UA wants to side with the " non-hunters"... we should part ways too. I really don't like flip floppers
Didn't say they are siding with non-hunters just not liking the way the Bowmars portray hunters so no sponsorship. It's kind of like the dumb veterinarian who shot the cat and posted it up on her Facebook. Just shoot the cat and shut the hell up. He could have harvested the bear with the spear legally and been proud, but people feel the need for others approval so they gotta selfie video the carnage. I don't have a problem with it personally as I've killed lots of things in various ways, but probably not the best idea to post to you tube. Wonder what he thinks of his decision now... Under Armour hunting stuff isn't my thing anyway so they never really had my business to lose.
And thats how you lose everything.. there are people that dont like us killing with a bow too... or a gun.. or at all. We shouldnt cave because some tree humpers dont like it. People been killing with spears for a very very long time. THEY are the ones that need to get over it, not us.
I feel like I'm one of the only ones that won't "boycott" under armour, or isn't outraged by them dropping the sponsorship. The thing is, under armour makes 90% of their money from selling non hunting items. It makes sense monetarily for them to drop them for this. If they don't, the non hunting apparel suffers much more than them dropping them and losing a few hunting purchases. It's a business for them. We all like to think that the business should support all hunting, but if they lose money, they're going to drop it quick. EVERY company would do the same.
it doesn't bother me either, grizzly, but for a different reason and that is cuz UA sucks anyway and I quit using it long ago.
Sad when a so called sponsor drops a member when they get some bad publicity. I doubt all the good promotions she had done before this would account for much. In the end
I wear UA head to toe. I understand that Under Armour hunting apparel isn't their biggest market, but I certainly have a problem with a company that cares more about the dollar signs then supporting the people who purchase their products in that market. Look all businesses are about making money, and I get UA has a ton of markets in different sporting industries, but if you don't support legal hunting and would rather make the antis happy so you don't lose money else where then get out of the hunting industry!! I can't be giving my hard earned money to a company that doesn't stand with the people who support it.
Some of you people act like they were going to go under if they stuck with them? A few people cried and I bet 90% of the people that cried didnt know who Under Armour was a week ago. If anything I bet they will loose more money by turning their backs on hunters.
What the Bowmars did, did not shed a positive light on our lifestyle which is already a losing battle. I do not disagree with the spear hunt, but somethings are just better left out of the public eye. The cost/benefit analysis was not very well thought out on the Bowmar's behalf. For Under Armour, it was a no-brainer. They are a Fortune 500 company and one of if not the largest athletic apparel companies based in the country. 90% (estimate) of their customers are non hunters and are not buying their hunting apparel, while the 10% that are hunters, are likely also buying other athletic apparel from UA as well. This was a business decision made by a company run by hunters, the CEO may not be, but Kip Fulks is a co founder and head of marketing and lives to bow hunt.
I respectfully disagree... If thats the case what about when bow hunting becomes spear hunting to the antis? Then do you suggest we do it behind closed doors as well? The more you bend for people, the more they expect you to bend.
If UA doesn't want to be associated with legal hunters then legal hunters shouldn't associate with them. Why don't the anti-hunters boycott Canada? They made it legal. Kilboars Hunt Club
I get it man, I do. I just see it from the side of preserving what we have as opposed to taking steps back in the eyes of the anti. Let's be honest, they out number us in society and government.
It is called being a HIPOCRITE ! You can not make camo and sponsor hunters then say they didn't know they were hunting LEGALLY.
Honestly, I really don't give a crap who any company decides to sponser? It's their choice and none of my business.
Cameron Hanes is a dbag. That letter is a crock of horse poo. I really like the part were he says he doesn't even invoice ua. No kidding all your cloths are shipped right to you. The only time you buy something is for your kids in the store if you need it for a sport they are in. Maybe he doesn't invoice any if his sponsors and does his show for free. Just because he has a soft spot for the people who believe in him and what he is doing... until his head is on the chopping block. Thanks for standing up for hunters everywhere Hanes. Class act. Taking dollars over ethics just like ua. I wonder how many of the people who signed the petition even buy ua? Now ua is going to loose way more hunting customers than signed that petition
I guess I just see what UA did as a stupid win for them.. I also know that stupid wins can build momentum. Just aggravates me for them to feel like they gained any ground on hunters.
I believe that the only thing Under Armour did wrong was to falsely accuse the hunt methods as being illegal. The anti's love that, and with the brand being so huge, it's bound to reach more ears. But all in all, I think sponsored "athletes" are dumb. It is their company, and they do have the right to hire and fire any one they want. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
