The "biggest rivalry in sports right now is between Nike and Under Armour," according to Nicole Goodkind of YAHOO FINANCE. Nike "makes more than 10 times the revenue of Under Armour, but still frequently finds themselves squabbling over endorsement deals and sponsorships," most recently Thunder F Kevin Durant. UA Founder, Chair & CEO Kevin Plank reportedly "refuses to even say the word 'Nike' and recently opened an Under Armour office in Portland, Oregon -- just a skip away from Nike's headquarters." StockTwits co-Founder Howard Lindzon said, "Nike is a data, technology, biotech and distribution business. Under Armour has snuck up and become much of the same through creative advertising and the use of technology to bring down the price of their goods." But he said there is "absolutely" room for both Nike and UA in the sporting goods market. Goodkind wrote it is "unlikely that Under Armour will surpass Nike in size anytime soon." But Lindzon said UA serves to "keep Nike honest, and it keeps them focused" (FINANCE.YAHOO.com, 9/12).
FEAR THE TURTLE: In Baltimore, Jeff Barker reported UA's extended contract with the Univ. of Maryland "all but prohibits Maryland athletes or staff from wearing the apparel of Under Armour's competitors, who, like it, outfit college Division I teams." UM will "benefit from Under Armour rights fees" ranging from $1.6M in the first year to $1.8M in '24. Each year, the school "will receive" $1.3-1.8M in UA products. The contract "requires coaches and teams to wear Under Armour gear during team activities and university-sponsored camps." But UA acknowledged that the school "cannot control products used by coaches at their own camps or clinics." Still, the deal "outlines the narrow circumstances under which a Maryland player or coach could wear the brand of an Under Armour rival during competition" (Baltimore SUN, 9/14).
