Under Armour just stepped in it....

Plant.One

Plant.One

Well-known member
not sure how many of ya'll have seen this - but as folks who enjoy the outdoors and i know almost all of us here are hunters - this needs to get around and Under Armour - and more importantly the outfitters who retail their products - need to hear about out displeasure regarding this.

https://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2016/08/john-boch/armour-dumps-hunters-hunters-returning-favor/

Under Armour Dumps Hunters, Hunters Returning The Favor

Did the Baltimore-based Under Armour just Zumbo itself?

Time will tell, but following a change.org petition, Under Armour dumped their sponsored huntress, Sarah Bowmar mere days after her husband legally harvested a bear in Canada using a spear. Now, the people of the hunting world are pushing back, starting their own boycott of Under Armour and burning the UA products they already own. Here’s how it all went down . . .

Hunting enthusiasts Josh and Sarah Bowmar posted a video on their YouTube channel of Josh taking a bear with a spear. That’s right, Josh speared the bear, kind of like hunting was done for tens of thousands of years. The bear was taken legally, ethically and morally. Of course for some, the only responsible and safe way to harvest an animal is to buy it at the grocery store, pre-sliced or ground.



The anti-hunting crowd got wind of the video and exploded with their own special brand of social justice warrior righteous indignation. The pitchfork mafia then launched a petition to pressure Under Armour into dumping their sponsorship of the hunter’s wife, Sarah Bowmar.

Business Insider reported that Under Armour signed Sarah earlier this year. She was the centerpiece of the company’s very first women’s hunting campaign, seeking to capitalize on the increasing women’s athletic apparel market.



Illinois social justice warrior Kelsey Brickl launched the change.org petition. I’m embarrassed to say Illinois has more than its fair share of anti-hunting radicals.



A mere 4000 supporters and not even 48-hours after receiving the petition, Under Armour cancelled their sponsorship of Bowman.

From Business Insider:

Quote:Under Armour has ended its endorsement deal with hunter and fitness star Sarah Bowmar after she posted a video to YouTube of her husband, Josh, brutally killing a black bear with a 7-foot homemade spear, The Daily Mirror first reported.

Brickl crowed about her victory, posting her reply from Under Armour at Change.org.

Quote:Victory! Under Armour Severs Ties with Bowmars!

AvZwSIwIRsNkvLL-800x450-noPad.jpg



Under Armour shared similar verbiage to Business Insider:

Quote:“The method used to harvest this animal was reckless and we do not condone it. Under Armour is dedicated to the hunting community and supports hunting that is conducted in compliance with applicable federal, state and local laws and hunting practices that ensure a responsible and safe harvest of the animal.”

If Under Armour is so dedicated to the hunting community, why then were they so quick to dump one of their sponsored hunters when her spouse hunted in compliance with all applicable laws, using hunting practices that ensured a responsible and safe harvest of the animal?

Next question: How long will it be before the social justice warriors demand another pound of flesh after getting taste of Under Armour’s willingness to throw their own overboard for doing that which they love in a legal, moral and ethical manner?

What’s more, how does that make other Under Armour-sponsored people feel? Particularly seeing how, just for doing what they love in a legal, moral, and ethical fashion, Under Armour can easily be pressured into throwing them under the bus to placate the social media pitchfork mafia? Now that the anti-hunters have tasted the blood in the water, how long will it be before even more of them move in seeking another kill?

News of the Baltimore-based apparel company’s quick surrender to the SJWs is still spreading.

Bowhunting.com put it well:

So while hunters have been killing animals with spears since the dawn of mankind, Under Armour has elected to deem Josh and Sarah’s actions as “reckless” despite their legality and the quick recovery of Josh’s bear.

As this story continues to unfold, the question remains if Under Armour will cave in to the pressures of hunters who are urging them to rethink their stance on sponsoring Sarah Bowmar the way they caved to the pressure from the anti-hunting masses.

We also eagerly await comments from the litany of high-profile hunters in the Under Armour camp including Lee & Tiffany Lakosky, Mark & Terry Drury, Jim Shockey, Eva Shockey and Cameron Hanes among others. Will these sponsored hunters speak up in support of the injustice their former teammate faces? Or will their social media feeds go surprisingly quiet in this matter? Only time will tell.

Bowhunting.com has updated their post with some videos from notables in the hunting world.
 
i have taken a few moments to write both cabela's and bass pro shops regarding this issue and the fact that they have Under Armour products on their shelves. I strongly encourage everyone to do the same. Please feel free to craft your own feelings about this, or even use the remarks i sent to bass pro as a template to expand on.

As outdoors enthusiasts we need to stand up and let company's know how we feel about things like this.


Originally Posted By: "my response to retailers"To Whom it may concern,

As a loyal Bass Pro Shops customer, i wanted to address an issue with one of your brands, and my displeasure of how they've treated the hunting community recently.

It has come to my attention that Under Armour has recently, due to some social media pressure, dropped its sponsorship of Sarah Bowmar. Apparently this stems from the posting of a video of her husband legally & ethically harvesting a bear with a spear.

The fact that they would drop her endorsement as one of the lead figures in their female hunters ad campaign because of something like this is distressing to say the least.

As an avid outdoorsman myself who's spent a lifetime legally taking many different types of game, for a company such as Under Armour to fold on something like this is disheartening to say the least, especially when the punishment doesnt fit the supposed "crime" - and i use that phrase loosely since no crime was committed. No less were the actions in question even taken by Sarah in the first place.

So now a company that expects us outdoors enthusiasts to support them and wants a big hunk of our clothing budgets is pulling the advertising relationship of one of its female hunters due to the (legal!) actions of her husband.

While i could understand this kind of backlash had she done something illegal or unethical while taking game - nothing of the sort happened. The actions taken were by her husband and well within the legal and ethical confines of hunting.

I was in the market to replace my base layer gear this fall in anticipation of the upcoming hunting season. I can guarantee you at this point that nothing they can do will put Under Armour clothing lines back on my perspective shopping list with your company. I find their actions against Sarah as a complete betrayal to her and the hunting community as a whole. They've lost any potential future business from me permanently.

Additionally, as a loyal shopper of your establishment i would strongly encourage you to remove their clothing line from your stores & website. If you were to keep them as a product line in your establishment it would be akin to agreeing with their stance regarding this incident. Supporting their product lines by keeping them on your shelves - both actual and virtual - would go against everything Bass Pro Shops does to support the legal and ethical taking of game species.

We as outdoorsmen (and women) need to stand strong on this and give Under Armor a heartfelt message where they'll feel it most - in their bottom line.

I sincerely hope that as a company Bass Pro SHops will stand with its customers and fight against this kind of nonsense toward the hunting community.

I look forward to your reply to this e-mail and will judge Bass Pro Shops formal corporate stance on this issue when i consider where to spend my outdoors budget in the future, especailly where it concerns clothing and attire.

Thank you for your time.
 
Here's the video in question. I watched it when it was first posted in July and actually sent it to several friends. I certainly never expected any backlash but maybe I'm naive. I was just impressed with the size of Bowmar's balls.


 
If that's how they want to act. That's fine, i won't buy their product and won't buy the products of the Hunters that are sponsored by them.

Shockey is always hocking a ton of stuff. Won't listen or buy now.

I just can't understand why these companies are such a group of pansies.
 
This isn't surprising given that we hunters are such a small subset of their overall customer base. It doesn't really hurt their bottom line to tick us off, but the same can't be said for the millions of recreational sports players they rely on to keep them profitable. It's unfortunate, but true. I wish it were otherwise, but these are the kinds of reactions we can expect from controversial social media posts.
 
I don't know DR... In the opposite respect, there are a lot of hunters who play ball. They tick hunters off, and they quit buying under armor for hunting and ball playing purposes and it could have a far greater impact than they think.


I always thought their goodies were overpriced to begin with. Never have owned a UA product.
 
i'm with rocky, they may have a sizable part of their income in the recreational sport world aside from the hunting/fishing crowd, but there's a big enough chunk of us out there that if that income stopped would make them pay attention.


they have a HUGE segment of clothing lines targeted at hunters of all stripes - just look at cabela's and see how much camo crap UA sells

http://www.cabelas.com/catalog/search/?N=&Ntk=AllProducts&Ntt=under%2Barmour&Ntx=mode%2Bmatchallpartial&WTz_l=Header%3BSearch-All%2BProducts&WTz_srn=SeeAllItems&WTz_stype=SP&form_state=searchForm&search=under%2Barmour&searchTypeByFilter=TopRated&x=10&y=6

they carry (according to the search) 802 different UA items... and as you scroll through the pages a SIGNIFICANT portion of that stuff is camo. and while i appreciate that as a brand, this camo targeted items may only represent 10 or 15% of their total product line... from a company as big as UA - you can bet that still represents a good portion of their income stream.


especailly from big corporations like Cabela's and Bass Pro..... who can afford to carry huge inventory levels (think not of physical items, but the $ value associated with this high priced stuff) of their products.


which is why if we as a hunting community need to share our displeasure where it can really make a difference, places like Cabela's and Bass Pro are a fantastic place to start. Those kind of retail outlets know who butters their bread. and yes while i'm sure a portion of it is the hippy tree hugging backpacker w/ hipster beards & manbuns, they sure arent spending the kind of money at cabela's that the shooting and hunting crowd does when you factor in firearms and ammo into that sale figure along with clothing lines.
 
You can go to their website and click chat with us at the top. I did and filled out the required info to chat. When they hooked me up to John M. I told him I and many friends owned quite a bit of their products, even willing to pay the higher price. I then told him that by dismissing the Bowmars and caving to the liberals they had stepped on their dick. As soon as I typed the word dick it cut me off saying it took too long for me to respond. I'm done.
 
i just had a chat with John M to... and his only response is to e-mail mediarelations@underarmour.com as thats wehre they request all feedback regarding the Bowmar's should be directed.

his "offical" job is only to handle website related questions.
 
Thx plant, here's what I sent

I have purchased many UA products as have many of my friends. We've been willing to spend the extra bucks, but alas, no more.

You guys really stepped on your dick this time. It's not nice to bite the hand that feeds you. Actually, it's kind of stupid. We are starting an email

campaign to Cabela's and Bass Pro asking that they stand up for their customers by refusing to carry your products or risk losing our business also.

None of your customers asked you to join in with liberal PC idiots who don't use your products anyway. I suggest that if you doubt my sincerity you check

the many online hunting forums to see the backlash while you watch your revenues drop like a rock. You owe the Bowmars a huge apology as well as

your customer base. They did nothing illegal and are enjoyed by most of your customer base. We'll be awaiting your response and not sending money

your way until corrective action is taken.

Thank you
 
Never cared to try the over priced crap in the first place but I would guess that a lot of hunters especially the TV personality type wont care what they did and will still endorse/use it.
 
UA is the tennis shoe ball playing crowd that jumped on the hunting band wagon to make some extra coin from the fan boys. Cabelas had compression fit undies and polyprolene cold weather gear long before the overpriced UA came along. This is an easy boycott for me because I dont even wear their sneakers. And I sure dont need an 80 dollar hoodie.

I always liked the companies that do one thing. Whatever happened to that.
 
Back
Top