit games, anything, three things. It's about relationships with the principals, not just sponsoring the events, about who is in there that you are able to work with to get attention, the actual players, the actual competitors, the actual people involved with the event. Because working with them outside of it can be just as impactful and likely cheaper. And then it's about having territory that the other people can't claim. Beats isn't competing for the ad that's on during the actual World Cup. They're competing for the tunnel or what people are wearing there. And then you want to create something that's worth sharing on its own terms, right? This Timothée Chalamet Adidas ad isn't just exciting because it's the World Cup. Again, it doesn't even mention the World Cup. It's interesting on its own. It's a short film. It's funny. It's creative. It has a lot of star power. Whether or not it's attached to the World Cup, it's worth sharing. And that's the mistake of just putting all the same creative or launching another ad or focusing direct on this is there's bigger ramifications now in terms of what virality can make. And right now in 2026, brands are expecting to double the social engagement in 2022. We're in a different world now. It's far more social, far more shareable. The ability to say, we're going to put out a campaign. We're going to get the conversation going. We're going to seed it with clips. We're going to get into a response. We're going to know that there's an algorithm building around it and act on it is crucial. You may have seen a video I put out a while back about Coachella. Why do so many brands spend so much money on Coachella? Because there's a Coachella algorithm. You consume some content about Coachella, just like the Olympics. And I put out videos around this. They did great. I had a video about Olympics. I had a video about Coachella. Because so many people are watching and viewing that content, whether it's a hate watch or a like watch, they show them more and more of it. The algorithms know this. They respond to it. They put it inside your feed and they test it to a lot more people. This happens at every big event. And this becomes an opportunity to hijack that, to sponsor a couple people to go, to release a jersey, to do X or Y collection related to it, to catch the tail of that algorithm, to get more views than you normally would. This is such an outsized opportunity for small brands who understand social media. I absolutely have to call it out. It's the same exact thing for creators as well. And all this goes back to big agencies not being able to understand it and leverage it, although they are getting better. Big brands have a hard time moving into this. And it is the time with the smaller people who can come around and move against the culture in different ways. And so I'm going to end with, what would I think Nike had to do to get back on track? So the first thing I think would be would be retire the SNKRS app. Sneaker culture, hype beast culture is probably the biggest negative implication and association with Nike now. So many people have used the SNKRS app and just never gotten the stuff they actually want. So the consumer now has a negative association with one of those top apps. Got to crush that. That has to go. And then when they do release it, do things like the limited, it has to just have more production. It doesn't have to be unlimited. But if someone wants something, you have to be able to let them get it. You will not be able to get the kids excited. You're not be able to get the collaboration scale, even know what works and what the depth is without more availability. You have to be anti-reseller culture. There are no people besides maybe crypto people who are looked down upon more than sneaker reseller, sneaker flipper. You have to remove that association. You have to actively work against that as that brand. You need to position that that is something they are never going to be able to support again. You should be able to get whatever you want from the brand at its own price. Resets with this new population who have such a negative association with these brand experiences. And with that comes an exiting of the C-suite, right? No one now responsible for marketing, for design, or for product. And thus, no one in the operations around that should be allowed to stay there. It needs to be a complete house clean. Same thing with the agencies. Every old agency has to go. None of them operate inside this world that we're in now. And does that mean more coordination, more campaigns, more failures, whatever? Yes, but there's no way you can keep winning with the same agency that you had 25 years ago. They do not have the juice to function in the modern era. I know. I go to these. I do these workshops at these major brands, at Fortune 500s, inside the household names. We talk about their marketing. We go through it. They know who they have, can't respond. They know they're behind. Most people just don't do anything about it. But with a brand where that lifestyle and the marketing is everything, you have to do something about it. Then fanatical focus on new silhouettes and actually incubating design talent that stays with the brand, actually documents what's happening and shares it. It cannot be the clothes vault. It has to be a story that Nike is telling with its designers, with its athletes, all in one amazing internet canvas that could be better entertainment than any other brand has. Nothing to care far more for the women's market beyond a few collabs and Skims, a handful of athletes. It feels like an afterthought and a design afterthought, and it's lost its purchase power with that demographic. But it's a complicated market there now with a lot of movement between those brands, the Lulus, the Allo's, etc., that potentially with some focus could get brought back. And lastly, to bring voices to social media. They need not just their Marcus Millioni, dozens of them. Unique people with perspectives inside the company are building their own brands or building subsections there. They're able to actually share with passion that

0:19

SPEAKER_00

entertainment than any other brand has. Nothing to care far more for the women's market beyond a few collabs and skims, a handful of athletes. It feels like an afterthought and a design afterthought, and it's lost its purchase power with that demographic. But it's a complicated market there now with a lot of movement between those brands, the Lulus, the Allos, etc., that potentially with some focus could get brought back. And lastly, to bring voices to social media. They need not just their Marcus Millioni, dozens of them. Unique people with perspectives inside the company are building their own brands or building subsections there. They're able to actually share with passion that story at a greater level. And frankly, I don't think they'll be able to do it. I think we'll see one of the great American brands get continually hacked and chipped away at into obscurity. It will remember what it was, and it will be more Kmart and TJ Maxx than anything else. And I hope that I'm wrong, but there's nothing that I've seen that was suggestible go a different way. If you're passionate about these kinds of topics, doing another creative direction webinar coming up here in a week or two, I will link down here where we run them as a community call where I talk a little bit and do a training. Then we all go through questions and Q&A and actually just workshop the things that are going on. So if you want to connect with other people that you're excited about this with and just get deeper into these topics and actually do some workshopping and talk about it, we'd love to have you then as well. We'll be documenting a lot more marketing around what actually happens during the World Cup. So you can find that on short form. I appreciate y'all so much for watching.

0:26

SPEAKER_00

soccer marketing in the most major of ways, right? Creating ads nothing like we'd ever seen before, pure cinema, drawing the absolute best out of the sport, marketing at its highest level. And when I was growing up, it seemed like they were on a run that would be completely unstoppable. I had branded posters hanging in my room. When they dropped an ad, it was a discussion point. You assumed the great athlete would be a Nike athlete. And this was their soccer strategy. Sign Brazilian athletes, make cinematic ads, and establish cultural urgency in the United States and globally around a sport

0:58

SPEAKER_00

that it didn't have deep roots in. Adidas was rooted and they were counter-positioning. And in their time, they dropped incredible ad after incredible ad. This one, World Cup 1998, Brazil at the airport, equally as important viewing, right? In a completely different flavor and way. All fun and skill and expertise and stardom while being distinctly Nike. Simple, fun. But perhaps my favorite ad is one that I bring up all the time when talking to brands now, and we talk about cinematic content, right? You see now streetwear brand, athletic brands, they're all doing real cinema. They're all putting together

1:31

SPEAKER_00

lookbooks, making their own movies, their own shows. And this Nike first-person POV directed by Guy Ritchie ad that puts you in the position of this player in this situation inside Arsenal was not just unique at the time, but is incredible for anyone who wants to immerse themselves inside a brand world. A truly masterful piece of advertising. But fast forward to today, that's not where Nike's at, and that's not what's happening in the culture. For most people, it's synonymous with mediocre. The shoes are okay. You wouldn't ever buy the clothes. Millennials have strong feelings about the

2:02

SPEAKER_00

brand. They grew up with it. They have hope for it. I have hope for it. But the reality of it with the consumer is something different. And to understand it, we should go away from soccer and into basketball, where they have one of the hottest athletes of the moment. If you look at the shoes they have, this is the shoe they have for Victor Wembenyama right now. They're simply bad. I had a moment with my son when Luka was traded to the Lakers from the Mavericks, when he was asking, does he have shoes? He was aware of the idea of the shoes and Jordan shoes. And I remember distinctly showing him the Luka shoes in all the styles and being like,

2:32

SPEAKER_00

yeah, I'm cool, bro. And I'm trying to put that in perspective of people that grew up in the era I did, where it would just be like them taking an L or doing that just seems not even comprehensible. But this is it. Look at the Jordan Luka 3. Look at this. Who is wearing this? How is this aspirational? How does one of the top athletes in one of the biggest markets get represented by Nike for something like this? And it's not just one athlete or two athletes. Everyone on the Jordan roster, everyone on the Nike roster, perhaps best exemplified by the honestly complacent trash

3:00

SPEAKER_00

of the Devin Booker shoe, trying to badly reinvent what came before it in a really unique market with a unique player who could have done so much more. One of the only players with a decent shoe in presentation, John Moran. But even then, they had to go through a sea of whack shoe after whack shoe to get to anything interesting and respectable. And to the point now, when you go on to the football cleats section of this, and you scroll through these now, there is very little here, if anything, that you'd want to wear, that you'd be excited about. And I find this interesting that this is where this brand is at. When we are in one of the most interesting times in design,

3:35

SPEAKER_00

possibly ever, where there's so much talent, there is so much high quality, and they choose again and again to put out stuff that is mediocre at best. So what happened? I'm going to talk for a bit about how jerseys began to take over culture and how that began to actually take share away from these big brands used to sell you athletics. We'll talk a bit about campaigns and relevancy in the modern era, the brands that are taking this share and the unique things that they're doing. And then go into the marketing behind the World Cup and why this is such an important and pivotal moment for both Nike

4:04

SPEAKER_00

and Adidas on the trajectories they're going, one up and one down. So the cultural cachet of sportswear is at an absolute all-time high. And the soccer jersey perhaps most exemplifies that. Brands like House of Errors that I'm wearing right now took that fandom that used to be expressed through like a Nike garment and made it simply more interesting. And that became a major trend. It's gone all the way down into brands like PacSun. And you'll see lots of brands that are actually passionate about the jersey use it pretty extensively inside what they're doing. Kid Super, another example I frequently point to,

4:33

SPEAKER_00

where the founder is passionate about soccer. And you see it again and again as a motif inside the clothes that they put out. But all of this, this embracing of this, used to be traditionally focused on these major athletic brands. But now the symbol isn't the jersey of the player itself. It's it as a fashion concept. That's an arena that Nike doesn't play in at all. And it's not like other brands haven't noticed. One of my favorite stories of the last few years is Umbrose taking a more fashion forward approach with the line they've done with Slam Jam. Right. And they came out and they launched

5:04

SPEAKER_00

it in 2025 with this chainmail jersey. Right. Which is the perfect example of the abstraction we have of these artifacts we have around sports. We want to purchase. We want to remember. We want to represent us. And what can be done with a vision around that. And when you look at these, you go, OK, this creative director working on this gets taken by Umbro, but not Nike. And you can see this brand was able to get life breathed back into it by making really interesting sportswear. And if you just go through the Slam Jam collections, there is more interesting things happening here than across the

5:33

SPEAKER_00

entire Nike site. And I say this to highlight that it is a talent war that we are in right now. We have more independent talent than ever. Better designers, more creative directors, the ability to sample and test more things, more inspiration, more people working together. But since the Virgil Abloh era, none of that has landed at Nike. And at the same time, you have the fanatics world, right? The world of cheap jerseys. My only fanatics anecdote is that's one of the most despised brands by generations. Right. You have, I remember at a Super Bowl party recently back in Feb, kids had angry fanatic stories and

6:05

SPEAKER_00

adults had angry fanatic stories. How they'd gotten a bad quality or not arrived on time or they'd been disappointed. There's been this cheapening of the official merchandise significantly by how bad of a brand that is and how much they've tarnished the fan experience that it dirties the brands in the middle and has made people go to more of these independent people that obviously care about it. Well, at the same time, we've seen the teams themselves actually flourishing by embracing design. In Italy, multiple clubs are doing just an exceptional job. The merchandise performs and is more widely known

6:32

SPEAKER_00

than the teams in their actual games. And they're putting out better stuff at better prices than a lot of the actual brands. And both of these have done an excellent job with their releases. And perhaps most interestingly, the campaign has changed. All those big ads I showed you before were done by the same ad agencies that are still working on Nike campaigns. We still see that the last bastion of the millennial, like big catchy tagline, a key moment ad. They still operate in this more antiquated way. And what's happening is you are seeing the internet build around it faster. And a great example is this young

7:04

SPEAKER_00

guy, Asher Hyde, who after Wemby's games against OKC the other day, released just mock-ups, right? It's just nano banana mock-ups of these ads are ruthlessly viral, hundreds of millions of views, where he's able to deploy a concept based on the nun iconography, the nuns that are at the sports games, at the Spurs games. But even that, just showcasing the size, showcasing him against other athletes. The creativity happens at a faster speed and done better by independents. And these brands are able to do with their own IP because they won't adapt their systems. They're locked in with these

7:35

SPEAKER_00

ad agencies that are antiquated, with these processes that are super behind. Those are the people that are desperately trying to catch up by watching the kind of videos, the stuff we have on our channel, and realizing they can't act like that. There's too much of a change. And you end up in this sea shift of brands that can act and brands that can't. But in the meantime, the campaigns are executed specifically by others. The personalities become the stars more than the brands behind them. How did we end up with a better Ja Morant ad from an AI creator, no matter how cursed you think that may be, then they got more

8:04

SPEAKER_00

interaction than anything the actual brand put out. And then we enter that relevancy moment too, with those athletes. Shohei Otani is with New Balance. Cooper Flagg is with New Balance. Anthony Edwards is with Adidas. There's more competition than ever, faster a speed to move. And we have a company with incredible IP that is behind the ball constantly. Before we dive into the state of marketing, why the World Cup is so important, and what's happening as we speak, as we think about the soccer jersey as a pop culture item. As something fashion brands interpret, something where the elements are broken down and recreated and shared, where these lookbooks are looked at

8:36

SPEAKER_00

aspirationally from these teams and these releases, where brands are even creating fictional teams, the play with materials, the things I talked about. So last year, I'd worked on some concepts around this for some brand merchandise. And I pulled together dozens of like vintage jersey designs, art direction, mood boards, and visual campaigns with football themes as part of the process, as well as a bunch of factories to make them. We ended up going with an alternative direction, this luxury collection you may have seen last summer. But I want to find a way to present this here and share a bunch of those resources. It's more than just a mood board or

9:02

SPEAKER_00

a link. So I went to Perplexity Computer and created a microsite from scratch that you can get here for free. It's a design resource, a factory resource. And so you'll see it has 38 campaigns, 100 jerseys, 16 manufacturers, mood boards, all live on this site with links you can use as a resource. If you ever wondered how it works to put something like this together, you can build that inside of Perplexity Computer. They have access to multiple different models for different functions. It can do deep research with one, it can compose copy with another, generate graphics, write, design, code, and deploy all in one interface you see here. So I gave computer the

9:34

SPEAKER_00

initial links and resources that I pulled. I asked it to pull a lot more. I could determine if I want to add or reject them. And then I asked it to build a complete browsable site with these different sections for mobile and desktop that I could present here as a design resource. In about 20 minutes, we went from concept to site. And you can see me asking it to change different specific things in here to go validate images and previews. I can just do this all inside the Perplexity Computer interface. If you've ever wanted any design inspiration around this niche now or for the future, you can check out the build in the description and you'll find the template and

10:02

SPEAKER_00

prompts I used you could use for compiling your own resource or building microsites with Perplexity Computer. All the links are in the description. I hope you find it super useful. And thank you so much to Perplexity for sponsoring this video. Before we get into this year's World Cup, I want to talk about running as an example of what's happening right now. Why this is such an important era to think about. So we have so many of these brands. If you look at like, why is Nike no longer the champion of running? Why are they not associated with running? Why have they even owned like a fraction of the

10:27

SPEAKER_00

subculture the way they used to? And look at how specific these brands have gotten, right? So you have Satisfye and Satisfye is here collabing with Adidas. You have Minted New York dropping running shoes with Saucony and incredible gear. You have District Vision and all of these are niched in, right? District Vision owns like the wellness end of it and they do it with New Balance. Satisfye has more of like the Ed Hardy affliction vibe. Granted a little higher end because they're French. Minted is fiercely independent and personality driven. Bandit owns the underdog and the concept. They launched that

10:53

SPEAKER_00

unsponsored project went directly at something that felt very Nike saying, hey, we're going to give these athletes, these underdogs a chance. Tracksmith has collegiate. The casual user, the user just wants to have a shoe that looks good on, just took all of that, especially in like the more suburban demographic. Hoka has the trails. There is no subculture that Nike is able to own and the world is splintering into these subcultures. And so every one of these categories is up for grabs. Part of when I originally started this channel, it's giving away lots of factory links and how to build brand items because the opportunity is so large because every one of

11:23

SPEAKER_00

those big conglomerates is operating behind the ball. You are able to get market share from them. And it's not just DTC anymore. It's not just getting it online. You see more and more of these people opening up stores. Tracksmith has so many stores and doing run clubs in all these regions. I was in Tokyo. I wandered by a bandit store in Tokyo. The scale that these brands are able to operate at and a certain amount of speed is just extremely encouraging. When you look at the soccer landscape, this is where Adidas' advantage shows the most clearly. Adidas owns roughly 40% of the global

11:50

SPEAKER_00

football boot market. And with their actual kit deals, their relationships run extremely deep. They basically dominate that segment. And in 2025, they announced home kits for 22 nations simultaneously. They've splintered down as well. More and more smaller collabs, more and more regional. And each one of those 22 kits that they announced had its own design background, its own lore, its own campaign. That's what it means to operate in this modern landscape if you are one of those bigger brands, is to use your scale to operate lots of smaller campaigns the way the internet works in niches, in regionality, in algorithms. For the 2026 World Cup, Adidas has 13 nations,

12:24

SPEAKER_00

including Mexico and Argentina. Nike has 12, two of them being the host countries, which is why this lines up to be one of the more competitive moments of this. And this comes at a peak moment, right? Adidas has been football-adjacent fashion culture in a much stronger way than Nike. The Samba, the Gazelle, the Copa, those are all also related to the football world. And the way that any of Nike's dominance is more SBs, basketball, their newfound growth and success is attached to a cultural memory of the game in a way Nike's never really was. And so globally, Nike's market share is set to decline,

12:52

SPEAKER_00

not a huge amount, but a minor amount. And Adidas is set to rise, a small amount as well. But this World Cup is particularly important because it is Nike's backyard, U.S. and Canada. And with them set to own the host countries, you see Adidas came in with the strongest campaign possible from the start. So before Nike was even able to announce what they're doing with their campaigns, we got Timothee Chalamet at the peak of his moments, messy, bad bunny, in a film that was, for the first time, something, you know, watched at the breakfast table with my family. Something on the par of what we saw in those Nike examples we had originally. And now whatever Nike does,

13:24

SPEAKER_00

as good as it is, and bringing out that star power, it's secondary to what they rolled out. I think it's worth talking about how this actually works. Why is this such an important moment? How brands that are both actually involved and involved on the side can like hijack these big moments like the World Cup. So FIFA does like a billion, 1.1 billion in sponsorships from this 2026 World Cup. Adidas pays for the tournament rights, Visa pays, Coca-Cola pays. Coca-Cola has been paying since 1976. So these are the official partners. Their logos appear on the broadcasts, corner flags, the match balls. They've bought the real estate around this. But that's not always the

13:54

SPEAKER_00

brand that walks away with the actual cultural resonance from the event. That just sets you up to make sure you have some guaranteed impressions. So in 2010 in South Africa, Adidas is the big FIFA sponsor, same way they are this year. And Nike is not an official sponsor. They never are. So they launched a film then with Kobe Bryant, Ronaldo, Federer. That went ultra viral, especially for that time, like 7 million views or something. And they ended up with a Nielsen tracked buzz of 30.2% of the brand conversation around the World Cup. Adidas only had 14, even though they weren't the

14:20

SPEAKER_00

official sponsor. And they did that for maybe 10, 25 million on the campaign versus the hundreds of millions Adidas spent to sponsor the whole thing. Because there is so much attention and conversation around the few monoculture moments that we have left. It's why a Super Bowl ad is still worth the money for a lot of brands. It's so hard to get that many targeted eyeballs at one time. They have the ability to potentially spur a bigger conversation. Now, this isn't always just the big brands like this, right? So in 2014 in Brazil, Beats by Dre had a moment. They weren't a

14:46

SPEAKER_00

sponsor. They're not even a sports brand. And they'd actually just been banned by FIFA. Players could not wear those headphones because Sony was the official sponsor. So Beats launched a film during the pregame. LeBron, Nicki Minaj, Lil Wayne. Doesn't even mention the World Cup. Gets 23 million views. And the same rating system basically shows that Beats has more of an association with the World Cup than Sony, the actual sponsor. Like, this is the virality move that we played. They also sent custom Beats in team colors to all the top squads in the tournament. And players kept wearing them

15:12

SPEAKER_00

despite the ban because they were hot. And then when Germany won the final, they gave the players 24 karat gold headphones delivered by Naomi Campbell, right? This is someone going for the jugular in a cultural moment. This is why, as we lead up to this, there's so much brand planning that goes into it. Because these official sponsorships only buy you access to the surface, right? The moment itself is just about who can direct human attention. And that's done through careful planning and thought and timing. Just like we saw with the Adidas. The Adidas fired early, knowing they could get ahead of

15:40

SPEAKER_00

the conversation, potentially be the first to dominate it. Anything Nike does now is in response to Adidas. Now, maybe they can blow it out of the water, but because it came out so strong, anything similar is another bunch of star power looks like a copy. They're preemptively getting ahead, knowing their competitor is down bad. Because guess what? Judging by Nike's recent track record, they probably don't have anything sick lined up. It's probably okay. And so the playbook for this, if you're actually looking at implementing this as a brand, because this goes to any event, goes to any new thing. If you want to think about how do you hijack something, the Boston Marathon,

16:07

SPEAKER_00

if you're a running company, if you see Bandit do this, a grip, CrossFit games, anything, three things. It's about relationships with the principles, not just sponsoring the events, about who is in there that you are able to work with to get attention, the actual players, the actual competitors, the actual people involved with the event. Because working with them outside of it can be just as impactful and likely cheaper. And then it's about having territory that the other people can't claim. Beats isn't competing for the ad that's on during the actual World Cup. They're competing for the tunnel or what people are wearing there. And then you want to create

16:37

SPEAKER_00

something that's worth sharing on its own terms, right? This Timothee Chalamet Adidas ad isn't just exciting because it's the World Cup. Again, it doesn't even mention the World Cup. It's interesting on its own. It's a short film. It's funny. It's creative. It has a lot of star power. Whether or not it's attached to the World Cup, it's worth sharing. And that's the mistake of just putting all the same creative or launching another ad or focusing direct on this is there's bigger ramifications now in terms of what virality can make. And right now in 2026, brands are expecting to double the

17:01

SPEAKER_00

social engagement in 2022. We're in a different world now. It's far more social, far more shareable. The ability to say, we're going to put out a campaign. We're going to get the conversation going. We're going to seed it with clippers. We're going to get into a response. We're going to know that there's an algorithm building around it and act on it is crucial. You may have seen a video I put out a while back about Coachella. Why do so many brands spend so much money on Coachella? Because there's a Coachella algorithm. You consume some content about Coachella, just like the Olympics.

17:24

SPEAKER_00

And I put out videos around this. They did great. I had a video about Olympics. I had a video about Coachella. Because so many people are watching and viewing that content, whether it's a hate watch or a like watch, they show them more and more of it. The algorithms know this. They respond to it. They put it inside your feed and they test it to a lot more people. This happens at every big event. And this becomes an opportunity to hijack that, to sponsor a couple people to go, to release a jersey, to do X or Y collection related to it, to basically catch the tail of that algorithm, to get more views than you

17:50

SPEAKER_00

normally would. This is such an outsized opportunity for small brands who understand social media. I absolutely have to call it out. It's the same exact thing for creators as well. And all this goes back to big agencies aren't able to understand it and leverage it, although they are getting better. Big brands have a hard time moving into this. And it is the time with the smaller people who can come around and move against the culture in different ways. And so I'm going to end with, what would I think Nike had to do to get back on track? So the first thing I think would be, would be retire the sneakers app.

18:15

SPEAKER_00

Sneaker culture, hype beast culture is probably the biggest negative implication and association with Nike now. So many people have used the sneakers app and just never gotten the stuff they actually want. So the consumer now has a negative association with one of those top apps. Got to crush that. That has to go. And then when they do release it, do things like the limited, it has to just have more production. It doesn't have to be unlimited. But if someone wants something, you have to be able to let them get it. You will not be able to get the kids excited. You're not be able to get the collaboration

18:38

SPEAKER_00

scale, even know what works and what the depth is without more availability. You have to be anti-reseller culture. There are no people besides maybe crypto people who are looked down upon more than sneaker reseller, sneaker flipper. You have to remove that association. You have to actively work against that as that brand. You need to position that that is something they are never going to be able to support again. You should be able to get whatever you want from the brand at its own price, resets with this new population who have such a negative association with these brand experiences.

19:08

SPEAKER_00

And with that comes an exiting of the C-suite, right? No one now responsible for marketing, for design, or for product. And thus, no one in the operations around that should be allowed to stay there. It needs to be a complete house clean. Same thing with the agencies. Every old agency has to go. None of them operate inside this world that we're in now. And does that mean more coordination, more campaigns, more failures, whatever? Yes, but there's no way you can keep winning with the same agency that you had 25 years ago. They do not have the juice to function in the modern era. I know. I go to these. I do these workshops at these major brands, at Fortune 500s, inside the

19:39

SPEAKER_00

household names. We talk about their marketing. We go through it. They know who they have, can't respond. They know they're behind. Most people just don't do anything about it. But with a brand where that lifestyle and the marketing is everything, you have to do something about it. Then fanatical focus on new silhouettes and actually incubating design talent that stays with the brand, actually documents what's happening and shares it. It cannot be the clothes vault. It has to be a story that Nike is telling with its designers, with its athletes, all in one amazing internet canvas that could be better

20:05

SPEAKER_00

entertainment than any other brand has. Nothing to care far more for the women's market beyond a few collabs and skims, a handful of athletes. It feels like an afterthought and a design afterthought, and it's lost its purchase power with that demographic. But it's a complicated market there now with a lot of movement between those brands, the Lulus, the Allos, etc., that potentially with some focus could get brought back. And lastly, to bring voices to social media. They need not just their Marcus Millioni, dozens of them. Unique people with perspectives inside the company are building

20:31

SPEAKER_00

their own brands or building subsections there. They're able to actually share with passion that story at a greater level. And frankly, I don't think they'll be able to do it. I think we'll see one of the great American brands get continually hacked and chipped away at into obscurity. It will remember what it was, and it will be more Kmart and TJ Maxx than anything else. And I hope that I'm wrong, but there's nothing that I've seen that was suggestible go a different way. If you're passionate about these kinds of topics, doing another creative direction webinar coming up here in a week or two, I will link down here where we run them basically like a community call where

21:00

SPEAKER_00

I talk a little bit and do a training. Then we all go through questions and Q&A and actually just workshop the things that are going on. So if you want to connect with other people that you're excited about this with and just get deeper into these topics and actually do some workshopping and talk about it, we'd love to have you then as well. We'll be documenting a lot more marketing around what actually happens during the World Cup. So you can find that on short form. I appreciate y'all so much for watching.

Reading tools

Type to find a passage

Appearance
Ask this transcript

Add a note