MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: Tugg Speedman on January 12, 2016, 02:44:06 PM
-
I think UA is wrong on this. This is not the way to reach this "elite group."
Sounds like they employ too many Yale alums and they want to support their Alma Mater.
January 12, 2016 — 1:11 PM CST
Why Under Armour Is Paying Big Ten Money to Sponsor Yale Sports
Apparel deal is said to be worth $16.5 million over 10 years
More per year than Nike pays Illinois, Rutgers, Iowa State
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-12/why-under-armour-is-paying-big-ten-money-to-sponsor-yale-sports
Under Armour announced a new deal with Yale Athletics Monday, and while the terms were not officially disclosed, a person with knowledge of them said the Baltimore-based apparel company will pay $16.5 million to outfit the Bulldogs for the next 10 years.
That’s more per year than Nike Inc. pays to outfit Rutgers or Illinois, according to the Portland Business Journal’s contract database, and dwarfs the $460,000 Nike pays Iowa State -- all major-conference programs whose basketball and football teams regularly appear on national TV, giving their sponsors’ logos valuable visibility across the U.S.
Yale can’t offer that. The Ivy League’s television deals are limited compared with the NCAA’s biggest conferences. No matter how much talent the Bulldogs recruit, they won’t qualify for the College Football Playoff.
So what’s in it for Under Armour? The Yale brand, said Under Armour Vice President of Sports Marketing Ryan Kuehl, who cited the powerful alumni network, its global footprint and its elite student body.
"The number of young people around the world who aspire to attend Yale University is mind-boggling. That aspirational positioning made the deal worth it," Kuehl said.
Of that $16.5 million, $2.5 million will be spent on marketing and brand exposure for Yale, according to the person, who asked to remain anonymous because the terms were not made public. That would allow Under Armour to use the Bulldogs in its advertising, for example. Kuehl and Patrick O’Neill, Yale’s associate athletic director for marketing and licensing, declined to comment on the terms of the deal.
-
I saw that in the local paper over the weekend and was going to share.
Interesting.
-
Under Armour has done a fantastic job of identifying and retaining upcoming talent in pro sports over the past decade.
The number of Y hats you see around the world is as high or higher than the number of Harvard sweatshirts. A UA logo on each of those will go a long way to furthering their brand. Nobody watches american football outside of the US because it's a boring sport, but people all over the world aspire to attend Yale University.
I think this aligns with their endorsement deal with Tottenham (another great pickup imo, but I'm a Spurs fan so I may be jaded).
https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/ua-roster
-
Under Armour has done a fantastic job of identifying and retaining upcoming talent in pro sports over the past decade.
The number of Y hats you see around the world is as high or higher than the number of Harvard sweatshirts. A UA logo on each of those will go a long way to furthering their brand. Nobody watches american football outside of the US because it's a boring sport, but people all over the world aspire to attend Yale University.
I think this aligns with their endorsement deal with Tottenham (another great pickup imo, but I'm a Spurs fan so I may be jaded).
https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/ua-roster
Oh come on
-
Most people I see with a "Y" on their hats are LDS.
-
Oh come on
That is the reason. It's built for commercials with constant breaks in the action. The rest of the modern world is used to soccer. No breaks in the action, no commercials.
-
Yale's deal is about a third of Wisconsin is slated to make from UA. The only reason that it is "Big Ten money" when compared to schools like Illinois and Rutgers is because those two are working on older contracts.
-
I am occasionally asked by friends and family, "can you pick me up a Yale t-shirt?"
-
I am occasionally asked by friends and family, "can you pick me up a Yale t-shirt?"
Below was mentioned in D Wade goes to Harvard thread.
Is it wrong?
If not, does it apply to Yale?
“I can’t wait to put on that Harvard sweater," Wade said
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-06-12/dwyane-wade-goes-to-harvard-craves-ivy-league-swag
Maybe it's just me, but anyone wearing an item of Harvard apparel without being a student/alumnus/parent is a tool.
-
It doesn't really apply to Harvard either except in Grayson's mind.
-
That begs a question.
If you see someone wearing a Power 5 or Big East T-shirt walking down the street. What do we assume? They are a fan of that school's revenue sports teams and/or student/alumni/parent.
What do we assume if someone is wearing a Ivy (or University of Chicago) T-Shirt? That they are fan of the team? How big a universe is this? I'm guessing "not very." Most likely we assume they must be a student/alumni/parent?
If the universe of Ivy swag is largely student/alumni/parent, then did UA pay too much? How does this universe of swag buyers translate into larger UA sales?
-
That begs a question.
If you see someone wearing a Power 5 or Big East T-shirt walking down the street. What do we assume? They are a fan of that school's revenue sports teams and/or student/alumni/parent.
What do we assume if someone is wearing a Ivy (or University of Chicago) T-Shirt? That they are fan of the team? How big a universe is this? I'm guessing "not very." Most likely we assume they must be a student/alumni/parent?
If the universe of Ivy swag is largely student/alumni/parent, then did UA pay too much? How does this universe of swag buyers translate into larger UA sales?
Ivy schools (Harvard, Yale, Princeton in particular because they are the most well known in the public eye) will always be considered elite academics. Power 5 conference teams could possibly only take a few years to fall out of elite status in a sport. Granted a lot of UA gear is sports related so I don't know if their investment will be worth it. Not saying I disagree with you but this is the only conclusion I could come up with.
-
That begs a question.
If you see someone wearing a Power 5 or Big East T-shirt walking down the street. What do we assume? They are a fan of that school's revenue sports teams and/or student/alumni/parent.
What do we assume if someone is wearing a Ivy (or University of Chicago) T-Shirt? That they are fan of the team? How big a universe is this? I'm guessing "not very." Most likely we assume they must be a student/alumni/parent?
If the universe of Ivy swag is largely student/alumni/parent, then did UA pay too much? How does this universe of swag buyers translate into larger UA sales?
One per centers anyone?
-
This is $50,000 per sport per year. Not really a huge premium over the cost of product .
-
This is $50,000 per sport per year. Not really a huge premium over the cost of product .
What cost over what product?
-
What cost over what product?
Each sport has uniforms equipment etc that Under Armour is providing as part of the deal. Home. Road, practice , warm ups, accessories etc.
-
I feel like it makes a lot of sense to align with any strong brand. I'm sure this is listed sow where but I'll but the Yale brand as more Valuable than Illinois or Rutgers any day of the week, regardless of athletic success.
-
Under Armour has done a fantastic job of identifying and retaining upcoming talent in pro sports over the past decade.
The number of Y hats you see around the world is as high or higher than the number of Harvard sweatshirts. A UA logo on each of those will go a long way to furthering their brand. Nobody watches american football outside of the US because it's a boring sport, but people all over the world aspire to attend Yale University.
I think this aligns with their endorsement deal with Tottenham (another great pickup imo, but I'm a Spurs fan so I may be jaded).
https://www.underarmour.com/en-us/ua-roster
One year later and UnderArmour (UAA) is now a complete mess. Executives are quitting left and right, they are way over their skis on licensing deals. Losing money and they really don't know what to do.
The first chart is the last year, yes, it is down 25% today and has been cut in half since September.
The second chart is the last four years (cannot see it on this chart but $21 is where it is trading now).
Most likely Seth Curry has made little to no money on his deal with them.
(http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=UAA&uf=0&type=2&size=2&sid=2155785&style=311&freq=1&entitlementtoken=0c33378313484ba9b46b8e24ded87dd6&time=7&rand=2069518699&compidx=&ma=0&maval=9&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&height=335&width=579&mocktick=1)
(http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/kaavio.Webhost/charts/big.chart?nosettings=1&symb=UAA&uf=0&type=2&size=2&sid=2155785&style=311&freq=2&entitlementtoken=0c33378313484ba9b46b8e24ded87dd6&time=11&rand=1656479775&compidx=&ma=0&maval=9&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&height=335&width=579&mocktick=1)
-
One year later and UnderArmour (UAA) is now a complete mess. Executives are quitting left and right, they are way over their skis on licensing deals. Losing money and they really don't know what to do.
The first chart is the last year, yes, it is down 25% today and has been cut in half since September.
The second chart is the last four years (cannot see it on this chart but $21 is where it is trading now).
Most likely Seth Curry has made little to no money on his deal with them.
You use the same argument that Chicos used to say Netflix was a failure. I begged to differ then and still do.
Nike and Adidas are the clear leaders. For any other company to join those two at the top meant there would have to be a huge outlay of cash to sign big stars. That means bad news for the bottom line - but probably only temporarily. It takes time to compete with the big boys and get attention.
But, anecdotally, I see an awful lot of UA now on kids. I saw none just a couple years ago. My grandson is playing this summer on a traveling team with mostly kids from one of Caron Butler's teams. When I pick him up - I see more kids dressed in UA gear than Nike and Adidas combined.
So, I am not arguing with the current state - I just differ in that I don't see it as the final outcome.
BTW, I seriously doubt that Seth Curry has ever had a shoe contract. :-\
-
Don't tell Jordan Spieth. He'll bee pissed, hey?
-
You use the same argument that Chicos used to say Netflix was a failure. I begged to differ then and still do.
Nike and Adidas are the clear leaders. For any other company to join those two at the top meant there would have to be a huge outlay of cash to sign big stars. That means bad news for the bottom line - but probably only temporarily. It takes time to compete with the big boys and get attention.
But, anecdotally, I see an awful lot of UA now on kids. I saw none just a couple years ago. My grandson is playing this summer on a traveling team with mostly kids from one of Caron Butler's teams. When I pick him up - I see more kids dressed in UA gear than Nike and Adidas combined.
So, I am not arguing with the current state - I just differ in that I don't see it as the final outcome.
BTW, I seriously doubt that Seth Curry has ever had a shoe contract. :-\
If you do a simple technical analysis of S&P 500 companies that lose 50% in three months, or 25% in a day, history says it will be many years before this stock will see $55 again, if ever. History says they are going to struggle for years.
This is critical because they were getting Seth Curry and Jordan Speith precisely because they were not paying them money, They were giving them stock options because the athletes (and their agents) thought stock would be worth a lot more than cash.
Now that Speith and Curry are holding a piece of crap stock, future athlete are going to demand hard cash instead of stock. They don't want to be in Curry or Speith's position. So UAA lost its currency that allowed it to sign mega-stars without outlaying actual money. Now they have to pay up.
Revisit this in a few years. It's Disney only far worse.
-
Their golf pants are fantastic though.
-
Bondholders Sweat as S&P Cuts Under Armour’s Credit to ‘Junk’
Downgrade follows weak sales during the holiday season
http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2017/02/01/bondholders-sweat-as-sp-cuts-under-armours-credit-to-junk/
S&P Global Ratings lowered Under Armour Inc.’s credit rating to junk status a day after the company posted disappointing sales during the pivotal holiday shopping season.
-
But, anecdotally, I see an awful lot of UA now on kids. I saw none just a couple years ago. My grandson is playing this summer on a traveling team with mostly kids from one of Caron Butler's teams. When I pick him up - I see more kids dressed in UA gear than Nike and Adidas combined.
I find your comment interesting because your anecdotal experience could not possibly be more different than my own. I'm sure it could be regional, and I also suspect that it could be related to which sport someone is involved in. I have four kids, ranging from 13 to 20, and in my experience Under Armour has completely disappeared. I find this particularly interesting in light of my post ten years ago (http://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=1245.msg8795#msg8795) talking about the extraordinary popularity of Under Armor and its plans on "world domination." Looking at that post, they did eventually manufacture "regular athletic shoes" and my kids did want them. And, incidentally, hated them (as did my wife). Looking back, I'd say that Under Armor has been completely off my kids' radars for at least five years, maybe longer. I can't remember the last UA product I purchased. Even that was almost certainly an actual under garment, which I think UA did quite well. My kids have been strongly in the Nike camp for years (although my son dabbles in Adidas with soccer clothing), and I've frequently commented at their basketball games that Nike seems to have nearly 100% of the shoe market in youth and high school basketball around here.
In short, I virtually never see kids wearing any sort of UA gear any more. Given what I was seeing happen ten years ago (and posting about), I find the drop-off completely astounding.
-
I've been looking for a reason to buy UAA, this recent sell off may be it. There is still a lot to like from the company. It grew revenue at 22%, footwear revenue grew 36%, international sales increased by 55%(60% if you factor out the strengthening dollar), BTW international sales only make up about 15% of revenue so there is plenty of room for growth there. Direct to consumer revenues were up 27% that now accounts for 30% of the business making the company less reliant on retail stores, which had a brutal Q4. The CEO is confident that they can return to 20% annual revenue growth soon.
I would be a buyer under $20 bucks/share and realize it will take some patience but I do think this may be a good long-term buy.
-
I've been looking for a reason to buy UAA, this recent sell off may be it. There is still a lot to like from the company. It grew revenue at 22%, footwear revenue grew 36%, international sales increased by 55%(60% if you factor out the strengthening dollar), BTW international sales only make up about 15% of revenue so there is plenty of room for growth there. Direct to consumer revenues were up 27% that now accounts for 30% of the business making the company less reliant on retail stores, which had a brutal Q4. The CEO is confident that they can return to 20% annual revenue growth soon.
I would be a buyer under $20 bucks/share and realize it will take some patience but I do think this may be a good long-term buy.
I don't disagree with this but I cannot believe UAA fell apart this bad to even allow this to happen in the first place.
-
Under Armour is down 32% YTD, it now ranks as the worst stock in the S&P 500 Year-to-Date.
This is self-inflicted as Nike is UP 8% YTD.
Steph Curry and Jordan Spieth call your agents. The lucrative endorsement deal you had with UA that you thought would make you gazillions, you're now at risk that this entire time you have been Pitching their product for nothing.
-
Nike is one of the iconic brands in the world. There are people in Africa who don't even have ways to communicate who somehow know the "swoosh." All others have miles to go to catch up.
NKE has nice profits, growing earnings, a growing dividend, a proven strategy and a proven track record. It is "expensive" by P/E ratio but historically it has always traded at a premium and nonetheless rewarded shareholders.
UAA? Let me know when its revenue is even a fifth of Nike's.
There's a reason Morningstar says Nike is a wide-moat company with exemplary management and UAA is a narrow-moat company with "standard" management.
-
I think Under Armour is being more affected by the retail meltdown than most. I remember that they took a bath when Sports Authority went under. I know that MC going belly up isn't helping. Nike is so big and has so many outlets and so many different product streams that they can weather it better.
-
I think Under Armour is being more affected by the retail meltdown than most. I remember that they took a bath when Sports Authority went under. I know that MC going belly up isn't helping. Nike is so big and has so many outlets and so many different product streams that they can weather it better.
Bingo.
-
I think Under Armour is being more affected by the retail meltdown than most. I remember that they took a bath when Sports Authority went under. I know that MC going belly up isn't helping. Nike is so big and has so many outlets and so many different product streams that they can weather it better.
that's a pretty big melt due to retail...if that were the case, wouldn't people be grabbing with both hands by now? i mean, the jobless rates/unemployment numbers are all down meaning the retail "meltdown" should be very temporary as all these gainfully employed people will soon have more disposable income
-
I think Under Armour is being more affected by the retail meltdown than most. I remember that they took a bath when Sports Authority went under. I know that MC going belly up isn't helping. Nike is so big and has so many outlets and so many different product streams that they can weather it better.
Could very well be, tower, but it's also a case of it moving up too high too fast. A lot of times companies peter out in such situations, especially when they are nowhere near the leader in the industry.
As an investor, I am a big fan of owning the No. 1 brands in their industries. Nike, Starbucks, JNJ, 3M, MO, etc.
-
Could very well be, tower, but it's also a case of it moving up too high too fast. A lot of times companies peter out in such situations, especially when they are nowhere near the leader in the industry.
As an investor, I am a big fan of owning the No. 1 brands in their industries. Nike, Starbucks, JNJ, 3M, MO, etc.
It could be a little of both. They were expanding and getting into new product lines and trying new things just as sporting goods retail contracted.
-
that's a pretty big melt due to retail...if that were the case, wouldn't people be grabbing with both hands by now? i mean, the jobless rates/unemployment numbers are all down meaning the retail "meltdown" should be very temporary as all these gainfully employed people will soon have more disposable income
Don't confuse "buying stuff" with "brick and mortar retailing."
Jeff Bezos net worth just crossed $76 billion passing Warren Buffett as the #2 richest man in the world. In addition, over half the households in the US now have an Amazon Prime account.
On the other side of this ...the state of brick and mortar retailing is worse than the Great Recession and when it's over, I fear we just won't gut the retailing industry, the builders of the stores, and the suburban mall, but the Amerian culture around driving and shopping.
America’s Retailers Are Closing Stores Faster Than Ever
April 7, 2017, 9:11 AM CDT
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-07/stores-are-closing-at-a-record-pace-as-amazon-chews-up-retailers
(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/i2vYWFZMrSJo/v1/800x-1.png)
(https://assets.bwbx.io/images/users/iqjWHBFdfxIU/imNerhIk3iOM/v1/800x-1.png)
(https://staticseekingalpha.a.ssl.fastly.net/uploads/2017/4/7/saupload_040717-Amazon-Effect.png)
(http://www.progressivepolicy.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/EcommerceZ.png)
-
ok, retail as in stores, i get that. but still-people should still be coming in to more money as the jobless rate decreases. if they aren't going to stores, then they are buying chit on amazon prime, like me. i make most of my purchases online with the exception of groceries and gas and a few other things i may want more immediately. if i want me some UA shoes-hello amazon
one night, about 9 or or so, i remembered i wanted this combination door knob entry-ordered on amazon and by noon the next day it was at my door step. i realize that may be considered slow, very soon, i've heard there are some areas you can be guaranteed delivery within 3-6 hours.
-
Manhattan Vacancy Rates, Retail Store Fronts
2017: 18%
2016: 10%
2015: 7%
2014: 5%
C&W Research, Douglas Elliman data
-
The number of Y hats you see around the world is as high or higher than the number of Harvard sweatshirts. A UA logo on each of those will go a long way to furthering their brand. Nobody watches american football outside of the US because it's a boring sport, but people all over the world aspire to attend Yale University.
As a brand both Harvard and Yale are at the pinnacle of American and global names. One will do well by either.
One take on the issue has Harvard being a stronger brand than Yale on the basis of cost, career advantage, campus/community, and student body.
http://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-vs-yale-2013-4
But as with all such situations the specifics are what matter. If one is interested in the fine arts then Yale is the obvious choice in the same way that economics, politics, and the hard sciences are better at Harvard.
In my case, when looking at MBA programs I had HBS at the top of my list but didn't apply to Yale.
Are there more Y hats in the world than Harvard sweatshirts? Who knows and, if so, what does that mean? Both are stellar brands.
If branded apparel is an indicator then I would argue that Michigan is the superior name as U of M gear is ubiquitous all over the world.
The specifics of curricula reminds me of when TAMU chastised me for comparing Michigan more favorably to Northwestern. Fact is, for my course of study, graduate work in engineering (aeronautical,) one would always choose Michigan over Northwestern for both grad and undergrad study.
https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/eng-rankings
-
Most people I see with a "Y" on their hats are LDS.
The "Polygamy Y" is to the west what the "ND" is to the Northeast.
Talk to folks sporting either of these logos and two facts will emerge - both will have vested a grossly overblown sense of greatness in said institution and the majority will not have actually attended the object of their adulation.
-
Could very well be, tower, but it's also a case of it moving up too high too fast. A lot of times companies peter out in such situations, especially when they are nowhere near the leader in the industry.
As an investor, I am a big fan of owning the No. 1 brands in their industries. Nike, Starbucks, JNJ, 3M, MO, etc.
The old Jack Welchism, of "I want to be #1 or #2 in every line I am in or I want to be out of the line of business." Worked well for GE under his leadership.
-
The old Jack Welchism, of "I want to be #1 or #2 in every line I am in or I want to be out of the line of business." Worked well for GE under his leadership.
Minor yet significant clarification: Welch's mandate was that if a business was not #1 in its space then there had to be a clear path to become so while still delivering GE-level return.
-
https://www.yahoo.com/style/stephen-curry-shoe-designs-roasted-143659106.html
Steph ain't helpin much either, ainta'? New shoe just out, currently being ROASTED on Twitter lol
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C8-11eTU0AERJjA.jpg)
-
As a brand both Harvard and Yale are at the pinnacle of American and global names. One will do well by either.
One take on the issue has Harvard being a stronger brand than Yale on the basis of cost, career advantage, campus/community, and student body.
http://www.businessinsider.com/harvard-vs-yale-2013-4
But as with all such situations the specifics are what matter. If one is interested in the fine arts then Yale is the obvious choice in the same way that economics, politics, and the hard sciences are better at Harvard.
In my case, when looking at MBA programs I had HBS at the top of my list but didn't apply to Yale.
Are there more Y hats in the world than Harvard sweatshirts? Who knows and, if so, what does that mean? Both are stellar brands.
If branded apparel is an indicator then I would argue that Michigan is the superior name as U of M gear is ubiquitous all over the world.
The specifics of curricula reminds me of when TAMU chastised me for comparing Michigan more favorably to Northwestern. Fact is, for my course of study, graduate work in engineering (aeronautical,) one would always choose Michigan over Northwestern for both grad and undergrad study.
https://www.usnews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/eng-rankings
A few years back me and Heisenberg went back and forth on this exact same question. IMO Michigan is vastly underrated as a school overall. I think the rank misperception vis-a-vis a school like Nwestern is that the latter is always near the top in Bschool and law school rankings, both of which are widely published/talked about in the popular press.
-
What in the World Is Causing the Retail Meltdown of 2017?
In the middle of an economic recovery, hundreds of shops and malls are shuttering. The reasons why go far beyond Amazon.
The Atlantic
April 10, 2017
https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/04/retail-meltdown-of-2017/522384/
-
UnderArmour continues to be a catastrophe ...
This year (Since December 31)
UnderArmour (UAA) is DOWN 43.51% (at $16, a five year low. Was $54 in Sept 2015 )
The S&P 500 is UP 16.79%
Difference 60.30%
How bad is it getting?
Under Armour Co-Founder Kip Fulks Takes Sabbatical
Sportswear maker mulls exiting smaller sports categories such as tennis and fishing
https://www.wsj.com/articles/under-armour-co-founder-kip-fulks-takes-sabbatical-1508780413
Under Armour recorded its first ever losses as a public company in the first two quarters of the year, and in August announced layoffs and a restructuring. The company is expected to report third-quarter results on Oct. 31. Analysts polled by FactSet expect earnings to fall by a third to $84 million on revenue of $1.48 billion, or little changed from a year earlier.
-
Underarmour reported their earnings this morning and it was bad (again) ...
Under Armour slashes full-year outlook, sending shares tumbling
* Under Armour reduced its full-year sales expectations, "reflecting lower North American demand and operational challenges."
* The company also slashed its 2017 earnings-per-share forecast.
* Under Armour shares have fallen more than 40 percent in 2017.
Lauren Thomas
Published 1 Hour Ago Updated Moments Ago
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/10/31/under-armour-q3-earnings-2017.html
Weaker demand for Under Armour products across North America is clearly hurting the Maryland-based retailer.
On Tuesday, the athletic footwear and apparel company trimmed its profit and revenue expectations for the full year, citing a "difficult backdrop" in North America — its largest market by sales.
The company reported third-quarter revenue that fell short of analysts' expectations, as it booked an $85 million charge for restructuring efforts during the period.
Shares of Under Armour were falling around 17 percent in premarket trade on the news.
---
As I noted in the post above, Underarmour's stock was down 43% this year. And another 17% loss to that today for this horrible earnings report.
And it is down 75% from its September 2015 high when CEO Kevin Plank was a genius and athletes Seth Curry and Jordan Speith begged to get an endorsement deal so they could be paid in UAA stock options. Now it looks like they will get nothing from the deal as they own a lot of worthless stock options.
-
I hope most Scoopers steered clear of UAA. Troubled company in a highly competitive industry.
In these situations, I either avoid or go with the clear leaders. Every once in awhile, I miss an up-and-comer, but overall buying the iconic brand has worked out pretty well for me. Even when UAA was flying high, Nike was crushing it as a business. I mean, it wasn't even close.
-
I've been looking for a reason to buy UAA, this recent sell off may be it. There is still a lot to like from the company. It grew revenue at 22%, footwear revenue grew 36%, international sales increased by 55%(60% if you factor out the strengthening dollar), BTW international sales only make up about 15% of revenue so there is plenty of room for growth there. Direct to consumer revenues were up 27% that now accounts for 30% of the business making the company less reliant on retail stores, which had a brutal Q4. The CEO is confident that they can return to 20% annual revenue growth soon.
I would be a buyer under $20 bucks/share and realize it will take some patience but I do think this may be a good long-term buy.
Yikes!!! Got in at around 19, sold around 17. Realized that I made a mistake, and moved on. When you go dumpster diving, you do sometimes end up with trash. In a year like this though it didn't hurt us at all when we have killed it on other stocks.
-
For Mr. Market, there often is guilt by association. So as a Nike shareholder, I am heartened that NKE is down only a fraction of a percent today despite Under Armour being down 15%.
NKE has had a little bad news lately, too, but it has been very resilient, always bouncing off its bottom (and you know how painful that can be -ha!).
-
It will be interesting to see if this impacts any of UA's endorsement/sponsorship deals. The Steph Curry and Jordan Spieth deals included large chunks of stock as part of the payments, so they're only worth a fraction of what they thought they were initially. I don't know how a lot of their university agreements are structured, but if they include stock those schools will be getting a lot less than they thought they were.