Nike also owns such popular companies and products as: COLE HAAN, HURLEY INTERNATIONAL, CONVERSE INC., UMBRO, as well as previously owning/selling of companies BAUER and STARTER.
With companies such as Nike running riot and controlling the board when it comes to sports company real estate, it makes it that much harder for independant companies and smaller sporting products to penetrate the market share. Moreover, if you look on the other hand, smaller companies such as Starter and Hurley may not have got as far as they did without the help of Nike and its promotion. I know for example Starter clothes would not have been as popular because of its simple styles and looks. Most people are probably familiar with the company, as their logo is the "S" that turns into a star... here i'll show you.
Nike can give a boost to smaller companies with big potential, which is good for the owner as well as the company. Nike pays the owener of the company a large amount ($$$$$$$) and then the company that they had built becomes more well known. What this also unfortunately can cause is the inability to boycott companies like Nike. Many people do not like the fact that companies such as Nike have used sweatshops in Asia and South America, and try the best they can to boycott these products. However this becomes difficult if one is unaware of the companies owned by the major company, or if the company is just too large to avoid.
What cross media ownership can create is a monopoly, except with just a few companies, "justafewopoly" in my words. This can be seen in the soft drink industry with Pepsi and Coke. If you're thirsty for a soft drink and you don't like Pepsi or Coke products, your pretty much a SOL, unless your into RC cola.... so yeah, your SOL.


No comments:
Post a Comment