Under Armour Updates Post on TPA Plans, Requests Headline Correction
Posted by Buzz Beeler on 20th July 2018

The Baltimore Post was contacted by Under Armour regarding our recent article about UA being AWOL at Tradepoint Atlantic.

Following a phone conversation, we received the following email. For privacy reasons, we redacted the name of UA’s Director of Corporate Communications.

Hello Buzz –
Thank you for taking my call earlier. I’m glad I was able to reach you this time. As a follow-up to our conversation, providing a statement regarding UA’s distribution facility at Tradepoint Atlantic.
Under Armour Statement:
“Our vision for the distribution house at Tradepoint Atlantic remains the same. It will be a top-notch service engine to support our direct-to-consumer business to deliver the right product, to the right place at the right time. The facility will be fully operational in 2019.”
We would appreciate a correction to the headline of the story you published on July 19th based on our response.

While we appreciate UA returning our call, and while we can understand the corporate positioning that motivated the request for us to correct our story, we have decided not to change our position.

We have several reasons for sticking to our guns. Some of the points supporting our position can be found in another previous article, which you can read by clicking on the following image:

Is UA “MIA” at TPA?

During our phone conversation with UA, we asked if there is a signed lease (versus a memorandum of “right of first refusal”) between UA and TPA. That lack of a signed lease is what prompted us to state that UA is AWOL at TPA.

Unfortunately, UA’s representative could not confirm that a lease has been signed. For that reason, we are not going to change our headline.

Interestingly enough, we had received the following quote from TPA after we posed the same question in a previous Baltimore Post article dated November 1, 2017:

Mr. Beeler,

A lease agreement has been signed and executed.



Aaron Tomarchio



There you have it, folks. Two seeming conflicting viewpoints from two different spokespersons regarding the status of the same property. Who is right? The UA spokesperson who can’t confirm that a lease has been signed, or the TPA spokesperson who claims that the lease has been signed and executed?

In our quest to be fair, we make the following offer to UA: If the company sends us photographs of the logistic operations–photos that clearly illustrate progress toward completion–we will be glad to publish those photographs.

After all, what company would spend money building out a facility without a signed lease agreement in place?

Folks, our goal is to inform our readers of the actual facts concerning these business deals, which will have a significant impact on the local economy, infrastructure, and overall quality of life. We all must remember that the number of jobs is not what will have the most impact on the economy. Rather, we should focus on the level and status of those jobs (entry level vs. management, full time vs. part time, permanent vs. temporary/seasonal), as well as whether or not the jobs promised will pay a living wage.

As always, our motto is, “You read; You decide.”

The Baltimore Post by the numbers from February, 2017 to July, 20th 2018:

Sessions – 429,106

Users – 284,229

Page Views –  617,194

Please disable your AdBlocker so our free service can continue delivering you breaking news, insightful analysis, and a collection of aggregated content that will keep you informed like no other.