Portuguese 
English 
Spanish 
5 min of reading 
0 comments 
Nike announced this Thursday (23) the layoff of approximately 1,400 employees, with cuts concentrated in the technology area. The measure is part of a plan to optimize operations and integrate the supply chain, as the company faces a multi-year sales decline and sees its shares accumulate a loss of more than half their value in three years to competitors such as On, Hoka, and Anta.
Nike has just confirmed that it is cutting approximately 1,400 jobs, equivalent to just under 2% of its global workforce. The technology area will be the most affected by the cuts, which are part of a restructuring aimed at concentrating technological operations in two main hubs: Oregon, in the United States, and India. In a memo sent to employees, the company stated that the measure seeks to streamline processes and better integrate its supply chain at a time when sales continue to fall.
Market numbers tell a story that goes far beyond the 1,400 laid off. Nike’s shares have fallen by more than half their value in the last three years, a period in which competitors like On, Hoka, and Anta gained ground with products that won over consumers who were previously loyal to the swoosh brand. CEO Elliott Hill, who took over in 2024, promised to reposition the company with a focus on sports like running and soccer and faster new product launches, but analysts believe the efforts have been inconsistent.
What motivated the layoff of 1,400 employees at Nike
According to information released by the G1 portal, the decision didn’t come out of nowhere. In January, Nike had already cut 775 positions as part of a strategy to accelerate the automation of internal processes. The new cuts of 1,400 positions deepen this restructuring and signal that the company is prioritizing operational efficiency over team expansion, a change in stance for a brand that for decades grew by hiring and investing in innovation with increasingly larger teams.
-
The UN’s Adaptation Fund approved nearly US$134 million in projects, but received over US$1.3 billion in proposals, exposing the size of the queue of vulnerable countries requesting climate aid without sufficient funds to meet their needs.
-
The Finance Ministry enters the field with a new proposal for renegotiating rural debts and tries to unlock a project that could involve up to R$ 30 billion for producers affected by droughts and floods.
-
Electricity bills rise for 22 million Brazilians in 8 states after Aneel’s decision, the increase reaches over 15%; see if your state is on the list!
-
Correios are seeking more money from banks, but say they don’t need to use the R$ 8 billion billion-dollar limit.
The concentration of cuts in the technology area reflects a geographical reorganization. Nike wants to centralize its technical operations in Oregon and India, eliminating redundancies in offices spread across other countries. For affected employees, the message is that the company is not abandoning technology, but reorganizing where and how it is developed. For the market, the interpretation is that Nike is cutting costs to try to recover margins that have been eroded by falling sales.
How Nike lost more than half its value in three years
The fall in Nike’s shares over the last three years is a reflection of problems that accumulated during the previous management. The company heavily invested in direct-to-consumer sales and reduced its presence in multi-brand retailers, a decision that initially seemed correct but ultimately narrowed the brand’s reach and opened space for smaller competitors to occupy shelves that were once dominated by the swoosh.
At the same time, Nike was slow to renew its product portfolio. While the company continued to bet on classic models like Air Force 1 and Dunk, brands like On and Hoka launched footwear with cushioning technologies that attracted runners and casual consumers looking for novelty. Anta, a Chinese giant, aggressively advanced in the Asian market, a territory that Nike considered consolidated. The result was an erosion of market share that translated into the devaluation of its shares.
Who are the competitors taking market share from Nike
The names that bother Nike most today are not Adidas or Puma, historical adversaries who also face challenges. On, a Swiss brand founded in 2010, grew with running shoes that combine minimalist design and patented cushioning technology, winning over an audience that previously automatically migrated to Nike models. The company went public in 2021 and has since seen its shares rise while those of its American rival plummeted.
Hoka, acquired by Deckers Brands, followed a similar path by betting on maximalist soles that became a phenomenon among runners and in the casual market. Anta, in turn, uses production and distribution scale in China to offer competitive products at lower prices, capturing consumers in a market where **Nike** charges a premium. The combination of these three fronts created competitive pressure that the company had not faced since the 1990s, when Adidas threatened its hegemony.
What CEO Elliott Hill plans to reverse the decline
Elliott Hill took over **Nike**’s leadership in 2024 with the mission of reconnecting the brand to sport and accelerating the product innovation cycle. The stated strategy is to return to its roots, prioritizing categories such as running, basketball, and football instead of relying excessively on lifestyle models that have saturated the market. Hill also promised to restore relationships with multi-brand retailers who were harmed by the previous focus on direct sales.
The personnel **cuts** are part of this plan, but analysts question whether the restructuring is deep enough to reverse the trajectory. Dismissing 1,400 employees in a company with over 70,000 collaborators does not change the competitive equation, and the real test will be **Nike**’s ability to launch products that win back consumers who have migrated to **competitors**. The **sales** in the coming quarters will tell if Hill’s strategy is a course correction or just a cosmetic adjustment in a company that needs more radical transformation.
What the layoffs mean for the future of the world’s largest sports brand
**Nike** remains the largest sports brand on the planet in revenue and recognition, but the gap to **competitors** is narrowing. The loss of more than half of its stock value in three years is not just a financial problem: it’s a sign that the market doubts the company’s ability to reinvent itself at the pace current consumers demand. The era when simply putting the swoosh on a product guaranteed record **sales** is over.
For the 1,400 employees laid off, the impact is immediate and personal. For Nike as a company, the cuts are a bet that fewer people doing the right things produce more results than large teams operating in dispersed structures. If Hill gets the combination of product, distribution, and speed right, **Nike** can regain its leading role. If he fails, the next **cuts** could be much larger than those announced this Thursday.
Do you still buy Nike or have you already switched to brands like On, Hoka, or another competitor? Tell us in the comments what made you switch or stay loyal to the brand; we want to know if Nike still represents what it used to for you.
Be the first to react!