buuhhh... not even tasteless, not now.

although, i don't give a f*** about nike, ugly sweatshopbrand should be banned anyway! but that's another issue...

btw: the logo designer got 35$ for the swoosh layout. and now it's one of the biggest brands ever. fair or not?

that reminds me of the eastpack commercials.. , although this one is a little extreme...

is this really an official ad or a fake?
btw. eastpak ads are funny.

who can forget the fake puma ad.

http://blank.antville.org/stories/314684/
http://blank.antville.org/stories/319162/

btw.. this has to be fake!!!!

i think someone just found the pic with the shoe close up and thought it would be fun .. the graphics are a bit sh.te

where did you find it.. ?

Of course the ad above is fake.

And yes it is perfectly fair that the designer of the swoosh got $35. If he hadn't been happy with it he should have kept the design to himself and sold at a higher price (or royalty based payments). There is little that annoys me more than people saying something isn't fair after the benefit of hindsight. If he'd been that sure the design (and associated company) would be that successful, he should've charged more money. End of story.

he (or was it a she?) should be happy making such a big impact in the world of brands that no money could ever pay.
it's like the first drummer of the rolling stones who left the band because they weren't successfull at that time... now he's selling hotdogs in front of the wembley stadium - happy and with no regrets. (...i don't think it was his lack of talent as a drummer. no one earns more money by playing one poor drumbeat throughout he's career than charlie watts, the second drummer...)