>>Hi Jim,
>>
>>The problem with looking at things through the media's eyes is that you only see whatever is newsworthy. Why didn't they go further to show that to the chinese it only cost $5 to manufacture the pair they sold to Nike for $11?!??!
>>
>>You have to look at the whole picture. They pay $11 for a pair, then they pay whatever it costs to promote it, then they also have to ship it here,
>
>This is bogus. They are manufacturing in China because the cost of production plus transportation is way below the cost here.
>
>I've often wondered how many products are on the shelves, where advertising cost is greater than production cost...

Yes, the $11.00 per pair included getting them back to the U.S., boxed and ready for sale.

MOST products have advertising costs greater than production costs as I see it.
That's how Mike was so successful... their heavy advertising let them give a special aura to their product, allowing them to charge far more than would otherwise be reasonable.
It's win-win for Nike + advertisers, the customers paying the price in the end. Most importantly, though, the whole mechanism proves that advertising works!

Most sad, when you think about it.