Protecting the House of Under Armour by Patrick Craft and Jackson Lee - Assignment Example

Article Critique Protecting the House of Under Armour by Patrick Craft and Jackson Lee EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This article explores on business success and growth of a young brand, the Under Armour brand, and the market competition with other brands, such as Nike and Adidas (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The Under Armour Company, a performance wear company was created by a former collegiate football player, Kevin Plank, with an aim to provide for the ‘unsatisfied’ performance wear needs for his teammates and other football players (Kraft & Lee, 2009).

The article describes on the rapid growth of Under Armour and the stiff market competition in the performance wear provision in America (Kraft & Lee, 2009). Through work ethics, hard work and determination, Plank was able to obtain a full scholarship, and became a captain of special teams, when he was a fullback for the University of Maryland (Kraft & Lee, 2009). Under Armour entered the active performance wear category in 2000, when the athletic apparel market was divided in the terms of percentage by other performance wear producers, such as Nike and Adidas (Kraft & Lee, 2009).

Under Armour had multiple challenges ranging from high market competition, having a minimum budget, and the lack of financial resources, and had to strategize for growth and market visibility (Kraft & Lee, 2009). Under Armour established diverse market initiatives to help in the development of its brand image and reach out to its targeted consumer group, which saw the creation of inexpensive marketing strategies for a hit entry into the market (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The marketing initiatives used by Under Armour to cut through the market clutter included; athlete endorsement, word of mouth marketing, popular culture, and product placement (Kraft & Lee, 2009).

The article further explores on other marketing strategies employed by Under Armour to withstand the competition from the already-established athlete apparel companies and the achievement of a market share (Kraft & Lee, 2009). CRITIQUE The authors of the article Protecting the House of Under Armour use counter evidence from multiple secondary sources, which makes the content of the article highly reliable (Kraft & Lee, 2009). However, the counter evidence is misrepresented through shallow exploration that may easily confuse the reader.

On the other hand, the article lacks a clear arrangement of sentences, whereby the users use shorter sentences that may need further information for clarity. However, the authors use simple language that is easily understandable by the intended audience (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The authors’ title of the article is quite misplaced and should be something like ‘The Rise of the Under Armour, since most of the article describes the struggles and challenges that face the Under Armour during its entry into the market, and its rise and growth (Kraft & Lee, 2009).

The article lacks a fundamental executive summary that is useful in guiding the reader on the contents of the article, without having to go through the entire article (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The title of the is about protecting the House of Under Armour, with the article itself explaining on the challenges facing Under Armour Company, and the strategies that were taken to ensure that Under Armour stood strong and grew as it entered the athletic apparel market (Kraft & Lee, 2009). I concur with the authors, being a case study article, that the contents of the article are relevant to its title.

The authors argue out with a business mind and this helps in achieving the objective of the article as a business or economic case study (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The authors’ arguments are based on real secondary data and other supportive evidence, which raises the credibility of the article. However, a real research study would have provided first-hand information that would be more accurate and reliable (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The sentences are short and concise, with provision of evidence for clarity and easier comprehension of the article.

The article has a long list of references that may serve as evidence of extensive research (Kraft & Lee, 2009). However, the secondary sources are not well referenced inside the article. The use of a long list of secondary resources leaves a speculation on overdependence of secondary information and data, in the stead of use of real fist-hand data from a study by the authors that could be more reliable (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The use of multiple secondary data adds the credibility and effectiveness of the article.

The article has no generalization, however, and data is well-placed to support the arguments. The introduction or a short history about the Under Armour Company should have been placed at the immediate start of the article to give the reader a general overview of the article contents (Kraft & Lee, 2009). The authors stay clearly on the scope of the article but tend to overstate their arguments about Under Armour, whereby more evaluation on the other market competitors would have proven the article more effective (Kraft & Lee, 2009).

The structure of the article is good though there is the use of large paragraphs that may be tiring for the reader to comprehend. The structure lacks a clear arrangement, in the terms absence of an executive summary, introduction and/or conclusion (Kraft & Lee, 2009). Reference Kraft, P. & Lee, J. (2009), Protecting the House of Under Armour, Vol. 18, 112-116.