I recently came across Edwin Chan’s blog about the profit-maximizing business strategy implemented by several sportswear companies. There’s no denying that a sustainable, well-executed plan that can ensure product quality and consistent innovation is the foundation of any successful business. However, I can’t help but disagree with the notion that all it takes for a company to achieve growth and gain market share is a great strategy.

For the sake of argument, I’ll also point to the sportswear industry. Contrary to Edwin’s opinion, I believe that endorsement and advertising is still the name of the game. Take Under Armour for example. The success of the rapidly growing American sportswear company can be largely attributed to its staggering collection of sponsored athletes. With talent like NBA MVP Stephen Curry; NFL MVP Cam Newton; MLB MVP Bryce Harper; top-five PGA golfer Jordan Spieth; and (maybe with some bias) the greatest quarterback of all time, Tom Brady; Under Armour has won the endorsement lottery to say the least.

These athletes account for a hefty amount on Under Armour’s payroll, and for good reason. In today’s world, it is essential to try to stand out and emerge from sea of advertisement consumers are bombarded with everyday, and these athletes effectively act as the face of the company. When people see these athletes and their accomplishments, they naturally associate the brand with them. I still remember when all my friends had LeBron James’ shoes in Grade 7. We didn’t care about the quality of the shoes and we definitely didn’t compare them to other brands. The only thing that mattered was LeBron wore them in games, and us, as fans, loved having the same shoes as him.

Similarly, whenever customers spot an Under Armour product, their first reaction would be, “Hey, those are Steph Curry’s shoes!” or, “I’ve seen Cam Newton wear that hoodie!” This initial connection with the brand cannot be underestimated. Not only does it create word of mouth, but also automatically put fans of the athlete into the loyalty loop. As expected, the results have been spectacular. For example, the Curry basketball line helped Under Armour increase their footwear sales by a staggering 58% from the year before.

Many sneakers today bear striking similarities.

Another important point to note would be the mystique quality holds. In a time where information and technology spreads at an astonishing speed, competitive advantages become increasingly transient and we start to see more and more points of parity between businesses – it is simply too easy to mimic a successful product. Therefore, it puts an even greater emphasis on endorsements and with their dream team of athletes; Under Armour has certainly put the sportswear industry on notice.

Word count: 441

Sources:

Edwin’s blog: https://blogs.ubc.ca/edwinchan/2016/10/30/blog-post-4-sportswear-companies-model-for-success/

Steele, Anne. “Under Armour Revenue Growth Continues.” MarketWatch. N.p., 26 July 2016. Web. 13 Nov. 2016.

https://andykomara.com/2014/05/31/andys-desk-adidas-element-refine-tricot/

http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/03/30/5-reasons-under-armour-could-blow-q1-expectations.aspx

http://www.kicksonfire.com/stephen-curry-under-armour-change/

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/golf/jordan-spieth-wins-tour-championship-to-cap-huge-season/

As gun owners of America watched Donald Trump take the last couple of states to clinch his shocking presidential victory, they let out a collective sigh of relief – their fear of gun regulation have finally come to an end. There are a plethora of policies Trump might change in the next four years, but implementing stricter gun laws certainly won’t be one of them. Trump is an advocate of the 2^nd amendment, and it showed in the market – stock prices of major gun companies like Sturm, Ruger (RGR) and Smith & Wesson (SWHC) have dipped more than 20% since Election Day.

The nature of gun control has always been fascinating to me. I came across this blog while researching the topic, and had ambivalent thoughts. Although I wholeheartedly agree with the notion that there must be some form of gun control, I must also partially disagree because I don’t believe guns can ever be “safe”, no matter how strict the rules may be. The only solution is to get rid of guns altogether and I don’t believe it can be accomplished in America. It is a constant struggle between politics and corporations, and ties back to the idea in my first blog post – business ethics.

Are gun companies being unethical? Unlike Wells Fargo and Volkswagen, they aren’t doing anything illegal or rule breaking. However, given the nature of the firearms industry, it is a sensitive topic that will always be entangled with controversy. They are selling deadly weaponsand many people fully expect them to take responsibility. Should we expect gun companies to directly address this conundrum? They can implement policies such as limiting gun selection or requiring an extensive background check before transaction. Doing so will help alleviate the epidemic of gun violence that exists in the U.S. today. With that being said, this is an incredibly lucrative industry, generating over $13.5 billion in annual revenue and companies have no incentive to walk away from any of it.

Fortunately for gun companies, they won’t have to face any form of government control for the next four years. However, the underlying question still remains: to what extent should businesses attempt to limit their revenue for the safety of others?

Word count: 366

Sources:

Blog: https://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/orlando-massacre-exposes-need-for-more-gun-control-not-more-counterterrorism/