In a February 2017 CNBC interview, Under Armour founder and CEO Kevin Plank praised then-President Donald Trump as 'a real asset for the country,' citing his pro-business stance. The comment came just after the administration's travel ban and ignited immediate criticism on social media.
The backlash was amplified by Under Armour's own endorsers. Stephen Curry, the company's highest-profile athlete, said the comment was an 'asset' only if you removed the last two letters. Dwayne 'The Rock' Johnson called the remarks divisive, and ballerina Misty Copeland said they contradicted her values. Within days Plank published a full-page open letter in The Baltimore Sun clarifying that the words did not reflect his intent and stating the company opposed the travel ban.
The episode resurfaced in August 2017 when Plank resigned from Trump's American Manufacturing Council after the Charlottesville violence. That move drew a counter-boycott from Trump supporters. For months, Under Armour had to manage a brand crisis that came not from a product failure but from a CEO's political remark.
Plank's praise read as political alignment, clashing with brand's diversity image; he quit Trump council, but the brand crisis cost months of damage control.
Plank framed the comment as business praise, but consumers and athletes read it as political alignment during a polarised moment.
Under Armour's brand identity rested on diversity and inclusion messaging, which made a pro-Trump statement feel inconsistent to its endorsers and audience.
The remarks came from the CEO personally, but they were attributed to the brand because the founder and chief executive is inseparable from a young company.
The company lacked a pre-prepared way to separate Plank's personal politics from corporate values, so every clarification looked reactive.
When a founder-CEO speaks, the market hears the brand. Personal political praise becomes corporate positioning unless the separation is built in advance.
Plank stayed CEO until 2020, when Patrik Frisk took over. Under Armour's stock and North American sales remained under pressure for years, though many factors beyond the Trump controversy contributed. The case is still cited as an example of founder-driven brand risk.
FOLLOW THE EVIDENCE