Nike is Still Ignoring Caitlin Clark and Destroying Shareholder Value

Nike does a big rollout for A'ja Wilson while avoiding Caitlin Clark's return

Here’s a very TMZ headline:

Malia Obama Nike Ad 'Shockingly Similar' To Sundance Piece...Filmmaker Says

Let me identify what’s telling about this headline, and no, it’s not the aired accusation of plagiarism directed at Barack Obama’s daughter. I, for one, do not think that Malia Obama knowingly stole content, and will get into why later on.

In my opinion, the more pertinent detail here is that TMZ, experts on what will get you to click, did not care to mention the subject of this Nike commercial. The ad was for A'ja Wilson’s new sneaker, the sneaker that apparently had to arrive before Nike felt comfortable launching an obviously more in demand Caitlin Clark sneaker. Within certain bubbles of online discourse, Wilson rates. Out in the broader competitive marketplace of online traffic, “Malia Obama” and “Nike” do a lot more to cut through the cultural noise.

You can dismiss this as just one decision, made by one disreputable tabloid, but it’s a choice that tracks. If Malia Obama had directed a commercial about Caitlin Clark, it’s getting mentioned up top. But TMZ can’t sell Wilson, similar to how Nike, in all likelihood (even if you’re not supposed to say so) can’t sell Wilson. But they won’t sell Clark, at least just yet. Apparently to appease Wilson. Nike’s stock is down from $177.51 in November 2021 to $58.62 at this moment. They are bleeding. This is madness.

Nike would counter, in their blitz of the business press, with a headline on how Wilson’s sneaker “immediately sold out.” If you dig into the details though, the feat is not so impressive. Nike limited the inventory and is not revealing how many pairs of Wilson’s A'Ones actually sold. It’s traditional for the apparel giant to choke off inventory in order to juice demand, but then, absent data, it’s impossible to know if a launch is successful.

I’m taking the under. While A'ja Wilson is an excellent basketball player, indeed the best WNBA player by consensus, she’s also ranked fifth in WNBA jersey sales. There’s been publicly expressed chagrin from WNBA supporters and from Wilson herself on a relative lack of acclaim, but in a way, they are correct. The renown is not in accordance with the accomplishments. Perhaps that’s not “fair,” but it is a reality.

A’ja Wilson is the best player in women’s basketball, but her style is more “highly accurate 15 footer” than viral highlight. The idea that she “deserves” a shoe line due to merit is based on a faulty premise, given that there have been great NBA bigs whose style of play just wasn’t conducive to sales. For instance, there was a time when Tim Duncan was clearly the NBA’s best player, but Allen Iverson was the league’s dominant sneaker salesman.

The question then is, “Why is Nike fighting this reality?” Selling signature sneakers is a very “winner take all” feat. Moving actual merchandise, at scale, is something the third or fourth most popular NBA player would struggle to pull off, and yet Nike has put a lot into the rollout of Wilson’s Nike A'Ones. They’ve got this sleek, pricey film of an ad. They’ve done pop up events.

The whole endeavor seems astroturfed to satiate Wilson’s demands and a loud Internet/WNBA cohort who’ll get mad if Caitlin Clark is prioritized. It’s absolutely insane for Nike to prioritize these feelings after years of steep stock declines, and yet they keep serving as validation for my theory that, “In the social media era, social incentives often overwhelm financial incentives.” Meanwhile, in the real business world, where companies actually attempt to make money, Gatorade is rolling out multiple Caitlin Clark commercials.

Clark has been a fairly deferential superstar, but there are rumblings that she’s taken notice of Nike’s short shrift treatment.