Learning Lessons From The Nike vs. Under Armour Brand War

How different can two athletic apparel brands be?

Nike and Under Amour are similar for many reasons – they cater to a wide array of sports, they have high-profile athletes touting their apparel and equipment, and they both have big-impact marketing campaigns.

Yet, when we gathered insights from more than 1,000 consumers, we found that they see the two brands very differently.

Let’s explore the Nike vs Under Armour face-off!

The Consumer Mind

Consumers are using the same language (those in all caps) and, in many cases, the exact same words to describe the typical Nike and Under Armour wearer.

But the meaning of the words they’re using underneath the language is markedly different.

Whereas the Nike descriptors are more all-encompassing, and include athletes, fans and health-conscious alike, the descriptions related to Under Armour conjure up a narrow audience, eloquently captured under the description of sporty: dudes, sweaty, football, runner.

Nike vs. Under Armor: Competitor Analysis Overview

We did a full-blown competitive analysis of the two brands, and the idea that Nike was relateable resonated throughout.

Although Nike has been around for much longer (32 years longer, to be exact), this relatability is no small factor in the brand’s dominant market share.

Nike is inspirational, motivational and accessible to consumers of all shapes, sizes and athletic abilities.

Under Armour, on the other hand, is seen as a brand that caters to serious athletes only – while it delivers extraordinary performance gear, it’s certainly not for everyone.

This sentiment reverberates throughout consumers’ perceptions of the gear and the brand’s advertisements: Nike is for me, Under Armour is for elite athletes.

Ironically, this difference is made clear through the similar mission statements on each of their respective websites.

Under Armour’s mission is to “make all athletes better through passion, design, and the relentless pursuit of innovation,” whereas Nike’s is to “bring inspiration and innovation to every athlete* in the world.”

The statements are nearly identical, minus the asterisk, which specifies: *if you have a body, you are an athlete. It’s that last one-liner that makes all of the difference in terms of relatability and inclusivity.

Leveling the Playing Field

Under Armour is already taking steps to be more approachable and reach a broader fitness community.

They’ve kicked off successful campaigns targeting women and purchased social fitness apps MyFitnessPal and Endomondo to better position the brand in front of athletes of all levels. Still, there’s one thing that the company could leverage to appeal to the emotions of a wider audience: Kevin Plank’s story.

Under Armour’s CEO epitomizes the American dream.

He drew up the concept for the brand’s first moisture-wicking shirt while he was a student at the University of Maryland, where he had worked his way up to football team captain after he was initially ignored by recruiters and fought to secure a spot on the team as a walk-on freshman year.

He saw a pervasive problem – cotton t-shirts held moisture like a sponge, weighing down athletes – and, upon realizing there was no solution, created his own.

He started the brand in his grandmother’s basement, and employed a nose-to-the-grindstone strategy, carrying two business cards as he prospected, allowing him to be Kevin Plank, president, or Kevin Plank, sales manager, depending on the audience.

Over the next few years, as his brand grew, he never lost his underdog mentality, staying hungry and seeking opportunities for growth. Each year at Christmas, he sent Nike founder Phil Knight a card with the simple message: “You will hear about us one day.”

In 1996, he generated $17,000 in sales and, now, just 19 years later, the company has recorded its 19^th straight quarter of more than 20 percent growth, raking in more than $3 billion in revenue last year. Plank no longer feels the need to send Knight Christmas cards, and even refuses to address Nike by name, referring to them instead as “those guys in Oregon.”

His climb to the top has been self-motivated, purposeful and unbelievably linear.

Wrapping Up: Nike vs. Under Armour Analysis

Today, as Under Armour aspires to reach out to audiences beyond their core of elite athletes, connect with more women, expand its shoe market, and grow internationally, it has a great story to reference: Plank’s.

Regardless of athleticism, anyone can relate to and rally behind his scrappy quest as an underdog striving to overcome the best in the business. As American Express demonstrated during the Oscars, people love a good success story, but they don’t want to skip straight to the end. Tell them about the early days, include the adversity and struggle, and leave them inspired that, someday, it just might be them.

Why wouldn’t Under Armour widen the lens to feature gritty determination beyond that of professional athletes? It may just be the card that helps them get the upper hand in the next brand war.

Our Verdict: Nike vs. Under Armour

The Nike vs. Under Armour brand comparison reveals distinct perceptions and brand positioning. Nike’s broader appeal and inclusive message resonate with a wide range of consumers. Its tagline, “If you have a body, you are an athlete,” encapsulates its universal appeal and commitment to inspiration, regardless of one’s athletic prowess. This inclusivity has been a significant factor in Nike’s dominant market share and enduring popularity.

In contrast, Under Armour’s focus has traditionally been on serious, high-performance athletes. This positioning, while establishing the brand as a go-to for high-quality athletic gear, has limited its audience reach. However, Under Armour’s recent strategic moves to broaden its appeal, including campaigns targeting women and acquisitions in the social fitness app space, indicate a shift towards a more inclusive approach.

Under Armour’s CEO, Kevin Plank’s story, is a powerful narrative of determination and resilience that has the potential to resonate with a wider audience. His journey from a college athlete to a successful entrepreneur is not just about building a brand but also about overcoming challenges and defying odds. Leveraging this story could significantly enhance Under Armour’s appeal, positioning it as a brand for everyone who embodies determination and grit, not just elite athletes.

In conclusion, while Nike maintains a broader appeal with its inclusive branding, Under Armour is making strides to expand its reach. The evolution of Under Armour’s brand narrative, coupled with its high-quality performance gear, may well position it as a formidable competitor to Nike in the future.

What do you think about the Nike vs. Under Armour brand comparison? Do you have a different opinion? Let us know in the comments.