>I didn't get those numbers from the media. I got them from an executive back in 87 (many years ago I grant you)

When Nike was manufacturing on some south pacific islands (Guam or vicinity) their cost per pair boxed and landed in the U.S. was $11.00.
Since they sold for $120. or more, they had boodles to spend on marketing. When they needed to change their bottom line for a quarter they simply cut their marketing costs.

Now that they apparently manufacture in China their landed boxed cost is likely way way lower.

It wouldn't surprise me at all that their "operating margin" and "profit margin" are stated around 12% and 8% - the balance being mainly marketing and basic overheads of the business they do.
They could undoubtedly have better "numbers", but at the risk of the gross numbers.


>
>
>>Currently, Nike operating margin is 12.6% and profit margin is 8.5%, so the numbers you mention must be applicable for certain product models only, though media could exaggerate them too.
>>
>>>it has been awhile (well a few years to be honest), but at one time Nike's profits on their shoes alone was 300%! I thought it was amazing that the average profit on furniture is 200%. Nike went way beyond that.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>It's a bit of exaggeration. Foreign companies can establish Chinese joint ventures only with operating issues controlled by locals, i.e. Nike doesn't decide how much to pay workers and they have to share profits with their partners/hosts. At the end they certainly get better margins comparing with US-based production but it's difficult to find ways, palatable for all, to cure it. After all, everyone likes low prices in department stores.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>A media report stated that Nike paid the Chinese workers one and a half cents per shoe. They were advertised for $150 and more. Did Nike reap any profit from laying off American workers and having the work done in China?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>This remind me a good Dilbert strip :) http://www.comics.com/comics/dilbert/archive/dilbert-20070501.html
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>There are many arguments concerning illegal aliens in this country. One such argument is that businesses that hire such individuals are the cause of the problem. There are laws on the books that require an employer to verify a person’s legal residency. There are places where you can buy the required proof, which complicates the issue. Let us say that employers have complied with the law but are unable to verify the legality of a persons papers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Employers have much to gain by hiring illegal aliens. They work in the agricultural fields, and construction trades as just two examples. Typically they are paid less and sometimes they are not paid at all. This saves the employer money. Tax payers pay for the education, medical assistance, and incarceration of illegal aliens, as a few examples of the cost involved. So this argument has to do with tax payers paying the way for illegal aliens.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>It was suggested that employers should pay for the services provided by the state, for illegal aliens. Will that solve anything? Then prices would have to be increased to pay for these services. The consumer would have to pay more. We would still pay taxes and I am sure that the legislators will find interesting ways to spend the existing tax revenues and more.