If Tennessee Leaves Nike Question

#76
#76
DeerPark12 said:
Nike is a publicly traded company, so shareholders actually get to see where the money goes. Does Phil Knight give some of his personal income to Oregon? Absolutely. But no Nike profits go to Oregon, beyond their apparel contract which is not in the top 10 of Nike deals.
Click to expand...
Can we sticky this ? How many times have you had to answer this in a uniform thread? If everyone that wore Nike was funding Oregon athletics they would be able to buy every single player on the planet .
 
  • Like
Reactions: ATC_VOL, b_gann and DeerPark12
#77
#77
volfaninky said:
When kids leave and don’t come here because of adidas it could. Name me one program with adidas that is elite?
Click to expand...
Kansas, Louisville, UCLA, Michigan, Nebraska ,all who have won national titles in the past.
 
Last edited:
#79
#79
RDU VOL#14 said:
Can we sticky this ? How many times have you had to answer this in a uniform thread? If everyone that wore Nike was funding Oregon athletics they would be able to buy every single player on the planet .
Click to expand...
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20250701_093950_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20250701_093950_Chrome.jpg
    136.8 KB · Views: 28
#81
#81
VOLnMiami said:
Kansas, Louisville, UCLA, Michigan, Nebraska ,all who have won national titles in the past.
Click to expand...
Those 3 schools that won in basketball all have much more storied basketball programs than Tennessee. We’ve won a football national title more recently than Nebraska and Michigan is Jordan Brand.
 
  • Like
Reactions: volfaninky
#83
#83
Is that a screenshot from Gemini?

That’s not reliable research. Be better.
 
#91
#91
Bigorangefaninga said:
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Click to expand...
You can laugh all you want, but if you think Phil Knight has the same power at Nike that he had 10 years ago, then you just don’t know anything about the situation. He barely has an active role at the company anymore. He is certainly not sending secret money to Oregon and its athletes.

Is he personally giving Oregon’s collective money? He absolutely was. But Nike is a publicly traded multinational corporation, not his pet project anymore. Money that the company spends has to have a justification on the balance sheet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lfvol
#92
#92
DeerPark12 said:
You can laugh all you want, but if you think Phil Knight has the same power at Nike that he had 10 years ago, then you just don’t know anything about the situation. He barely has an active role at the company anymore. He is certainly not sending secret money to Oregon and its athletes.

Is he personally giving Oregon’s collective money? He absolutely was. But Nike is a publicly traded multinational corporation, not his pet project anymore. Money that the company spends has to have a justification on the balance sheet.
Click to expand...
Well, if you want to think Phil Knight would be a billionaire without Nike or that Nike would even be Nike without Phil Knight I have oceanfront property in East TN to sell you! Also Phil and his family own like 97% of all class A stocks which hold the power in the Nike corp. Those A stocks allow them to control who and who is not on the board of directors, the class B stocks(the publicly traded ones have no company value only money you make on the stock or lose). So between Phil and Swoosh LLC(him and his sons LLC) they own the majority of power stocks in the company. Even if you held Class B, you have no say so in the company at all. There is a reason Oregon isn’t in top 10 Nike contracts and that is because Phil makes up the rest himself and between the 2 no one else is even close to the same. So he might not be contracted as Nike to pay them, but his money is Nike money and without that he might still be rich since his dad owned a newspaper back in the day, but he sure as heck wouldn’t be a billionaire! So yeah, that’s Nike money because Phil Knight is Nike and controls Nike!

So again I laugh at you, because you are making a fool of yourself!

Maybe this can help you understand Knight and family and their control of Nike Corp!

www.investopedia.com

Top Nike Shareholders

Top Nike shareholders are Philip Knight, Mark Parker, John Donahoe, Swoosh LLC, Vanguard Group, and BlackRock. The Knights control the vast majority of Class A shares.
www.investopedia.com www.investopedia.com
 
#93
#93
Bigorangefaninga said:
Well, if you want to think Phil Knight would be a billionaire without Nike or that Nike would even be Nike without Phil Knight I have oceanfront property in East TN to sell you! Also Phil and his family own like 97% of all class A stocks which hold the power in the Nike corp. Those A stocks allow them to control who and who is not on the board of directors, the class B stocks(the publicly traded ones have no company value only money you make on the stock or lose). So between Phil and Swoosh LLC(him and his sons LLC) they own the majority of power stocks in the company. Even if you held Class B, you have no say so in the company at all. There is a reason Oregon isn’t in top 10 Nike contracts and that is because Phil makes up the rest himself and between the 2 no one else is even close to the same. So he might not be contracted as Nike to pay them, but his money is Nike money and without that he might still be rich since his dad owned a newspaper back in the day, but he sure as heck wouldn’t be a billionaire! So yeah, that’s Nike money because Phil Knight is Nike and controls Nike!

So again I laugh at you, because you are making a fool of yourself!

Maybe this can help you understand Knight and family and their control of Nike Corp!

www.investopedia.com

Top Nike Shareholders

Top Nike shareholders are Philip Knight, Mark Parker, John Donahoe, Swoosh LLC, Vanguard Group, and BlackRock. The Knights control the vast majority of Class A shares.
www.investopedia.com www.investopedia.com
Click to expand...
I never said Phil wouldn’t be a billionaire without Nike, he’s obviously the most important person in the company’s history. But you have misunderstood the point repeatedly that I’ve been trying to make. Phil Knight’s personal wealth from which he donates to Oregon athletics and the NIL collective that supports its athletes and money spent by Nike, a publicly traded corporation, are different. You can look at them as intertwined if you would like, but that’s not reality.

My firm has negotiated or written more than 100 contracts with Nike in the past calendar year. My career depends on knowing the difference between Phil Knight money and Nike money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: lfvol, TrumpedUpVol, rockytop989 and 2 others
#94
#94
DeerPark12 said:
I never said Phil wouldn’t be a billionaire without Nike, he’s obviously the most important person in the company’s history. But you have misunderstood the point repeatedly that I’ve been trying to make. Phil Knight’s personal wealth from which he donates to Oregon athletics and the NIL collective that supports its athletes and money spent by Nike, a publicly traded corporation, are different. You can look at them as intertwined if you would like, but that’s not reality.

My firm has negotiated or written more than 100 contracts with Nike in the past calendar year. My career depends on knowing the difference between Phil Knight money and Nike money.
Click to expand...
😂😂😂😂😂😂. Yeah, no intertwine at all. I thought lawyers were supposed to be smart, but you seem to be all book smart with no common sense! By the way, explain to me, if his finances aren’t intertwined, why when Nike who has lost market shares this past year has caused a loss in ole Phi Knights net worth? Seems to me when that happens at the same time that maybe the health of Nike also affects the health of Phil’s billions, but no none of us see any intertwining.

Also by the way a publicly traded company has nothing to do with how Nike runs its company with those that own Class B stocks(those owned by the public). They ONLY really answer to those that own class A stocks and those again are owned 97% by Phil and family. So if you think publicly traded in the sense you keep using it means much you are sadly mistaken. If you own their stock class B, they don’t give 2 craps what you think about the direction of the company and if you think they do, please call their corporate and see how far that gets you!

So hopefully Adidas brings the brinks truck and we don’t look back, tell Nike where to stick their junk as I’ll be looking forward to owning my first pair of UT(non hey-dude) branded shoes. Maybe they will make some soccer cleats for the boy also.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Franklin_Vol09
#95
#95
Bigorangefaninga said:
😂😂😂😂😂😂. Yeah, no intertwine at all. I thought lawyers were supposed to be smart, but you seem to be all book smart with no common sense! By the way, explain to me, if his finances aren’t intertwined, why when Nike who has lost market shares this past year has caused a loss in ole Phi Knights net worth? Seems to me when that happens at the same time that maybe the health of Nike also affects the health of Phil’s billions, but no none of us see any intertwining.

Also by the way a publicly traded company has nothing to do with how Nike runs its company with those that own Class B stocks(those owned by the public). They ONLY really answer to those that own class A stocks and those again are owned 97% by Phil and family. So if you think publicly traded in the sense you keep using it means much you are sadly mistaken. If you own their stock class B, they don’t give 2 craps what you think about the direction of the company and if you think they do, please call their corporate and see how far that gets you!

So hopefully Adidas brings the brinks truck and we don’t look back, tell Nike where to stick their junk as I’ll be looking forward to owning my first pair of UT(non hey-dude) branded shoes. Maybe they will make some soccer cleats for the boy also.
Click to expand...
This statement should disqualify any and all opinions from here on out when it comes to apparel discussions
 
  • Like
Reactions: rockytop989
#96
#96
I don't hate the move. I actually like the Adidas clothing better than Nike. The quality seems better overall.

I will say I am a little shocked that Nike did not try harder to hold onto the UT brand. Honestly seems like this has to be a major hit to their bottom line. I would love to see the P&L breakdown per school for the apparel. I am not saying UT is #1, but I guarantee its top 5.
 
  • Like
Reactions: UTvols#1
#98
#98
They are advertising their new Nike Smokey greys this morning so I don’t know if we are switching to Adidas
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top