Does Djokovic has the worst luck in terms of sponsorship money?

Discussion in 'Pros' Racquets and Gear' started by martini1, Feb 3, 2013.

  1. Sid_Vicious

    Sid_Vicious G.O.A.T.

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2010
    Messages:
    11,681
    Location:
    In The City
    The point is that Federer went through two amazing seasons (2004, 2005) without picking up massive contracts. It was not until January 2008, pretty much the start of Federer's downfall relative to his peak form, that Federer singed a lucrative nike contract that was worth over 100 million dollars for 10 years IIRC. The lifetime endorsement deal with Wilson- Signed sometime mid-2006.Over 2 years after he became number 1. 15 Million dollar rolex endorsement-signed mid 2006.

    And if you look at some of Federer's even bigger deals, they came way after he peaked as tennis player. Mercedes Benz- 2010. 30 million dollar deal with Moet & Chandon- End of 2012. Credit Suisse- 2009. 16 million dollar Jura deal- 2008.

    Djokovic's team has not done anything wrong. It took a while for both Federer and Nadal to buff up their endorsement portfolios and it will most likely take Djokovic time as well. Djokovic has done very well for himself, and nothing can change that.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
    #51
  2. martini1

    martini1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,173
    Federer is Federer, Djoker is Dojker. This thread is not about what contract Fed got in 04 and 05. Different time in tennis and way off topic.

    The ST deal was a blunder. They did not do enough background check on ST's financials and they should always have faith on their man winning it big in the coming year. May be not 3 slams, but at least 2. Simple business school thinking and they just dropped the ball.
     
    #52
  3. Rjtennis

    Rjtennis Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2009
    Messages:
    1,834
    Nole could have gone with anyone, I'm sure Uniqlo was just the best paying suitor. Just because they are not Nike doesn't mean he is not making huge Nike like money. What does the size of the company have to do with anything and Uniqlo is fairly large outside of the US I'm sure he got a huge signing bonus and got paid hefty termination fee with ST as well. Djokovic is doing very well! I'm not sure why you are trying to argue the point that he isn't.

    ST just couldn't afford him over the long term, but he still got paid. There would have been lawsuits filed otherwise.
     
    Last edited: Feb 13, 2013
    #53
  4. sosa09

    sosa09 Semi-Pro

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2009
    Messages:
    684
    Location:
    Tucumán
    He means that djokovic won 4 of 5 GS in 2011 and beggining of 2012.

    In 2011, AO - RG - WIMBLEDON - USO

    In 2012, AO


    Understand?
     
    #54
  5. High street sw19

    High street sw19 Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2013
    Messages:
    281
    Location:
    Off Church road
    I'm pretty sure the day's of specialist tennis brands are on the way out, it's all about media branding. If Nike was relying on RF and it's players to pay for it's lopsided tennis budget by selling tennis gear to the very small tennis market they would be bankrupt. Players now day's (nerds excepted) cannot support the industry costs, especially now that racquet production is all "off shore" in two or three Asian manufacturers and no longer in house.
     
    #55
  6. PhrygianDominant

    PhrygianDominant Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Apr 9, 2012
    Messages:
    2,014
    probably already mentioned but Djokovic is allegedly impossible to negotiate with. He always wants to work in stuff with his family into the deal, but that's just what I heard.
     
    #56
  7. martini1

    martini1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,173
    I read Fast Retailing's (uniqlo's parent co.) financial reports. Not even close compared to Nike. Guess what, Nike is also pretty big outside of the US too.

    It's not about Djokovic doing well compared to an average player on tour looking for any sponsor money day in and day out. It's about his luck (and timing) when doing great in 2011 and yet got very little sponsor money compared to the others.
     
    #57
  8. lawlaw

    lawlaw Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2009
    Messages:
    189
    Location:
    around the world
    Uniqlo wanted to add a brand ambassador. Novak, and just about any player, can be bought out of a contract if the money is right. ST thought their clothing would fly off the shelves and paid a silly fee to get a player in the top 4. The collection didn't fly off the shelves, not a great surprise if you saw their collection and price points. Instead of being stuck servicing his payments, Uniqlo came along at the right time to relieve them of a financial burden. The company/founder has the cash and their aim is not to sell tennis clothes, they retail highly affordable casual wear and Novak is simply an championship winning ambassador for their huge global chain of stores. Novak got paid very well, Uniqlo seem happy with the deal = winners all around.

    Easy. :)
     
    #58
  9. martini1

    martini1 Hall of Fame

    Joined:
    Sep 11, 2008
    Messages:
    3,173
    The problem with ST is their manufacturing and distribution pipeline is way too slow. They could not capitalize on any of the Djoker success. Then they basically ran out of money to pay the bonuses for every slam he won.

    The truth is there is more than ST just letting him go. They must have some undisclosed agreement after that. Yes, Uniqlo did sign him after that when they want a bigger star than just Nishikori. But the strange thing is Uniqlo has yet mass market the Djoker line to the world, especially after he made the USO final and then winning this year's AO. If they only want a face to go with the brand logo but never gonna sell an exclusive line, both parties would end up making less, especially for Djoker because he could get a nice percentage off every item sold with his name on it. Like RF and Rafa line.
     
    #59

Share This Page