To answer question one it’s important to not that Nike has created a very powerful image in the minds of consumers in America. Nike wanted consumers to see it as an innovative brand that produces top of the line performance gear that was associated with very powerful and important athletes (mostly males). Their profile users are represented as famous athletes such as Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods. The athletes reflected the brand personalities such as competitive, winners, strong, and better than the rest. This also is a way for Nike to obtain credibility and quality. With the Air Jordan line, Nike sold over $100 million shoes in the first year (129).
Nike’s sources of brand equity hit all the way to the top of the CBBE pyramid for American consumers. Within the first two years alone Nike had 50% of the market share for athletic shoes. Salience is huge with the Nike logo. About 97% of Americans were able to recognize the Nike logo in 2000 (139). Imagery and performance were the main points that Nike stressed with its brand when it advertised itself. Nike stresses its performance as a main key point. Nike has been able to fulfill individual needs or judgments such as self-respect and self-confidence (which you obtain when wearing shoes that the athletes wear). It fulfills needs that are more difficult to articulate such as the social needs for power and belonging. Resonance is obtained through the athletic communities Nike has built such as the relationships that were built with the athletes on Nike’s behalf as well as the consumer’s behalf with the Air Jordan line.
It doesn’t surprise me that Europeans had a lack of respect for the Nike brand as stated in question two. To start off, Europe didn’t have the same view on certain sports as well as the fact that their athlete idols were different. Second, athletic shoe specialty stores didn’t even exist there. Third, their culture is different than the...