We’ve already profile Nike a number of times in our media metric updates, but this time I’d like to illustrate the performance beneath the parent brand, namely the rating trend underlying Converse, Hurley and Nike Golf.

It seems like everyone I know at one time owned a pair of Converse sneakers.  My first pair came in the 4th grade when I told my parents that the NBA was my calling in life.   Fortunately for the NBA I didn’t break 5′ 10″, and consequently left MVP opportunities to the likes of LeBron and Curry.

But Converse has been a bright spot in the sneaker business for Nike.  July media numbers show the brand up +7 points or +11 percent to a strong 65 media rating, 4 points ahead of the brand trailing 12-month average.  Converse also moved up the sector ranking by +7 positions!

I don’t know about you guys, but I’m seeing Converse sneakers everywhere, from my two daughters to the jocks at the local 24 Hour Fitness.   The big news was a deliberate comfort addition to the brand’s flagship model, the Chuck Taylor.  The company incorporated a number of Nike elements into the classic Taylors and generated a functional upgrade to immensely popular Converse Chuck Taylor model.

Long term growth is only moderate with year-over-year growth up +5 percent and cumulative growth (CUME) at +2 percent.  The overall rating trend for Converse paints a picture of extreme media volatility with a very slight decline in overall media visibility over the prior 4-year period.  Note that the trendline below fluctuates between 60 and 66 points, a fairly narrow range considering the time period.

Looking significantly further down the media rating scale you find another Nike owned brand, the surf apparel and gear guys at Hurley.  The brand has successfully pulled out of a massive media ratings slide, settling into a solid 12-month moving average rating at 35 points.  The current media cycle saw Hurley jump +3 points or +6 percent to a moderate 41 rating position.  Momentum has been slowly building for Hurley, up +35% for July.  Year-over-year growth is quite strong at +22 percent.  Cumulative growth (CUME) is still underwater given the massive drop in 2013.

Nike Golf (like the parent brand) had an off-media cycle with both Tiger and McIlroy absent from the British Open in July.  Nike Golf is off -2 points or -5 percent at a 43 rating.

In comparison, Under Armour, Adidas and Oakley all had endorsed athletes in the top-10 finishers, with Oakley taking top honors with Zach Johnson the eventual winner.  Apparently, Nike benefits from an event like the British open even when their endorsed athletes are absent.  I tend to disagree, but there is analytic evidence that Nike’s consistent involvement in many sports venues has a cumulative effect on the brands exposure regardless of athlete performance or even presence at an event.

Overall, Nike’s sibling brands had a good media cycle with the exception of Nike Golf which suffered in July due to the absence of Tiger and McIlroy from the highly visible (ratings were up significantly over the prior year) British Open.