I agree 10000% with this response to a post on LinkedIn to the Nike/Skims collab. Where amongst other things the post mentioned in was a year in the making (which I get) but a decision that was made before EH came on board and should be have been re-analyzed as to whether it’s on message with EH’s vision or more of what’s not working.. Maybe someone can help me understand the pro to the collab 🤷🏼♂️
Response:
I watched one of the world's most iconic sports brands — Nike — make a move I never thought I’d see: teaming up with SKIMS, a brand synonymous with Kim Kardashian. This collaboration is said to "disrupt the global fitness and activewear industry." But is it the kind of disruption Nike's legacy was built on?
Nike has always represented the pinnacle of athletic excellence, innovation, and performance. It was a brand that athletes, fans, and fitness enthusiasts looked up to. Now, they’re leaning on celebrity clout rather than the raw performance and dedication that used to define their gear. Kim Kardashian may bring visibility, but is this the kind of visibility that aligns with Nike's core identity?
In times of crisis, we all make moves. But seeing Nike, once a beacon of athleticism, walk down this path feels like a step away from their heritage. It’s a shame to witness. Excited to see where they scatter to next!