Pretty much all of the post-Vick endorsement reaction is going to center on what the decision means for Nike’s business; after all, there’s not much to analyze about Michael Vick’s position. (“Money? Sure!”) But is Nike taking a bigger risk with Vick? What happens if something goes wrong? Yahoo!’s Dan Wetzel has an interesting perspective:
Vick Reaction: Wait, So Is This a Good Thing?
Nike re-signing Michael Vick is the kind of move it made when it was a new, anti-establishment company. Then it became the establishment.
Which makes sense, except, um, is that a good thing? Companies want to be the establishment, right? Or is Wetzel implying that Nike was better before it took the seat of power?
Either way, it’s hard to argue that the move is not as bold as it seems. Nike saw which way the wind was blowing for Vick. This decision isn’t being made without careful observation.
See More:
