Design Football Memebrs Blog


Jun 05
2012

Tailored by Umbro, Divested by Nike

Posted by Jay29ers in Untagged 

Jay29ers

di·vest   [dih-vest, dahy-] 
verb (used with object)
Commerce .
a. to sell off: to divest holdings.
b.to rid of through sale: The corporation divested itself of its subsidiaries.

Me neither.  Put simply, Nike are going to try to sell Umbro as they're losing money.

Now, I'm about to argue pretty convincingly that I saw this coming, quoting myself seemingly spotting warning signs and melodramatically prophecising.

Don't believe a word of it.  It came as as much as a shock to me as it did anyone.  What I actually predicted, wrongly, was that Nike (the brand) would take the England contract from Umbro - something that the FA may or may not have vetoed - and whilst I was somewhat vindicated by Manchester City going down that route, along with some Brazilian sides, and did question "whether or not Nike have had enough of allowing Umbro to continue..." it was solely in reference to the Three Lions.

My main worry was not business-related.  My fear that Umbro had "jumped the shark" was from looking at the company from a design standpoint, particularly in light of the recent England Home kit release, which disappointed.

And, we have to assume, the sales of that shirt have been disappointing too.  Umbro, and particularly the Tailored By direction, have been unfortunate in presiding over a period which has seen their England poster boy, John Terry, tear up his own image - repeatedly - and the team perform at best underwhelmingly and at worst shambolically.  The recession wouldn't have helped much either.  Nontheless, if you'll forgive the CJ-ism, Nike haven't got to where they are today by shirking ruthlessness.  Perhaps the England release in the lead up to Euro 2012 was the last chance.  With JBB and Sports Direct currently selling the dilophosaurus-styled shirt for around £25, it seems Umbro didn't take it.

There couldn't be a worse time to lose direction in design and, particularly, marketing.  The current England Away kit release focused on the David Haye launch - a brash approach which seemed at odds with the thoughtful design process which was brilliantly based on the England cap.  The shirt currently retails, with Euro 2012 only a few days away, at £15.  In the Home shirt, to take one of the most heartening elements Tailored By gave us, the beautifully embroidered and coloured England crest, and replace it with monotone red smacks of one temporary campaign making way for another.  Maybe people saw through it.

With Under Armour rumoured to be a contender for the place in the Nike family which Umbro will vacate, it could also be that Nike are shifting away from the timeless and traditional and towards the scientific and technological.  (The irony would be that, whilst not a specialist like UA, Umbro actually produce excellent baselayers which, almost uniquely, are made with pale badges and gaping necks so as not to interfere excessively with the external look of the playing shirt.)

Whatever the reasoning, here's hoping there is light at the end of the tunnel.  The industry and football shirt-buying public should forever be indebted to the shift Umbro created across the board via Tailored By and, with their 2011-12 Athletic Bilbao Away shirt bettered by no one, some of their releases remain on a par with the best of adidas and Nike.  If they can restore that direction to design and marketing they'll surely live on, thrive, and raise the bar again.

 

 

Comments (1)

Subscribe to this comment's feed
...
0
The current England kit was not in keeping with the previously brilliant 'Tailored by' approach. The monotone badge, as you say, was a disaster. England fans who are not Manchester United fans - and there are many of us - wanted nothing to do with it.

They did great things initially but have saturated the market; at each England gathering there has been a new anthem jacket or training top. By being too greedy they have undermined the subtlety that characterised the new Umbro.

I hope they survive this as their designs are better than the technology-centred (but ultimately cheap and garish looking )Nike and Adidas efforts, but they will need to recapture what made them briefly great again in 2009.
Stanchion , June 05, 2012

Write comment

smaller | bigger
security image
Write the displayed characters

busy
You are here: