Nike shares, which reached $177.51 in November 2021, had fallen to $33.87 by the 2nd of this month.
That is a decline of about 80.9% from their peak.
Nike’s slump continued in the first quarter of FY2027, with revenue falling 4% year over year to $11.213 billion.
How did Nike, once seemingly untouchable in the sportswear market, end up here?
There are several reasons for Nike’s prolonged slump, but China has been one of its biggest challenges. Recent revenue in Greater China fell 22% year over year to $1.18 billion, deepening Nike’s decline in the Chinese market.
But it was not Nike’s China sales that recently caught enthusiasts’ attention.
It was a comment by Nike CEO Elliott Hill about the Jordan brand’s retro products.
Hill recently concluded that oversupplying Jordan’s iconic retro products had eroded the brand’s value.
He said Nike would reduce the quantities and release frequency of some Jordan retro products going forward.
Jordan has reissued a range of retro products recently, but sales have declined nonetheless.
Jordan brand revenue fell from $8.701 billion in FY2024 to $7.27 billion in FY2025 and $7.034 billion in FY2026, a decline of about 19.2% over two years.
But were frequent releases and large quantities really the only reasons Jordan’s sales fell?
Of course, putting more products on the market than demand can support may diminish their scarcity.
But explaining Jordan’s current struggles simply by saying it made too many products leaves one question unanswered.
Why did the market stop absorbing that volume as it once did?
Perhaps Jordan needs to look again at changing consumer tastes, not just supply.
Long associated with hip-hop and street culture, the Jordan brand grew alongside a major cultural movement in the mid-to-late 2010s.
Show Me the Money became hugely popular in South Korea, as did The Rap of China in China, while streetwear and sneaker culture moved to the center of fashion.
Amid this shift, Jordan became more than a basketball shoe brand: it became a symbol of the culture of the time, and its sales grew rapidly.
The COVID-19 pandemic made the situation even more unusual.
Strong demand, supply disruptions and limited release quantities made Jordans even scarcer, and popular products repeatedly sold out as soon as they were released.
At the time, it was not just established retro products that drew attention. Even products whose main draw was having “Jordan 1” in their name attracted interest.
Nike’s share price also reached a historic high during this period.
But as the pandemic ended and fashion trends changed, so did the sneakers consumers sought.
A few years ago, bulky, striking silhouettes like the Air Jordan led the market. More recently, lower-profile, slimmer shoes such as the Nike Total 90 and Adidas Tokyo have drawn attention.
Jordan has not disappeared; rather, consumers’ criteria for choosing shoes have become far more varied.
Reducing Jordan Retro releases could help Nike cut discounts and excess inventory while restoring the products’ scarcity.
But whether reducing supply will make consumers want those products again is another matter.
Ultimately, Jordan’s next challenge seems less about how few pairs to make than about which Jordans people will want to own again.
