Nike to quit Chamber post in climate protest

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Nike will relinquish its spot on the board of directors at the Chamber of Commerce to protest the business lobby’s opposition to climate-change legislation.

"We believe that on the issue of climate change the Chamber has not represented the diversity of perspective held by the board of directors," the company says in a statement obtained by POLITICO. "Therefore, we have decided to resign our board of directors position."

Nike has long been a strong advocate for government action to combat global warming and has said it "fundamentally disagrees" with the Chamber's position on the climate bill. The company helped found Business for Innovative Climate & Energy Policy, a coalition of businesses supporting congressional action to address climate and energy legislation.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/...l#ixzz0Sd14PPSZ

[dalegg 143]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

[Dan J 277]

Nike will relinquish its spot on the board of directors at the Chamber of Commerce to protest the business lobby's opposition to climate-change legislation.

"We believe that on the issue of climate change the Chamber has not represented the diversity of perspective held by the board of directors," the company says in a statement obtained by POLITICO. "Therefore, we have decided to resign our board of directors position."

Nike has long been a strong advocate for government action to combat global warming and has said it "fundamentally disagrees" with the Chamber's position on the climate bill. The company helped found Business for Innovative Climate & Energy Policy, a coalition of businesses supporting congressional action to address climate and energy legislation.

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0909/...l#ixzz0Sd14PPSZ

They were not the only ones, PG&E and another utility left too.

[Tahoma 2,292]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Apparently, Nike believes that sweatshops are just fine. Maybe they think that their latest PR stunt will cause people to forget how they really operate.

[almaty 19]

and hiring a dog killer like micheal vick...

[HAL 9000 96]

Nike sucks.

[mRx 16]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Apparently, Nike believes that sweatshops are just fine. Maybe they think that their latest PR stunt will cause people to forget how they really operate.

Ah, yes. I know this decision will make front page news across the world, and Earthlings will rush in droves to purchase the latest Air Jordans due to their altruistic environmental stewardship.

You may've been a business strategic analyst in another life, Tahoma--But not this one.

Nike--like many pro-enviro businesses--stands to profit hugely from restrictive emission standards--which explains their stance.

WSJ ran a great article on the moneytrail behind the enviro-movement and the Climate-Industrial Complex.

[Tahoma 2,292]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Apparently, Nike believes that sweatshops are just fine. Maybe they think that their latest PR stunt will cause people to forget how they really operate.

Ah, yes. I know this decision will make front page news across the world, and Earthlings will rush in droves to purchase the latest Air Jordans due to their altruistic environmental stewardship.

You may've been a business strategic analyst in another life, Tahoma--But not this one.

Nike--like many pro-enviro businesses--stands to profit hugely from restrictive emission standards--which explains their stance.

WSJ ran a great article on the moneytrail behind the enviro-movement and the Climate-Industrial Complex.

It's apparent that you have been out of the loop for at least 20 years. However, I'm not going to do your homework for you again. You'll have to google "Nike + greenwashing" for yourself. Read and learn.

[mRx 16]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Apparently, Nike believes that sweatshops are just fine. Maybe they think that their latest PR stunt will cause people to forget how they really operate.

Ah, yes. I know this decision will make front page news across the world, and Earthlings will rush in droves to purchase the latest Air Jordans due to their altruistic environmental stewardship.

You may've been a business strategic analyst in another life, Tahoma--But not this one.

Nike--like many pro-enviro businesses--stands to profit hugely from restrictive emission standards--which explains their stance.

WSJ ran a great article on the moneytrail behind the enviro-movement and the Climate-Industrial Complex.

It's apparent that you have been out of the loop for at least 20 years. However, I'm not going to do your homework for you again. You'll have to google "Nike + greenwashing" for yourself. Read and learn.

That greenwash is fine and dandy, except it has nothing to do with the article; which I tried (unsucessfully) to point out to you.

Nike may advertise in a way as to attract naive, smelly, Liberal tree huggers--but, their decision to resign their position at the CoC is a lobby tactic, not a PR tactic.

[HYENA 4]

Nike= EVIL SATANIST MONEY MONGER SLAVE DRIVING FVCKHEADS

[Tahoma 2,292]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Apparently, Nike believes that sweatshops are just fine. Maybe they think that their latest PR stunt will cause people to forget how they really operate.

Ah, yes. I know this decision will make front page news across the world, and Earthlings will rush in droves to purchase the latest Air Jordans due to their altruistic environmental stewardship.

You may've been a business strategic analyst in another life, Tahoma--But not this one.

Nike--like many pro-enviro businesses--stands to profit hugely from restrictive emission standards--which explains their stance.

WSJ ran a great article on the moneytrail behind the enviro-movement and the Climate-Industrial Complex.

It's apparent that you have been out of the loop for at least 20 years. However, I'm not going to do your homework for you again. You'll have to google "Nike + greenwashing" for yourself. Read and learn.

That greenwash is fine and dandy, except it has nothing to do with the article; which I tried (unsucessfully) to point out to you.

Nike may advertise in a way as to attract naive, smelly, Liberal tree huggers--but, their decision to resign their position at the CoC is a lobby tactic, not a PR tactic.

I see that you didn't do your homework. By ignoring 20+ years of well-documented Nike behavior, it's understandable that you would have no context in which to fit the WSJ article.

But, before you read up on Nike, keep in mind: Nike makes nothing; Nike contracts everything; Nike has only their brand name; protecting their brand name is everything.

[SuperDuper! 230]

And how does Nike feel about selling their shoes for $160/pair while the chinese workers who made them got less than a dollar to do so?

Ask the star athletes who make big bank just by endorsing the nice shoes. Who pays michael jordon and tiger woods and all the advertising, and G5 for the CEO?