2. What was the main objective of the campaign? 4. What was their promotional strategy? Do you approve such a strategy? What was the main criticism and how would you respond to it? 6. How would you measure the effectiveness of the campaign? 2. The main objective of the campaign was to “gain an edge over the competition and reenergize its business in the US”, meaning that Adidas had the goal to (re)gain some of the market share and revitalize its image in the eyes of the national consumers 3. Adidas mainly focuses on people who are around 13-30 years of age, who are into sports. Their products are affordable but the quality is of high end. It was launched only for sports people, but with the changing trends, people of other disciplines also started purchasing the products due to its high quality. As noted in the study paper, the campaign was focused on 12- to 24-year-old consumers involved in sports. 4. The promotional strategy was to reach American consumers and to improve the company’s market share in the US, with television, print, and Internet advertising, featuring some of the elite athletes from various sports and based on “overcoming the impossible”. The criticism of not focusing on the products is not really pertinent if we consider the identity building that this sort of campaign allowed to generate. 5. The elements used were the advertising, (personal) selling, and direct marketing. With the different initiatives promoted, all the way to, for example, encouraging consumers to share ir own stories of overcoming the impossible to succeed, and giving prizes for it, I believe that the elements were all good calls, with the awards that the campaign received coming to show exactly that.