se decreased by 44 per cent year-over-year (YoY) in Q2 to $24 million, down from $43 million in the same period in 2024. In a research note issued on Monday, BNP Paribas Equity Research senior analyst Laurent Vasilescu suggested that Nike may be considering a sale of its Converse brand due to the brand’s poor performance. “We’ve never seen a 44 per cent decline in demand creation for a brand,” wrote Vasilescu. “With Nike pulling back on so much demand creation, the company may be evaluating strategic alternatives for Converse. A potential divestiture would not be Nike’s first.  “Rather, it would cap off a long history of divestitures from Cole Haan, Umbro, Starter, Bauer, and Hurley. A divestiture of Converse would complete the divestiture of all of Nike’s acquired brands, a further testament that brand acquisition is hard to pull off.” Scott Benedict, the founder and CEO of Benedict Enterprises, remarked that Nike’s potential sale of Converse speaks volumes about how even category leaders recalibrate when brand fit, focus, and long-term value creation are on the line. “As consumer behavior evolves, brands are increasingly forced to ask: Where do we play, and where do we let others lead? Nike’s decision suggests that doubling down on core performance and direct-to-consumer strength outweighs managing a heritage lifestyle brand outside its growing sweet spot.” Experts weigh in on keeping or cutting Converse from Nike’s brand portfolio Converse has such a strong heritage in the footwear industry that it is a shame to see the brand’s lackluster performance as of late. Since first entering the scene in 1908, Converse has been a major symbol of style in pop culture and sports.  This includes its role in the basketball scene, with the classic Chuck Taylor silhouette dating back to the 1920s, and its adoption in the 1990s as a symbol of individuality and rebellion among punks, artists, and other tastemakers. However, as analyst Neil Saunders, managing director at GlobalData, remarked, heritage alone is not enough to make a brand relevant for younger generations of consumers. “The high-level problem with Converse is that it is a weak brand in a highly competitive market and it is simply not drawing enough attention from consumers in the way it needs,” he said. “This has led to a grave decline in market share.” He noted that one of the main issues with Converse is that its product range has become quite dull. “All this stems from a weak innovation pipeline over a long period of time. Where Converse has innovated, it has mostly been with tweaking the traditional lines with things like different heels or shapes, which have not been enough to excite or expand its consumer base.” Without fresh, compelling designs or a clear brand direction, Converse risks losing relevance in a crowded market. In many ways, it’s a victim of its own success, with its name so closely associated with a certain type of design. “Nike could revive Converse, but it is a tall order – and one that is far more difficult than the revival of the core brand,” concluded Saunders. In alignment with Saunders’s perspective, retail analyst Scott Benedict remarked, “Owning a beloved brand isn’t always enough. If the synergy with strategic priorities isn’t strong, it can dilute innovation, allocation of resources, and overall consumer clarity. This move signals a willingness to sharpen the competitive edge.” However, other retail analysts, such as CI&T’s global director of retail strategy, Melissa Minkow, feel that keeping Converse within the Nike portfolio is a worthwhile investment. “If I were Nike, I personally would not choose to sell off Converse, especially considering how swiftly other brands in the footwear and various retail spaces have been able to achieve impressive turnarounds.” Minkow also noted that Nike’s main struggles within its overall portfolio stem more from declining overseas sales and its shift to largely direct-to-consumer operations, rather than from its prior focus on wholesale relationships. “Selling off Converse doesn’t really fix either of those problems. Instead, Nike should be more deeply leveraging some of the techniques they have been using to boost their own namesake brand, such as mass customization tools, which are much more advanced now thanks to AI, clever marketing campaigns, and experiential collaborations.” Regardless of whether Nike decides to reinvest in Converse or simply hand it over to another corporation to manage, this situation highlights the importance of consistent image innovation without overreliance on brand legacy. Further reading: ‘Signs of progress’: Nike results suggest rebuild is working