Under Armour: Competitive Advantage Over Nike

680 Words3 Pages
8.) According to the weighted strength assessment Under Armour doesn’t have a competitive advantage over Nike. The thing that really hurt Under Armour in the test was its Global strategy. Nike beat Under Armour in the strength assessment by a little more than one point. We thought that Product Innovation was the most important key success factor along with quality, and global strategy. We didn’t think that cost competitiveness was that important because Nike, Under Armour, and Adidas aren’t a best cost provider in fact they seem to be a differentiated provider. We believed that Under Armour was better than the other companies in product innovation because of all their advanced moisture-wicking fabric. Global strategy was also really important to us because that company has to focus on other countries besides the one that it is in. And with Under Armour struggling with their sales revenue in foreign countries we gave them a nine compared to Nike that we felt was a ten because a lot of their revenue comes from other countries.…show more content…
The very first issue that Under Armour should address is there global strategy. Global Strategy is important issue because it can help the company expand on its revenues in foreign countries. According to exhibit 2, Under Armours net revenues from foreign countries only account for 6.1% or $89.3 million compared to Nike that has roughly $7 billion in foreign countries. Under Armour should look into how other companies expand into foreign markets and start from there. In order for Under Armour to increase their market share they have to try and start manufacturing and focusing on foreign countries. Unlike Under Armour, Nike has over 250 stores in foreign

More about Under Armour: Competitive Advantage Over Nike

Open Document