In 1948, two brothers, Adi and Rudolf Dassler, owned the biggest shoe company in the world. But their success didn’t last. What started as a collaboration between two talented minds in the footwear industry soon spiraled into a bitter feud that tore their family and business apart. The story of how Adidas and Puma came to be is one of intense competition, personal betrayal, and groundbreaking marketing strategies that still affect the world of sports today. Let’s dive into the history of Adidas vs. Puma and the legacy that lives on.
The Early Years: Gebrüder Dassler Schuhfabrik
In 1919, two brothers from Herzogenaurach, Germany, Adolf “Adi” and Rudolf “Rudi” Dassler, founded the Gebrüder Dassler Schuhfabrik—Dassler Brothers Shoe Factory.
- Adi Dassler focused on craftsmanship, designing shoes with an eye for performance.
- Rudi Dassler handled the business side, overseeing sales and strategy.
From the beginning, the two brothers had complementary skills. Their first major success came at the 1928 Olympics when German runner Lina Radke won gold and set a world record, thanks to her innovative spiked track shoes from the Dassler factory. This event marked the beginning of the Dassler brothers’ commitment to getting athletes to wear their footwear—a strategy that would revolutionize sports marketing.
Global Recognition: The 1936 Berlin Olympics
The 1936 Berlin Olympics were a turning point for the Dassler brothers. Jesse Owens, an African American athlete, wore Dassler shoes during the games and won four gold medals. Owens’ success was a game-changer for the brothers and solidified their position in the sports world. Athletes wearing their shoes claimed seven gold, five silver, and five bronze medals—further establishing Dassler shoes as the footwear of champions.
The Turning Point: The Nazi Party and World War II
In the early 1930s, both brothers joined the Nazi Party. While both shared Nazi ideals, Rudolf was known to be more devoted to the cause. When World War II broke out, their factory was repurposed to produce military equipment, further straining the relationship between the two brothers. Tensions between Adi and Rudi reached a breaking point during the war.
The Betrayal
The rift between the brothers deepened when Rudi was drafted into the German military and sent to the front lines. He believed that Adi and his wife had conspired to get him drafted, feeling betrayed by his own brother. Meanwhile, rumors and accusations swirled about their wives’ strained relationship, fueling the animosity. Eventually, Rudi was arrested twice by Allied forces, and he blamed Adi for betraying him to the authorities.
The Split: Birth of Adidas and Puma
By 1948, the tension between the brothers had reached a breaking point. They decided to go their separate ways. Adi kept the original factory and created Adidas, a name derived from his own nickname “Adi” and the first syllable of “Dassler.” Meanwhile, Rudi moved across the river and founded Puma (originally called “Ruda” after his own name).
The split didn’t just affect the brothers; it divided their entire hometown of Herzogenaurach. The community became polarized, with businesses aligning themselves with either Adidas or Puma. Marrying someone from the other company became taboo, and entire families were torn apart by their allegiance to one brand or the other.
The Fierce Rivalry: Adidas vs. Puma
The division between Adidas and Puma fueled a fierce rivalry that lasted for decades. Both companies pushed each other to innovate and grow. As they battled for dominance in the footwear market, they set the stage for groundbreaking marketing strategies and athlete endorsements that would change the sports business forever.
The Pelé Pact and the Marketing War
In the 1970 World Cup, a monumental event occurred that exemplified the rivalry between the two companies. Both Adidas and Puma agreed not to sign football legend Pelé to avoid any disputes that could damage their brands during such a high-profile event.
However, Puma broke the pact. They secretly negotiated with Pelé and offered him an astonishing deal:
- $25,000 for the duration of the World Cup
- $100,000 for the following four years
- 10% royalties on his signature shoe line
This groundbreaking endorsement deal helped cement the idea of athlete endorsements as a powerful marketing tool in the sports world. From then on, sponsoring top athletes became a crucial component of any sports brand’s strategy.
The Brothers’ Legacy: A Feud That Lasted Beyond Death
Despite their professional success, Adi and Rudi never reconciled. The feud extended into their final years. Rudi passed away in 1974, followed by Adi in 1978. The brothers were buried at opposite ends of the same cemetery in Herzogenaurach—ironically, in a final gesture of separation.
Both companies remained in family control until 1989, but even after the Dassler families lost ownership, the fierce rivalry between Adidas and Puma continued to drive both brands forward.
The Nike Takeover
While Adidas and Puma were locked in their intense competition, neither of them saw the rise of another shoe company—Nike. Today, Nike reigns as the leader of the sports shoe industry, with annual sales of $51 billion. Adidas generates $24 billion, and Puma brings in $8.5 billion.
Yet, despite this shift in market dynamics, the rivalry between Adidas and Puma left an indelible mark on the footwear industry. Their competition:
- Pushed both companies to innovate in design and performance.
- Created groundbreaking marketing strategies, including athlete endorsements and sponsorships.
- Helped transform footwear into a multi-billion-dollar global industry.
Conclusion: The Legacy Lives On
The story of Adidas vs. Puma is one of rivalry, innovation, and legacy. What started as a passionate family feud turned into a battle that reshaped the sports business and left behind a legacy that still influences the industry today. While the brands now compete with more players than ever before, the history of their rivalry will always remind us of the power of competition, the importance of innovation, and how family ties can shape—and sometimes shatter—empires.
