Marketing Strategies Impact Business Success: The of Nike, Inc - Case Study Example

Marketing Strategies Impact Business Success: The Case of Nike, Inc. Table of Contents Table of Contents Introduction 2 Marketing Strategy— Branding 3 The Case of Nike, Inc. 5 Nike’s Branding Strategy 8 Effectiveness of Nike’s branding strategy 14 Limitation 22 Summary 24 References 26 Introduction The underlying reason for doing any sort of business is to make profit and this explains why it is significant for anyone intending to start any business to have a clear idea of how they intend to reach their target-consumers. However, that is not all there is to doing business, as one must also begin to think seriously about how to increase their sales and how to achieve a sustainable competitive market advantage soon after beginning a business (Pike, 2009: 620). Businesses are preoccupied with the goal of growing their market share to increase their profitability, to guarantee their longer-term survival in the highly dynamic and competitive global market environment (Mehrizi and Zahedi, 2013: 42). The purpose of this paper is to interrogate the extent to which Nike’s marketing strategy contributes to its success. The paper is structured into three major sections. The first section will provide a quick overview of the essence of branding as a marketing strategy while the second one will investigate the manner in which Nike uses its branding strategy. In this section, evidence and examples will be invoked to explain branding as Nike’s marketing strategy, and how it affects the corporation’s success. The third section will utilize graphs and tables in assessing the success of Nike’s branding strategy as highlighted in the previous section. Eventually, this discussion will culminate to the conclusion regarding the extent to which branding contributes to Nike’s success. Marketing Strategy— Branding Marketing refers to everything that a business does to get the customers to buy the specific product or service it provides to satisfy a market need (Kotler and Armstrong, 2012: 5). The manner in which a potential customer perceives a business and all that is done to attract the customers’ interest and to lure them into purchasing a product or service is the core of marketing (Khalili, 2013: 3834). Since marketing entails a vast range of activities that form the basis for sales (Wind, 2008: 22), a marketing strategy can simply be understood as an organization’s attempt to integrate all its marketing goals into a unified comprehensive plan. For that matter, it should be expected that a company’s marketing strategy will be line with its overall mission statement, thereby forming the basis of its marketing plan in turn. While marketing is an effective way of focusing attention on the company, branding is certainly a significant marketing tool. According to the American Marketing Association, branding refers to a “name, term, sign, symbol, or a combination of them” (Lake, 2015: 1), which serves to mark and distinguish the products and services of a seller from those of competitors. In general, branding can be thought of as the process of generating a distinctive product name and image that sticks in the consumers’ minds through marketing campaigns that feature a consistent theme. Branding serves a number of functions including raising market consciousness, growing customer loyalty, increasing prestige and the ease of promotion, as well the clarity of focus. In the contemporary business world, a brand means more than just a name and a logo, as it encapsulates the whole essence of an organization (Bilotti, 2011:11). In fact, a good and integrated brand not only mirrors, but also determines the manner in which an organization looks, acts and speaks, all at once (Bowers et al., 2014). In that respect, a brand describes not just the quality of a product, but also its features, benefits as well as value, through a combination of a strong image and a short catchy statement or slogan that helps to articulate its unique identity; differentiating it from competitors. A good brand is not only genuine, but also authentic, thereby acting as bridge between the company and potential buyers, communicating the underlying mission and vision of the organization to its market segments (Bilotti, 2011:11). In addition, a powerful brand has a great impact on a company’s success, a fact that is well recognized as proved by the vast corporate resources dedicated to the cultivation and protection of brand images. A good brand tells a consistent and meaningful story that engages the consumers at an emotional level, thereby significantly influencing how individuals perceive a company (McCune, 2015). Most importantly, a strong brand influences consumer choices, consequently driving loyalty thereby improving the sales of a company in the process (Bilotti, 2011:12). This explains why most of the internationally recognized successful organizations such as Nike and Adidas have developed some of the world’s most recognized and respectable brands. The Case of Nike, Inc. Found by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight in 1964, as Blue Ribbon Sports, Nike Inc. is an American-based multinational corporation that operates in the apparel and accessories industry (Nike, 2014a). The company was officially renamed Nike, Inc. in 1978, taking its name after the Greek goddess of victory (Nike, 2014a). Nike is headquartered in the Washington County, Oregon, United States and it primarily engages in a vast range of activities includes designing, development, manufacturing, global marketing and distribution of footwear, apparel, equipment, as well as accessories and other related services (Nike, 2008). Nike is not only one of the leading global suppliers of athletic shoes and apparel, but also a major producer of sports equipment; the company’s revenue exceeded US$24.1 billion in the fiscal year 2012 and it employs more than 44,000 people globally. In the fiscal year 2014, Nike was valued at $19 billion, which is $1.7 billion more than its value the previous year (Ozanian, 2014; Nike, 2014b). This makes Nike the most valuable brand among all leading sports businesses in the world, according to Forbes’ (2014) listing of world’s most valuable sports brands. Nike markets its vast range of products under its own brand as well as under Nike Pro, Nike Golf, Air Jordan, Air Force 1, Air Max, and Nike Skateboarding among other brand names; its subsidiaries include Brand Jordan, Converse and Hurley International (Jensen and Rechtin, 1998: 4). The company has also ventured out into other areas of investment such as in the retail industry, where it operates under the Nike town name. Throughout the trajectory of its development, Nike has relentlessly focused on expanding its product line to incorporate the vast range of sports and regions of the world from the 1980s, thereby increasing in both size and scale. Nike has succeeded in placing its products to a vastly diversified global market population through its numerous stores, malls and departmental stores strewn across nearly 200 countries in the world (Nike Inc., 2015). The company has reliable sellers, production units as well as customer services in all the countries in which it operates and markets its products around the world. Nike’s pricing structure is designed in such a way that it is competitive with its competitors such as Adidas and Reebok, in line with its marketing strategy, which seeks to popularize the Nike brand in vast consumer segments. Consequently, Nike offers high quality products at low prices in its convenient stores to cater for the lower market population segment. The company’s initial goal was to break German’s domination in the sport’s industry by offering good quality products at affordable prices. Nevertheless, prices of the company’s products vary greatly, depending on many factors including but not limited to the season of the year as well as the type and size of the product. Nike has experienced significant growth over the years, from an importer of Japanese shoes in 1962, to a globally recognized supplier of sportswear and manufacturer of sports equipment. Presently, Nike holds nearly 37% of the global market share of the athletic foots and apparel industry (Forbes, 2014: Nike, 2014b). Nike’s sale of athletic footwear, apparel and sporting equipment rose to about $18.6 billion in the 2008 fiscal year, with each of these major segments accounting for 52%, 28%, and 6% of the company’s total revenue respectively (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 1). This is partly attributable to Nike’s massive expenditure to the tune of billions of dollars in establishing a strong brand image so that customers all over the world can recognize and capture their loyalty. Generally, these figures indicate that the Nike brand’s vast global success is partly attributable to the company’s branding marketing strategy (Thomaselli, 2006: 1). Generally, Nike focuses its marketing strategy towards the goal of becoming a leading soccer apparel and sneaker industry corporation. In the following section, focus will be turned to exploring the relationship between branding as Nike’s marketing strategy and the company’s global success. Nike’s Branding Strategy Although Nike was found in 1964, the company did not focus on brand development until later in the 1980s, when it shifted its focus from the product to customer and the brand. Since Nike’s inception as Blue Ribbon Sports, the company’s winning formula had primarily been product innovation and low production costs. Even though Nike had been profitable in the 1970s, its revenues and financials plummeted rapidly by the mid-1980s, in the fiscal year 1985. In the fiscal year 1987, Nike’s sales further dropped by $200 million, a development that compelled the company to lay off nearly 280 people to survive its declining profitability (Brier, 2014). The declining financials were a strong indicator that the formulas that had gotten Nike to $1 billion sales namely product innovation and cost-effective-production, were no longer tenable, considering the shifting market dimensions including emerging competition from rivals like Reeboks. Nike reconsidered its processes and discovered that product-focus alone was not sufficient to get it to its desired future position. In response to declining sales, Nike embarked on a vigorous learning process that entailed understanding its consumers and the company’s representation; thus, the shift to consumers and branding (Willigan, 1992). Nike has primarily managed to attract customers through a marketing strategy that focuses on branding; significantly, branding expresses the company’s narrative, refines it into a brief and engaging slogan, and then communicates that story through visual symbols such as the Nike’s swoosh logo, Nike’s colours and fonts (Kalb, 2011). Many customers attach a lot of significance to the Nike brand because it captures Nike’s core identity while at the same time communicating the essence of what the company really represents (McCune, 2015). Nike is positioned as a premium brand supplying its global customers with a wide assortment of well-designed and affordable high-end products. The company’s strong brand image is attained through its distinctive swoosh logo and the now-famous advertising slogan known as “Just Do It” (Den, 2009:102); the company’s logo and slogan have become synonymous with resolve and purpose, thereby reverberating across market populations. Nike’s swoosh logo expresses not just the brand value, but also the spirit and status encapsulated by the company’s products without the need for any words (McCune, 2015); evidently, the swoosh logo is one of the most recognizable symbols in the world (Kotler and Armstrong, 2012: 36). Nike’s “Just Do It” slogan highlights America’s ancient wisdom while at the same time emphasizing the company’s corporate philosophy of grit, determination, and passion. The underlying corporate philosophy expressed through Nike’s slogan is that of the triumph of the human spirit and resolve against adverse situations or conditions (Deng, 2009:102). In that respect, the American style ideology of ambition and patience daringly expressed in the “Just Do It” dictum is that anyone can seize the moment to pioneer the future regardless of who they are or the colour of their skin (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 7). Nike has exploited a vast range of mass media platforms such as the TV, Internet, newspapers and magazines, to promote its brand image across a highly diversified consumer market population. In the year 1977, the Seattle-based John Brown and Partners advertising agency created Nike’s first ever brand ad titled “There is no finish line”, which, despite not having shown any of the company’s products was very powerful. By the year 1980, when Nike began trading publicly, the company had gained nearly half of the United States’ athletic shoe market share. To this day, Wieden+Kennedy are Nike’s principal ad agency and together they have made countless print and television commercials for the company (Grow, 2008: 312). Nike’s globally recognized “Just Do It” slogan was coined by Dan Wieden, the advertising agency’s co-founder, in a 1988 Nike ad campaign (Gaffney, 1994: 146). Nike promotes its products through sponsorship agreements with celebrity athletes, professional teams as well as college athletic teams, thereby encouraging global support for its products and services (Kwon et al., 2008: 163). Significantly, Nike has primarily focused on using the endorsement of famous persons to market its brand image and position itself as a superior global footwear and apparel corporation (Kim et al., 2012: 65). Nike is the benefactor of some of the world’s high-flying athletes and sports teams through its globally renowned “Just Do It” and Swoosh logo trademarks (Freeman, 2000). For instance, excellent sporting figures such as Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods have been long time Nike promoters (Leslie, 2003). The company has had a long standing history of using professional athlete endorsement over the years, particularly because of its tried and tested effectiveness as a marketing strategy. From the beginning, the founder of the company Phil Knight often argued that if five cool guys (in this case cool guys being the most excellent and popular athletes) were spotted wearing his shoes people would also want to wear those same shoes (Nickell et al., 2011: 577). This was the philosophical basis for Nike’s use of outstanding athlete personality endorsements to market its products to its buyers. Indeed, the company has always attempted to link the excellent performance of sports athletes such as Michael Jordan and Tigre woods to the quality of its sports shoes (Miner, 2009: 74). The now-famous Jordanian ad that emphatically states “It’s gotta be the shoes” does create a psychological feeling that people purchasing Nike shoes can have such power as Jordan (Coleman, 2013). Apart from sponsoring athletes, Nike’s global branding strategy entails establishing a presence in global sporting events such as the Olympic Games. For instance, Nike was one of the major sponsors of the 2000 Sydney Olympics and the 2002 World Cup in Japan and Korea, as well as the 2002 Winter Olympics in Utah’s Salt Lake City (Wedekind, 2008: 48). The world cup often presents a great opportunity for Nike and other sports apparel makers to cash in on the international soccer mania associated with the tournament. The company focused a great deal of its advertising as well as research and development towards the goal of becoming a leader in the soccer and sneaker industry ahead of the 2002 World Cup. Nike’s branding was partly responsible for the increase in Nike’s soccer-related sales from $1.8 billion in the year 2011 to about $2billion a year later (Freeburn, 2013). Nike also managed to attach its name to the most recent World Cup event held in 2014 in Brazil, by sponsoring Brazil’s national team while its rival Adidas was sponsoring three teams, Spain, German and Argentina. Nike also sponsors other national sporting events such as the Hoop It Up High School basketball and The Golden West Invitational high school track and field events. Such kind of sponsorship greatly alters attitudes towards brands (Nickell et al., 2011: 577). In this strategy, the company majorly focuses attention on its products and uses the media, the internet and websites in generating a buzz around such events (Friedman, 2000). For instance, the company hosted an event dubbed 7-ON in July 2013, which brought the best US high school football players to the company’s campus (Cortsen, 2013). Since the event was broadcast live via ESPN, a US-based global cable and satellite TV channel, it is most likely that it focused increased attention on the company and its products to a wider audience population. Nike also brands itself as a futuristic company through innovative product designs and reengineering that seeks to ensure the company delivers performance to athletes and its loyal customers around the world. For instance, in an attempt to pioneer the future of the sporting apparel and sportswear industry, Nike engaged in vigorous product re-engineering and development thereby introducing new lines of products such as the Alpha line, which is an integrated line of matching shoes, watches among others. The company taunts this line of products as the “Total Performance Products” by virtue of the fact that the clothing is made of a skin-like fabric (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 8); the Alpha shoe was redesigned to make it more comfortable while reducing weight while the watches and eye wear were made more durable, fashionable and sporty. Effectiveness of Nike’s branding strategy Nike has come a long way as an athlete foots and apparel company, thanks to its elaborate branding strategy that has partly contributed to its success around the world. Prior to its branding in the 60’s and early 70’s, the company predominantly focused on product innovation and production efficiency as its value creation strategies, thereby ignoring the potency of product marketing and branding. Even though Nike was rapidly growing, with its revenues going up from $28.7 million in 1973 to $867 million in the fiscal year 1983, the company’s sales started on a downward trend, leading to its first quarterly loss (Rovell, 2013). The subsequent decline in Nike’s sales in the mid-1980’s was a significant indicator that product innovation alone was not enough to ensure the company’s survival and profitability in the longer term. The shift in Nike’s focus, from the product to the customers and the brand in the late 1980’s onwards was the beginning of a vigorous product branding that has partly contributed to the company’s growth and success. There has been an increased demand for Nike’s products, which has resulted to an increase in the company’s revenue over the years. Nike started its 2015 fiscal year in a very strong position and it is focusing on further growth potential (Mathew, 2014). According to Nike’s current president and CEO, Mark Parker, the company’s strong connection with consumers and capacity to innovate together with its strong global portfolio give it an edge over its competitors the world over. Nike has grown its revenues significantly, through its trajectory in becoming a top brand since its inception through the years. Ten years after its inception, from 1988 to 1998, Nike managed to increase its share of the U.S sport-shoe business from 18% to 43% (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 1). This translated to an increase in the company’s global sales, from $877 in 1988 to about $9.2 billion by 1998; the company has continued to post excellent results over the years, generating revenues of up to $15.0 billion in 2006, which was a 9% increase from level of revenues in the previous year. The company’s 2009 financial reports indicated that the company was still leading the pack of athletic apparel and footwear corporations with $18,627 million worth of revenue and a net income of $1,883.4 million (Nike, 2014b). The bottom line is that Nike has successfully positioned itself as a premium performance brand that can be trusted to deliver high quality performance, by linking its products with the outstanding performance of professional athletes. Nike has gradually become the world’s leading competitive sports and Fitness Company with branches spanning across the vastness of the global society. Concerning Nike’s marketing strategy, the company’s founder Phil Knight has been quoted saying that Nike is essentially a marketing oriented company and its product is the company’s most valuable marketing tool (Thomaselli, 2006: 1). This statement does highlight the significance of product marketing to Nike and the fact that marketing is essentially an integral component of the company’s success. There has been an unprecedented increase in Nike’s “demand creation”, or simply marketing expenditure as indicated by table 1 which shows the progressive rise in the company’s marketing budget over a period of 20 years from 1990 to 2010. This has also been paralleled with an increase in Nike’s revenues, which have also been growing over the years as indicated in table 2, which shows the progressive rise in Nike’s revenues over a period of 20 years from 1990 to 2010. Table 1Adapted from: (Chow, 2014) Table 2: Adapted from: (Chow, 2014) Nike spends billions of dollars on the so-called “demand-creation” exercise, particularly on advertising and endorsement of athletes. Nike evidently invests heavily in demand creation activities because it associates them with increased sales and profits respectively (Stock, 2014). Notably, the company spent $3 billion on marketing in the year 2013 (Chow, 2014), which exceeds the total revenue earned by the company’s rival in basketball footwear, Under Armour, by far. Nike’s consolidated statements of income for the years 2013 and 2014 indicate that the company’s revenues for the two consecutive years were $6,971 million and $7,982 million respectively, which represents a 15% change (Nike Inc., 2015). Similarly, the statements show that the company registered a 23% increase in demand creation expenditure, from $731 in 2013 to $897 in the year 2014. In the end, there was a 23% increment in Nike’s net income, from $779 million in 2013 to $962 million the year 2014 (Nike Inc., 2015). In that respect, the paralleled increase in both Nike’s revenues and demand creation expenditure is a significant indicator of the positive relationship between the company’s sales and marketing strategy. The increase in Nike’s demand creation expenditure is attributable to Nike’s increased branding efforts to increase its brand visibility in the global consumer markets. For instance, spending on demand creation went up particularly during the period leading to the 2014 World Cup event (BBC, 2014). Evidently, the company boosted its branding efforts ahead of the event in anticipation of high returns on investment on demand creation spending. Nike announced that it had experienced a rise in its sales and profits in the fiscal first quarter of 2014, following a high demand in its footwear and apparels in link with increased branding during the World Cup event. The increase in Nike’s sales and profits in the period leading to, during and after the 2014 World Cup tournament can be taken as a positive indicator of the effectiveness of the company’s branding. Nike’s superior brand image created by its logo and slogan has been a central component of Nike’s success particularly because they are easily recognizable and they resonate with people (Stabile, 2000: 186). Most of the time, the company does not even use any words in its ads because the swoosh logo, which is unique to its brand, is widely recognizable to buyers all over the world (Sanusi et al. 2014). Nike strives to put its logo on the kit of the world’s most popular athletes and rightly so, particularly because the soccer kit industry is a vast industry that generates more than $5 billion annually. Precisely, Nike’s branding strategy during mega global sporting events such as the World Cup gives the company a huge boost in terms of sales. Nike’s branding through kit-sponsorship deals is a major contributor to the company’s growth and global success since the company generates nearly $2 billion in revenues from soccer alone (Khan, 2014). In 2014’s World Cup, Nike got the highest number of kit-sponsorship deals than its rivals, thereby putting its logo on 11 teams out of the total 32 qualifying teams, including on the hosts Brazil. Nike’s Swoosh logo has been effective in creating audience awareness about the company’s, particularly because it appears nearly everywhere, in sports sections on all media outlets and in TV coverage of sporting events (Sanusi et al. 2014). Nike’s swoosh logo is conspicuously displayed on uniforms and sports gear to ensure maximum exposure that makes the brand to be always imprinted in the minds of all the audiences that see these sporting events or witness reruns and news coverage. In that respect, the swoosh logo functions as a sort of brand validator that gives the company’s product high desirability; the company’s customers gain both status and recognition (Kalb, 2011). Significantly, whenever an audience sees the Nike’s swoosh logo on sports clubs kits or sport professionals, they automatically associate the Nike brand with high performance, of the respective teams or athletes. This eventually triggers positive attitude formations amongst the audiences, thereby influencing consumer choices in return; consumers are more likely to buy Nike products since they associate them with the high performance of their favourite professional athletes or teams. Nike’s “Just Do It” slogan has been effective because it resonates with audiences across multiple market cultures (Kim and Heere, 2012: 20); the subscript inherent in this three lettered dictum, that anyone can accomplish anything by using its products, inspires confidence and trust in the company’s products. In that respect, Nike’s slogan echoes the company’s positive view of the world and everyone in it, defining the endless possibilities for the potential of all human beings, thereby inspiring athletes and consumers around the world. When consumers see the Nike brand being associated with the heroism of successful athletes such as Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods, they gain more confidence that they too can be successful by purchasing the Nike brand (Kalb, 2011). Limitation Although branding is important for growth and success of brands in the highly dynamic and competitive global market environment, particularly in the athletic foots and apparel industry, branding is not necessarily all that there is to Nike’s global success. The company has had to reconsider its marketing strategy in an attempt to stimulate its global sales that have gradually levelled-off in the previous decades . In some markets, Nike has resorted to marketing some of its products as off-brands, which essentially refers to brand names that are either unrecognized or relatively unfamiliar compared to major recognizable brand names like Nike. The recognition that consumers are more likely to switch to cheaper or somewhat generic “nameless” brands sold at specific chains, as a cost-cutting mechanism, has inspired major chains to off-brand their products as a way of raising private-label sales (Tuttle, 2012). Nike is simply trying to give the off-brands, their own recognizable identity so as to reach out to cost-conscious customers that evade branded items as a way of saving on their purchases. For instance, in what could be perceived as a risky marketing strategy, the company has recently experimented with ad campaigns that promote the script logo rather than the well-known swoosh symbol. Precisely, the company has attempted to de-swoosh its products using more off branding; for instance, the company has off-branded Tiger Wood’s apparel concurrently with the now-famous yin-yang sign (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 9). Similarly, the Nike swoosh on Michael Jordan’s Air Jordan shoes was replaced with the Jump-man symbol. Nike’s sales decline in the wake of devastating scandals such as Tiger Wood’s extramarital affair also indicate the limitation of the company’s branding strategy. Evidently, celebrity endorsements like Tiger Woods do not necessarily guarantee Nike’s continued growth and success in the longer term as indicated by a 2009 study by researchers at the University of California. This research indicated that Nike’s shareholders and other Tiger Woods sponsors lost approximately $5 - $12 billion as a direct consequence of Tiger Woods’ extramarital affair scandal (UC Davis Graduate School of Management, 2009). The study shows that total shareholder losses for Nike exceed the worth of Tiger Woods’ personal endorsement earnings for numerous decades. As a way forward following this Woods case Nike adjusted its marketing strategy in the United States market, by softening its brand name and aggressive brand image. For instance, Nike resorted to combining its trademark “Just Do It” slogan with a new slogan, “I Can”, with the aim of appealing to the non-athletic market segment (Ching-Chieh, 2010: 9). Perhaps the sudden shift in Nike’s script narrative is indicative of the company’s cognizance of the insufficiency of branding alone, as a marketing strategy. Summary Overall, this paper attempted to explore the extent to which Nike’s branding has contributed to its success. The initial two sections of this paper reviewed the essence of branding and the manner in which Nike uses its branding strategy respectively. In the second section of this paper, evidence and examples were cited explaining Nike’s product branding, its effectiveness and limitations towards the ccorporations’ success. The third section utilized graphs in evaluating the relationship between Nike’s branding and the company’s success. Ultimately, the discussion above highlights that branding is indeed an integral component of Nike’s success. Originally, Nike had established its foundations on product innovation and efficient production, and it was less inclined to bother itself with the consumers or the brand. However, its profitability and survival could not be pegged on this model alone, particularly because it was increasingly facing competition from rival companies. A shift in Nike’s fortunes in the mid-1980’s inevitably compelled the company to reconsider its focus, from the product, to the customers and the brand. Ever since then, Nike has been essentially a marketing-oriented company, delivering a valuable and innovative product to athletes all over the world. In other words, Nike’s phenomenal success is highly dependent on the company’s marketing strategies, particularly the company’s branding. To achieve its global expansion goal while increasing its revenue across global market populations, the company devotes a vast proportion of its resources and efforts to marketing of its products to potential consumers. The company’s recent consumer-centered approach enables it to manufacture products that fulfill its customers’ wants, needs and expectations; the company focuses its marketing campaigns to specific market segments that are more likely to buy its products. Nike’s superior brand image created by its logo and slogan has been a central aspect of the company’s success particularly because they are easily recognizable and they resonate with people all over the world. Proof of the significant influence of Nike’s marketing strategy on its success is in its rapidly growing sales, despite the immense competition it faces in the athletic apparel and athletic footwear industry. The company has continued to post excellent results over the years, through intensive product marketing campaigns. Nike’s effective product branding has enabled it to win against competition thereby remaining competitive and profitable, which implies that marketing is essentially an integral component of the company’s success. References BBC. (2014). Nikes marketing costs soar on World Cup. BBC.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/business-28051656 Bilotti, Katie. (2011). "Emotional Brand Attachment: Marketing Strategies for Successful Generation" CMC Senior Theses. Paper 273.[Print]. Available at: http://scholarship.claremont.edu/cmc_theses/273 [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Bowers, J.M., Fricke, M.M., & Yeats, K.D. (2014).Evaluating Effectiveness of Public Library Branding Efforts.[Online]. Available at: https://juliebowers.wordpress.com/about/evaluating-effectiveness-of-public-library-branding-efforts/[Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Brier, D. (2014). Case Study—27 Years at Nike: “What I Learned About Branding. [Online]. Available at: http://www.risingabovethenoise.com/nike-branding-after-27-years-with-david-brier/ [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Ching-Chieh, L. (2010). A Successful Marketing Strategy for Nike Inc.: The Story Behind and Its Analysis. [pdf] Latitude International Consultancy. Chow, L. (2014). You See Sneakers, These Guys See Hundreds Of Millions In Resale Profit. Fivethirtyeight.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/you-see-sneakers-these-guys-see-hundreds-of-millions-in-resale-profit/ Coleman, C.A. (2013). Classic Campaigns - "Its Gotta Be the Shoes": Nike, Mike and Mars and the "Sneaker Killings". [Online]. Available at: https://muse.jhu.edu/login?auth=0&type=summary&url=/journals/advertising_and_society_review/v014/14.2.coleman.html [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Cortsen, K. (2013). Nike – utilizing events to facilitate brand experiences. [Online]. Available at: http://kennethcortsen.com/sport-economy/nike-utilizing-events-to-facilitate-brand-experiences/ [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Deng, T. (2009) “Just Done It” – Nikes New Advertising Plan Facing Global Economic Crisis. International Journal of Business and Management, 4(3):102-105) Forbes. (2014). Nike.[Online]. Available at: http://www.forbes.com/companies/nike/#[Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Freeman, M. (2000). Nike considers `swoosh golf clubs. The San Diego Union – Tribune. 14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://search.proquest.com/docview/271727252?accountid=1331 Freeburn, C. (2013). The Big Sporting Event Adidas and Nike Are Counting On. [Online]. Available at: http://investorplace.com/2013/06/the-big-sporting-event-adidas-and-nike-are-counting-on/#.VQKWq46Ucac [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Friedman, W. (2000). Nike picks up the pace in race to harness web. Advertising Age, 71(10), 1. Gaffney, A. (1994). Nike, inc. Sporting goods business, 27(2), 146. Grow, J.M. (2008). The gender of branding: Early Nike womens advertising a feminist antenarrative. Womens Studies in Communication, 31(3), 312-343.  Jensen, J., &Rechtin, M. (1998). Jump ball: Jordan team to pick shop for Nike line. Advertising Age, 69(25), 4.  Kalb, I. (2011). How Nike Continues To Just Do It Again And Again. Businessinsider.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://www.businessinsider.com/nike-the-brand-that-keeps-on-giving-2011-12#ixzz3UHpC7lll Khalili, M. A. (2013). Marketing Management Strategies of Selected Multinational Enterprises: An Assessment In Philippine. International Journal of Management Research and Reviews, 3(12), 3834-3849. Khan, S. A. (2014). Nike Bets Billions On Soccer As The World Cup Nears. Gurufocus.14 Mar, 2015Available at: http://www.gurufocus.com/news/253509/nike-bets-billions-on-soccer-as-the-world-cup-nears- Kim, C., &Heere, B. (2012). Consumers from emerging markets: Perceptions and attitudes toward global sporting brands. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 21(1), 19-31.  Kim, Y. D., Magnusen, M., & Kim, Y. (2012). Revisiting sport brand personality: Scale development and validation. Journal of Multidisciplinary Research, 4(3), 65-80.  Kotler, P., & Armstrong, G. (2012) Principles of Marketing. NY: Prentice Hall. Kwon, H. H., Kim, H., &Mondello, M. (2008). Does a manufacturer matter in co-branding? The influence of a manufacturer brand on sport team licensed apparel. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 17(3), 163-172.  Lake, L. (2015). What is Branding and How Important is it to Your Marketing Strategy? [Online]. Available at: http://marketing.about.com/cs/brandmktg/a/whatisbranding.htm [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Leslie, W. (2003).Nike purchasing converse, a legend on the blacktop. New York Times.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://www.nytimes.com/2003/07/10/business/nike-purchasing-converse-a-legend-on-the-blacktop.html Mathew, J. (2014). Nike Profit Jumps on Strong Demand for Brand During World Cup.ibtimes14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/nike-profit-jumps-strong-demand-brand-during-world-cup-1467265 McCune, M. (2015). Why a Great Brand Just isn’t Enough: Exploring the Relationship Between Brand and Customer Experience. [Online]. Available at: http://bridgeable.com/great-brand-just-isnt-enough/ [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Mehrizi, M. Y., &Zahedi, S.A. (2013). Effective Marketing Strategies On Consumer Behavior As A Key Success Factor In E-Marketing. Kuwait Chapter of the Arabian Journal of Business and Management Review, 2(8), 42-52.  Miner, D. A. T. (2009). Provocations on sneakers: The multiple significations of athletic shoes, sport, race, and masculinity. CR: The New Centennial Review, 9(2), 73-107,272. Nickell, D., Cornwell, T. B., & Johnston, W. J. (2011). Sponsorship-linked marketing: A set of research propositions. The Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, 26(8), 577-589. Nike Inc. (2015). Nike, Inc. reports fiscal 2015 first quarter results. [Online]. Available at: http://investors.nike.com/files/doc_financials/2015/q1/NIKE-Inc-Q115-Press-Release-FINAL_v001_q1avi0.pdf [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Nike. (2008). Nike names Cindy Davis president of Nike golf. Entertainment Business Newsweekly, 13. Nike. (2014a). Reports Fiscal 2014 Third Quarter Results. Nike.com.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://news.nike.com/news/nike-inc-reports-fiscal-2014-third-quarter-results Nike. (2014b). Annual Report on Form 10-K. Investors.nike.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://investors.nike.com/files/doc_financials/2014/docs/nike-2014-form-10K.pdf Ozanian, M. (2014). "The Forbes Fab 40: The Worlds Most Valuable Sports Brands 2014". Forbes.14 Mar, 2015. Available from: http://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2014/10/07/the-forbes-fab-40-the-worlds-most-valuable-sports-brands-2014/ Pike, A. (2009). Geographies of brands and branding. Progress in Human Geography, 33(5), 619-645.  Rovell, D. (2013). How Nike landed Michael Jordan. [Online]. Available at: http://espn.go.com/blog/playbook/dollars/post/_/id/2918/how-nike-landed-michael-jordan [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Sanusi, M. et al. (2014).The Swoosh of Creativity. [Online]. Available at: http://businesstoday.intoday.in/story/nike-marketing-strategies-global-brand/1/207237.html [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Stabile, C. A. (2000).Nike, social responsibility, and the hidden abode of production. Critical Studies in Media Communication, 17(2), 186-204. Stock, K. (2014). Is Nike Spending Too Much on Superstars? Bloombeg.14 Mar, 2015. Available at: http://www.bloomberg.com/bw/articles/2014-03-20/is-nike-spending-too-much-on-superstars Thomaselli, R. (2006). The CEO forgot: Ads rule at Nike. Advertising Age, 77(5), 1-1, 32. Tuttle, B. (2012). Brand Names Just Don’t Mean as Much Anymore. [Online]. Available at: http://business.time.com/2012/11/01/brand-names-just-dont-mean-as-much-anymore/ [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. UC Davis Graduate School of Management. (2009). Tiger Woods Scandal Cost Shareholders up to $12 Billion.[Online]. Available at: http://gsm.ucdavis.edu/news-release/tiger-woods-scandal-cost-shareholders-12-billion [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Wedekind, J. (2008). The commercial games: Selling off the Olympic ideals. Multinational Monitor, 29(2), 47-53. Willigan, G.E. (1992). High-Performance Marketing: An Interview with Nike’s Phil Knight. [Online]. Available at: https://hbr.org/1992/07/high-performance-marketing-an-interview-with-nikes-phil-knight [Accessed: 14 Mar, 2015]. Wind, Y. (2008). A plan to invent the marketing we need today. MIT Sloan Management Review, 49(4), 21-28. Read More