Oh wow finally an answer!!! This is LITERALLY the first time you or Relly have said that We would have made more money under Nike than under Adidas (over the length of the contract thus far) and not no bs “well we could possibly have made up for it in royalties” (no ******* **** it’s possible - would we have is the question). You keep saying I’m lying (which is retarded), yet you were the one that has refused to make a definitive statement on the subject of actual ******* money until right now. I have consistently said I took your guys (the claimed insiders) lack of answer as an answer. In fact all this discussion/arguing could have been avoided a year ago if you had said that from the getgo - you know like I asked from the very beginning lol. Maybe if your old *** misremembering brain needs a refresher, why don’t you go back to the original post a year ago and see if I said I’m open to trusting either of you if you said we would have made more … yet all you had were dumb *** excuses….’well see here sport, there are apples and over here are bananas’…lol. Like it’s hilarious you don’t know how dumb that sounds that you can’t do simple math. Total = Initial payment + Xequipment + Yroyalties * sales. If our expected sales (based on inside info or historical sales rankings) under Nike were enough to make the total money received more, then we would have received more money. Yet the ONLY statement that has every been shared is ‘Bama is 2nd in sales and makes about $7M…’ and just cause I know you only feel attacked and like to say I’m lying about everything, that’s not a direct quote.
Also I said I don’t care about the quality, not the ******* design dip**** lol. Yet again it appears you’re lying and using your lie to accuse me of lying. You are the one *****ing about the quality. As best as I can remember I have never once said smjack **** about any of that really, just that I didn’t care. . I’m saying I think the design for Adidas has been FAR better than the previous two Nike offered, and how much that impacts which contract is subjective. My statements have been clear and consistent. But apparently you can’t comprehend them. It’s also hilarious that you can’t possibly understand that I (and others) can possibly think stuff like the feather shoulders weren’t even 5% as bad as those orange and green helmets and general uniforms Nike tried to have us wear. This is exactly why I have said that I don’t give a **** what argument you guys make regarding this aspect, because it’s subjective. I also said if that was one of your major factors in deciding Nike is better, go right ahead. Whether that be the quality, the U, the nameplate, any of it, merch quality cause the collar doesn’t fit right… any of it, I didn’t care. Because your opinion was different than mine. How much we weigh those factors in forming our opinion in which deal is better is also entirely subjective opinion. Idk why that was ever so complicated.
Also you keep trying to alter history, it’s honestly a joke. Show me what I said about Adidas ******** us in our contract and whether I accepted y’all statement about that lol. Go ahead provide the receipts. regarding the NCAA investigation, all I said was we didn’t get in trouble for it. So am I lying there? Lol.
Maybe you also need to check your timelines on when I said 12 years is too long, and when you said rumors are Alonzo wants us to move to Nike lol. Cause it seems like you forgot to take your Alzheimer’s meds again cause your timeline are 100% false. Very funny the one continuously calling me a liar is the one doing the lying.
Stop lying.
It's a simple request. Just stop lying.
We have consistently stated that Miami would most likely have made more money with Nike. But honest people like
@Rellyrell and myself try not to speak in absolutes, because dopes like you can change the variables to arrive at whatever answer you have predetermined.
I understand that your narrow and simplistic brain can't handle complexity. And I can't change that. And more importantly, Beta Blake never negotiated with Nike in good faith in order to get to a point where we have actual figures on what our royalty rate would have been, what escalators we would have had, etc.
So I've tried to dumb things down for you. I've said all along that if we would have signed a shorter deal with Nike, been given MARKET terms on royalties and escalators and incentives (or maybe slightly better, because we're Miami) and sold comparable levels of apparel and merch that we had been selling previously, then we would have made more money. I've said that for years, though it's impossible to prove with your Simple Jack math formulas.
But, again, IF YOU ACTUALLY CARED, you would look around and see what the rest of the market is doing. Cal just went back to Nike. UCLA went back to Nike. Everyone that actually has a choice is trying to go back to Nike. WHY? The reasons are endless. Sure, your brain is so basic that you want it expressed in only one unit, dollars, as if that is the only consideration. And we've tried. We've tried to give you every possible explanation (without inventing falsified numbers to make your tiny brain feel better).
No matter what, you will dig your heels and spin up more lies, more misdirection, more nonsense.
Look, in the 8 years since we signed our 12 year prison sentence, the industry is changed. People who want to stamp their feet and cry that Nike didn't make us any Sweet 16 merch in 2013? Yeah, Nike just signed a MANUFACTURING deal with Fanatics, now they'll be able to print Sweet 16 merch for Nike schools AND have it in your hands before the Sweet 16 games are even played. The game has changed, but we're still stuck with a company that couldn't even sell a "Miami Nights" jersey until late September 2022 when the season was 1/3 OVER.
I know you like to complain that I act like a know-it-all, but you fail to take into account that I've actually worked in this industry, and that I know what I'm talking about. I can absolutely tell you (from actual knowledge) about a company in the sports apparel and merchandise business that was bankrupted on "guaranteed money". That's the truth. When the recession hit in 2009, they absolutely could not pay the guaranteed amounts. And I happen to know that company was acquired for zero-point-zero cash after they defaulted on the guarantees. And makes a nice profit today, now that all the guaranteed-payout deals have expired.
It's obvious from conversing with you, that you know NOTHING about the industry, you know NOTHING about these deals, you know NOTHING about the trends. But you are **** good at trying to demand overly-simplistic answers from people who DO KNOW, and you loooooove to presume the things that you have predetermined when people don't want to give you overly-simplistic answers.
You're on record. Your prior posts exist, all those ones where you BRAGGGGED about all the guaranteed adidas money and never once complained about the 12 year deal. I realize you're trying to change your schtick slightly, but you have way too much history of parroting Beta Blake's lies to change things now.
And let's memorialize yet another one of your gems:
"Go ahead provide the receipts. regarding the NCAA investigation, all I said was we didn’t get in trouble for it."
Yessss...we "didn't get in trouble for it." I am fairly certain you are talking about the FBI investigation, which had a tremendous impact on our program. This is where you go so wrong, you pick ONE metric (we did not receive NCAA punishment for the adidas crimes) and then you ignore all other metrics (how the FBI investigation destroyed our basketball recruiting for two years).
Anyone who chooses to argue that "we didn't get in trouble for the adidas bribery scandal" is intentionally telling lies.
Stop lying.