Replies

At least at Wal-Mart, you can buy $30 shoes made in the so-called "sweat shops" rather than forking over $150 for a pair of similarly made shoes endorsed by some big-name NBA star. Silly consumers sometimes.

But isn't that part of the point? We are told that Nike can't afford to have workers in any place other than China and Vietnam. They then pay Lebron James $90 million. Well, it is just a business priority then. If he sells 9 million pairs, they have to give him $10 per pair of shoes sold. If they cut the cost of these endorsements in half, say made it $45 million, and hired american, they could still make the same profit. Seriously. If that $5 per pair of shoes went to an american worker's salary. Does anybody believe an american worker couldn't produce enough pair of shoes per hour to pay for $5 per pair? My guess is that the american worker could at least produce 4 pairs of shoes an hour for a salary of $8.50. If ya add health care, overhead, etc... it would still be under $20.

But instead, these shoe companies are competing for the next big celebrity instead and turning celebrity endorsements into the old dutch tulip market.

18 year old kids who haven't taken a single NBA shot, are worth more than the president of the United States.

But isn't that part of the point? We are told that Nike can't afford to have workers in any place other than China and Vietnam. They then pay Lebron James $90 million. Well, it is just a business priority then. If he sells 9 million pairs, they have to give him $10 per pair of shoes sold. If they cut the cost of these endorsements in half, say made it $45 million, and hired american, they could still make the same profit. Seriously. If that $5 per pair of shoes went to an american worker's salary. Does anybody believe an american worker couldn't produce enough pair of shoes per hour to pay for $5 per pair? My guess is that the american worker could at least produce 4 pairs of shoes an hour for a salary of $8.50. If ya add health care, overhead, etc... it would still be under $20.

I understand all that, but production and marketing are two separate functions. They would still spend the money on big-name endorsements if it brought customers willing to spend the larger amount. Would you sell your house for $50,000 if you had buyers willing to pay $100,000? Would you pay some sports star $25,000 if there was a good chance that you could command $150,000 for the same house?

But instead, these shoe companies are competing for the next big celebrity instead and turning celebrity endorsements into the old dutch tulip market.

PT Barnum had a saying about consumers that applies here. I think its rather silly to pay $150 for athletic shoes just because some celebrity endorses them. Yet people do it every day. Caveat Emptor.

18 year old kids who haven't taken a single NBA shot, are worth more than the president of the United States.

Beauty is apparently in the eyes of the beholder - nobody said that people are required to think. I agree that the aggrandization of American sports "heros" is a big facade, but people, for some reason, are buying it. I wonder how many people would purchase running shoes endorsed by George W. Bush, President of the United States?

The President gets a salary of $400K a year. The campaign costs to win the Presidency alone are well above $100 million per election. I somehow doubt most who try to become the President do it for the salary. It's about the power to head the largest economic entity in the world....The US government. Le Bron James cannot order where multi billion dollar aircraft carriers go no matter how much Nike or the NBA give him.