In a series of tweets, the senator said the manufacturing jobs would have been created in Nigeria, according to him, if the contract had been given to a firm in Aba rather than Nike, more job opportunities would have been created.
Just imagine if those 3 million Nigerian Super Eagles jerseys were made by a firm in Aba rather than @Nike. Aba tailors have the capacity to produce them. We just lost an opportunity to infuse at least $100 million into the Nigerian economy and provide jobs for our youths.
— Ben Murray-Bruce (@benmurraybruce) June 1, 2018
One of his followers took him up with some pointed questions, countering the senator Bruce to which he replied that he was talking about manufacturing not marketing.
1. Value chain does not begin and end with manufacturing.
2. No Aba firm dead or alive has the brand and marketing capital to generate such demand.
3. Let’s not talk about the capital to tie down $100m in inventory
4. What value will manufacturing in Aba add to the product? https://t.co/qqJIUJiPKU— Amara Nwankpa (@Nwankpa_A) June 1, 2018
Thanks for your tweet. I talked about manufacturing not marketing. @Nike doesn’t make jerseys at its base in Europe or America. They‘re generally made in Asia. Instead of Asia, make them in Aba. Nike could then market. As to question 4, I’m stunned you ask https://t.co/FsnHuFY4MA
— Ben Murray-Bruce (@benmurraybruce) June 1, 2018
According to him, if Nike had been persuaded to manufacture the jerseys in Nigeria instead of Asia, it would have been a win win situation for all.
It is a win/win situation. If we persuaded @Nike to manufacture our team’s jerseys in Aba instead of Asia, we would all have benefited. Nike would make money from marketing, the Nigerian economy makes money from products made in Aba and our youths get jobs even if temporary.
— Ben Murray-Bruce (@benmurraybruce) June 1, 2018
