Professional Cycling For the Fans - Nike will shoe Armstrong’s Team Radioshack

Ultimately Nike didn’t have anything to gain by flipping the entire bill for Lance’s new Pro Tour team, but the shoe giant will have a major role.

This will be no surprise to anybody but last Thursday Nike has confirmed it will to be the footwear and apparel supplier to Team Radioshack.

Unless team members are stars with their own shoe contract they will be required to wear Nike footwear and apparel in competition and training. This was confirmed by Nike spokeswoman Erin Dobson in an interview with The Oregonian. Nike is based in Portland, Oregon.

The spokeswoman declined to disclose the financial level of Nike’s sponsorship, but it will be minor compared with RadioShack’s. A title sponsor typically pays $10 million of the more than $15 to $20 million it takes to fund a Pro Tour team for a year of racing.

In this year’s 2009 Tour de France, Lance Armstrong sported black shoes with two of Nike’s large yellow swoosh’s on the side… with black socks of course.
http://cyclingshoesonline.com/featured-articles/nike-will-shoe-armstrongs-team-radioshack/

Does this mean Lance will give up those custom kicks he's been wearing? Seems a bit hypocritical. What if you have your own shoe contract but not considered a star like maybe Frischkorn and D2. Frankly I hated my Poggio III's...not that I'm in any danger of being offered a contract. :)

I am guessing you don't have to be a "star" to wear another brand, simply if you have your own shoe deal.

I don't get this thread. Nike sponsors "The Shack" and they expect the team to wear their product, unless they have a previous shoe/clothing contract. Lance is now a hypocrite? I must be missing something.

Did we just need an excuse to call Lance a hypocrite? If so can we do it more clearly next time? Just a simple "Lance is a hypocrite, just cuz I say so" will do. Thanks

I guess finding good riders is far more important than having them wear Nikes. If a great rider is endorsing, say, SIDI, and wants in on The Shack, the last thing LA wants is for him to be unable to join the team because of his shoes!

I don't get this thread. Nike sponsors "The Shack" and they expect the team to wear their product, unless they have a previous shoe/clothing contract. Lance is now a hypocrite? I must be missing something.

Did we just need an excuse to call Lance a hypocrite? If so can we do it more clearly next time? Just a simple "Lance is a hypocrite, just cuz I say so" will do. Thanks
You are missing the fact that Lance doesn't wear Nikes either. Requiring someone else to use equipment you wouldn't use yourself is hypocritical. I guess you think his shoes are really Nikes because they have a purdy swoosh on them?

If Nike pays your company to make something for Nike.....then it is Nike. Just like any other producer. Nike outsources all kinds of stuff all the time. As do many big corporations. Ex. GM sells both the Vibe (Toyota Matrix) and the Aveo (Daewoo?). Both are still GM cars. Lance isn't a hypocrite for making his employees do as he wants. He's the boss. Either way if his shoes are labelled Nike....then they are Nike. By next year he'll probably have shoes made for him anyway. He's simply keeping his sponsors happy by making sure his employees wear the sponsors shoes.

If Nike pays your company to make something for Nike.....then it is Nike. Just like any other producer. Nike outsources all kinds of stuff all the time. As do many big corporations. Ex. GM sells both the Vibe (Toyota Matrix) and the Aveo (Daewoo?). Both are still GM cars. Lance isn't a hypocrite for making his employees do as he wants. He's the boss. Either way if his shoes are labelled Nike....then they are Nike. By next year he'll probably have shoes made for him anyway. He's simply keeping his sponsors happy by making sure his employees wear the sponsors shoes.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. If Cervelo were to make his bike, and it was painted up and had Trek decals, would you say he's riding a Trek? It's one thing if there's a business arrangement in place, and you could buy said hypothetical Cervelo labeled as a Trek, perhaps we could agree that - through the miracle of branding - it's a Trek. But if he were to just get one and paint it up for the sake of appearance, it would seem to merely be false advertising.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. If Cervelo were to make his bike, and it was painted up and had Trek decals, would you say he's riding a Trek? It's one thing if there's a business arrangement in place, and you could buy said hypothetical Cervelo labeled as a Trek, perhaps we could agree that - through the miracle of branding - it's a Trek. But if he were to just get one and paint it up for the sake of appearance, it would seem to merely be false advertising.

Ask you buddy LeMond what kind of Huffy he rode in the TDF? I don't think anyone sued him.

When Nike started sponsoring Tiger Woods, all he did was wear their logo on some clothes. Now Nike has a full range of clubs, balls, clothes, and bags. Same thing for Michael Jordan and his basketball shoes. It's a little late to jump on the Lance bandwagon for them and develop a full line of bike equipment, but I imagine they might try to expand a bit.

When Nike started sponsoring Tiger Woods, all he did was wear their logo on some clothes. Now Nike has a full range of clubs, balls, clothes, and bags. Same thing for Michael Jordan and his basketball shoes. It's a little late to jump on the Lance bandwagon for them and develop a full line of bike equipment, but I imagine they might try to expand a bit.

I certainly hope so! The more competition the better.

This is done all the time in professional tennis. Logo gets strung because the pro can't make the adjustment to the new equipment. The LA bash parade continues....

Ask you buddy LeMond what kind of Huffy he rode in the TDF? I don't think anyone sued him.

That's actually kind of the point. If you're talking about the Serotta/Huffy, the general public could purchase a comparable bicycle branded as a Huffy. If Nike doesn't make the shoes, and you can't buy comparable branded as Nike, it would be different. That would put it in the realm of Tom Simpson's "Peugeot" (which was actually a Masi). You couldn't go to your LBS, and order a "PX-10" that was "just like Simpson's".

p.s. - me and Greg are real tight. :rolleyes:

Lance has no say in what shoes people on his team wear. It's Nike who decides. They're the ones footing a bunch as sponsors. Ultimately, it's up to them to decide whether or not people on the team can wear competitors shoes because of prior contracts, not Lance. I think it was a good gesture to smooth the contracts out, especially considering they're the official sponsors. I think it's pretty standard and some of you guys are making mountains out of mole hills; seriously.

Lance has no say in what shoes people on his team wear. It's Nike who decides. They're the ones footing a bunch as sponsors. Ultimately, it's up to them to decide whether or not people on the team can wear competitors shoes because of prior contracts, not Lance. I think it was a good gesture to smooth the contracts out, especially considering they're the official sponsors. I think it's pretty standard and some of you guys are making mountains out of mole hills; seriously.

I had heard that most pro contracts actually don't require riders to wear a certain kind of shoe, or ride a certain type of saddle. Those are two personal choice items that can seriously affect a rider's performance, and while they might get incentives, they often are not forced to use them.

Lance has no say in what shoes people on his team wear. It's Nike who decides.
Nike is only involved because of Lance, therefore he has 100% say in it. It could very well be that Nike just wants people to wear Nike sneakers on the podium. I have a hard time believing they're really going to get back in the shoe making business, but then maybe the ones Cavendish and others have been wearing will suddenly hit the market next year.

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. If Cervelo were to make his bike, and it was painted up and had Trek decals, would you say he's riding a Trek? It's one thing if there's a business arrangement in place, and you could buy said hypothetical Cervelo labeled as a Trek, perhaps we could agree that - through the miracle of branding - it's a Trek. But if he were to just get one and paint it up for the sake of appearance, it would seem to merely be false advertising.

So we agree. If Nike calls up whoever supplies Bontrager with shoes....or any other manufacturer for that matter, and says make me a shoe in this colour and in with this logo......then it's a Nike. In fact if Nike called up Cervelo and said make me a thousand RS's in Silver with Nike on them (and Cervelo agreed) then yes it would be a Nike bike. Do you think that Nike actually designs all the product they sell? Or would you agree that John Q waterbottle maker just silk screens the swoosh onto some bottles of with Nike's specifications (replace bottle with gym bag/sweater/golf ball/soccer ball/socks/etc). It's all still Nike. I'm sure Nike is working on next season's shoes right now......

So my cervelo water bottle wasn't made in italy by cervelo? Awww Shux.

So we agree. If Nike calls up whoever supplies Bontrager with shoes....or any other manufacturer for that matter, and says make me a shoe in this colour and in with this logo......then it's a Nike. In fact if Nike called up Cervelo and said make me a thousand RS's in Silver with Nike on them (and Cervelo agreed) then yes it would be a Nike bike. Do you think that Nike actually designs all the product they sell? Or would you agree that John Q waterbottle maker just silk screens the swoosh onto some bottles of with Nike's specifications (replace bottle with gym bag/sweater/golf ball/soccer ball/socks/etc). It's all still Nike. I'm sure Nike is working on next season's shoes right now......

But if Nike buys a pair of Sidis for a rider, takes the Sidi logos off, and puts theirs on - then it's merely dishonesty. The line isn't crystal clear, but there is a line there.

But if Nike buys a pair of Sidis for a rider, takes the Sidi logos off, and puts theirs on - then it's merely dishonesty. The line isn't crystal clear, but there is a line there.

SIDI probably won't do it, since their brand is so famous.

In that case, Nike will just relent and put their logos on other kits. Heck, who notices the shoes anyway? Its the jersey, front and center, that counts.

http://cyclingshoesonline.com/featured-articles/nike-will-shoe-armstrongs-team-radioshack/

Does this mean Lance will give up those custom kicks he's been wearing? Seems a bit hypocritical. I see nothing at all hypocritical about it.

I had heard that most pro contracts actually don't require riders to wear a certain kind of shoe, or ride a certain type of saddle. Those are two personal choice items that can seriously affect a rider's performance, and while they might get incentives, they often are not forced to use them.

A guy I know either has to wear the sponsor shoes, or shoe covers at all races and group rides.

A guy I know either has to wear the sponsor shoes, or shoe covers at all races and group rides.

What level is this fellow riding?

Is it his personal sponsorship, or his team's?

I refuse to buy Nikes.. What if the cycist finds them uncomfortable. . Pretty head strong for someone not a major sponsor of the team.

-
Who says the shoes have to be off the shelf Nike's? I'm pretty sure they will be custom to whatever extent they need to be for the rider . No Professional Team has it in their best interest to have a rider wear anything that will impair his/her performance. . . so the shoe may say Nike . . . but what it's made with and how may not be anything like the retail shoes.

I say it's no big deal they have to wear Nike logo'd shoes . It's underneath that logo that counts.

Pro teams have done this forever. Guys riding rebranded bikes, wheels, saddles etc to meet their teams sponsors needs has been going on since sponsors first started paying the bills.

I don't think that Nike has made cycling shoes on a consistent basis. Lance's shoes are either custom made Rockets with a Nike emblem on them or custom made by Nike specially for him. I actually read an article some time ago that explained. But I can't seem to remember the exact details. So I expect that the same condition will exist for the rest of the team which is a good deal. Either way, you get custom shoes.

If you get on the internet you will find only a couple of old stock Nike shoes for sale. I don't think that Nike is actually making cycling shoes anymore. So they have left the market. Are they going to re-enter it? I don't know.

I just hope it means I will soon be able to buy QUALITY Nike stuff at local box stores for less than what I currently buy. I doubt that is true since the last generation of Nike cycling gear sucked, but one can hope...

I remember when Honda first came out with an SUV. It was a rebadged isuzu. You could peel off the Honda sticker on the radio and see Isuzu underneath. I don't get what the big deal is here, other than it's LA and one more chance to bash....

What level is this fellow riding?

Is it his personal sponsorship, or his team's?

Team, he rides for U23 Livestrong.

So my cervelo water bottle wasn't made in italy by cervelo? Awww Shux.

You do know that Cervelo is a Canadian company, right?

I guess what I was trying to say is it would be less confusing if the original post was more to the point "I hate lance" instead of this sponsor talk. Yeah look for "The Shak" team to be wearing Nike branded clothing, and shoes when they're not on their bikes. Some may even wear Nike cycling shoes (if they start producing them again and they suck less than their last attempt), some may not.

Lance's team has sponsors who pay money to have their brand mentioned/showcased - shocking! I mean SHOCKING! The nerve of LA!

Big farking deal, man. I mean seriously. I'm not a lance fanboy (nor a hater) but holy cow this thread is scraping the very bottom of the barrel.

I hope SuperCuts doesn't ever sponsor the team. We'll be reading about Lance being a hypocrite because he does not have enough hair to justify a hair cut.

Again, next time would you kindly title the new thread "I hate lance, let's dog pile on him"

Thanks!

Full disclosure: I would never OWN anything Nike, NOTHING! There is not a single "swoosh" in my home and there never will be. NEVER! My kids will go through life NEVER knowing what it's like to wear a pair of $100 Nikes...NEVER! Ha ha ha!

ps: I think AC is a hypocrite for being Spanish yet using the English language, terribly I might add. That bast****

I'm not sure I'm following your logic. If Cervelo were to make his bike, and it was painted up and had Trek decals, would you say he's riding a Trek? It's one thing if there's a business arrangement in place, and you could buy said hypothetical Cervelo labeled as a Trek, perhaps we could agree that - through the miracle of branding - it's a Trek. But if he were to just get one and paint it up for the sake of appearance, it would seem to merely be false advertising.


Back in the 7-11 days the team rode Serrottas and then switched to Eddie Merkx frames, might have been when the became Motorola. Hampston and some one else rode Landsharks, but they had team paint and looked just like all the others with Serrotta or Merkx on the down tube. All that mattered was that the sponsor was covered. Sorry about the time frame, the 80's are fading. The 90's are close behind.

On edit: I forgot about the Huffy days. I found this in another thread just now.

Originally posted by BengeBoy (http://www.bikeforums.net/member.php?u=95393)

"See Jan Heine's recent book, "The Competition Bicycle." It's a full history of actual racing bike, and he weighed each bike complete with saddles and pedals. Except for a few rare track bikes, and a few bike with exotic parts or drilled-out components, most of the classic racing bikes were well over 20 ponds:

Some weights from that book:


Sean Kelly's 1991 Concorde: 22.8 lb
A. Hampsten's 1988 Huffy (actually a Landshark): 22 lb
Greg Lemond's 1981 Gitane: 22 lb.
E. Merckx's 1974 deRosa: 24.3 lb.
B. Waddell's 1965 Cinelli Supercorsa: 25.3 lb (this was a bike bought retail by a college student who was racing at the time)
1948 Wilier Tristina: 23.1 lb
1910 Labor Tour de France: 29.3 lb

Earlier thread here:

http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...+heine+bicycle
(http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=503679&highlight=jan+heine+bicycle)"

You do know that Cervelo is a Canadian company, right?
Sort of.... R&D (Vroomen-White Design) and assembly (Cervelo Cycles Inc.) are in Toronto but the head office (Cervelo SA) has been in Switzerland since 2006.

I don't think that Nike is actually making cycling shoes anymore. So they have left the market. Are they going to re-enter it? I don't know.

I have the same observation/question. If Nike cycling shoes were popular/in demand, you would see them on the shelves of more stores/LBS. Nike will probably contract it out/rebranding if they plan on offering cycling shoes to the general public again and continue with the custom fit and hand made for pro cyclists.

Expect to see Nike expand their running or training shoe selections in their 'Livestrong' section rather than seriously get back into offering cycling shoes at their own factories. Any of the big athletic shoe companies would have to come out with something technologically superior, more comfortable, or more stylish and be price competitive to carve out a decent/profitable share of the market. You see more skateboard and sailing shoes from the big companies than cycling shoes. Are cycling shoes that small of a niche market?

all I can say is Nike bibs are horrible. :(

Sort of.... R&D (Vroomen-White Design) and assembly (Cervelo Cycles Inc.) are in Toronto but the head office (Cervelo SA) has been in Switzerland since 2006.

I thought just Cervelo Test Team is registered in Switzerland.

So my cervelo water bottle wasn't made in italy by cervelo? Awww Shux.

My Cervelo water bottle says on the Bottom: Made in HR.

The country abbreviation is Croatia and its name is Hrvatska

The most shocking thing to me is the fact that there is a web site devoted to cycling shoes.
Weird. Just, weird.

My understanding is that Nike never made their own cycling stuff. They had a joint contract with Trek & Trek provided the stuff to them (with the Nike markings) & Nike used their name & power of distribution to get it out. Once Lance retired from Cycling, Nike saw that as the loss of a major icon in the sport, had no idea what direction (the sport popularity) would take -because face it; love Lance or hate him - a lot of people took interest to our sport because of him. If you asked average joe to name 5 professional cyclists; a majority would struggle with that question. And let's face it, if you look at Nike's money making opperations, cycling was never a major part of that. Compare how many people can own a pair of running shoes & go running - vs how many people own bicycles fancy enough to have $100 (or much more) pedals & a special shoe to clip into it. They probably sell more running shoes in one day across the US then cycling shoes they would sell in a year. But Nike does know the power of an icon - Michael Jordan, Tiger Woods, etc. And Lance & Nike blew it up with the yellow band Livestrong promotion. Something he was hoping to sell 200,000 & they did over a million with those things for sale on ebay for like $30 a piece at one point.

So yes, Nike will make cycling stuff again; probably a very limited offering that will be outsourced to some company in Italy or Asia. They demand a low price (because they are Nike), sell it at a high price & people will buy it because it is Nike & it is Lance Armstrong.

As far as the riders & the shoes they wear - a couple comments:

1) Most of these riders are not the high paycheck riders that Lance is - therefore he repects the endorsements contracts that these riders can get - which I really see as only shoes & sunglasses with some other stuff sprinkled in.

2) They will probably be required to wear shoe covers on training rides

3) I am sure if they don't already have a contract in place, Nike will be happy to offer them one.

4) Oakley has backed Lance for years; but I am sure we will see some guys in different glasses this year.

5) For a long time, Tiger played a Titliest ball even though Nike had developed one. Tiger still plays a Scotty Cameron putter (with decals removed) because it is your money maker (well it use to be; this week it wasn't).

But if Nike buys a pair of Sidis for a rider, takes the Sidi logos off, and puts theirs on - then it's merely dishonesty. The line isn't crystal clear, but there is a line there.

How about if Nike sends the guys to a custom cobbler (shoe-maker) and pays for them to be individually fitted then puts a logo on the shoes? Would that be honest enough for you?

Nike does short-run prototype stuff for many of their professional athletes. Why should the cyclists be any different?

The only reason Nike is sponsoring a cycling team is beacuse Lance in the Devil. There, I said it.

I tried to buy some Nike Romaleos weightlifting shoes they just started producing last year for the Olympics. They're already out of production.

-
Who says the shoes have to be off the shelf Nike's? I'm pretty sure they will be custom to whatever extent they need to be for the rider . No Professional Team has it in their best interest to have a rider wear anything that will impair his/her performance. . . so the shoe may say Nike . . . but what it's made with and how may not be anything like the retail shoes.

I say it's no big deal they have to wear Nike logo'd shoes . It's underneath that logo that counts.

Yep. Nike is all about the brand not just a shoe. Look how much buzz they are getting here! Love 'em or hate'em... everyone knows the brand Nike. Probably why they have grown from just a waffle shoe to what they are now. Shrewd marketing campaign

:thumb:

[QUOTE]I don't get this thread. Nike sponsors "The Shack" and they expect the team to wear their product, unless they have a previous shoe/clothing contract. Lance is now a hypocrite? I must be missing something.

Did we just need an excuse to call Lance a hypocrite? If so can we do it more clearly next time? Just a simple "Lance is a hypocrite, just cuz I say so" will do. Thanks


ummm, ya, haters are lame.

The Nike logo on the jerseys will seen more than the ones on the shoes. Good to see American companies outfitting American teams with kit.