NIKESkims: A Strategic Power Move or a Brand Risk? 🤔
- Kyle Frazier
- Apr 7
- 6 min read
Updated: May 14
A Brand Strategist’s Take
Nike just made one of its boldest brand moves in recent history. 🚀 The question is—will it pay off?
The NIKESkims partnership signals where the industry is heading, but in the pursuit of cultural relevance, brands must tread carefully. Will this deal redefine how sportswear brands engage with consumers, or will it serve as a cautionary tale of brand overexposure? Some industry insiders view brand partnerships as transformative, but they are inherently risky.
And what happens when your “partner” in the partnership risks it all? 🎭
🚀 First Thoughts: A Bold Yet Risky Move
As a brand strategist, I was genuinely surprised by the NIKESkims partnership. Given where Nike currently stands and where they should be in terms of brand positioning, this collaboration raised a few eyebrows if not red flags.🚩
While I understand the economic upside and recognize that Skims has disrupted the market (minus the nipple bra moment—yeah, we remember that), I initially had reservations based on the risk. 🤨
Skims has successfully evolved beyond its core inclusive shapewear identity, expanding into athleisure. The brand has built credibility through collaborations, including its groundbreaking deal with the NBA.
I am intrigued by the Brand Whisperer herself, the incredible Emma Grede, Kim’s partner in building Skims.
However, the Nike deal felt even bigger than their partnership with the NBA—especially considering Nike is the NBA’s biggest brand partner. With Nike, Skims now has an innovation partner with an established ecosystem, and a performance/lifestyle reputation that could redefine women’s sportswear. 🏆
And the stock market reacted positively.
🤝 The Power of Partnerships
Partnerships can be game-changing for brands looking to amplify reach, align values, and create impactful storytelling moments.
While launching an emerging men’s grooming brand, I secured partnership deals with three athletes and one recording artist—trust me, brand alignment was everything. 🎯
“No partnership is perfect or predictable.”
However, IMO, there are two brands Nike should’ve/could've partnered with instead (shrugs). Keep reading. 👇🏽
Collaboration vs. Partnership
💡 Collaborations = short-term, hype-driven, and highly promotional (e.g., Nike x Travis Scott, Adidas / Bad Bunny).
💎 Partnerships = long-term, integrated into brand values and innovation (e.g., Nike x NBA, Apple x Hermes).
Nike and Skims didn’t just collaborate—they walked hand in hand straight down the aisle without a dating period. 💍 Enter NIKESkims brand risk.
🎥 [Insert Hangover meme GIF here.]
So how did we get HERE? The NIKESkims brand risk
🤖 The Tesla Photoshoot Controversy
How does an unrelated Tesla photoshoot impact the NIKESkims partnership?
During an interview with Perfect Magazine, Kim Kardashian said:
🗣️ "I think the big joke of me even doing the shoot with the robot is that I feel like I’m so robotic." 👀
At face value, this seems harmless. But in branding, timing is everything—so is brand integrity and trust. Aligning with Musk & Tesla, a brand that has lost nearly half its stock value amid controversy, is EXTREMELY risky. 🚩🚨
Her followers may feel Kim is prioritizing appeasing Musk over her core audience, damaging the trust she’s built.
The response?
❌ Disappointment.
Disgust. 😤
Social media backlash. 😡
How Could This Affect NIKESkims?
If Kim’s fans feel betrayed and she doesn’t take steps to rebuild trust, the backlash could escalate—even leading to a boycott of her brands. I know some Nike fans are not happy with this situation either and have said as much. So, Nike would face a pivotal decision: double down or distance themselves?
Sidebar:
Let’s monitor the Kai Cenat situation.
TMI & Overexposure: Uniquely Kardashian
Another potential red flag? How publicly shared text messages and private life details can derail a brand’s plans and erode integrity—especially when the brand is synonymous with the founder.
The thin line between relatability, authenticity & overexposure has always been part of the Kardashian playbook. But when does it become too much?
For Kim, that line has been blurred for so long that it’s hard to know when it’s been crossed. And in this case, it might already be too late.
🔥 Crisis mode: Activated.
🛡️ The Trust Factor in Branding
Brand trust is everything. Consumers invest in you before your product. When brands make decisions that don’t align with consumer trust, they risk alienating their audience.
Nike has historically been protective of its brand integrity:
✅ Dropped Kanye West after controversy.
✅ Stood by Colin Kaepernick, reinforcing its values.
✅ Distanced from Tiger Woods, later reintegrating him.
🧐 The difference? Nike seems to be prioritizing cultural capital over long-term brand alignment.
Does growth come at the cost of brand integrity?
🔍 3 Ways to Protect Your Brand in a Partnership
If you’re entering a high-profile brand partnership, consider these critical legal protections:
Morality Clauses ⚖️ 🔹 Allows brands to terminate agreements if public backlash occurs. 🔹 Protects against reputation damage.
Severability & Exit Clauses 🚪 🔹 Defines what happens if the partnership fails. 🔹 Outlines exit strategies to protect both parties.
Performance & Financial Protection Clauses 💰 🔹 Establishes KPIs for success (sales, brand lift, engagement). 🔹 Ensures financial recourse in case of underperformance or crisis.
Nike, like any brand, must have protective measures in place. The question is: Did they build an escape hatch? 🤔
🎤 Was This Deal in Motion Before Elliott Hill Took Over?
I suspect this deal was already in the works before Elliott Hill became Nike's CEO. These agreements take months (or years) of negotiations before being finalized.
💡 Nike's newly appointed CEO, Elliott Hill, shares his vision for the iconic sportswear brand’s future. From intern to chief executive, Hill's 30+ year journey at Nike gives him a unique perspective on its DNA. He plans to refocus on core strengths, emphasizing sports and athlete partnerships while addressing recent market challenges.
🎉 If anyone loves an underdog story, Elliott’s journey is one to cheer for.
But here are the real questions:
🔹 Will he pivot if this partnership backfires?
🔹 Will Nike reinforce its brand identity or continue chasing cultural relevance?
🔥 Does Gen Z & Alpha Relate to Nike or Skims? 🤝
Younger consumers interact with brands in ways that differ vastly from older generations:
✅ Gen Z: Prioritizes authenticity & inclusivity—Skims’ size diversity and shade range align with their inclusivity values.
✅ Gen Alpha: Digital-first and hyper-online—Skims' viral marketing and influencer strategy fit their consumption habits.
⚠️ Both generations care about social responsibility—which makes the Tesla controversy a major red flag. Will this partnership hold up under scrutiny?
Nike x Skims may be a business win—but is it a cultural one? 🧐
Nike’s Alternative Partnership Choices: My Top 2 Picks 🏆
I'll start off by saying I understand why they chose Skims. But what if they hadn't? Here are my top 2 picks for Nike.
#1 Lululemon 🏋️♀️🧘♂️
Brand Values: Athletic innovation, performance, and community-driven fitness.
Strategic Fit: Lululemon dominates the premium athleisure market. A Nike x Lululemon partnership would have solidified Nike’s presence in both high-performance and luxury activewear.
Market Potential: Lulu owns the women’s market and is growing its men’s activewear sector. Nike’s performance dominance + Lululemon’s premium positioning = a powerhouse 📈 combination.
#2 Apple 🍏⌚️
Brand Values🚀 : Innovation, performance, and design excellence.
Strategic Fit ⚡ : Apple has been expanding its footprint in health and fitness (Apple Watch, Apple Fitness+). A Nike x Apple collaboration could have led to the next wave of wearable fitness technology.
🌍 Cultural Impact: Both brands are cultural tastemakers. Together, they could redefine how we experience fitness, tech, and performance.
⏳ What’s Holding It Back? Nike+ and Apple had a partnership before, but Apple phased it out in 2018. What would it take to reignite it? 🔥
Pssst, I’d love to know what your thoughts are!
📌 Final Take: How Far Can a Brand Go with Partnerships Before Losing Itself?
NIKESkims is one of the most fascinating brand case studies for me as a curious brand strategist. Proof all brands need to stay vigilant of potential scandals and crisis management. But in the race for relevance, how far can any brand go before it RISKS losing its core identity even if you are as big as Nike? 🤷🏽♂️
Comments