Nike playing catch up in World Cup stakes

Nike inc. is now recognised alongside adidas as the worlds leading supplier of sports equipment, boasting annual revenue of over $18billion (2008 accounts). However, comparatively to their rivals however Nike's rise to sporting stardom has been a much faster ride. 40 years the junior of rivals adidas, Nike has exploded on the sporting landscape in a flurry of cutting-edge design and marketing innovation which has become a benchmark for the industry. However, like its main rivals adidas Nike, or at this stage Blue Ribbon Sports, began life modestly in January 1964 Oregon, under track athlete Philip Knight and his coach Bill Bowerman, as a US distributor for Japanese footwear firm Onitsuka Tiger (now actually owned by Nike's main competitor in the running sector, Asics) selling the shoes at track meets across the region of Oregon.

Circumstances led to their agreement with their Japanese suppliers ending in 1971 and the pair, both keen on the technical innovation of running footwear began the design and production of their own range. It was with these early designs that the company found its legendary "swoosh" and amid experiments with a waffle iron and some rubber, Nike's infamous"Waffle design" was produced with great success. Consistent innovation saw the company quickly gain a near 50% share in the US athletic shoe market under its new name - Nike.

Nike quickly saw the potential around key sponsorship of elite athletes and invested heavily in acquiring a broad range of superstars which they felt best portrayed their personality. Superstars who gained Nike sponsorship were expected to do much more than just wear the clothing, but had a duty to represent the complete ethos of the brand in their lives, on and off the field. You are perhaps by now asking what relevance this has to the World Cup?

Although Nike have dominated sports marketing over the last few decades, investing millions in portraying its identity through carefully selected superstars and exciting advertising campaigns, they are falling well short in World Cup stakes. Nike has only sponsored one world cup winner since its inception (Brazil 1998), while its rivals adidas have five such associations to their name. The effect this has on their bottom line is arguable, I mean despite this Nike are one of the biggest and most successful brands, so surely this doesn't concern them right? For a brand which prides itself on being the best, and bringing out the best you can bet your bottom dollar Nike is keen to start clawing this figure back on adidas, perhaps reflected in their multi million pound deal with Brazil and the recent $500million deal to take over the rights for the French national team from adidas.

Nike doesn't like being beaten on promotion by anyone, and has already started to invest accordingly. In South Africa Nike will have to be reliant on their main protagonists of Brazil, Holland and Portugal to carry their swoosh to a second world cup commercial payday, preventing adidas sponsored Spain claiming their partners a sixth world title. It's a battle of the brands which is akin to the Roman emperors sending their gladiators into battle, with marketing ego's and multi-million pound consequences on the line. To the victor the spoils, and Nike mean business!