In 1988, Reebok seemed untouchable. The company controlled more than a quarter of the U.S. athletic footwear market, having dethroned Nike only two years earlier. Revenues reached $1.8 billion while Nike trailed at $1.2 billion.
Today, the scoreboard looks very different. Nike dominates with roughly 86% of the global basketball sneaker market and stands among the world’s most valuable apparel brands. Reebok holds just over 1%.
The story was never about who made the better shoe. Reebok built excellent products. Nike simply understood that their brand isn’t an accessory. It’s the foundation on which everything else depends. When you engineer and integrate that foundation correctly, it becomes a self-propelling system.
Breaking out of the blocks
In the early 1980s, Nike and Adidas battled for the attention of male athletes and runners. Reebok found a completely different lane. The company noticed an audience the rest of the industry ignored: women taking aerobics classes.
Reebok’s 1982 Freestyle was the first athletic shoe built specifically for women, and it arrived at the perfect moment. Aerobics classes were filling up, and Jane Fonda’s workout tapes had become a cultural phenomenon. Reebok laced itself directly into that movement.
By 1986, the company had sprinted to the front. Revenues hit $1.4 billion in 1987 and $1.8 billion in 1988. Acquisitions such as Rockport and Avia signaled plans to expand into new sports. Reebok was the brand of the moment.
But momentum built on a single trend can fade as quickly as it forms. When the aerobics craze slowed, Reebok had no deeper engine to keep the brand moving forward.
The Pivot: Changing court position
By 1984, Nike was slipping. Market share in athletic footwear had dropped to about 15%. In basketball, they were barely a contender.
Conventional wisdom said to spread the risk: sign several athletes, divide the budget, and play the numbers. Sports marketing executive Sonny Vaccaro argued the opposite. He told Nike to use its entire basketball budget on one rookie, Michael Jordan.
It wasn’t just a sponsorship. It was a blueprint for alignment. Nike offered Jordan his own line, complete with profit sharing and creative control. The company treated him as a partner, not a billboard. Adidas, Jordan’s personal favorite, could not match that structure.
The decision set Nike on a new trajectory.
Creating the spark
The first Air Jordan 1s were black and red at a time when nearly every basketball shoe was white, and for good reason: it was required by the NBA’s uniform policy. Nike moved forward anyway.
Every time Jordan laced up, the NBA fined him $5,000. Nike paid the tab without blinking. The league called them illegal. The cameras called them iconic. Sportswriters filled columns arguing about color, rules, and rebellion. Then, Nike leaned in even harder, running ads that showed Jordan soaring in the same shoes, crossed out with a red X. The shoe they tried to ban became the one everyone wanted.
The controversy turned into global attention. Nike projected $3 million in sales over 3 years. They earned $126 million in the first year and $70 million in the first two months. That outcome was not luck. It was a deliberate design.
Building the engine beneath the brand
The Air Jordan success was not a single play. It was the start of a complete performance system. Nike increased production capacity, expanded distribution, and restructured marketing. Every department worked from the same playbook.
Each new model introduced a technical leap. Visible Air units. Lightweight materials. Collaborations with designers like Tinker Hatfield. Nike positioned the shoes not just as gear, but as culture. Basketball and hip-hop were rising together, and Nike placed itself at the center of both.
By 1987, Nike’s market share had climbed to 43%. Today, it owns nearly the entire U.S. basketball sneaker market. The Jordan brand alone generates roughly $5 billion in annual revenue.
Reebok, meanwhile, made sharp but disconnected moves. The Pump captured attention, but nothing tied it to a broader narrative. Partnerships came and went. The brand’s direction blurred.
When Adidas bought Reebok in 2005 for $3.8 billion, it inherited a company without a clear identity. Was it about fashion? Fitness? Performance? None of the answers stuck. As former CEO Paul Fireman later said, “Adidas paid almost $4 billion to destroy it.”
Lessons from the locker room
You may not sell sneakers, but growth in any industry follows the same mechanics. Brand is not surface polish. It is structural. It helps determine market share, pricing power, loyalty, and long-term resilience.
Nike’s success was not luck or timing. It came from what we call a Growth Engine: a connected system in which brand, marketing, sales, and service work together to deliver measurable results. Reebok focused on individual moves. Nike built integration.
Consider how that distinction applies to your organization:
Are you building systems or running plays?
Reebok made wise choices that worked briefly, but they never connected. Nike created a framework where every decision strengthened the next. In your company, are marketing, brand, and sales aligned under a single strategy, or are they running separate drills?
Do you have the infrastructure to back your ambition?
Nike’s Jordan partnership succeeded because the company already had the manufacturing, logistics, and marketing structure to scale it. Big ideas only endure when they rest on firm foundations.
Can your brand create its own gravity?
Reebok grew by attaching itself to a cultural moment it did not control. Nike built cultural momentum that continued long after the first spark. In volatile markets, the strongest brands attract opportunity even when conditions change.
Is your data guiding execution or explaining it afterward?
Nike treated their results as part of the engine, not a post-mortem. Every launch refined the system. Actual growth comes from feedback loops that inform the next move instead of simply validating the last one.
Built to Go the Distance
The Jordan brand still drives billions in annual revenue through retro releases and new models. That’s what happens when the brand becomes part of your infrastructure instead of an isolated campaign.
In energy and industrial markets, the same principle holds. When brand, marketing, sales, service, and execution operate together, the outcome compounds over time. Fragmented activity creates noise. Integrated systems create lift.
Reebok and Nike both built great shoes. Only one built a framework that could keep running when conditions changed. Growth is not an accident. It’s engineered.
Let’s talk about building your Growth Engine
At HexaGroup, we help energy and industrial firms design integrated systems where brand, marketing, sales, and service move in sync to deliver measurable growth. Whether you create a custom approach, tailor a GOpack, or start with a project-based engagement, we help you move faster and more confidently.
Growth is engineered. Here and now. Are you ready for takeoff?
Good to grow? Gauge your readiness in 10 minutes flat.

Unlock growth without boundaries
Need region-specific fresh eggs and flying lessons? Learn more about BBN, the agency that unites co-pilots from all corners of the sky.