Nike has significant influence over fitness consumers and culture through its branding. The author analyzes Nike's impact on consumer behavior and identity formation within the fitness subculture. Key factors in Nike's success include iconic sponsorship of star athletes, recognizable logo, and targeting of demographics like women and young athletes. While Nike products offer performance benefits, their high price also serves as a status symbol. The brand cultivates desire among fitness enthusiasts by associating with an athletic lifestyle. This drives consumers to purchase Nike products to feel accepted and keep up with cultural codes within the fitness community.
1. The Power of a Brand and its Influence on a Sub-culture
By Alex Mowbray
The objective of ones study is to discuss Nikes affect on fitness consumers
with the focused topic of their behaviour behind the purchase, this will aim to
cover three topics, as one delves into a thesis discussing and exploring, the
influence and true power behind a brand which culturally and individually
affects those within a focused sub-culture; fitness enthusiasts, an umbrella
stamp spreading across to male and female gym devotees and casual health
conscious individuals. These topics will cover, behaviour, aesthetics and
consumption. The foundation of this thesis will be the focus on Nike, its impact
of consumerism on culture, how behavior and identity are informed by
consumerist choices, following individual identity which is formed and affected
from social consumption through aesthetics. One will consider the buyer's
embedded behavior molded from the process of, the desire of the product to
the purchase of the product. To assist with this, two sourced book authors will
help explore the matter further; Joe Marconi with “The Brand Marketing Book,
Creating, Managing and extending the value of your brand” and “Marketing
Aesthetics, The Strategic Management of Brands, identity, and Image”, by
Bernd Schmitt and Alex Simonson. These sources will also broaden ones
investigation to uncover, who and why fitness enthusiasts choose to wear
branded Nike sports and fitness wear rather than any other brand, and the
overall ideological effects from interacting with Nikes market.
“A better-known brand is thought to be a better brand.” (Marconi, Brand
Marketing, xi) Nike, formally known as Blue Ribbon Sports (BRS), as we know
is a hugely successful brand in terms of visibility and financial gain, yet
incorporates so many rooted elements to its success when considering its
aesthetic attributes and perception from the market it targets. Basing its
strategic advertising on sponsorship agreements with renowned athletes and
professional sports stars such as Michael Jordan, offers so much more
towards the products they sell in terms of sports equipment, its no wonder
why “Nike rolled over such powerful competitors as Reebok and Adidas”
(Marconi, pg, 144). Product consumption with Nike appears head-and-
2. shoulders above competing brands, via price and design, in conjunction with
Marconi, Bernd and Simonson discuss how “the Nike logo seems “dynamic”-
…the curving stripe depicts movement…the Reebok style appeared static”,
(Bernd and Simonson, pg, 117) a design aspect relevant and required for a
successful sports logo. Yet one objects to any claim towards Nikes franchise
becoming successful on sheer aesthetic merit. One feels the consuming
cultures are what support the brand and its financial success, but questions,
what supports the cultures ‘interaction’ with Nikes products? What maintains
that interaction to buy more than one thing? ‘Nike marked its 25th anniversary
in 1997 along with “completing the most financially successful 12 months in its
history…its logo…-referred to as a “swoosh” was considered to be one of the
most recognizable logos throughout the world” (Marconi, pg 144). Personally
if my favourite athlete or role model wore a purple wristband, for example,
whilst scoring a touchdown for charity, having that personal preference would
result in oneself wearing a purple wristband in the not too distant future.
However, one would remember to wear it for charity and donate, whereas
others choose to wear it as a fashion statement, regardless of any stains to
the brand such as, O.J. Simpson from a double-murder case, posing for
photographs while wearing a Nike baseball cap. Nikes sustainability can
afford to bleach these issues out with nine billion dollars in annual sales.
Therefore the Swoosh is and will remain a fashion statement, to whichever
culture or sub-culture wishes to state it, whether it is for charity or not.
Basketball as a sport, Michael Jordan as an athlete in that sport, Nike offers
that connection to consumers by producing Basketball shoes for them to
wear, yet have probably never stepped foot on a basketball court. That “claim
to fame” they so desire may be what pushes them to fuel Nike with its
success. Perhaps, focusing their products on sportswear offers the consumer
that step closer to becoming the next big athlete, to be vectored in the well-
renowned action, slam dunk shot and printed on Nikes products. Its what is
offered with the brand that will have the edge on its competitors?
“Organisations have strong, well-recognised, respected brands -…” they claim
consumption is swayed through the “…unique aesthetics that surround these
brands.” (Bernd, Simonson, Marketing Aesthetics pg, 21). Consumer
ideologies and identities are shaped through mass-mediated marketplaces
3. such as Nike, thus has an effect on their behaviour towards a purchase. A
fitness enthusiast, may use Michael Jordan or any other sports athlete and
fitness inspiration to fuel that incentive to go to the gym. Perhaps a way to do
this would be to wear the Nike logo where they can (i.e. the purple wristband).
These gym-goers will all have their own reason why they go to the gym,
however, by doing so, they enter a sub-culture whether they know it or not, as
it distributes them from others who do not go to the gym. The same principle
for cultures that choose to buy something from Nike, or not and choose
Adidas or Slazenger instead; to not fit into shared communities uncovers 'anti-
normalcy' to ravage uniqueness and declare an anti-establishment.
Regardless, they still interact with that marketplace through making a
conscious decision. There are many variables to consider such as, price,
should a gym membership for someone who works and can afford it along
with all the gear, stop someone who can’t from still getting exercise? No, but
will stop that particular person from purchasing the well-recognised respected
brands, according to Bernd and Simonson; Nikes surrounding, unique
aesthetics which come with the brand, in this case performance which the
product offers, is what distinguishes Nikes prices in the market from
competitors as being a lot more expensive. “When your company or product
provides specific experiences-…you are adding value and you can price that
value. As a result, an aesthetically attractive identity enables premium pricing”
(Bernd, Simonson, Marketing Aesthetics pg, 21). Would this then classify the
gym enthusiast as being of a higher class, and must state this through
branding themselves with the ‘best-you-can-buy’ brand? According to
Marketrealist.com, “NIKE’s high-performance athletic gear is mostly targeted
at professional athletes-…The Company also focuses on women customers.
In fact, the Women’s Training segment is faster growing than the Men’s
Training segment-…young athletes are a big part of its sales strategies,
especially in categories such as soccer, basketball, and running. Young
athletes will form NIKE’s target market in the future.” It would appear from this
demographic and previous observations that the primary, intended function for
Nikes products are more tangible, therefore more expensive, but there are
tangible benefits of identity, such as, “The increase of productivity, creating
loyalty, allows for premium pricing, saves costs, affords protection from
4. competition and cuts through information clutter”, (Bernd, Simonson, Figure
1.3 Tangible benefits of Aesthetics, pg.22) evidently pinning the company’s
silent philosophy; you get out from what you put in, much like fitness itself. But
one personally would then see the added social pressure and behavior when
considering the markets choices within its culture, which goes behind these
tangible aesthetics purchases, making them more intangible, regardless of
cost.
While considering class and the economic climate pressurizing consumer’s
purchases, at what cost would someone pay for pair of shoes or a fitness vest
top with the Nike swooshes on it? “The NBC Shop-…learned that a shirt or
jacket sold for considerably more with the networks logo on it than without-
…people want to associate themselves with the images of things they like-and
they’ll pay extra to do it-…people are also preconditioned to believe that an
item with a Nike, DKNY, Mercedes-Benz, or Polo insignia identifies them as
being of a particular, very discriminating class” (Marconi, Chapter 1: The Right
Name is a Good Way to Start, pg 3). It seems that culture is the single largest
factor in shaping desires and thus behaviour which embeds this into the
minds of each individual consumer; fitness enthusiasts are deemed as a sub-
culture, yet still have their own class’s and beliefs reinforcing the values
instilled by the culture at large. For example, they feel the need to wear a
"uniform" to look the part for the gym, that badge (swoosh) of acceptance
branded to show others, rather than themselves, for doing it the “right” way,
compared to someone who is in non-branded, grey sweat gear. Or could it be
simply looking good in the gym? Both men and women have that pride, yet
slight vanity to showing off their qualities on what they work for, suggesting
men require big arms and a chest, so Nike offers the material and style of a
vest than a t-shirt, and make the vest more expensive; women work more on
their legs and gluts, therefore following the same principle for shorts or
leggings? According to the Department for Culture, Media & Sport (DCMS)
“We want to get more people playing sport safely from a young age, and help
them keep playing sport throughout their life, no matter what their economic or
social background.” DCMS decides whether funding is available or not, so
would theoretically affect Nike and how it can promote its products from the
5. consumer’s sale rates? One cant help but sense irony towards this as there
are different economic sectors that exists in the UK: actions taken place within
them, is informed by the way they are funded through different means, one
big cycle, driven by the consumers embedded behavior molded from the
process of, the desire of the product to the purchase of the product. Yet
DCMS, (noted as being a British organisation) seems they wont affect the
economic and social backgrounds of the consumers, yet, sale strategies, and
“Nikes target market in the future” could be affected. One claims this as
evident, through Nikes products being tangible, yet class is a huge factor
influencing their products as intangible. If a certain poorer economy cant
afford the best of Nikes market but can still afford a gym membership, they’ll
at least want to look good while working up a sweat, perhaps insecurity may
provoke this aesthetic use, an individual hiding as a sheep in wolf clothing
perhaps? Each class is defined by a shared set of values and behaviour but
also factors such as wealth, occupation and education, the public
consumerism rate within a social and economic order and ideology is what
encourages the acquisition of goods and services in ever greater amounts.
The public sector such as local councils deciding on council tax along with
income rates from jobs and other factors, funded by the government,
essentially deciding for that economy; through the consumers eyes, if Nike is
affordable or not. Assuming individuals can afford a gym membership and all
that Nike has to offer, social construct can mean different things to different
people within the cultural context, but “A marketer must know what the public
wants” (Marconi, Brand Marketing, xiii). A marketers approach of
structuralism and understanding natural forms, physical identities, social
systems and cultural forms; an ever-growing, adapting culture would require a
minimalistic, dynamic logo to stand as a cultural reference compressing all of
the above into a signifier that consumers understand the meaning of. To do
so, one thinks their way of seeing is based on the semiotics of a logo in order
to guide them in the right direction for purchase. Nike does this, and
distinguishes class through premium price and performance that comes with it
and then leaves the decision up to the consumer’s behaviour inside and
outside the fitness culture, since the underlining of consumerism are business
models created through and changed through a marketing process.
6. “If you were a better-known brand in the minds of consumers, you would be
considered a better brand”, (Marconi, pg, 34), ‘a successful company such as
Nike must have the right price and quality, equalling the value contributing to
the individuals overall image.’ This brand producing and marketing process
swung from the pendulum of ideologies knocked back and fourth by the hands
of inequity and the rite of passage unquestioned within the health and fitness
sub-culture. “It is important to understand the intrinsic value in the brand
name.” (Marconi, Brand Marketing, xii) The way marketers would go about
this would be through advertising, the first step is the product which can be
sold to somebody and the keys to this is understanding who is going to buy it,
it must be beneficial to whoever finds some use of it. Then have it somewhere
where someone will see it that will want to buy it. Gym enthusiasts are always
looking to feel and perform the best way they can inside and outside the gym,
therefore marketers such as Nike and other companies will recognise where
consumers will see their products most, then promote it there, such as ‘protein
shakes’, new Nike running shoes, Nike branded sweatbands etc.
Consequently, the individuals already have the mind set for keeping fit and
believe that these advertisements are the next step in their culture for keeping
ahead of the culture and even standing out, because, the more immersed you
are in the community the more you fit in. This is how products are kept
available and the brands visible. A belief can be defined by the culture around
you, and is the same for any culture outside ones focused topic, a set of
opinions, beliefs referring to a set of ideas characterizing a particular culture,
forms the ideology in near enough anything where people believe they may
either feel accepted or any reason for becoming part of that culture, or sub-
culture such as “Comic-con”, the use of “Snap-Backs”, “Doc Martins” and so
on. To reference the Consumer Culture Theory (CCT), it’s the study of
consumption choices and behaviours from a social and cultural construct
opposed to an economic and psychological one, explaining that cultural
meanings are patchy amalgamations rather than one concept. That’s not to
say social pressures are invisible, ones says this influences to keep fit and
maintains an incentive to “Just do it”, but may obligate the consumers; they
have to act and be better in the gym if wearing Nike, to meet an imaginary
