4
What About the “Ick” Factor?

July 29, 2007, Kelli Matthews

The California Supreme Court has banned the sale of Adidas soccer cleats and other products made of kangaroo leather.

Adidas is the biggest commercial buyer of kangaroo leather, which is considered lighter and more flexible than cowhide.

Animal rights groups are protesting the use of the leather, and heralding this ruling as a good step in the right direction.

According to USA Today, activists say the problem with kangaroo leather is:

“…hunters mistakenly shoot endangered species. They also say abundant kangaroo species are killed cruelly – sometimes shot during night hunting parties, and sometimes clubbed to death as babies.”

The Predator cleats by Adidas – made of kangaroo leather since their introduction to the market several years ago – have been popularized by none other than superstar David Beckham. Even Beckham, though, is distancing himself from this controversy. His spokesperson responded very tersely to this ruling by saying, “David wears synthetic Predator boots so this ruling has no relevance to us.”

The Australian government is siding with Adidas (of course) saying that hunting kangaroos is good wildlife management and that the country has more than 25 million of the animals – hardly endangered.

Other manufacturers use kangaroo leather. But many manufacturers are using very high end synthetics in their soccer cleats and users seem to like it just as well, if not better.

There seem to be some genuine benefits to kangaroo leather, and I suppose demand prevails as soccer takes over the world. But, as a PR manager for Adidas, you have to be smart about the markets where you sell your products. Seems, based on the coverage in the American press, Adidas should be considering the “ick” factor. American consumers, for the most part, are saying “ick.” (And this certainly doesn’t help me like, or understand, soccer any more…)

What do you think?

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Kelli Matthews
  • Paull Young

    Well I’m an Aussie and this is one of the first times I’ve heard this debate.

    I think it looks like a perfect example of how the facts can easily be distorted on behalf of a cute animal (after all – look at the rise of PETA which is nothing but an extremist outfit).

    The bigger question – how do you engage a non-profit pressure group if facts, truth and reality are not an issue that worries them?

  • Kelli Matthews

    Great point, Paull. Doesn’t seem Adidas is doing much to frame the debate and other manufacturers, like Nike, are distancing themselves.

    Engagement with groups like PETA is difficult, for sure. And the California Legislature may be acting in the absence of balanced information and in a knee-jerk way based on the sensational nature of the story.

    It’s still a little icky, though. :)

  • Paul Wall

    well if the FACT that the animal is
    1.not endangered like you “say” that its hurting the animals population, and that the fact that people in australia dont even know that they are using to much kangaroo leather makes no sense in fighting it.

    and anyway,
    kangaroo leather is very confortable.

    :)

  • Kelli Matthews

    Paul, thanks for coming by. I have to say, though, I have no idea what your argument is. If you drop back by, maybe you can clarify.