The Shoe Co
-
How much is Nike Nеt Wоrth & ЕаrnіngѕТhе соmраnу’ѕ rеvеnuе іѕ ѕаіd tо bе аrоund $34.35 bіllіоn, аnd thе vаluе оf іtѕ tоtаl аѕѕеtѕ іѕ $23.26 bіllіоn. Іtѕ ореrаtіng іnсоmе аnd thе nеt іnсоmе аrе еѕtіmаtеd tо bе $4.95 bіllіоn аnd $4.24 bіllіоn rеѕресtіvеlу, аnd thе nеt wоrth оf thе brаnd іѕ $29.6 bіllіоn. https://www.thewealthrecord.com
How much is Adidas Net Worth in 2017 Adidas has an estimated net worth of more than $6.8 Billion US dollars as of 2017. Adidas also makes millions from the sales of its other subsidiaries like Reebok. Adidas’s apparel collection is also considered as a popular fashion brand, which also helps in fueling its net worth. https://www.thewealthrecord.com
After reviewing the https://247sports.com recruiting rankings and just looking at the top 15 prostects in each class over the last 5 years. These are the guys I would think were worth the investment if the shoe fits? These kids are the 6 figure kids. I have not put any thought into how it works below the 6 figure kids yet.
If you were to say that Nike is about 5 times larger than Adidas based on the information I provided you would be accurate. It equates to 2 schools I will call the flagships for Nike. 1 shcool for Adidas. Nike takes this TOP tier of players and distributes them out over 2 schools. It would look really suspicious if ALL of the top 15 guys went to the same school so they have a couple teams. Adidas just puts everyone they can get their hands on to KU. Over the last 5 years KU has added 8 recruits in the top 15. UK has added 21, and Duke 18 according to https://247sports.com. That is roughly 5 times more kids going to the Nike flagships. The majority of the 6 figure kids are going to these 3 schools. The rest are distrubited out to other schools at a MUCH lower rate. I have not researched my theory on these other schools but after texts that have been made public reciently these other 6 figure kids could be new contract incentives/extensions? Could just have a strong moral upbringing? Could have a faorite team? I bet you could link several of these kids to signing with a team around the same time their chosen school signed a new deal with a shoe co? I have not looked into that.
There was enough dirt dug up for anyone on this board to put this puzzle together. If someone really wanted to spend some time connecting the dots I be they could really figure out how corrupt this really is? The rest of the top 100 recruits in the country are probably a lot more of an incentives/extensions type of deal but Nike/Adidas ship yard have more ships. They still have to take care of the rest of the fleet. I am sure that there are similar things going on for the rest of the top 100 just on a smaller scale with a lower budget?
-
Excellent information.
I would offer that the shoe companies are not corrupt at all. They are in business to make money and further their brand. They are great companies. I have seen nothing really anywhere that indicate they are corrupt. They have a duty to their shareholders.
The corruption lies with the schools, coaches, players, and parents/guardians. They violate the rules. They are the only ones that can be punished by rules violations (parents/guardians by punishment to the player they are interested in). Further, the schools are the NCAA, they determine policy. So any lax enforcement is on the schools.
I also have trouble using the word “corruption” when it is solely internal rules violations. But it seems to work here.
-
@Statmachine The connections are pretty easy. There are two major things.
- Certain schools sell more gear than others. Especially when they are winning. Funneling kids to profitable schools works for both parties.
- Brands are competing for the next Jordan or LeBron or KD. Go look at how much revenue comes from selling basketball shoes with one of those 3 guys name on them. LeBron sells $300M+ worth of shoes every year. KD close behind that. Kyrie, right behind that. It isn’t hard to see why shoe companies want guys. So it is totally worth spending $3-5M a year trying to convince players to go to a school and sign with your company because all you have to do is find one guy to sell shoes.
-
@HighEliteMajor I think it is traditionally accepted to think of anyone inducing another person to cheat by offering money as a corrupting (adj) influence who corrupts (v) the other person, and the resulting activity is “corruption” (n). The distinction you are making seems surprising in view of the strict standard of integrity you have been urging for Self and Staff.
But, interesting enough, adidas got its start under that name back after (I believe) WW2 when two German brothers split up their shoe company into Puma and adidas. A great scandal ensued in 1960 when Puma offered an Olympic track star some $50,000 to wear its shoes. The athlete tried to get adidas to match the offer. adidas allegedly refused to do so on the grounds that it was not proper.
If you are correct that the corporations are merely accomplishing their profits through these activities and are not doing anything wrong, I am sure their audited/reported financial statements would account for these expenses properly. If they are properly serving the shareholders, don’t you think the shareholders would want to know?
-
@mayjay Offering enormous sums of money and falsifying documents so that people can hide those transactions isn’t corrupt!!! Every good organization in the world does that. For crying out loud, our fearless leader and role model Donald Trump has never done anything like that. Bernie Madoff either. Organized crime rings definitely didn’t do anything like that. Only clean, wholesome companies have a “black ops” division whose job is to pay people under the table and off the books illegally.
-
@Kcmatt7 If you could, please identify the relevant corporate records that were falsified. You know, the ones you analyze before you buy a stock … yes, I’m laughing. Hint: an expense report from an employee doesn’t count. Just helping out there. And yes, if Adidas falsified certain corporate documents, then sure, I’ll listen. On the other hand, offering “enormous sums of money” is good business. Troubling as that might be to some. There is no rule or law that says you have to have a written contract to do so, just thinking ahead on what the next complaint might be.
@mayjay Not taking the bait. You understand the term “duty” right? Adidas has no “duty” to the NCAA. They are not a fiduciary. Bill Self does have a “duty” to KU. You know it’s completely different. Further, if KU (their contractual partner) knew of payments and conspired, not sure how KU does anything but applaud. I would agree that the issue of whether certain corporate documents were falsified would be an issue for shareholders. Never heard that connected to this. Paying athletes to wear your product at a school you have contract with seems like good business (assuming that was deemed good business by Adidas).
It is not a strict standard of integrity to simply be honest and not violate the rules you contractually agreed to comply with, all the while understanding that if you violate the rules, the program you’ve been entrusted with could suffer significant consequences. May sound strict to some, like @mayjay, but not to me.
-
@HighEliteMajor It may be simple, but it is strict–by which I mean, you have presented it as a black/white/no grey choice. A bright line test: honest, or not honest, but no room for “what other people do.” And that actually is the standard I prefer to use, so I wasn’t criticizing you on the standard, just your suggestion that corruption may not apply to the company’s actions.
-
HighEliteMajor said:
Excellent information.
I would offer that the shoe companies are not corrupt at all. They are in business to make money and further their brand. They are great companies. I have seen nothing really anywhere that indicate they are corrupt. They have a duty to their shareholders.
The corruption lies with the schools, coaches, players, and parents/guardians. They violate the rules. They are the only ones that can be punished by rules violations (parents/guardians by punishment to the player they are interested in). Further, the schools are the NCAA, they determine policy. So any lax enforcement is on the schools.
I also have trouble using the word “corruption” when it is solely internal rules violations. But it seems to work here.
Leaving 20k cash in a hotel in Vegas sure seems corrupt to me? If I go in and purchase 20k in chips in Vegas and leave it in your room and claim I lost it in the casino and you claim it as winnings then is that corrupt? That is how I have heard most of these transactions are completed.
-
@HighEliteMajor Just because something isn’t a material amount, that doesn’t make it legal. “Mr. Integrity.”
-
@Kcmatt7 Just so you know … just because something is done in a manner you don’t prefer, it doesn’t make it “illegal.” I said nothing about “amount” though. Nothing. Adidas paid players with Adidas money. You’re lost. If they did something illegal in their accounting, I’m open to listening.
And you’re just comical. Really, you make laugh. It’s sad, too. Because someone believes in being honest and acting with integrity, it gets mocked. But it’s a certain element of our society that looks down on that sort of thing, and trivializes it, so I get it.
@mayjay So you know, I’m not setting up the lawyer like “bright line test”. I understand that there is some grey. And there can be grey in recruiting violations. It’s not hard to follow rules, to be honest, and to act with integrity. I’m sure that’s how you handle your affairs. Attorneys get a bad wrap, but integrity and ethics is very important to most in the profession. I take it you agree with me on the fiduciary part and the significant difference between Adidas and Self.
-
@HighEliteMajor I’m making fun of how you can think it is ok for someone to disguise payments that knowingly would make a player ineligible. Which risks that player’s career. And they are doing it for their own personal gain. And yet, somehow, you think that is acting with integrity.
But then you are also criticizing coaches for doing the same thing. And you can say it is because of the rules agreed to that they are different, but these Adidas reps know the rules. (Which is why they are disguising payments). They know what could happen if a player were to get caught. They know that a kid like Bowen could have his entire career ran off the tracks because of this. They know they could get someone in deep trouble with the IRS. They know they are tempting people to break the rules and laws. In what way is that showing a single ounce of integrity? And this doesn’t even get to what moral code you are abiding by. Is it Christian? Is it your own? Buddhist?
I’m not mocking you for demanding integrity. I’m mocking you for not consistently expecting it across the board from everyone in everything they do and acting like Bill Self ran over your dog but that Adidas is somehow immune from any wrongdoing because they were just trying to take advantage of the capitalistic model of the United States.
Fwiw, Adidas did not pay players with Adidas money. According to the falsified documents on the paper trails they left, they paid someone else, who then paid players. There is no invoice to Billy Preston’s mom. There was no 1099 or W2 filed for Fenny Falmagne. There was no direct payment from Adidas to a player. It was done in a way that was not honest. Honesty is a major part of integrity, is it not? Why would they not be honest about where payments were going? Because it was wrong.
I just don’t like when someone paints themselves as Jesus on the Cross one day, but then tries to justify moral ambiguities the next. It makes them seem disingenuous.
-
Maybe it isn’t corrupt for Adidas to funnel money to kids families so they go to KU, but it’s dirty as heck and it’s got us all squirming. There’s little integrity there and I hate to say it because I love my Adidas.
-
I sort of agree with HighEliteMajor and am not very troubled by the money aspect. The shoe companies and schools and the NCAA get billions and the athletes get little. I tend toward supporting the spirit of the law rather than the letter. I don’t see much evidence of harm except the disproportionate wealth for the institutions and the NCAA.
-
Careful you said:
I sort of agree with HighEliteMajor and am not very troubled by the money aspect. The shoe companies and schools and the NCAA get billions and the athletes get little. I tend toward supporting the spirit of the law rather than the letter. I don’t see much evidence of harm except the disproportionate wealth for the institutions and the NCAA.
Then you definitely aren’t on the same side as HEM, historically. He is very much against paying players last I knew. Unless he has changed his tune but I haven’t seen anything indicating that.
-
@BShark you’re right i favor a farm system or G league model as more transparent and fair (maybe and hopefully).
-
@Careful-you i think a lot would be solved by letting players profit off of their likeness. That would encourage transparency in my opinion.
-
@Kcmatt7 You are just being ridiculous. Simply being honest and having integrity is not painting yourself as Jesus. Or maybe it is so out of the ordinary to you that it is. I don’t know. That’s what that sort of tripe sounds like. I can’t believe I’m even responding to that sort of idiocy.
-
@HighEliteMajor Please, specifically, what part of my last post was idiocy? I would love to not be such a ridiculous, tripe-posting idiot who lacks integrity in his ordinary life. Please help me.
-
Connecting the dots for you … the hyperbole in comparing the simple suggestion of honesty and integrity to “Jesus on the cross” (and the trivialization that is clearly your point). That is idiocy. That is tripe.
And of course, you stray into territory reserved for a few other posters. You mock me, “Mr. Integrity”, referencing my “moral code”, etc. Then act with indignation when it is turned on you ( your reference – “… who lacks integrity in his ordinary life.”).
-
Maybe more basketball and less focusing on each other?
-
@HighEliteMajor You should read the rest of the post instead of focusing so much on the one sentence hyperbole. I think it brought up plenty of valid points. You seem to be holding Self to a standard that you are not holding Adidas to in this scenario.
-
HEM is the kind of person that would kill hundreds of thousands of people to turn a profit, as long as it was allowed within the rules/law.
-
@BShark I truly cannot think of a more insulting comment one can direct to another. Suggesting that one would be fine with the killing of thousands. What a sick a**hole you are. But thank you. When you say something like that, it provides some unequivocal insight.
And again, of course, based on the simple suggestion that Bill Self act with honesty and integrity, and follow the rules he agreed to follow; and for providing rationale as to why Adidas, as a separate entity, should not be bound by the same rules.
That translates to the conclusion that I’d support the killing of thousands. Demented.
@Kcmatt7 It’s not one sentence hyperbole. Re-read what you wrote. More than one sentence. You always think you bring up valid points. I have addressed each of your points prior, in total. Apply to what you have typed. You speculate on the IRS, you have no clue on “reporting” of transactions and accounting, you have no clue regarding what shareholders are entitled to, and you seem to be focused on what was done internally by Adidas folks. You continue to miss and ignore the significant difference – Self is bound by the NCAA rules, Adidas is not. No one should be held to account for rules enacted by independent organizations or entities. If you can’t see that difference, or refuse to recognize it because it doesn’t fit your narrative, that’s not my problem.
-
BShark said:
HEM is the kind of person that would kill hundreds of thousands of people to turn a profit, as long as it was allowed within the rules/law.
I think this is much more true of weapons sellers than it is of HEM.
-
@HighEliteMajor I’ll bet I know more about internal and external reporting requirements than you do. But we can just move on. If that is where you find your moral ambiguity, we won’t ever see it the same and I’m ok accepting that.
-
mayjay said:
BShark said:
HEM is the kind of person that would kill hundreds of thousands of people to turn a profit, as long as it was allowed within the rules/law.
I think this is much more true of weapons sellers than it is of HEM.
HEM reminds me of the monopoly man. I’ll be done replying to him. I snapped a bit for reasons I shouldn’t dig into because I’d just make things worse. That’s my bad, I shouldn’t have went to that level.
-
@HighEliteMajor I think that what is upsetting people is precisely your claim that adidas has no duty to respect the NCAA rules that Self and KU are bound by. That may technically be true–the lack of any nexus to the NCAA (that we know of) is the crux for that conclusion.
However, I think that the assumption may be quite false. Adidas is a vendor and licensee of NCAA schools’ apparel. They have contractual relationships with the NCAA and KU is at least a beneficiary of those relationships, and could possibly be a party, as well.
Those contracts, I think it is safe to surmise, require dealing in good faith with the other parties to those contracts. When adidas acts in a way to damage the value of either the NCAA or the KU brands, they could well be in breach of the contracts. Further, tortious interference with any entity’s business is actionable in law. It may not give rise to criminal liability, but it certainly would to civil liability.
You also said you could see no fiduciary duty on the part of adidas. But civil suits and torts are not at all limited to fiduciary relationships.
The issue of shareholder reports and accounting/audit records was brought up by me. I was not saying they were falsified, only that if a line item of “payments to players” occurred anywhere in the financial documents reviewed by adidas’ independent auditors, it likely would have raised questions and probably been revealed in the auditor’s’ report. As a publicly traded company on a European exchange (i.e., scutinized pretty closely compared to, say, Chinese exchanges), anything like this, with the amounts in question running cumulatively to probably millions over the years, would likely have been noticed. I cannot say it was not reported–but with the actors working so hard to keep it secret, and since we only found out through an FBI investigation arising out of other activity by a crooked financier, I believe the inference that adidas buried the expenses, and never revealed these underhanded activities to shareholders, is well warranted.
I also think their secrecy supports the notion that they knew it was wrong.
-
@mayjay Working backward. I think, of course, Adidas knew this was going on. If the Adidas folks involved were outside their course and scope of employment, Adidas couldn’t be held to account for their actions. But I think they were doing this with company knowledge. We all probably do. Too big in scope with Nike, UA, etc.
Regarding your paragraph on shareholder reports, no issue there.
On the potential lawsuits, I agree. In fact, I assume a few civil claims could be fashioned – but all premised upon KU’s lack of knowledge of the activity. Of course, you would agree, that any lawsuit would be DOA if that were true. And never filed because of the discovery process that KU would want to avoid. We are talking theory, though.
And civil suits are brought in corporate contests all the time. It’s many times a corporate strategy. I give little weight to whether someone might get sued, outside of related criminal conduct.
Even if KU didn’t know, I do not think a tortious interference with contract would make sense. KU had no “deal” with the recruits. They were free agents so to speak. No LOI was signed. In fact, Adidas, in the spirit of competition, could go to a recruit, pay him $1 million to play for a Spanish team and wear Adidas shoes (unless prohibited by their deal with KU – which it wasn’t). That would make him ineligible. However, if the recruit had signed the LOI, it might become more dicey there, but I’ve never heard about a tortious interference claim, even against a slimy agent enticing a kid out. Open to hearing other logic on that.
But your point on implied “good faith” (and fair dealing) elements, I agree, could create a claim of some sort. Nothing clear on that, though. Or there could be a contractual provision. Again, though, KU couldn’t have been working with them in this venture to get players, or that would be a nullity. I’m sure you agree there. “Unclean hands”, right? Estoppel?
I think your statement that my point is “technically” true then begs whether there are any exceptions. I think you ID’d one that could be fashioned … but if KU knew of the actions, then it would not have any foundation.
-
If I underrated correctly, Adidas did not pay anyone. It made payments to its affiliate AAU teams (independent contractors) which in turn distributed the money. If there was a 1099 form to be issued it should have come from the AAU teams and not Adidas;. I will guess Adidas payment to its affiliate AAU teams are properly recorded. If Adidas correctly recorded payment to its AAU affiliate teams then I don’t see how it broke the law.
As far as secrecy, it does not necessarily imply acknowledgement of wrong doing; Adidas can simply say it was confidential information that was kept under warps to not tip the competitors that are doing the exact same thing and going after the same players.
-
@JayHawkFanToo Maybe I misread, but I thought Gassnola was using his employee “expense account” to also pay players/parents in cash. Also, Gatto was processing /approving invoices from, I believe it was Dawkins, that were fake. Again, I could have misread and finding all the details is kind of a mess as I have yet to find a nice compiled facts sheet. But that is how I have understood it. You may very well be correct in yours though.
-
Gassnola was a “consultant” to Adidas and as such an independent contractor not an employee.
-
@HighEliteMajor Thanks for keeping it civil. @BShark Thanks for the reversal.
Both perspectives have merit, and character assassination isn’t going to invalidate the other.
</soapbox>
-
Myron Medcalf Verified account @MedcalfByESPN 11m11 minutes ago
Bill Self opening up about the impact of the FBI trial. Hasn’t mentioned directly but said he’s comfortable with “how we do business” and doesn’t expect the trial to have a “negative” impact on his legacy. Repeats that he’ll make a comment once the trial is over.
-
@Statmachine Solid work. Zero chance that any top nike recruit goes to UK or Duke or even UNC & AZ without getting some sort of under the table benefit from it. Zero chance.
-
@HighEliteMajor Nike has the biggest overhead by far. Its not close. A company that big has power. Lots of it. What does power do? It corrupts. Its that simple.
-
Lulufulu said:
@Statmachine Solid work. Zero chance that any top nike recruit goes to UK or Duke or even UNC & AZ without getting some sort of under the table benefit from it. Zero chance.
The reason for my post wasn’t that no kids would attend UK or Duke without some under the table benefit. My point is that if Adidas was going to pay a Kids parents, provide housing, and a comfortable job then I personally think that there would have to be a counter offer. Zion for example, there are recordings that his parents were asking for under the table benefits so its easy to conclude that they took the highest offer. It had nothing to do with where he wanted to attend his one year in school. No one is talking about how Zion turned down cash, housing, jobs to attend Duke are they? My question is why aren’t they? Lets not focus on KU and the recorded phone calls lets talk about how much Nike ponied up to keep Zion from committing to KU?
-
@Statmachine Actually, there is no evidence he was offered anything by any school, is there? If KT’s comment meant he was contemplating offering what the family wanted, it really would not have been hard to do it. Drop in the bucket for KU and adidas. That is why I don’t see it as portrayed, “Gosh, we will have to do that.” I see it as, “Geez, if that is what he wants we need to figure out how to recruit him without all that crap.” If KT was dirty on this, why would he have sounded mystified?
-
As long as we are with Adidas, we will have a target on our backs.
-
@mayjay No schools were offering anything but the shoe companies were. The wire tap proves that money was going to change hands at some point. Adidas lost the battle so he went to the highest bidder. That bidder then had him choose a school affiliated with their product.
-
If Preston was worth $90K then Zion must have gotten considerably more. I can’t imagine Zion going anywhere that did not pay…and I mean a lot more than $90K.
-
@JayHawkFanToo The going rate for top guys is 250k+ from what I understand.
-
Total “packages” reach seven figures for top talent, once you factor in transportation, housing, and a job for one or both parents. Rent in swanky new Durham subdivision isn’t cheap my dudes.
-
FarmerJayhawk said:
Total “packages” reach seven figures for top talent, once you factor in transportation, housing, and a job for one or both parents. Rent in swanky new Durham subdivision isn’t cheap my dudes.
Oh for sure. I was thinking just shoeco payments. I believe 250-500k for the absolute top guys. I would think the housing and job stuff is typically stuff for boosters of the school to take care of. I have no first hand knowledge though, of course.
-
Reading some of the last posts here.
Just last week Self said he had no knowledge of inducements provided by third parties. But we certainly have a lot here who seem to have that knowledge.
Since Self won’t tell us, what are our top guys getting? Wiggins, Embiid, Selden, Jackson, Doke … anyone? Wiggins and Josh were “absolute top guys.”
And remember, simply because Preston was shut down after the car wreck thing doesn’t mean Self didn’t know about the $90,000. When the info reaches the compliance department, that changes the game.
-
Doke wasn’t quite in the same ranking vein as Josh or Wiggs.
-
@BShark Thus my qualification on Wiggins and Josh.
So what is the word on what they were getting, “absolute top guys” or not?
-
I am still amazed that for all the people who “know” Cal is dirty, or that Duke pays players, or the people who routinely call our coach “Dollar Bill,” apparently none of those people has reported any of that knowledge to the NCAA. Our posters here won’t report KU, of course, nor would other schools be reported by their fans.
But come on, there are probably thousands of claims from all around the country over the past 15 years about Self, and longer about K and Cal from people who hate them. And no one ever puts that knowledge to use? No disillusioned player booted out ever blows the whistle? No journalist ever manages to get the story of any of these scandals (the “all players are paid” scandals, not the outliers like the hooker parties at UL) even off the record? Maybe rumor begets rumor begets claims of “knowing” that is really merely suspicion and self-reinforcing cynicism.
-
HighEliteMajor said:
@BShark Thus my qualification on Wiggins and Josh.
So what is the word on what they were getting, “absolute top guys” or not?
http://arizonasports.com/story/1438377/report-suns-jackson-mother-received-2700-committed-kansas/
according to this report Josh Jackons’s mother got a $2700 advance.
“His situation is going to get done at the very end," Dawkins wrote of Jackson’s agent status, according to Yahoo. "UA is giving (Jones) 10k a month and she’s also getting paid by adidas now — so she’s plenty taken care of.
Hard to say what the total $ figure was on that one
-
BeddieKU23 said:
HighEliteMajor said:
@BShark Thus my qualification on Wiggins and Josh.
So what is the word on what they were getting, “absolute top guys” or not?
http://arizonasports.com/story/1438377/report-suns-jackson-mother-received-2700-committed-kansas/
according to this report Josh Jackons’s mother got a $2700 advance.
“His situation is going to get done at the very end," Dawkins wrote of Jackson’s agent status, according to Yahoo. "UA is giving (Jones) 10k a month and she’s also getting paid by adidas now — so she’s plenty taken care of.
Hard to say what the total $ figure was on that one
Apple was getting money when Josh was in 8th grade!!! So yeah, there is no way we can figure the total she got from the shoecos before Josh ended up in Lawrence.
-
@BeddieKU23 so why is nothing done about all these guys on that ledger sheet? Fred vanfleet and his dad were on there, EJ. Are these adidas guys making this up and pocketing the cash? Do they have an accountant? This just kinda went away. Is there any limit on an amount to fund aau teams?
-
I believe this was Christian Dawkins documents that the FBI got a hold of when they raided ASM and Andy Miller. Dawkins was found guilty in the trail pertaining to Gotto & Code. I believe Dawkins goes to trial again in April which could be where all of which your talking about could be brought to light.
We have seen guys that were mentioned in all this that had nothing done to them. Wendell Carter, Bridges of Michigan St for example. They didn’t miss the NCAA tourney when all this broke. Sexton of Alabama was suspended just one game.
