Apple and Nike?

[MacRumors]

Apple's retail site (http://www.apple.com/retail/) mentions a new Nike-Apple promotion:

Express. Define. Create. State.
Express yourself, define who you are, be creative and make a statement. What do your shoes say about you? That you’re a fan of USC? That you adore the color pink? With NIKE iD, you can personalize your shoes to represent you. Visit an Apple Store and ask a Mac Specialist for more details about NIKE iD.


According to one report sent to MacRumors, Apple Store employees will be wearing the Nike ID shoes in stores along with Nike tie ins (Nike website as default on Safari) in a cross promotion effort lasting until May 18th.

[nsb3000]

Apple's retail site (http://www.apple.com/retail/) mentions a new Nike-Apple promotion:



According to one report sent to MacRumors, Apple Store employees will be wearing the Nike ID shoes in stores along with Nike tie ins (Nike website as default on Safari) in a cross promotion effort lasting until May 18th.

I don't know...Apple and Nike? Is this really a good thing?

[27407]

First Pepsi and now Nike? Who's next, McDonalds? Oh wait....

[SilentPanda]

That for some reason just... it doesn't "bother" me... but... it's like it's okay with me but sorta weird... I'm not really sure I understand "why?" is what I'm getting at.

[Foxer]

Sounds like free pub for Nike. What's in it for Apple?

[Photorun]

All I could think to say after reading that was "what the...?"

[evolu]

another intelligent strategic marketing partnership from apple!

Pepsi, HP, Nike, etc - all companies with strong brand identities (like apple).

It's always good to share like a minded customer base.

nice work apple.

[GrannySmith_G5]

excuse me while I regurgitate. Nike?

[CmdrLaForge]

For me it sounds pretty COOOL :D :cool:

[Namacste]

A couple of years ago you could go on Nike's website and personalize your sneaker. Some guy wanted to put "Sweatshop" on his, but Nike wouldn't let him...

[nagromme]

I can't say I care for Nike much. Those 9-year-olds on a dollar a week do make great shoes though! :rolleyes: Strategically I realize Nike is a popular brand... I wonder what Apple gets out of this--how Nike will promote Apple?

[nagromme]

There was some Shockwave thing on Nike's site a year or two ago--a contest to make your own Nike music video with some canned clips and music in a very simple little interface.

I DID put something about sweatshops in mine :)

[TEG]

First off I must say that I do not currently own a pair of Nike Shoes. The reason I don't were them is not because they are made in 3rd and 4th world countries, by workers being paid handsomely by that countries standards, or because others don't like them, I don't were them currently because I cannot afford them. I have owned them in the past, and will in the future, but I wait until they are $35.99 at the NEX or K-Mart before I'll buy them. No athletic shoe, or most shoes for that matter should cost more than $50. My dad has a pair of RBK White Sneakers, and has been wearing them for 4 years, and they are barely worn, and only cost $35. So if you want to spend $100+ on shoes be my guest, but personally I'd like my money to mean something. That is why I'm saving for a PMG5 4Ghz.

TEG

[newbie17]

Hmmm- that sounds like a bad move. Besides all the other good things about apple, I thought they attracted a kinda 'think different--think for yourself' crowd. The kind that sort of shuns places Nike, which uses sweatshop labor. Maybe its a superficial, well-marketed attraction, but I thought it was there intentionally. I guess that's a segmet they can afford to lose. :rolleyes:

[atari1356]

Sounds weird... I think we're only getting half the story here. Is Nike going to cross-promote Apple in some way?

Not that I really care, I prefer Vans (http://www.vans.com/) :cool:

[barbaloot]

Foxer, Herbert rocks!

Sounds like free pub for Nike. What's in it for Apple?

[jsw]

First, before we go too far down the "Nike is bad because they use sweatshops" road, I think we need to be certain that Apple sells no products which are made in (or include parts made in) other countries where the labor standards are more, er, "loose" than here. I'd be happy to listen to ranting posts from people who buy and/or consume only those products which are exclusively made by happy, well-paid people. Of course, it might be hard to post such a reply, since I'm not sure any computers would fall into that category. I'll try looking outside for smoke signals.

Anyway, I think it's a good move if it gets people into the Apple stores and gets them to buy Apple products as a result. If all it does is get people to buy Nike products, then it's a bad idea. I guess we'll see. As it is, when I go to the mall with my wife and daughter, the Apple store is really my only refuge. Now, at least, I can get shoes while I'm there. :)

[Kid Red]

How is Apple advertising a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with the #1 shoemaker a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with any number of MAJOR corporations in any way a bad thing?

People, the only way for Apple to ever climb out of the cellar is for more then 25 million people to know about macs. It's more of today's youth to know about macs and that there is an alternative to that grey/beige box their parents bought at Costco. We need to be mainstream, to have mainstream appeal. To do that, we need to join the mainstream crowd and McDonalds, Pepsi, Nike all represent that.

How is that a bad thing? The more Apple does this, the greater then improve their odds of surviving long enough to maybe make some leaps forward in terms of market share. The iPod is their trendy appliance, but what else? Computer sales have sucked and still suck, they need more people interested in their machines. You do that by getting into the public eye, looking like a mainstream alternative, a better alternative. How is that a bad thing?

[autrefois]

First, before we go too far down the "Nike is bad because they use sweatshops" road, I think we need to be certain that Apple sells no products which are made in (or include parts made in) other countries where the labor standards are more, er, "loose" than here. I'd be happy to listen to ranting posts from people who buy and/or consume only those products which are exclusively made by happy, well-paid people. Of course, it might be hard to post such a reply, since I'm not sure any computers would fall into that category. I'll try looking outside for smoke signals.

Anyway, I think it's a good move if it gets people into the Apple stores and gets them to buy Apple products as a result. If all it does is get people to buy Nike products, then it's a bad idea. I guess we'll see. As it is, when I go to the mall with my wife and daughter, the Apple store is really my only refuge. Now, at least, I can get shoes while I'm there. :)

I've long wondered about Apple's record since some parts are apparently made in China, if I'm not mistaken. I'd appreciate it if anyone does have facts about Apple's record to let us know.

But Nike is basically THE symbol of sweatshop labor. Everyone knows it, even if they buy Nike shoes anyway (which I never have and never will, btw). So this promotion says that Apple is willing to be associated with a company notorious for making poor little children slave away for next to nothing.

I don't buy from companies that I know force children to work. I can't guarantee that nothing I buy came from child labor, but I avoid any companies that I know are involved in such horrible things. I hope I don't have to add Apple to the list...

Ignoring children's livelihood for a moment, I also don't see what Apple gets out of this specific deal. Maybe Steve just gets a kick out of giant corporations wanting to be associated with Apple now. Maybe just he wanted free shoes for his kids?

[jsw]

Perhaps Apple's changing their logo...

[wdlove]

If this promotion with Nike will help Apple then I am in agreement. Will definitely have to check this out.

[nagromme]

I'm not pointing fingers at Nike alone... I'm sure any electronics company--Apple too--has some things going on overseas (with suppliers at the very least) that don't bear scrutiny.

[cjc343]

I have never liked NIKE, I do not like this partnership.........


I have always refused to buy shoes (and other items) that I KNOW have been produced by sweatshop labor.

[sw1tcher]

A couple of years ago you could go on Nike's website and personalize your sneaker. Some guy wanted to put "Sweatshop" on his, but Nike wouldn't let him...

Yup. You can read about it here (http://mat.uab.es/~alabert/readings/nike.html)

[titaniumducky]

How is Apple involved with this Nike iD thing at all...

And what's in it for Apple...

I'M SO CONFUSED - AGGH :mad: :confused:

[sw1tcher]

Hmmm- that sounds like a bad move. Besides all the other good things about apple, I thought they attracted a kinda 'think different--think for yourself' crowd. The kind that sort of shuns places Nike, which uses sweatshop labor. Maybe its a superficial, well-marketed attraction, but I thought it was there intentionally. I guess that's a segmet they can afford to lose. :rolleyes:

Agreed. Many Mac users/Apple fans I know hate what NIKE does.

Good point about the "think different -- think for yourself" crowd. It seems to me that such a partnership would be a terrible idea. I think many Apple users would be turned off by this. I know I am.

[sahnert]

Sounds weird... I think we're only getting half the story here. Is Nike going to cross-promote Apple in some way?


remember that blurb about the Chinese(?) clothing company that wouldn't let apple make apparel because the logo was too similar? Maybe now apple has an outlet for it's clothing line.

[alms]

This could really hurt Apple on campuses. The anti-sweatshop movement is still very strong on campuses, and for those groups Nike is the symbol of all things bad. If the Apple brand gets strongly associated with Nike, it could really hurt.

Someone didn't do their background research.

[Savage Henry]

But Nike is basically THE symbol of sweatshop labor. Everyone knows it, even if they buy Nike shoes anyway (which I never have and never will, btw). So this promotion says that Apple is willing to be associated with a company notorious for making poor little children slave away for next to nothing.



I really isn't good public association but makes excellent business sense ... rather like a sweatshop really. Hooray for market share and stock price!!

Nike Not Good: Short Story
I was looking for running shoes and found some Nike, made in Indonesia pricing £59 (or US $100). I then saw some New Balance, made in UK, for the same price. I then thought : UK shoe manufacturing employee $7 an hour, Indonesian 10¢. It made me sad. :mad:

[stingerman]

I have never liked NIKE, I do not like this partnership.........


I have always refused to buy shoes (and other items) that I KNOW have been produced by sweatshop labor.

You limousine liberal, what would you rather have these kids doing in those poor countries. If you take away their work, it's either child prostitution or starvation. While they make comparably horrible wages their wages goes a lot further and keeps them out of the prostitution trade. killing oversees labor does the children more harm than good and only enriches national union mobsters.

[bdkennedy1]

How is Apple advertising a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with the #1 shoemaker a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with any number of MAJOR corporations in any way a bad thing?


How is it not a bad thing? I mean why is Nike promoting their products through Apple when Apple can't even advertise correctly? When was the last time you saw a PowerMac G5 commercial on TV? How about an iMac commercial? How about a commercial for any Apple product that's been shown more than 6 times? I'm sick of it actually.

Is Nike going to put the Apple logo on their shoes? If not I don't see any reason why Apple should promote them.

[ITR 81]

I can't say I care for Nike much. Those 9-year-olds on a dollar a week do make great shoes though! :rolleyes: Strategically I realize Nike is a popular brand... I wonder what Apple gets out of this--how Nike will promote Apple?

Most Nikes I have owned are made in Taiwan or Korea.
Most New Balances which is what I wear now are mostly all made in China.

I think China pays less.

Nike commercial with Apple Computers or that endorses Apple in some way or fashion.

Nike commercial for running shoe with iPod Mini discount or something like that.

[ITR 81]

Nike ID will allow you to sport some Apple Design sneakers.

Maybe even t-shirts and such.

[Koodauw]

I Love Apple. I love Nike. If I could get Apple shoes made by Nike, I think it would be heaven. Although, I (along with everyone else it seems) don't see the how this will help Apple.
Nike shoes are awesome though. Does it get any better than these?

[Indiana Mac]

Well Apple finally gets in the marketing groove, and stops releasing hardware...

[kirk26]

Bah, Reebok still owns! :D

[jsw]

I have never liked NIKE, I do not like this partnership.........


I have always refused to buy shoes (and other items) that I KNOW have been produced by sweatshop labor.

First of all, as others have said, what you consider to be offensive sweatshop labor might actually be saving the life of a family overseas. Most of the world's population doesn't have the option of choosing to avoid certain jobs.

Second, it seems a bit "head-in-the-sand" to base your decisions on what you happen to see in the news. It is unlikely that many of the products you own did not, at some point along the line, involve taking advantage of someone who was poor. I don't think that ignorance is an acceptable excuse when you choose to stand on principle.

[speakster]

How is it not a bad thing? I mean why is Nike promoting their products through Apple when Apple can't even advertise correctly? When was the last time you saw a PowerMac G5 commercial on TV? How about an iMac commercial? How about a commercial for any Apple product that's been shown more than 6 times?

I suppose you're not taking into account the ipod ads?

[JohnGillilan]

What do your shoes say about you? That you’re a fan of USC?

Fight on!!

[rjgjonker]

I think this would be a rather bad move.

First of all, there is the already discussed child labour issue, wouldn't be too good for Apple to be associated with a brand so much associated with child labour and terriible working conditions.

Secondly, Nike hasn't been very popular the last few years. You don't see much Nike shoes and clothing on the streets anymore, it's all Adidas and Puma nowadays. I suppose their out of fashion or something.

The most important issue, however, is that this could be beneficial to Nike, but I really don't see what's in in for Apple. Both Apple and Nike are already quite well-known brands, especially products like the iPod have added to Apple's brand-strength.

This is, however, about Nike products, I don't think the Apple brand will help much in that. Besides, mindshare is far more important for selling Nike's products than it is for selling Apple's.

After all, I don't suppose such a deal would be in Apple's best interests.

[ALoLA]

Um, I might be mistaken, but aren't those sweatshop claims old news? I'd be surprised if they're still using sweatshops to manufacture their goods. Now, don't equate overseas manufacturing with sweatshop conditions. Not all overseas factories are sweatshops. Just because they have low cost labor (by our standards) doesn't make it bad. In most cases, I suspect the workers are making good money for their countries.

Personally, I think too many people are too quick to jump on the latest protest bandwagon without researching the issue. As a previous poster noted, think different. Think first. :)

[GrannySmith_G5]

maybe nike will be the next company to re-brand the ipod. They sell mp3 players don't they?

<very bored here.>

[MacKenzie999]

Nike is an advertising powerhouse and their presence is everywhere. I have nothing to back this up but I would bet that more people who are potential Nike-buyers have a positive association with the brand then a negative one. Apple stand to alienate a few buyers, maybe, but the extra exposure should far outweigh the bad. It would take a hell of a lot more then a potentially negative partnership to make me give up using macs.


The one thing I wonder about is conflict of interest: Nike also sell mp3 players, so I doubt the iPod will factor into whetever this venture entails.

peace out

[jsw]

This could really hurt Apple on campuses. The anti-sweatshop movement is still very strong on campuses, and for those groups Nike is the symbol of all things bad. If the Apple brand gets strongly associated with Nike, it could really hurt.

Someone didn't do their background research.

Well, hopefully at least some of the students actually think about what they're objecting to and realize that it's not as terrible or as clear-cut as they believe. They either have to boycott virtually everything (and, of course, they're still stuck with knowing that their homes are likely on what used to be Indian territory until it was stolen by the government...), or they have to get on with life. Life isn't fair. If they're that concerned about injustice, they should join the Peace Corps. Presumably, they already realize that not buying Nike shoes means someone in Indonesia (or wherever) loses a job. Yeah, that's sound reasoning.

Look, I think it's terrible that the average worldwide standard of living is so bad. But not buying Nike shoes isn't going to help it at all. Buying non-sweatshop shoes just keeps the money in the developed countries, which actually worsens things.

So, I guess, the more sweatshop-based stuff you buy, the more you help the third world.

So, then, cheers to Apple for choosing Nike.

[SuperChuck]

Everyone seems to be wondering what's in this for Apple. Although no one can be sure, my bet is that this is an iPod cross-promotion. The iPod is a perfect fit with the trendy, athletic types who are so obsessed about the look of their shoes that they feel the need to design them from scratch. These shoes are for those people that use the word "accessorize" far too often, and there is no better accessory for the morning jog than an iPod.

BTW, the web design on the shoe-building application is outstanding.

[cc bcc]

I don't know if Safari is screwing things up, but I get a Netscape flavicon at the Nike site.. :D

[2neDesign]

NikeID has been around for a number of years, but previously the interface was slow, inconsistent, slow, and didn't work well on Macs.

NikeID as it exists today is super nice, all in flash, and runs super fast on my Mac.

I'm guessing Nike is now using Apple technology for NikeID, whether for creation of the site or the server backend. That's why there is the tie-in.

And for those of you saying Nike is dead, dream on. Not only am I a Mac-Head, I'm a Shoe-Head. I've got over 30 pairs, most of them over $50, and I quite enjoy them. There is a pretty significant subculture devoted to collecting shoes, both vintage, new, retro, and limited. They're the ones who camped out at NikeTown NYC overnight in the cold and rain for a chance to buy limited shoes designed by Pharrell, ESPO, and Jennifer Garner. They're the ones who waited in line for over a mile in Tokyo for a chance to buy 1 out of the 200 pairs of super limited Nike Dunks (the most sought-after shoes). They're also the ones who have significant money to spend, who follow closely what the "hipsters" are doing, and who are naturaly drawn to Macs and iPods.

Nike is cool because you can't buy certain styles everywhere and have a different ethos than other brands
Apple is cool because they focus on what others don't, and realize there is an intangible benefit to the design aesthetic of a piece of technology.

The more Apple can be seen as unique and interesting and worth-while by yet another segment of the population, especially younger people who are having less and less exposure to Macs in schools, the better chance Apple has to get new customers and make money. Which is, lest we forget, the aim of any business.

[eSnow]

Whoa, so Apple is going to outsource computer production to child-labor sweatshops? Terrific idea to co-market with Nike...

[JohnGillilan]

I just called an Apple Store -- they said the significance/hope of the promotion is that consumers will order their shoes to match their new iPod mini.

[yamabushi]

It appears that this campaign is intended to draw in customers to try out a Mac in order to place an order for NikeID. I doubt this will be very successful unless some additional incentive (such as a price discount) is provided to place the order at an Apple store.

[kotovasii]

...... 4th world countries, by workers being paid handsomely by that countries standards.......

TEG

It is clear that you have spent a great deal of time in those countries to say about their standards!
:mad:
This attitude is soooo much like that Bill Gates you people do not like!
PS we have to be responsible even if it concerns Apple.

[amnesiac1984]

I'm not gonna comment on the sweat shop issue here, but I would never buy Nike shoes just because they are generally worn by Pikey scumbags! (Who can somehow afford them) and they look ridiculous. If I were to choose a shoe brand then mine would probably be merrell. check out these babies ;) (http://www.merrell.com/catalog/gallery.asp?NavID=MSPR)

That is why i object to this marketing thing. Aside from that the thing that REALLY pisses me off is this safari homepage nike thing! WTF is this about? Our desktops are not a commodity to be sold by apple, this is a microsoft tactic and I don't like it.

[PPC970FX]

Apple is not stupid, I don`t think thay will do somthing that will hurt the brand name. They use enormus amounts of money on marketing the brand Apple. And they are realy god at it.

Maybe Apple just gets free stuff from nike, like you get a nike thing along with a mac.

[Brainfree]

Contrary to popular belief, child slave labor is actually quite beneficial to both the corporation and the 3rd world country: http://www.childslavelabor.com.

[SuperChuck]

Contrary to popular belief, child slave labor is actually quite beneficial to both the corporation and the 3rd world country: http://www.childslavelabor.com.

Yes, and slave labor was quite beneficial to the US economy and the plantation owners. This doesn't make it a good thing. For crying out loud, listen to yourself as you type.

[jsw]

...we have to be responsible even if it concerns Apple.

Are you certain that even Apple is completely responsible in this area?

[Kagetenshi]

4th world countries

Do tell? No such beast, as far as I know; I've never heard anyone expand the "worlds" to include a fourth.

~J

[jazzmfk]

Nike caught lightning in a bottle when signing a relatively unknown, untested Michael Jordan way back when; his image (and success) helped take a moderately successful sneaker company and turn it into the best selling brand in the world. Then, they did it again with Bo Jackson, and when the brilliant "Bo knows" ads hit, suddenly everyone wanted to be associated with Nike (just think of all of the sports and entertainment stars that were part of that particular ad campaign...).

Their position as the undisputed #1 brand has been under assault over the years by rival shoe companies (especially Reebok), bad publicity (the sweatshop thing), some bad signings, and a bad economy not willing to support the idea of hundred-plus-dollar sneakers. Still, they remain as the #1 volume seller, the #1 moneymaker, and probably the leading edge of the "hip" factor, especially in certain circles where the brand of sneaker you wear is almost as important as the car you drive.

So, in short, they are known for being hip, cool, expensive, exclusive, and very desirable (to the point where people have been killed for their sneakers).

Doesn't that kinda sound like iPod frenzy (except for the death part, that is....)?

I'm not 100% behind this move, but I'm really curious to see how it plays out. I think this could be a really good thing - we'll see.

MFK

[jelloshotsrule]

Most Nikes I have owned are made in Taiwan or Korea.
Most New Balances which is what I wear now are mostly all made in China.


you could check which shoes are made by new balance in america, with american made parts... they have about 3 or 4 lines which are made entirely in the usa. it's actually as simple as asking a new balance employee or writing to the company. of course, it's easy to ignore the atrocities that take place when they're not in your backyard.

[JohnGillilan]

Contrary to popular belief, child slave labor is actually quite beneficial to both the corporation and the 3rd world country: http://www.childslavelabor.com.

I really hope you are being sarcastic. If not, you definitely didn't read the entire website.

[jelloshotsrule]

First off I must say that I do not currently own a pair of Nike Shoes. The reason I don't were them is not because they are made in 3rd and 4th world countries, by workers being paid handsomely by that countries standards, or because others don't like them, I don't were them currently because I cannot afford them.


ok... how to put this while not breaking the rules and getting banned.... "workers being paid handsomely by that countries' standards"? hmm. how about not being allowed to organize? how about being tortured and raped in the factories? how about working in awful conditions that lead to cancer and other deadly illnesses? how about being scared to speak up because of possibly losing a job, or a limb, or worse..?

sorry, but just because they make more than joe fruit stand worker in the streets of beijing (assuming you are right) doesn't mean that 1. it's a better life or 2. it's something that can be praised.. i'm not satisfied with the status quo and it makes me sick that some people can turn a blind eye to the truths of the situation.

but you do make a great point, how can nike rationalize charging 100+ for a shoe that costs them less than 5 to make?

this partnership is gross.

[jsw]

It's always good to know that one can stop wondering about Apple for a while and discuss the relative merits of differing styles of global capitalism.

[c0n]

ahhh

first pepsi then nike
why are apple being so uncool at the moment!
they shouldnt want to be seen as a huge corporation like the afor mentioned

[Lancetx]

Why is it anytime Apple does any cross promotion with anyone, whether it be Pepsi, HP, Nike or McDonalds (allegedly), that there is always such a negative reaction. Apple is in business to sell products, they're not in business to make political statements.

As a few have eloquently pointed out, if you put such a microscope on ANY corporation, even Apple, you'd find at least a few instances where they do some things that aren't always "politically correct." But I guess some people have little else to do other than to always protest or gripe about something it seems... :rolleyes:

[bar italia]

Sweet!

Pepsi, McDonalds...and now Nike!

Who's next to partner with? N.A.M.B.L.A? The KKK?

Gates and Co. are scumbags, but at least they're not hypocrites.

[jelloshotsrule]

First of all, as others have said, what you consider to be offensive sweatshop labor might actually be saving the life of a family overseas. Most of the world's population doesn't have the option of choosing to avoid certain jobs.

Second, it seems a bit "head-in-the-sand" to base your decisions on what you happen to see in the news. It is unlikely that many of the products you own did not, at some point along the line, involve taking advantage of someone who was poor. I don't think that ignorance is an acceptable excuse when you choose to stand on principle.

first of all, does that mean we should settle for such terrible living conditions? especially when the poor people in our country end up paying through the roof for these over over over priced products?

second, so you prefer to just not stand on principle then?

[jsw]

ok... how to put this while not breaking the rules and getting banned.... "workers being paid handsomely by that countries' standards"? hmm. how about not being allowed to organize? how about being tortured and raped in the factories? how about working in awful conditions that lead to cancer and other deadly illnesses? how about being scared to speak up because of possibly losing a job, or a limb, or worse..?

sorry, but just because they make more than joe fruit stand worker in the streets of beijing (assuming you are right) doesn't mean that 1. it's a better life or 2. it's something that can be praised.. i'm not satisfied with the status quo and it makes me sick that some people can turn a blind eye to the truths of the situation.

but you do make a great point, how can nike rationalize charging 100+ for a shoe that costs them less than 5 to make?

this partnership is gross.

Supply and demand, my friend. That's capitalism. If people wouldn't pay them $100, they wouldn't charge it.

Obviously, you don't need to buy the shoes. Also capitalism in action.

I just think it's naive to think that not buying Nike shoes - or even, say, preventing Nike from using labor in those countries - will in any way improve the standard of living for those people. The only way to do that is to get the governments of those countries to change. Boycotting a shoe manufacturer isn't going to help anything at all.

The way I see it, going to the Apple store and buying Nike shoes that look like my iPod mini will give Nike money. Giving Nike money helps the American economy. I live in America. To me, this is a good thing. Helping the American economy helps the global economy. Helping the global economy helps everyone. Plus, I get matching shoes.

Amazingly, I'm a democrat. But I'm also a realist.

[jelloshotsrule]

Supply and demand, my friend. That's capitalism. If people wouldn't pay them $100, they wouldn't charge it.

Amazingly, I'm a democrat. But I'm also a realist.

1. that's why i'm not a big fan of capitalism

2. why amazingly? the democrats are purchased and paid for just like the republicans... they tend to be bought by less oil based constituents though.

[jsw]

first of all, does that mean we should settle for such terrible living conditions? especially when the poor people in our country end up paying through the roof for these over over over priced products?

second, so you prefer to just not stand on principle then?

(1) I think the conditions are deplorable. I think the US should help other countries to enhance their human rights positions. Once, of course, we stop making the rest of the world hate us because of our bizarre foreign policy.

(2) I dispute only that not buying Nike shoes will help anyone in these countries.

(3) The poor people in this country needn't pay for these products.

(4) And, yes, I seldom stand on principle. It's too hard to be certain that one side of the story is the only true and accurate side.

[bdkennedy1]

I suppose you're not taking into account the ipod ads?

No I wasn't :) And big deal. It promotes Windows also and not Macs own computes. Besides, when was the last time you saw an iPod ad in the past month?

[jsw]

1. that's why i'm not a big fan of capitalism

2. why amazingly? the democrats are purchased and paid for just like the republicans... they tend to be bought by less oil based constituents though.

(1) Dude, if it weren't for capitalism, we'd all be "third world" and we'd all use child labor. Bad or good by itself, the capitalist-driven industrial age gave us the machines that got us past child labor. Unless you're Amish (doubtful, given the email... :) ), capitalism has improved your life.

(2) Hey, man, it doesn't bother me that democrats are "purchased and paid for". I'm a capitalist, so I'm cool with that. ;)

(3) As much as I'd like this thread to bump me from "member" to "regular" (which is many tens of replies away for me), I hope that we can bury the hatchet. I agree that child slave labor is bad. I agree that, if an action produces a net decrease in suffering, it is good. I only disagree with the inferred suggestion that not buying Nike will help.

(4) I'd love to get back on-topic of whether Apple will be helped or hurt by the Nike tie-in.

[jelloshotsrule]

jsw- no hard feelings. interesting to get your take. and at least you are knowledgeable on the subject, whereas most people are ignorant (whether by choice or not)...

and no, i'm not amish. ;)

[bar italia]

I just think it's naive to think that not buying Nike shoes - or even, say, preventing Nike from using labor in those countries - will in any way improve the standard of living for those people. The only way to do that is to get the governments of those countries to change. Boycotting a shoe manufacturer isn't going to help anything at all.
So what you're saying is that if you disagree with the way a corporation does business, the best thing to do is to continue buying their products?


Amazingly, I'm a democrat.
So is Lieberman. What's your point?


But I'm also a realist.
Which means that "I know I shouldn't be doing this, but I'm too lazy to protest. Even if it means all I have to do is stop buying their crap products."

[PBGPowerbook]

not because they are made in 3rd and 4th world countries, by workers being paid handsomely by that countries standards

revolting and ignorant, aside from the pervasive misspellings.

[jsw]

So what you're saying is that if you disagree with the way a corporation does business, the best thing to do is to continue buying their products?

No, I'm saying that not buying their product is unlikely to change the way they do business. I don't disagree with your right to not buy something. Nor do I disagree with the way Nike does business.

So is Lieberman. What's your point?

So is roughly half of the U.S. My only point was that I'm not a Bush Republican who thinks that the sole definition of "good" is "helps big business".

Which means that "I know I shouldn't be doing this, but I'm too lazy to protest. Even if it means all I have to do is stop buying their crap products."

No, it doesn't mean that at all. I personally am not offended by Nike's business practices. And I don't think that their products are crap. In fact, their shoes fit my feet better than those of other manufacturers. So I buy Nike. I don't buy Apple because I like their business practices or because I think MS is evil (on the contrary: without MS, there'd be a lot fewer computers in the world) - I buy Apple because I like their products.

Now, if I found out that Nike took their leather by stealing and brutally killing and tanning house pets, I'd stop buying Nike - because fewer house pets would die if I didn't buy my big size 13 boats. As it stands, though, I think they do more good than harm overseas. That's my opinion, based on what I've read. Obviously, you're entitled to your own opinion, based on what you've read. I assume neither one of us has been to a Nike sweatshop overseas and interviewed children there, so we're stuck with what we hear second-hand.

All I really care about - getting back to the thread - is whether Apple will benefit from this alliance.

[ckelley]

I'm not gonna comment on the sweat shop issue here, Aside from that the thing that REALLY pisses me off is this safari homepage nike thing! WTF is this about? Our desktops are not a commodity to be sold by apple, this is a microsoft tactic and I don't like it.
I think they mean in the Apple Stores where the promotions are. Not on our HOME computers.

I can't seriously believe you thought that... :rolleyes:

[Wonder Boy]

i dont like to be bothered with where my shoes were made or by who. if they look good, are of high quality, and reasonibly priced, ill buy them.

hmm, that approach isnt that different than how i purchase my computers. hmmmmmm

[autrefois]

(1) Dude, if it weren't for capitalism, we'd all be "third world" and we'd all use child labor. Bad or good by itself, the capitalist-driven industrial age gave us the machines that got us past child labor. Unless you're Amish (doubtful, given the email... :) ), capitalism has improved your life.

If it weren't for socialists and progressives fighting against raw capitalism, we wouldn't have the 40-hour work week or even the idea of "weekends," and we wouldn't have child labor laws in the US. Check your facts before making blanket statements, please.

(2) Hey, man, it doesn't bother me that democrats are "purchased and paid for". I'm a capitalist, so I'm cool with that. ;)

If you say so. :)

(3) As much as I'd like this thread to bump me from "member" to "regular" (which is many tens of replies away for me), I hope that we can bury the hatchet. I agree that child slave labor is bad. I agree that, if an action produces a net decrease in suffering, it is good. I only disagree with the inferred suggestion that not buying Nike will help.

I don't know if not buying Nike will help, but if companies were really there to help 3rd world countries, as someone suggested, then they'd pay them a livable wage and not force children to work.

(4) I'd love to get back on-topic of whether Apple will be helped or hurt by the Nike tie-in.

Well we're the Mac faithful, and tons of people are voting negative and posting their doubts about this partnership, so my guess is that there are at least some non-Mac people who would not support this.

[jelloshotsrule]

i dont like to be bothered with where my shoes were made or by who. if they look good, are of high quality, and reasonibly priced, ill buy them.

hmm, that approach isnt that different than how i purchase my computers. hmmmmmm

forgive me for the seemingly off topic question, but do/did you support the war in iraq?

[johnnowak]

**** it, I'm going Linux.

[El Tritoma]

1) In the history of the U.S. our economy has depended, literally for its life for long periods, on slavery and sweatshop labor. A lot of coal and hard rock miners, steel workers, and administrative assistants might argue that we still have sweatshops.
2) In some countries people have a choice between a (relatively) good wage and starving or resorting to crime. You could say they are forced into this and mistreated (and you would be right in a lot of cases), but sometimes the survival instinct makes people desperate. If Nike made their shoes somewhere else and charged 4x as much, honestly, would you buy their shoes? I guess it is better that you don't know exactly how laws, sausages, or shoes are made.

[weev]

on one end nike pays hundreds of millions of dollars to sports stars to promote their shoes, on the other end, childred are paid appallingly in sweatshops in poor countries to make them

for apple to allign itself with nike is a disasterous brand association

what next?, monsanto, esso, the bush administration...

[jelloshotsrule]

what next?, monsanto, .

monsanto? awesome! you're from australia? i didn't realize their evil was realized worldwide... or at least by people who care to look. have you read "toxic deception"?

[Wonder Boy]

forgive me for the seemingly off topic question, but do/did you support the war in iraq?

yes i do suppport the war. i support the war on terrorizism more, but we must finish the job in iraq.

[mac_lowlife]

Computers and Shoes. Together at last.

[bar italia]

No, I'm saying that not buying their product is unlikely to change the way they do business. I don't disagree with your right to not buy something. Nor do I disagree with the way Nike does business.

Are you trolling?

How can you possibly argue that if enough people stop buying Nike, they won't change their business practices? Recent organized protests/boycotts have already made Nike make some concessions regarding their workforce.

Granted, these organizers aren't "realists" like you. Thank god.

I think the real reason you want to get the thread back on topic is because you've painted yourself into a corner.

[bar italia]

If Nike made their shoes somewhere else and charged 4x as much, honestly, would you buy their shoes? I guess it is better that you don't know exactly how laws, sausages, or shoes are made.

Are you even listening to yourself?

How could employees making living wages possibly raise the price of the shoe 400%?

The labor costs involved in the final price of sneakers is miniscule compared to the costs involved regarding endorsements/advertising.

[gelbin]

jsw, and the likes of you who claim that wanting to avoid sweatshops is about ignorance, you sicken me too.


this is a gross move. this makes me mad. this makes me not want to buy from apple. yes, i am sure there are issues with apple itself, but as many have said here, so publicly embracing and benefiting from a brand that has been clearly labeled as sweatshoppers and brutal tyrants over their cheap labor is really a horrible thing.

www.nikewages.org


it is not about a job, it is about human rights, it is about humiliation, torture, and killing.

[jsw]

Are you trolling?

How can you possibly argue that if enough people stop buying Nike, they won't change their business practices? Recent organized protests/boycotts have already made Nike make some concessions regarding their workforce.

Granted, these organizers aren't "realists" like you. Thank god.

I think the real reason you want to get the thread back on topic is because you've painted yourself into a corner.

Sorry. Had to drive to pick up my daughter. I don't think I'm painted into any corner whatsoever.

No, the real reason I want to get the thread back on topic is that this is a religious discussion that is outside the Apple topic. But, what the hell...

If you choose to believe that boycotting Nike by yourself or by the thousands will truly improve sweatshop conditions, then by all means do so. I disagree.

The basis of your argument seems to be that (a) boycotting Nike will force them to make substantial changes; (b) that those substantial changes will positively impact the conditions in their overseas factories; and (c) that those positive impacts will produce a net overall good.

I simply disagree with you. I think, in the big picture, a decision to buy a Nike shoe isn't the political statement you seem to make it out to be. Of course, any leather shoe or product is likely made from South American beef hides - so I assume that, if you own any leather goods, you support Amazon deforestation.

The truth is that you can't simply pick on one thing you don't like and think changing that will make the world better. It might, but it's really hard to know ahead of time. Plus, I disagree with your contention that sweatshop laborers think they're being exploited. Of course they'll accept better conditions. I'd love it if my employer would buy me a fancy car. But not if doing so put them out of business and left me without a job.

[jsw]

jsw, and the likes of you who claim that wanting to avoid sweatshops is about ignorance, you sicken me too.


this is a gross move. this makes me mad. this makes me not want to buy from apple. yes, i am sure there are issues with apple itself, but as many have said here, so publicly embracing and benefiting from a brand that has been clearly labeled as sweatshoppers and brutal tyrants over their cheap labor is really a horrible thing.

www.nikewages.org


it is not about a job, it is about human rights, it is about humiliation, torture, and killing.

Wow. Now I feel personally responsible for torturing and killing people because I buy Nike shoes. Not.

You see, I don't disagree with Nike. You do. You think changing Nike will change the world. And yet, your sole means of showing this disagreement seems to be to boycott Nike. Instead, why don't you go to help the people in the sweatshops? Send them money, buy them food, whatever. Stop sitting in front of your computer discussing how unfair the real world is.

However, I support any move by Apple which might increase sales of Apple products. It's smart marketing. And I seriously doubt that there will be any large-scale backlash because you can choose Nike shoe colors in an Apple Store.

[bar italia]

Of course they'll accept better conditions. I'd love it if my employer would buy me a fancy car. But not if doing so put them out of business and left me without a job.

Yes. Nike workers getting a living wage is comparable with the make of your car.

Yes. Nike paying their workers a living wage would bankrupt them.

[bar italia]

However, I support any move by Apple which might increase sales of Apple products.
This says a lot. You'd support the company that makes your computer -- regardless of what they do -- as long as it increases their profits.

Either you're the most mindlessly loyal consumer/sheep ever, or you're a troll.

And I seriously doubt that there will be any large-scale backlash because you can choose Nike shoe colors in an Apple Store.
Time will tell.

[LaMerVipere]

Both Apple and Nike are outsourcing their jobs overseas, so maybe it's a match made in heaven. :rolleyes:

I do agree with the people saying that why, if Apple has this "Think Different." motto, why they are going so mainstream lately, sad times.

[barbaloot]

I just went by the apple store here in San Francisco. They didn't even know anything about it. I had to tell them what was on the site.

[jsw]

jsw, and the likes of you who claim that wanting to avoid sweatshops is about ignorance, you sicken me too.

From Trillium Asset Management, a pro-labor inventment site, at http://www.trilliuminvest.com/pages/activism/activism_issuedetail.asp?IssueID=27 :

"Sweatshops are a pervasive problem. No large company can guarantee that none of their products are made in sweatshops."

Assuming that this is true, then there is no way to know that any product you buy which isn't locally made from local material produced by people you know doesn't in some way involve sweatshops somewhere along the line.

Therefore:

(1) Apple can't guarantee they don't use sweatshops.
(2) Apple cannot enter into a business relationship with anyone who can make that guarantee.
(3) You can't guarantee that you aren't, in fact, promoting sweatshops when you buy an alternative product.

Therefore, given that I like Apple and I like Nike, there's no way to prove that the Apple-Nike alliance is in any way worse than any other single or combined business, and I like their products. So I'll buy their products.

And those third-world countries? They'll be better off if the global economy is better off.

[Daschund]

It is clear that you have spent a great deal of time in those countries to say about their standards!
:mad:
This attitude is soooo much like that Bill Gates you people do not like!
PS we have to be responsible even if it concerns Apple.

I do. I lived in one of them for 24 years. And I agree 100% with what TEG said. It's very easy to say "Nike is terrible because they employ child labor and don't pay by US standards", but people don't think about the fact that this child most of the time is bringing more money (proportionally to the country standards) than any teenager here in the US working at the local McDonalds. Take that away from them and they will starve and die. Or will you go and feed them?

[jsw]

I do. I lived in one of them for 24 years. And I agree 100% with what TEG said. It's very easy to say "Nike is terrible because they employ child labor and don't pay by US standards", but people don't think about the fact that this child most of the time is bringing more money (proportionally to the country standards) than any teenager here in the US working at the local McDonalds. Take that away from them and they will starve and die. Or will you go and feed them?

Thank you.

I don't think that anyone thinks slave-wage child labor is good. It is, however, better than the alternatives for many.

To all the anti-Nike posters:

If you truly think that boycotting Nike will improve the conditions in the countries containing their sweatshops, then I support your decision to boycott them. I disagree, but I don't think you're idiots. I am sorry if that boycott forces you to buy PCs instead of Macs.

I wish you'd respect that fact that not everyone agrees with you, and they aren't idiots because they believe differently. You act like this is clear-cut. It isn't.

[MacKenzie999]

<snip> how can nike rationalize charging 100+ for a shoe that costs them less than 5 to make?

I guess that's due to the demand portion of supply + demand.

[jelloshotsrule]

yes i do suppport the war. i support the war on terrorizism more, but we must finish the job in iraq.

so you can't be bothered with the conditions that your shoes are made in... why did you support going to iraq?


to all those saying that the kids are better off with the jobs.... who cares? that doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to improve them further... yes, i'm better off making 10 cents an hour than not getting anything, but should i settle for that when i'm being kicked and beaten (physically, and emotionally) along the way?

[jsw]

...what next?, monsanto, esso, the bush administration...

Well, given that Gore's on the board, at least you needn't worry about that last one.

:)

[jelloshotsrule]

I guess that's due to the demand portion of supply + demand.

i guess it's due to human greed... it's sickening

[jsw]

...to all those saying that the kids are better off with the jobs.... who cares? that doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to improve them further...

Agreed. I think the area of disagreement is one of whether or not boycotting Nike will improve the plight of those children in the sweatshops. If the boycott improves working conditions without losing jobs in the factory then I certainly agree with that. Of course, if paying more increases costs and causes Nike to lose market share and thus fire those kids, then it's arguable that their lives haven't been improved. But I don't see anything wrong with working to improve conditions.

Note also that a lot of non-third world people work for Nike as well, and boycotting the company might cost those people their jobs as well. Better to work with them than against them.

[bar italia]

but people don't think about the fact that this child most of the time is bringing more money (proportionally to the country standards) than any teenager here in the US working at the local McDonalds.
This is so vague as to be meaningless.

And what do workers who make $200 sneakers have to do with someone flipping $1 burgers?

And since when has McDonalds been the paragon of corporate responsibility?

Take that away from them and they will starve and die.
Really? What did these people do before Nike blessed them with "jobs"?

[bar italia]

But I don't see anything wrong with working to improve conditions.

I'm heartened to learn that you wouldn't stand in the way of improving their conditions. You're quite a guy!

[jsw]

i guess it's due to human greed... it's sickening

One man's "greed" is another's "ambition". Without greed/ambition, we'd still be living in caves. Greed/ambition drives innovation, drives the economy, and improves lives through better product quality and choice.

Unchecked greed without empathy is, of course, bad. But I still don't count Nike selling shoes for $129 as proof the Devil walks among us.

Do you negotiate for the lowest possible wage from your employer, the minimum amount you can accept to survive? Doubtful, given that you can email. Some greed is good. Calling it "greed" brands it as bad, when it isn't necessarily so.

[jsw]

I'm heartened to learn that you wouldn't stand in the way of improving their conditions. You're quite a guy!

Thank you. I didn't know you cared. :)

Of course I'd like their conditions to improve. I'm only arguing about whether boycotting Nike, or, by extension, Apple, will help.

[gelbin]

my 'sole means,' come on man, you don't know me from any of the other geeks on this ridiculous board. how do you know what i am doing to help stop the abuse of sweatshops? come on man, i laugh at you.

send them money - great, so it is a sink, a constant need and a constant dollar from me. rather than from the overpaid executives of nike, or how about tiger woods or mia hamm or one of the other over paid athletes getting millions for endorsements. distribute. yes. i will do what i can, and i will tackle the sweatshop issue in ways that I feel i can to make a true difference, including, but not limited to, your bandaid suggestions.

stop sitting in front of your computer - ha ha ha....ha ha ha. i laugh at you again. i am at work, taking a break from what i was doing because someone sent me a message about this sick campaign and so i checked it out, i saw your foolish response and had to say something.

ha ha ha.


Wow. Now I feel personally responsible for torturing and killing people because I buy Nike shoes. Not.

You see, I don't disagree with Nike. You do. You think changing Nike will change the world. And yet, your sole means of showing this disagreement seems to be to boycott Nike. Instead, why don't you go to help the people in the sweatshops? Send them money, buy them food, whatever. Stop sitting in front of your computer discussing how unfair the real world is.

However, I support any move by Apple which might increase sales of Apple products. It's smart marketing. And I seriously doubt that there will be any large-scale backlash because you can choose Nike shoe colors in an Apple Store.

[bar italia]

One man's "greed" is another's "ambition". Without greed/ambition, we'd still be living in caves. Greed/ambition drives innovation, drives the economy, and improves lives through better product quality and choice.

Unchecked greed without empathy is, of course, bad. But I still don't count Nike selling shoes for $129 as proof the Devil walks among us.

Do you negotiate for the lowest possible wage from your employer, the minimum amount you can accept to survive? Doubtful, given that you can email. Some greed is good. Calling it "greed" brands it as bad, when it isn't necessarily so.

Do you know what "greed" means? It is by definition a negative term.

"An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth: “Many... attach to competition the stigma of selfish greed”.

I suppose it's easier to base your personal beliefs on "Wall Street" than open a ***** book.

[trose]

I don't like Nike shoes, not for political reasons, but just the shoes themselves. Still though, this is another good move for Apple. They are finnaly getting the right idea when it comes to winning market share. Putting your name everywhere, being recognized as a major player. How can someone call Apple an insignifigant company when it is teamed up with America's biggest fast food chain, second largest soda company and most popular shoes? It may not persuade the more savvy computer users, but the general public (Sales machine) are swayed by things like that.

PS- Vans is the only shoe you will see my feet in :)

[gelbin]

it is not simply about a low wage, in fact, it has very llittle to do withthat. and likewise, little, if anything, to do with outsourcing jobs.


it has to do with torture and murder of employees for trying to organize labor. something recognized as a fundamental human right. it has to do with being forced to bleed on the factory floor because your supervisor won't let you take a break when you are having your period. it is about 8 year old children ruining their hands to make your shoes because the wage that their mother and father make is not enough to feed their family. it is about the government taking the land from these people once used to farm and provide food and an existence for them before nike's big money came in. it is about nike burning shoe rubber at the end of each day, polluting the air and water and causing increases in disease and cancer. it is about the rape of workers.


come on man, open your eyes. it is not about american jobs. it is not about low wages. it is about corporate domination and the lack of accountability. not everyone benefits from capitalism, and certainly not everyone benefits from nike.

come out of your cave.

[billyboy]

If you want to change the world, you have to have a bit of power. Little Apple of today seem for the most part to have a healthy attitude to business, and to be honest, if they sleep with the enemy at times to get to the top so they can do basically a good job for lots more people, then I wouldnt disagree with their alliances. It is a really dirty world of trade out there, I know first hand, and even with good motives, being a totally good guy gets you nowhere. If Apple's basic premise is profit-making through making a positive difference to everyone touched by one of their computers, then fine. If not and they stamp on everyone every which way from hereon in, then they would deserve to be screwed royally.


Those of you saying boycott Nike etc to help poor people in the Third World are also terribly naive. Again it is not a nice fair world out there, but the kids I have met in my involvements with development work would be far better off working for peanuts making you nice trainers rather than sniffing petrol before walking the streets prostituting themselves. Write to Nike and get your friends to write to Nike and shout at them and make them really uncomfortable and shame them into changing whatever it is they do that you dont like. Or better still, make a big difference yourselves and send your spare cash to projects in towns in the Third World that are promoting self help enterprise schemes. Or get off your ass and take a skill abroad and offer it for nothing for a year. It might even make your CV shine and in the long run you can reap the rewards of learning the hard way about the real world outside your comfy back yards.

Time to put on my Nike trainers and jog off for a big mac

[jsw]

Do you know what "greed" means? It is by definition a negative term.

"An excessive desire to acquire or possess more than what one needs or deserves, especially with respect to material wealth: “Many... attach to competition the stigma of selfish greed”.

I suppose it's easier to base your personal beliefs on "Wall Street" than open a ***** book.

My point was simply that calling something "greed" gives it a negative connotation, even though it might not, in fact, be negative.

And thank you for the assertion that my vocabulary comes from Michael Douglas movies.

[gelbin]

it is not about helping the poor people (directly) either. it is about not supporting the evil that nike is responsible for, and all of those that give them money and support their efforts are responsible for. the people still have to prostitute themselves because they can't feed their families. what more, they are raped at work by their NIKE bosses. i agree, not all sweatshops are equal, and not all low wage labor is a bad thing, but this is nike, and this is a story of rape and abuse of people.

if you looked at the link i posted, nikewages.org is about helping the people, about educating, and about making a change. they have approached phil knight, they offered to work in a sweatshop, they also went and lived witht he poor villagers doing nike's dirty work....so yeah, i am a part of that.

get off my ass - i love it. you make me laugh too. ha ha ha. i laugh. comfy back yards, ha ha ha. i will continue to despite nike. and will do what i can to work for justice. and then laugh because you make me.


Those of you saying boycott Nike etc to help poor people in the Third World are also terribly naive. Again it is not a nice fair world out there, but the kids I have met in my involvements with development work would be far better off working for peanuts making you nice trainers rather than sniffing petrol before walking the streets prostituting themselves. Write to Nike and get your friends to write to Nike and shout at them and make them really uncomfortable and shame them into changing whatever it is they do that you dont like. Or better still, make a big difference yourselves and send your spare cash to projects in towns in the Third World that are promoting self help enterprise schemes. Or get off your ass and take a skill abroad and offer it for nothing for a year. It might even make your CV shine and in the long run you can reap the rewards of learning the hard way about the real world outside your comfy back yards.

Time to put on my Nike trainers and jog off for a big mac

[gelbin]

i see you were back...at your computer, i hope you have a response for me.....

My point was simply that calling something "greed" gives it a negative connotation, even though it might not, in fact, be negative.

And thank you for the assertion that my vocabulary comes from Michael Douglas movies.

[jsw]

it is not simply about a low wage, in fact, it has very llittle to do withthat. and likewise, little, if anything, to do with outsourcing jobs.


it has to do with torture and murder of employees for trying to organize labor. something recognized as a fundamental human right. ...

Once again, if you think that boycotting Nike will improve the conditions in those factories, as opposed to simply having Nike pull out and having the factory produce goods for another corporation, then power to you.

I'm not pro-torture. I simply believe - naively perhaps - that boycotting Nike won't improve things.

Clearly, this is a religious issue. My opinion is that, if this alliance improves Apple's sales, then that's good. Otherwise, it's bad. I think that almost any global manufacturer violates rights or allows them to be violated or doesn't bother to ensure that that aren't violated. However, I can't lead a life without buying globally-produced products unless I want to severely limit my standard of living and that of my family.

So, I will buy Nike products. You won't. Fine by me. I'll buy Macs even if Apple aligns with Nike. Presumably, you won't.

I just think it's wrong to argue that I'm completely blind to some horrible evil when, clearly, there's a variety of opinion to be had here as to the best way to proceed.

[jsw]

my 'sole means,' come on man, you don't know me from any of the other geeks on this ridiculous board.

Granted. Likewise.

how do you know what i am doing to help stop the abuse of sweatshops?

Granted. Likewise. You chose sweatshops, I choose other things. We all have our causes.

send them money - great, so it is a sink, a constant need and a constant dollar from me.

Well, yes, agreed, it'd be better to provide them with a means to provide for themselves. However, that's a tall order.

rather than from the overpaid executives of nike, or how about tiger woods or mia hamm or one of the other over paid athletes getting millions for endorsements.

Presumably, you are not overpaid. Atheletes get millions because they bring in millions. It's worth the money, else companies wouldn't pay them. Overpaid executives? Yes. Of course, that's true nearly everywhere. Yes, true, they could donate money as well. Although it seems like you're arguing against donating money to them.

i will do what i can, and i will tackle the sweatshop issue in ways that I feel i can to make a true difference, including, but not limited to, your bandaid suggestions.

I'm not arguing that they're good suggestions. Frankly, I doubt you can make much of a change in their lives no matter what you do, unless you can organize a large enough group to effect change. Perhaps you can.

stop sitting in front of your computer - ha ha ha....ha ha ha. i laugh at you again. i am at work, taking a break from what i was doing...

Ah, so you are overpaid.
:)

I apologize for anything I said - here or before - which was insulting. If what I wrote was offensive, I am sorry. However, it wasn't that fun to be told that I made you sick. Sorry if I overreacted.

I still think that boycotting Nike won't change anything. However, I will look at the links.

[gelbin]

just kidding, jsw.

i at least appreciate your level-headedness about this.

yeah, i have my causes, but they don't stop at sweatshops.


and i don't buy nike, and i don't eat meat, and i try to limit supporting things that i don't agree with fundamentally, and that has not changed my life that dramatically, or my standard of living as you would say. i think that is a bit of a cop out, on yours, or anyone's part that would offer that thought.

yes. i am overpaid. and i understand that. and i distribute my income. which, by the way, i was not saying not to donate, but i was saying that donation is not a solution. for example, i take homeless people to dinner with me. it is not a solution. on the other hand, it is better than handing them crack money. and it is a maintenance step while i work toward a more level distribution of wealth.

[Wonder Boy]

so you can't be bothered with the conditions that your shoes are made in... why did you support going to iraq?


to all those saying that the kids are better off with the jobs.... who cares? that doesn't mean that we shouldn't work to improve them further... yes, i'm better off making 10 cents an hour than not getting anything, but should i settle for that when i'm being kicked and beaten (physically, and emotionally) along the way?

i like to think we're in iraq so it can be safe for me to go on a plane again, not to get fancy discounts

[gelbin]

i don't know you. as you don't know me. but i know what you said. and i attacked that. you, on the other hand, attacked beyond what i said, implying or assuming that i was not fighting for anything, not doing anything to improve the world, not working to end sweatshops (other than a 'boycott' of nike or banter on macrumors).

[gelbin]

safer AFTER we took unilateral action?! ha ha ha. man...now that even our friends hate us, i feel so much safer.



i like to think we're in iraq so it can be safe for me to go on a plane again, not to get fancy discounts

[noxes]

that Nike ID website is fricken cool.

[jelloshotsrule]

i like to think we're in iraq so it can be safe for me to go on a plane again, not to get fancy discounts

how did you reach that conclusion?

i'm glad you "like to think" that.. unfortunately, i like to think that you are far from the truth in terms of our real reason for being there, or even that it will have the results you think it will

but, let's save that for the political forum

gelbin- jsw did in fact apologize if he offended you, no?

ha ha ha #4?

[jsw]

i don't know you. as you don't know me. but i know what you said. and i attacked that. you, on the other hand, attacked beyond what i said, implying or assuming that i was not fighting for anything, not doing anything to improve the world, not working to end sweatshops (other than a 'boycott' of nike or banter on macrumors).

In all fairness, man, you said:

"sweatshops sicken me...jsw, and the likes of you who claim that wanting to avoid sweatshops is about ignorance, you sicken me too."

That's pretty direct. Not "your opinions sicken me" - "you sicken me". hence my reaction. Not defending it. Just trying to explain it. I was put out by it.

[gelbin]

my last pair of replies was not meant to be attacking. well, other than the substance of the argument.

you didn't offend me.

the attitude does sicken me, be it yours or in general.

so do suvs.



In all fairness, man, you said:

"sweatshops sicken me...jsw, and the likes of you who claim that wanting to avoid sweatshops is about ignorance, you sicken me too."

That's pretty direct. Not "your opinions sicken me" - "you sicken me". hence my reaction. Not defending it. Just trying to explain it. I was put out by it.

[jsw]

safer AFTER we took unilateral action?! ha ha ha. man...now that even our friends hate us, i feel so much safer.

Damn, this is disconcerting. I actually agree with you, gelbin. What is the world coming to? Had Apple aligned with Halliburton, say, we'd even have been on the same side this entire thread. Frightening. :)

Yeah, I think it's bad policy to get your allies to hate you. Not generally one of the top ten ways to succeed. Nor do I feel any safer. I feel duped. I also know someone who was killed over there, so I'd have to say it'd be pretty hard to justify it to me. On the other hand, I support, to a large degree, actions in Afghanistan.

I suppose now I need to stop eating meat and start taking the homeless out to dinner. :) Actually, I volunteer at a soup kitchen/homeless shelter, so I guess that counts.

[gwangung]

Oh, I think I can add more fuel to the fire.... :)

Certainly, there's an awful lot of oversimplification going on here. Yes, what they pay factory workers overseas sounds like a pittance....but how much does that pittance buy over there? If it's enough to bring the workers up to a lower middle class standard, then it's obviously not quite as bad as at first glance; a friend of mine constantly says that his entry level blue collar job would enable him to "live like a king" back home. Then there's the other factor that the one thing THird WOrld countries can offer is cheap labor--that gives them foreign currency which is not a bad thing in and of itself. And if the country is resource poor, that may be the only thing that allows them to get participate in trade [and is ultimately less corrosive to them than always accepting charity].

On the other hand, it is certainly right to hold Nike's and other companies' feet to the fire and make sure they're not mistreating workers. They can get their sweat, but not their blood and tears.....

[johnpg]

If you truly think that boycotting Nike will improve the conditions in the countries containing their sweatshops, then I support your decision to boycott them. I disagree, but I don't think you're idiots. I am sorry if that boycott forces you to buy PCs instead of Macs.

I wish you'd respect that fact that not everyone agrees with you, and they aren't idiots because they believe differently. You act like this is clear-cut. It isn't.

Thank you for the common sense. I just wanted to lend my support. There are FAR better ways to deal with this issue than boycotting Nike. That won't do anyone any good. It clearly hasn't so far.

Any partnership with Apple and Nike (or other large hip companies) is a good idea. Now, if it turns out to be beneficial for Apple is still up in the air. The Pepsi cap debacle in LA has me wondering.

Cheers,
John

[swingdog]

But Nike is basically THE symbol of sweatshop labor. Everyone knows it, even if they buy Nike shoes anyway (which I never have and never will, btw). So this promotion says that Apple is willing to be associated with a company notorious for making poor little children slave away for next to nothing.

I don't buy from companies that I know force children to work. I can't guarantee that nothing I buy came from child labor, but I avoid any companies that I know are involved in such horrible things. I hope I don't have to add Apple to the list...

Ignoring children's livelihood for a moment, I also don't see what Apple gets out of this specific deal. Maybe Steve just gets a kick out of giant corporations wanting to be associated with Apple now. Maybe just he wanted free shoes for his kids?

I can't believe the ignorance of this post and other similar anti-Nike posts here...yes I guess ignorance really is bliss...and easy. I have worked in corporate responsibility (CR) for many years and I know Nike and their CR programs quite well. Nike is a poster child of proactive labor involvement, stakeholder engagement and community support. I only wish that more international companies followed their lead. A few facts: Nike's age standard is above the Fair Labor Association's child labor requirements (Nike imposes an age limit of 18 years in shoe manufacturing and 16 in apparel...not all factory operators like this higher standard position). Nike gives 3% of pretax profits to charity (over $30 million in 2003), much to international education and community-based programs (how much do you give?). Nike does not own any factories. They outsource to over 900 factories in over 50 countries (with 3rd party monitoring) with over 680,000 workers (workers that otherwise might not have access to any job opportunities). Nike has also sponsored over 15,000 micro lending loans around the world to stimulate local economic development. Nike's proactive initiatives are too numerous to list here. Spend some time at www.nikeresponsibility.com or third-party sites like www.fairlabor.org or www.bsr.org or www.theglobalalliance.org and try to learn something about the complex issues of foreign government oversight, import/export treaties, global supply chains, labor standards, poverty, educational opportunity, etc. Sure, there is still along ways to go and there are a lot of issues yet to be resolved, but you are thinking in the past and thereby making yourself part of the problem, not the solution. Go on Apple, with Nike you are partnering with a leader in corporate responsibility and accountability.

[gelbin]

i started with soup kitchens.....there is hope for you after all..... :)



I suppose now I need to stop eating meat and start taking the homeless out to dinner. :) Actually, I volunteer at a soup kitchen/homeless shelter, so I guess that counts.

[TEG]

I do. I lived in one of them for 24 years. And I agree 100% with what TEG said. It's very easy to say "Nike is terrible because they employ child labor and don't pay by US standards", but people don't think about the fact that this child most of the time is bringing more money (proportionally to the country standards) than any teenager here in the US working at the local McDonalds. Take that away from them and they will starve and die. Or will you go and feed them?

Thank You Dashund, you made my point better than I did, or could have.

I'm not pro-sweatshop, but I think it is unfair for people to judge working conditions based on 1st and 2nd world working conditions. In reality most working arangments in 3rd and 4th world "sweat shops" are luxurious compared to other places of employment. Also, the few places whith acinine rules (like the one where the woman blead to death because she could not take a brake) ARE evil, they are also the responsibility of the company in charge of the location, not the bigger company buying parts from that "sweatshop". Nike is only a customer of another company, if the second company want to change a policy, Nike has no control over it. My own company has parts built in a 3rd world country, but the company, our suplier can do what ever they want, and we can't complain unless it dammages our product. Our only other alternative is to switch to another company, but the market is tough.

Another thing... Many of the companies in 3rd and 4th world countries that are connected with compaines like Nike, may not pay worker a lot compared to Western wages, but they do give most of them full health benefits, something we don't even have here (In the US).

BTW.. The TEGIAN defination of Economic Worlds on Earth;

1st World - Free Countries, with semi-liberal governments, many/most social services, and growing economies. Also, many people in 1st World counties complain when Unemployment is at 5-7%, which is below the "Natural" Unemployment Rate, or complain even the the economy is shrinking even when the country's growth is still positive.
Examples: United States, United Kingdom, Germany, Japan.

2nd World - Semi-Free Countries, with semi to extreme liberal governments, many/most social services, and stagnent economies.
Examples: Canada, France, Italy, The Netherlands.

3rd World - Semi-Free Countries, with moderate to semi-conservative countries, few social services, and stagnent to declining economies.
Examples: Russia, Tiawan(sp)/DRC, Mexico, Argentina, Iraq.

4th World - Dictatorial Counties (i.e. Not Free), semi-conservative to extreme conservative countries, no social services, declining economies.
Examples: Cuba, People's Republic of China, Zimbabwe (sp).

5th World - Countries in civil war, or Anarchy (sp).
Examples: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Sudan, Haiti.

Please don't flame me, I'm just calling how I see it. If you are from any of the countries, I apologized in advance if I have offended you, I'm just attempting to relate my views of the world to you. Also, Canadians (or Canadiens) I am half Canadian, and enjoy Canada, but you and I both know I was being generious.

TEG

[gelbin]

again. nikewages.org.

they lived on the wage.
or should i say, starved on the wage.
it is not about simply lower costs of living...i think you are the one oversimplifying.

wrong. simply wrong. they had to choose to eat or have a jug of heating oil. no lower middle class nothing.

Oh, I think I can add more fuel to the fire.... :)

Certainly, there's an awful lot of oversimplification going on here. Yes, what they pay factory workers overseas sounds like a pittance....but how much does that pittance buy over there? If it's enough to bring the workers up to a lower middle class standard, then it's obviously not quite as bad as at first glance; a friend of mine constantly says that his entry level blue collar job would enable him to "live like a king" back home. Then there's the other factor that the one thing THird WOrld countries can offer is cheap labor--that gives them foreign currency which is not a bad thing in and of itself. And if the country is resource poor, that may be the only thing that allows them to get participate in trade [and is ultimately less corrosive to them than always accepting charity].

On the other hand, it is certainly right to hold Nike's and other companies' feet to the fire and make sure they're not mistreating workers. They can get their sweat, but not their blood and tears.....

[Kagetenshi]

Didn't Second World refer to USSR and allies until its demise? Canada most emphatically does not qualify, nor does France.

~J

[gelbin]

they contract to the factories that hire and abuse children and adults.
they are responsible no matter how the contract is written....

I can't believe the ignorance of this post and other similar anti-Nike posts here...yes I guess ignorance really is bliss...and easy. I have worked in corporate responsibility (CR) for many years and I know Nike and their CR programs quite well. Nike is a poster child of proactive labor involvement, stakeholder engagement and community support. I only wish that more international companies followed their lead. A few facts: Nike's age standard is above the Fair Labor Association's child labor requirements (Nike imposes an age limit of 18 years in shoe manufacturing and 16 in apparel...not all factory operators like this higher standard position). Nike gives 3% of pretax profits to charity (over $30 million in 2003), much to international education and community-based programs (how much do you give?). Nike does not own any factories. They outsource to over 900 factories in over 50 countries (with 3rd party monitoring) with over 680,000 workers (workers that otherwise might not have access to any job opportunities). Nike has also sponsored over 15,000 micro lending loans around the world to stimulate local economic development. Nike's proactive initiatives are too numerous to list here. Spend some time at www.nikeresponsibility.com or third-party sites like www.fairlabor.org or www.bsr.org or www.theglobalalliance.org and try to learn something about the complex issues of foreign government oversight, import/export treaties, global supply chains, labor standards, poverty, educational opportunity, etc. Sure, there is still along ways to go and there are a lot of issues yet to be resolved, but you are thinking in the past and thereby making yourself part of the problem, not the solution. Go on Apple, with Nike you are partnering with a leader in corporate responsibility and accountability.

[martman]

Well, hopefully at least some of the students actually think about what they're objecting to and realize that it's not as terrible or as clear-cut as they believe. They either have to boycott virtually everything (and, of course, they're still stuck with knowing that their homes are likely on what used to be Indian territory until it was stolen by the government...), or they have to get on with life. Life isn't fair. If they're that concerned about injustice, they should join the Peace Corps. Presumably, they already realize that not buying Nike shoes means someone in Indonesia (or wherever) loses a job. Yeah, that's sound reasoning.

Look, I think it's terrible that the average worldwide standard of living is so bad. But not buying Nike shoes isn't going to help it at all. Buying non-sweatshop shoes just keeps the money in the developed countries, which actually worsens things.

So, I guess, the more sweatshop-based stuff you buy, the more you help the third world.

So, then, cheers to Apple for choosing Nike.


This logic is flawed!
Buying things from corporations that rip off the poor is NOT benificial to the poor. This kind of thinking would lead to even more explotation of the underprivilaged classes. It takes verry little inteligence to see why these ridiculous rationalisations are being used by people like us who live in the first world. You want your cheap prices at any cost.
Sweat shops rob children of their childhood and expose people to unsafe working conditions. I find it extremely sick that anyone would advocate sweatshops as benificial to anyone but the rich.
What a horrible self-serving attitude.

If this rumor is true shame on Apple and shame on me for having just bought a new G5!

:mad: :mad: :mad: :mad: :mad:

As for the notion that one must boycot everything, it is true that there is a lot of injustice on the planet and it would be hard to boycot everything that is wrong at once. This is why we chose our battles one at a time.
***** Nike and its horrible buisness practices.

[Kagetenshi]

Ok, I did some looking up, and you are completely wrong. (@TEG)

The First World refers to the industrialized capitalist nations of the world. France, Canada, the US, and every other nation listed in your Second World definition falls under that.

The Second World is the developed Communist countries; the USSR while it was alive, China.

The Third World is the less-developed nations, and the Fourth World (turns out there really is such a thing, you were right about that) is the least-developed nations. Third World is middle-east style or India-style, fourth is Congo-style and such.

There is no Fifth World, never was, and probably never will be.

~J

[billyboy]

it is not about helping the poor people (directly) either. it is about not supporting the evil that nike is responsible for, and all of those that give them money and support their efforts are responsible for. the people still have to prostitute themselves because they can't feed their families. what more, they are raped at work by their NIKE bosses. i agree, not all sweatshops are equal, and not all low wage labor is a bad thing, but this is nike, and this is a story of rape and abuse of people.

if you looked at the link i posted, nikewages.org is about helping the people, about educating, and about making a change. they have approached phil knight, they offered to work in a sweatshop, they also went and lived witht he poor villagers doing nike's dirty work....so yeah, i am a part of that.

get off my ass - i love it. you make me laugh too. ha ha ha. i laugh. comfy back yards, ha ha ha. i will continue to despite nike. and will do what i can to work for justice. and then laugh because you make me.

Er, excuse me, my post with no reference to anyone and with no quote just happened to appear under yours. I certainly was not talking to you. If you actually got off your ass good for you. Its quite hard to bring down a big corporation though that was no doubt doing its own style of profiteering way before it ever became public knowledge. But if you are into tilting at windmills like the majority of well meaning activists hard pushed to balance their beliefs against a backdrop of a comfy existence, I wont laugh at you.

btw if you can tell me something even more naive than offering to go work in the place of the employees of a sweatshop in the name of improving the job opportunities for the local people, I would love to hear. Send your plane fare to someone local so they can set up something constructive. :rolleyes:

[TEG]

Ok, I did some looking up, and you are completely wrong. (@TEG)

The First World refers to the industrialized capitalist nations of the world. France, Canada, the US, and every other nation listed in your Second World definition falls under that.

The Second World is the developed Communist countries; the USSR while it was alive, China.

The Third World is the less-developed nations, and the Fourth World (turns out there really is such a thing, you were right about that) is the least-developed nations. Third World is middle-east style or India-style, fourth is Congo-style and such.

There is no Fifth World, never was, and probably never will be.

~J

It is my view of the world. NOT some scientific setup. I AM intitled to my opinion, am I not? My view of the world breaks down some of the sterotypes when it comes to economic classes. I invented the 5th World, and I fear, that if we continue this bickering there will develop a 6th world... The Internet.

TEG

[vpalvarez]

Sounds like free pub for Nike. What's in it for Apple?
Besides the brand association...probably not much, but that may be enough. Nike might have agreed to use Apple technology

[rdowns]

I don't know...Apple and Nike? Is this really a good thing?

I don't see why not.

Upgrade your damn aging, old technology based lineup. Just do it!

[ITR 81]

The reason why?

We as a nation(US) buy the cheapest products we can buy. How do we get these cheap products? We outsource to cheap labour countries...and then we complain about it. How typical..

Where was my PB made?? China. How much do they get paid probably less then few bucks. Does this bother me?? No.

I buy what I like...and I'm not going to stop buying what I like just because someone tells me it's a bad company.

Would I want some kid making a few bucks a day or whoring him or herself out on the streets and get some STD?? Not much of a choice but working is the best choice. In Korea if your poor and can't get a low paying job you have to start turning tricks on the street or get some GI to buy you from your handler. It's pretty common around the DMZ. $2k will buy a girl or boy their freedom and their passport.

Would this make me stop buying Korean products? No, I'd probably buy more to help Korean's like myself.

[jaykk]

How is Apple involved with this Nike iD thing at all...

And what's in it for Apple...

I'M SO CONFUSED - AGGH :mad: :confused:

Apple just want to increase their foot traffic to their stores. The concerts have the same purpos- to get more people visit the store.

[rdowns]

Man, where are the mods? This thread is out of control.

Maybe this isn't the best time to inform you all that Kathy Lee Gifford will be starring in the next Apple switcher TV ad campaign. It breaks next Tuesday.

[jsw]

Man, where are the mods? This thread is out of control.

Maybe this isn't the best time to inform you all that Kathy Lee Gifford will be starring in the next Apple switcher TV ad campaign. It breaks next Tuesday.

I wondered where the moderators were myself! Perhaps out buying Nike shoes. ;)

And man, it was dangerous to mention Kathy Lee....

In any event, at least it shows people care. Given the subject and the flow of the thread, it didn't even got too out of control. I'm sure all will be fine tomorrow. With this thread. Not, of course, with the downtrodden. By that, I mean those poor people waiting for the next G5 announcement.

[gwangung]

again. nikewages.org.

they lived on the wage.
or should i say, starved on the wage.
it is not about simply lower costs of living...i think you are the one oversimplifying.

wrong. simply wrong. they had to choose to eat or have a jug of heating oil. no lower middle class nothing.

I question this. It's easy to say wrong, wrong, wrong from over here. In order to force that choice between working in a factory and starvation, there has to be no other choice for work. What kind of conditions generate this? Conditions similar to England and the US during the Industrial Revolutions. And those conditions were eased from within, not from without. Conditions that outside corporations and other countries find highly resistant to change from without. I wonder if external methods are the best way to go about this.

[croasmun]

Just a quick, hopefully helpful note on first, second, third world terminology. The terminology dates from the Cold War era in which U.S. foreign policy viewed nations in the world in one of two camps:

1) "free" nations of the world--Western democracies, essentially--comprised the First World. U.S. and their allies.
2) Communist nations, U.S.S.R., China, and satellite nations.

In the eyes of American policy-makers, they were engaged in a worldwide battle between the good 1st World and the bad 2nd World. The problem was that--largely because of nuclear weapons--the 1st and 2nd worlds did not dare do battle directly. Instead, they fought for influence in as-yet unalligned nations--Korea, Vietnam, Cuba, etc. The theatre for Cold War flare-ups was the Third World, nations who were commited neither to the ideals of western Democracy nor to Communism. The fact most or at least many of these nations were not yet industrialized during the Cold War brought about our colloquial use of "Third World," meaning underdevloped, poor, etc., but, really, in the beginning, it was just a political designation.

[jnasato]

Man, I built the ugliest shoe on the Nike ID site...

I like the idea of customizing one's shoe, and I hope that this all benefits Apple somehow.

[vpalvarez]

How is Apple advertising a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with the #1 shoemaker a bad thing? How is Apple partnering up with any number of MAJOR corporations in any way a bad thing?

People, the only way for Apple to ever climb out of the cellar is for more then 25 million people to know about macs. It's more of today's youth to know about macs and that there is an alternative to that grey/beige box their parents bought at Costco. We need to be mainstream, to have mainstream appeal. To do that, we need to join the mainstream crowd and McDonalds, Pepsi, Nike all represent that.

How is that a bad thing? The more Apple does this, the greater then improve their odds of surviving long enough to maybe make some leaps forward in terms of market share. The iPod is their trendy appliance, but what else? Computer sales have sucked and still suck, they need more people interested in their machines. You do that by getting into the public eye, looking like a mainstream alternative, a better alternative. How is that a bad thing?

I will definitely second that

[vpalvarez]

Agreed. Many Mac users/Apple fans I know hate what NIKE does.

Good point about the "think different -- think for yourself" crowd. It seems to me that such a partnership would be a terrible idea. I think many Apple users would be turned off by this. I know I am.

No Apple fan will stop using acs becasue Apple has a relationship with Nike, this can only help there will be no harm from this endeavor at all

[?Hater]

How is it that no one has brought up Nike mp3 players yet? Couldn't this suggest a future Nike mp3 player by Apple? Here's the current one, I don't see why they don't pull an HP and make the mini a workout branded Nike Model. Change the material, band, put a swoosh on it and put it in Niketowns.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/B00006LT11/ref=ase_miscdiscs/102-2415304-3960900?v=glance&s=electronics

[gelbin]

I question this. It's easy to say wrong, wrong, wrong from over here. In order to force that choice between working in a factory and starvation, there has to be no other choice for work. What kind of conditions generate this? Conditions similar to England and the US during the Industrial Revolutions. And those conditions were eased from within, not from without. Conditions that outside corporations and other countries find highly resistant to change from without. I wonder if external methods are the best way to go about this.


i agree, it is somethign to think about. the problem though is that this is not the US industrial revolution. these are not Thai companies taking avantage of their own people, waiting for a labor revolution and the formation of unions, to triumph over the company so that both prosper in the end. this is US (foreign) companies coming in and taking the majority of the wealth out of their country, giving the governments a cut for the kind treatment, and keeping them from forming unions or organizing in opposition to work/labor policies. i am not saying it is wrong for them to develop, i think it is wrong for them to 'develop' under the fist of american companies that do not have a stake in their long term development and will pull up stakes as soon as another country is proven to be a cheaper whore (read: i.e. jamaica to mexico).

[Sabenth]

oh joy fantastic fan fare and look at the fuss its already got and the attention just from here :) its already working

[gelbin]

Er, excuse me, my post with no reference to anyone and with no quote just happened to appear under yours. I certainly was not talking to you. If you actually got off your ass good for you. Its quite hard to bring down a big corporation though that was no doubt doing its own style of profiteering way before it ever became public knowledge. But if you are into tilting at windmills like the majority of well meaning activists hard pushed to balance their beliefs against a backdrop of a comfy existence, I wont laugh at you.

btw if you can tell me something even more naive than offering to go work in the place of the employees of a sweatshop in the name of improving the job opportunities for the local people, I would love to hear. Send your plane fare to someone local so they can set up something constructive. :rolleyes:

first, i work to take down big corporations. i do it with the law. and let me clarify, i work to get corporations to follow the law, to respect life, and to respect human rights. i got an education, quite a bit of it. and i am trying to work within the system to bring about justice and change. i appreciate the windmills reference though, but i will bring change, and any excuse that you may have to stand by silent i reject.

there is nothing naive about offering to work for nike in a factory, in order to test their claim that they are not sweatshops and that they are good, clean, healthy, factories. they offered to do it, and when nike refused after several offers, the two went to live on the wage to see if it was purely a matter of the cost of living conversion (as many people suggest, here and elsewhere) and they found that they could barely survive, loosing like 20 lbs in a one month period due to starvation.

[erova]

I thought they attracted a kinda 'think different--think for yourself' crowd. The kind that sort of shuns places Nike, which uses sweatshop labor.

now there's a logical connection.


:rolleyes:

[erova]

the two went to live on the wage to see if it was purely a matter of the cost of living conversion (as many people suggest, here and elsewhere) and they found that they could barely survive, loosing like 20 lbs in a one month period due to starvation.


amazing what happens when a mcdonalds isn't on every corner, huh?

doh.

[coolsoldier]

Amazing how this turned into a discussion on corporate ethics...

Seriously, do you really buy your computers based on principle? Or based on quality/value?

If you buy based on principle, I suggest you buy from the kid down the street building computers in his basement. We know he is satisfied with his working conditions and we know his computers are made in the USA. Apple is not the model of ideal working conditions any more than any other international company. If you boycotted any company that was associated with a company that used less-than-ideal working conditions you would never buy anything.

If you buy based on quality/value, then this whole discussion of sweatshop labor is completely off topic. The quality/value of Apple products doesn't change because of a marketing deal with Nike. The mindshare of Apple products does. That makes this a good marketing deal for Apple.

[activ8media]

"Certainly, there's an awful lot of oversimplification going on here. Yes, what they pay factory workers overseas sounds like a pittance....but how much does that pittance buy over there? If it's enough to bring the workers up to a lower middle class standard, then it's obviously not quite as bad as at first glance; a friend of mine constantly says that his entry level blue collar job would enable him to "live like a king" back home. Then there's the other factor that the one thing THird WOrld countries can offer is cheap labor--that gives them foreign currency which is not a bad thing in and of itself. And if the country is resource poor, that may be the only thing that allows them to get participate in trade [and is ultimately less corrosive to them than always accepting charity]."

From http://www-mcnair.berkeley.edu/2001journal/EChavarria.html:
Although maquila textile worker earnings are higher than those of non-maquila textile workers and non-manufacturing workers, they are still relatively far from the minimum wage earnings suggested in the Conner et al. study. Maquila workers are 3,630 colones short of the recommended 4,556 colones. This is obviously a huge gap that condemns their families to poverty. Advocates for the increase of the minimum wage claim that an increase in the wages of maquila workers would create many benefits for the workers as well as the firms that own the maquiladoras (Conner et al.). Policy intervention aimed at raising the minimum wage is often considered an option.

The study proves that maquila, or sweatshop workers make more than non-sweatshop workers, but still far below a living wage. I've been to sweatshops in El Salvador and Guatemala, and I think there's no excuse for the living conditions these people are forced into. It's incredibly ignorant to claim that there was nothing there before the benevolent capitalists came in to save the poor people of the third world. I think we need look no further than Venezuela to see another model of development (i've been there too). It's also bordering on racist to assume that people in the underdeveloped world can't think for themselves and create models of development that don't exploit the poor to these extremes. Sweatshop labor does not promote the working poor to the middle class, it keeps the working poor working poor. Many workers do sweatshop labor because due to free trade, and a callous lack on interest in public welfare on the part of governments held hostage by world bank and IMF policies, alternative modes of development are ignored at best at often attacked.

At any rate, to get more to the point, I think that given the success of recent campaigns regarding apple, such as the faulty iBook problem, it would behoove those of us with concern about the Nike/Apple partnership to voice those concerns directly to apple as opposed to complaining on macrumors. I hereby suggest someone more saavy than myself create an online petition to apple decrying their decision. I think calling apple to let them know what we think could help as well. Who knows? Perhaps this is a blessing in disguise, and we can get apple to open up about their own labor practices. Think Different is just a marketing campaign, but maybe we can get apple align themselves with their own marketing. Too bad this didn't happen when apple aligned themselves with the GAP!

http:///www.activ8media.org

Powermac 7100/66
Beige G3 266 w/DVDRAM
G4/450 Tower
Powerbook Al (venceremos) 15" Superdrive
iPod 3g 15Gigs
Sony DSR-11 DVCAM deck (yes it actually still works, can you believe it?)
Sony DSR-370
Sony PD-X10
Sony PVM 20M4U
Other stuff too.

[amnesiac1984]

Contrary to popular belief, child slave labor is actually quite beneficial to both the corporation and the 3rd world country: http://www.childslavelabor.com.

I truly hope you are joking, have you read this site?

ok... how to put this while not breaking the rules and getting banned.... "workers being paid handsomely by that countries' standards"? hmm. how about not being allowed to organize? how about being tortured and raped in the factories? how about working in awful conditions that lead to cancer and other deadly illnesses? how about being scared to speak up because of possibly losing a job, or a limb, or worse..?

sorry, but just because they make more than joe fruit stand worker in the streets of beijing (assuming you are right) doesn't mean that 1. it's a better life or 2. it's something that can be praised.. i'm not satisfied with the status quo and it makes me sick that some people can turn a blind eye to the truths of the situation.

but you do make a great point, how can nike rationalize charging 100+ for a shoe that costs them less than 5 to make?

this partnership is gross.

here here, thankyou jello, the question is not whether they are making enough money to live in their country, but can you really sit by while these foreign CHILDREN labour away while our kids play in the back yard?


I just think it's naive to think that not buying Nike shoes - or even, say, preventing Nike from using labor in those countries - will in any way improve the standard of living for those people. The only way to do that is to get the governments of those countries to change. Boycotting a shoe manufacturer isn't going to help anything at all.


hmmm So every 3rd world government is corrupt and evil, where did you here that? Maybe they are in the crap house because the US and other western countries have been crapping on them for the past 150 years.

(1) Dude, if it weren't for capitalism, we'd all be "third world" and we'd all use child labor. Bad or good by itself, the capitalist-driven industrial age gave us the machines that got us past child labor. Unless you're Amish (doubtful, given the email... :) ), capitalism has improved your life.


I don't really see how this is the case to be honest. Yes these things happened under capitalism but why could they not have happened under an alternative economic system? Also, The Soviet Union was very industrialised.


(2) Hey, man, it doesn't bother me that democrats are "purchased and paid for". I'm a capitalist, so I'm cool with that. ;)


I pray to God, Allah, Buddha and Steve Jobs that you were having a laugh with this one. :rolleyes:

[amnesiac1984]

I think they mean in the Apple Stores where the promotions are. Not on our HOME computers.

I can't seriously believe you thought that... :rolleyes:

fair enough I see that now but I read the article again and my interpretation is entirely plausible IMO, in fact it's the type of thing that goes on all the time, I just didn't think Apple was that kind of company, so no need for any nasty shenanigans okay? :p

[jsw]

hmmm So every 3rd world government is corrupt and evil, where did you here that? Maybe they are in the crap house because the US and other western countries have been crapping on them for the past 150 years.

Ummm... I didn't say that the governments were corrupt or evil. I said that change wouldn't occur without changing the governments of those countries. "Change" doesn't mean "overthrow". I simply meant that they need to operate in a different manner. "Change" could also imply actions on behalf of NATO countries to forgive debt, etc. However, I do believe a number of those governments are corrupt or at least that they turn a blind eye to things.


I don't really see how this is the case to be honest. Yes these things happened under capitalism but why could they not have happened under an alternative economic system? Also, The Soviet Union was very industrialised.

(a) They didn't happen under any other economic system; (b) the Soviet Union pretty much goes to show that industrialization without capitalism doesn't work - as I recall, they don't exist anymore, and shortages ran rampant even though natural resources were plenty.

In any event, Apple is a capitalist company, and I'm happy to support them by buying their products. I think they provide good value. I think the world is, overall, a better place because of Apple, and, since they yield a net good, I have no problem buying their products. I personally don't think that, overall, the world is a worse place due to Nike, so, again, I have no problem buying their products.

[7on]

Has anyone just think Jobs likes wearing Nikes and the Nike CEO likes using Macs?

And you can't tell me that this shoe isn't awesome to the max,
http://www2.truman.edu/~jps137/web/shoe.jpg

[jsw]

(2) Hey, man, it doesn't bother me that democrats are "purchased and paid for". I'm a capitalist, so I'm cool with that.

I pray to God, Allah, Buddha and Steve Jobs that you were having a laugh with this one.

I was, since I don't think that either party here is completely "purchased and paid for" and, regardless, I at least can pick what I think is the lessor of two evils right now.

Plus, of course, Apple's pro-Democrat. ;)

[Kagetenshi]

It is my view of the world. NOT some scientific setup. I AM intitled to my opinion, am I not? My view of the world breaks down some of the sterotypes when it comes to economic classes. I invented the 5th World, and I fear, that if we continue this bickering there will develop a 6th world... The Internet.

TEG

You're entitled to your opinion, but this isn't a matter of opinion. You're using preexisting terms that are very clearly defined. It's like my deciding to call England Nebraska. I can do that all I want in private, but if I tell anyone else that Heathrow Airport is in Nebraska, they will (quite correctly) tell me that I am wrong.

~J

[autrefois]

Apple's retail site (http://www.apple.com/retail/) mentions a new Nike-Apple promotion:



According to one report sent to MacRumors, Apple Store employees will be wearing the Nike ID shoes in stores along with Nike tie ins (Nike website as default on Safari) in a cross promotion effort lasting until May 18th.

I decided to look at the actual site itself to see what Apple was saying, and I don't see Nike mentioned anywhere on the retail site. Is it possible they took it down?

When I do a search (on the bottom of the retail site), the second link that comes up in the results is titled "Apple Store" and says:

"... you? That you’re a fan of USC? That you adore the color pink? With NIKE iD, you can personalize your shoes to represent you. Visit an Apple Store and ask a ..."

And when I click on it, it brings me to the retail site, which has no mention of Nike anywhere.

Am I just missing it somewhere? Or maybe they've cancelled the promotion!?! :D

[alphaq619]

If I had to guess, all the employees get something free. Like shirts with the Nike logo instead of the Apple. And in turn, all the stores have nike.com set as the homepage.

[kotovasii]

Are you certain that even Apple is completely responsible in this area?
What I attempted to say is that Apple is just another big corporation; and just because they make the best computers and actually think of their customers, does not necessarily mean we have to support them all way long. People and even businesses DO make mistakes (such as this co-project with Nike – which I am totally against!)

[kotovasii]

You're entitled to your opinion, but this isn't a matter of opinion. You're using preexisting terms that are very clearly defined. It's like my deciding to call England Nebraska. I can do that all I want in private, but if I tell anyone else that Heathrow Airport is in Nebraska, they will (quite correctly) tell me that I am wrong.

~J

Thank You! Kagetenshi!
:) :) :)

[barrancs]

Yeah why not, I mean apple already supports slave labor in Taiwan. Just goes to show how Steve Jobs is just another Bill Gates, only one with half as much success. Sold your soul for a buck. It's ok, though once emagic makes samplitude a competitor apple is screwed anyway. You've got Premier on a PC who needs Final **** Pro.

[Nermal]

**** it, I'm going Linux.

Have fun. SuSE is the best.

Why do I have this strange feeling that we're going to have a "post pics of your shoes" thread? :eek:

[neon]

if you dont care about sweatshops, fine, but pretending they're nice is something else

it's like dressing up your apathy and it stinks

[CmdrLaForge]

I'm not pointing fingers at Nike alone... I'm sure any electronics company--Apple too--has some things going on overseas (with suppliers at the very least) that don't bear scrutiny.

What the hell are you talking about ? What do you mean with going on overseas ?
Pls explain