Nike sale of Bauer confirmed

[monoclub 5]

Could someone kindly direct me to the transcript of the chat with the fellow form Nike Bauer mentioned earlier in this thread.

[JR Boucicaut 3805]

http://www.modsquadhockey.com/forums/index...showtopic=38041

[jigsaw 0]

sucks, cause everything i use is nike/bauer with expections to my jock and visor

[DCott 0]

sucks, cause everything i use is nike/bauer with expections to my jock and visor

umm why? now some of you new shit won't have a swoosh hence you won't match?

[Wolfpack_1986 154]

yeah, that makes no sense... doesnt mean you have to go get new equipment. use what you've got and dont worry about being a label whore.

[steve66 45]

I also think it's a shame that Nike have pulled out. I think the energy and dollars poured into R&D will be missed.

[Gummer12 134]

I also think it's a shame that Nike have pulled out. I think the energy and dollars poured into R&D will be missed.

<SteveJonesNBH> I can't stress that enough. There are no plans to move locations or impact any jobs, so it will be the same people - backed by the same funding - that will continue to create our innovative products

[jigsaw 0]

sucks, cause everything i use is nike/bauer with expections to my jock and visor

umm why? now some of you new shit won't have a swoosh hence you won't match?

damn right.

[Chadd 916]

sucks, cause everything i use is nike/bauer with expections to my jock and visor

umm why? now some of you new shit won't have a swoosh hence you won't match?

damn right.

That's sad on so many levels

[MillShow 0]

If anything, more stuff is going to be outsourced to places like China. KKR makes their money by buying companies who are operating with some excess fat and leaning them right out. They probably think that hockey equipment is one of the only types of products where a good portion of the stuff is made in North America still, which is really an outdated way of doing things. I know alot of stuff is now made in China, but I'm betting even more of it will be soon. If you want to read a really good book, read Barbarians at the Gate about the LBO of RJR Nabisco back in the 80's.

[Chadd 916]

They probably think that hockey equipment is one of the only types of products where a good portion of the stuff is made in North America still, which is really an outdated way of doing things.

They didn't spend $200M without knowing the full story. They aren't thinking anything, they know.

[Rustyhole 1]

sticks have been outsourced for a few years now and the public are still buying them (amittedly in ignorance for most cases, im sure) and prices are continually astronomical so what changes?? the country label on the stick?

WHOOPEEE!!!

i also agree that overseas factories are probably a lot more modern than the picture of the stereotypical sweatshop

maybe one day, Bauer/CCM/RBK skates made overseas will be a desirable commodity??

[shooter27 117]

If anything, more stuff is going to be outsourced to places like China. KKR makes their money by buying companies who are operating with some excess fat and leaning them right out. They probably think that hockey equipment is one of the only types of products where a good portion of the stuff is made in North America still, which is really an outdated way of doing things. I know alot of stuff is now made in China, but I'm betting even more of it will be soon. If you want to read a really good book, read Barbarians at the Gate about the LBO of RJR Nabisco back in the 80's.

While I do agree with the general premise of your post, there are a few items to note. 1. Kohlberg was the financial backer here not KKR, Kohlberg did co-found KKR, but left KKR back in the '80s. 2. The LBO world has changed a bit since the buy-cut-flip mentality you are referring to. Not to say that is not the Kohlberg strategy, but there are more and more LBO shops growing companies through multiple acquisitions, creating large companies that will command higher multiples on a second sale. 3. Agree with you completely on Barbarians at the Gate, just keep in mind if you're reading it from the perspective of this deal, I believe Kholberg had left KKR by the time they did the RJR Nabisco deal.

[jimsandwich 0]

I agree that this is a good thing for hockey. Hopefully they will go back to some traditional qualities in their products. It seems that Nike was going to make their gear light and at the edge of technology, but what ever happened to quality. Like so many have said, Vapor skates don't last more than a few years with regular use. Old Bauer seemed to have a better outlook on the customer and what they wanted their business to stand for. Sure, when you bought an old pair of Bauer skates, they wouldn't get your business for a while for a new pair, but I respect that in a company and when it is time, I looked for Bauer products. Since Nike bought them, I tend to see what other products are available that I may have more confidence and trust in. Look for example at Graf. You can buy the new G series skates, but they still make the old 5,6,7 series in a modified version with DURABLE materials. I spend my $ on Grafs because Bauer was not the same with Nike and I knew Graf was not bailing out on their quality products. If Bauer gets back some of their old qualities which it sounds could happen under Graeme Roustan, I would consider them again. They don't have to go back to lower quality or materials, but for heavan's sake, skates should be black and white. They don't need to look like a bag of skittles (Vapor XXXX).

[AWE46M3 0]

I guess I am in the minority here. I don't see this as a good thing for hockey in general. Nike, has a passion for associating themselves with winners in different sports (Roger Federer, Tiger Woods, Michael Jordan, etc), and if they felt that hockey was not conducive to portraying this image nor was there a person to market it, I see a problem. Hockey, itself seems to have a problem becoming mainstream, and I dont think this helps much, at all. As much as you may think Nike was bad for hockey, and how they hurt quality, I really dont think many hockey players bought equipment for the logo. Hockey players, IMO are different than other athletes in that our game - I dont think, is filled with brand snobs and Nike really had no one single figure to push its products on us; sure they had Fedorov, Sundin, and a few others, but those days a long gone. I just think that this is a case of someone else giving up on hockey. Hopefully Im wrong and this is great for the sport, but for some reason, Im not so sure that is the case.

And on a quality note, I never found my Vapors to give me issues. In fact, I had Vapor 10s for 4-5 years, and when I for rid of them they still had plenty of life - they just looked like hell from all the play! haha

[DarkStar50 679]

Nike is a publicly owned company that has to answer to their shareholders for return on investment. If you have been following this decision since Nike stated their intention to sell NikeBauer Hockey, you would know that Nike's other brand names earn a much better return on investment(on shoes and apparel) for their shareholders than NikeBauer Hockey in particular did. NikeBauer Hockey is the #1 brand in the hockey industry right now and has been on top for quite some time. Nike Corporate is appreciative of everything that NBH did for them but at the end of the day, this is a business decision made by extremely smart business people. This decision to sell NBH has very little to do with finding the next Tiger Woods or Michael Jordan in the hockey world for Nike Corporate. It is about where Nike wants to be in 5 years from now and what provides Nike with the best possible opportunity to reach their goals from a business perspective. Unfortunately for some of us, Nike now has nothing to do with hockey on the equipment end. They stumbled at the beginning but were smart enough, of course, to understand they had the people in place already, Bauer people, to right the ship. That happened, NBH dominated the business letting their Bauer people do what they do best but now its time for Nike to move on.

[AWE46M3 0]

^^^ My point wasn't about finding the next TW or MJ, it was more about associating the brand with things synonymous with success (maybe naming names was confusing), and by dropping hockey, they essentially said hockey is a losing proposition. I am well aware that hockey was not as profitable as their other businesses, but I was more concentrated on the message it might send to the public.

I mentioned Fedorov and Sundin, because I was inferring that I felt hockey players in general we're not as brand snobby as people in some sports like basketball, or baseball, etc., and would not have been all that persuaded by a name.

I fully agree that this was purely a business decision made by smart and effective business people, but I think the message to the hockey world would be a little unsettling.

To me, looking at it from a business perspective, when one of the world's most recognized brands disassociates itself with your sport because it doesn't generate revenue, it sends a message - a rather loud message. Perhaps, and hopefully, it will have no ill effects, because the average person probably doesnt even know that Nike had anything to do with hockey.