Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Which Golfer Deserves More Endorsements?
Examiner.com ^ | 04/15/10 | Rob Binsrick

Posted on 04/15/2010 4:42:03 AM PDT by Desperado67

As is true for most professional athletes, PGA golfers are often showered with endorsement money from golf suppliers and other companies to advertise and be spokesmen for their products and services. Some golfers have obviously done better than others in the endorsement market, which is often determined by the exposure that certain golfers receive during television broadcasts of golf tournaments and elsewhere. Certainly other criteria come into play as well in terms of which golfers companies want out there hawking their products and services for them.

A quick analysis of two golfers shows some of the criteria that companies must evaluate in determining which athletes they will use for endorsements.

(Excerpt) Read more at examiner.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Hobbies; Sports
KEYWORDS: golf; masters; mickelson; tiger

1 posted on 04/15/2010 4:42:04 AM PDT by Desperado67
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Desperado67

The one that will earn the most money for said sponsors. Period.


2 posted on 04/15/2010 4:44:18 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

Ha. Saved me the trouble of writing the same thing. If Tiger is in the hunt on Sunday, I’ll watch. If he’s not, I won’t. Simple as that.


3 posted on 04/15/2010 4:45:44 AM PDT by thefactor (yes, as a matter of fact, i DID only read the excerpt)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

I like your answer. It reminds me of an interview Rush gave on 60 Minutes MANY years ago. They asked him, “What is your goal?”. Rush answered, “My goal is to get as big an audience as I can and hold that audience for as long as I can so I can charge confiscatory advertising rates.”

It did my capitalist heart good. :)


4 posted on 04/15/2010 4:47:53 AM PDT by Artemis Webb (Any dissent means you are a troll.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

Thank you.


5 posted on 04/15/2010 4:54:13 AM PDT by cripplecreek (Remember the River Raisin! (look it up))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch
The one that will earn the most money for said sponsors. Period.

Ditto, was going to say the exact same thing.

6 posted on 04/15/2010 5:06:24 AM PDT by mnehring
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

Absolutely. Morality has no place in public life.


7 posted on 04/15/2010 5:20:53 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Desperado67

In the name of economic justice, they should all receive the same amount from endorsements and that income should be taxed at a 98% rate, because they don’t really need it.


8 posted on 04/15/2010 5:24:08 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

I’ll bite... so it’s moral to say that someone should receive higher endorsement money based on the feeling that they are a “good guy” and that the other guy is a “bad guy” and not based on his potential to actually earn more money for the sponsors?


9 posted on 04/15/2010 5:38:19 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

“The one that will earn the most money for said sponsors. Period.”

Amen.


10 posted on 04/15/2010 5:40:47 AM PDT by Grimmy (equivocation is but the first step along the road to capitulation)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

Time to crawl back into your leftist hole.


11 posted on 04/15/2010 5:42:29 AM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a tea party descendant - steeped in the Constitutional legacy handed down by the Founders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

BTW, my first reply was based on my assumption that you were being sarcastic. If you were serious then disregard my reply... :-)


12 posted on 04/15/2010 5:43:02 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea

I took their reply to be a tongue-in-cheek poke at the “social/economic justice” whackjobs...


13 posted on 04/15/2010 5:44:27 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wyatt's Torch

I’m assuming that this is all “Tiger related”, and my point is if that the sponsors can make money with Tiger, then they shouldn’t consider his morals, anymore than a record company should worry about what a rap star spews on the air or how he lives his personal life. Morals have no place in the economic equation. If there’s money to be made, then make it.


14 posted on 04/15/2010 6:00:01 AM PDT by Wolfie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea

I’m going to report you to the Commission on Human Rights, you right wing meanie.


15 posted on 04/15/2010 6:02:15 AM PDT by centurion316
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

Got it. We agree.


16 posted on 04/15/2010 6:29:20 AM PDT by Wyatt's Torch (I can explain it to you. I can't understand it for you.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Artemis Webb

“confiscatory advertising rates.”

By definition, any rates reached by mutual voluntary agreement cannot be confiscatory. Rush’s surely are higher than those commanded by Air America’s, but only because advertisers can pay these rates and still make enough extra money from such ads that it is worth the higher price.


17 posted on 04/15/2010 7:42:37 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: centurion316

LOL...:)


18 posted on 04/15/2010 7:50:16 AM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea (I am a tea party descendant - steeped in the Constitutional legacy handed down by the Founders)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Wolfie

“Morals have no place in the economic equation.”

Well, it’s not just about short-term dollars and cents. I think many companies are concerned about “reputation” or “brand” and take great pains not to sully it. A company like Disney won’t sign a contract with a rapper sleazeball simply because any short-term profits from such a “business” arrangement simply aren’t worth the tarnishing of their reputation. They want to remain “squeaky clean.”

Now you can argue that this simply means that such companies are maximizing their long run profitability. That may be true, but consider the case of OJ. He was acquitted of murder, yet advertisers would have nothing to do with him, even for ads targeting the black community (a majority of whom believe his verdict was just). It just seemed like someone other than a profit-and-loss calculus was at work.


19 posted on 04/15/2010 7:50:41 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: thefactor

The nice thing about woods not playing as much is that we finally get to see that there are other players playing some pretty good golf


20 posted on 04/15/2010 7:58:28 AM PDT by saltydog11
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: centurion316
In the name of economic justice...

Har!! Good one. Thanks.

21 posted on 04/15/2010 8:52:17 AM PDT by laotzu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: saltydog11

I quit watching because of Tiger. I love to see some of the new talent coming in golf. You don’t see anyone else if Tiger is playing.


22 posted on 04/15/2010 8:54:34 AM PDT by KYGrandma (The sun shines bright on my old Kentucky home......)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Desperado67

who? The first ‘big three’that is who....Slammin’ Sammy Snead, Bantam Ben Hogan and Byron Nelson. Then the next ‘big three’..Jack, Arnie and Gary. Look it up younger FReepers if you do not know these MEN. Tiger??........


23 posted on 10/01/2010 8:28:13 PM PDT by bobby.223
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson