The Cost of Unsold Uniform Inventory
ESPN – Jersey change too costly for Raiders WR Porter – NFL
Bad news for Oakland Raider Jerry Porter:
The Oakland Raiders receiver said Wednesday he would have to pay $210,000 to switch his uniform from No. 84 to 81 in order to reimburse the team and Reebok for the cost of the unsold jerseys.
I guess with a “leaner” uniform supply chain, they wouldn't have this type of problem? Either way, it's a drag for Porter to get hit with this. You'd think this sort of inventory risk would be part of the cost of doing business for Reebok. What if Porter retired or got hurt, thus reducing uniform sales? Do the Raiders pay a penalty if they had released or traded Porter? I guess you could argue that changing or not changing numbers is truly under Porter's control, but still…
What do you think? Please scroll down (or click) to post a comment. Or please share the post with your thoughts on LinkedIn.
Don't want to miss a post or podcast? Subscribe to get notified about posts via email daily or weekly.
[…] Remember this story from last year? Another year, another NFL receiver, another Reebok “waste of inventory” story. “He’s legally changed his name, so we’re willing to recognize that,” [NFL Commissioner Roger] Goodell said. “There’s what I call a more administrative issue that has to be dealt with. There’s a large inventory of jerseys that are out there with 85 Johnson. Any player that changes a number or changes his name has to address that so that our licensing is not stuck with a large inventory. That’s just something we’re dealing with. As far as we’re concerned, if he changes his name legally, that’s fine with us.” […]
[…] jerseys is significant, but it’s important to only produce what is needed and not create a glut of jersey inventory that can be problematic. Remember, excess inventory is a waste. Hopefully Jimmer plays well and the […]