←back to thread

How much do you think it costs to make a pair of Nike shoes in Asia?

(twitter.com)
689 points taubek | 2 comments | 09 Apr 25 12:58 UTC | HN request time: 0.001s | source
Show context
aimor ◴[09 Apr 25 16:21 UTC] No.43633841[source]▶
Trying to summarize the summary for myself

From a $100 shoe that sells for $76:

- $24 goes overseas (22 cost, 2 freight)

- $8 goes to the US gov't (3 import, 2 Nike tax, 3 Footlocker tax)

- $33 goes to US employees or businesses (5 Nike marketing, 11 Nike expenses, 17 Footlocker expenses)

- $5 goes to Nike (11% return)

- $6 goes to Footlocker (8% return)

But now with 100% tariffs, it's a $100 shoe that sells for $100 (or a $132 shoe that sells for $100) and:

- $24 goes overseas (22 cost, 2 freight)

- $29 goes to the US gov't (22 import, 3 Nike tax, 4 Footlocker tax)

- $33 goes to US employees or businesses (5 Nike marketing, 11 Nike expenses, 17 Footlocker expenses)

- $7 goes to Nike (11% return, 7.15 exactly)

- $7 goes to Footlocker (8% return, 7.45 exactly)

And if a US shoemaker wanted to undercut the import, a Made in USA shoe that sells for $100:

- $7+ goes to the US gov't (? shoemaker tax, 3 Nike tax, 4 Footlocker tax)

- $79 goes to US employees or businesses (46 to shoemaker, 5 Nike marketing, 11 Nike expenses, 17 Footlocker expenses)

- $7 goes to Nike (11% return, 7.15 exactly)

- $7 goes to Footlocker (8% return, 7.45 exactly)

replies(5): >>43633989 #>>43634855 #>>43634868 #>>43639490 #>>43645462 #
1. singron ◴[09 Apr 25 17:33 UTC] No.43634855[source]▶
Just to say the obvious, they are also going to sell fewer/cheaper shoes according to the demand elasticity since the consumer price is 32% higher. Despite Nike making slightly more on a per-shoe basis, they are probably going to make less overall.
replies(1): >>43635430 #
2. washadjeffmad ◴[09 Apr 25 18:17 UTC] No.43635430[source]▶
I wouldn't assume that they wouldn't segment products. Nike already offers more expensive lines with higher margins to offset less profitable ones. Why should we expect them to pass on direct costs to customers?

The blog also doesn't acknowledge the externalities of shipping. Having a "Nike USA" brand that becomes their premium domestic flagship won't incur the same logistical expenses or tariffs. I may be biased because I'm from a debtor colony that understood there's no way free people can compete with slave labor, but the distaste for compensating workers is largely a classist taboo.

People are theorycrafting ways to lose, but I would only expect that from a company that was trying to signal their disdain for current trade policy, not actually run their business.