Should only Championships Justify Endorsements?

[BluBarry]

I will openly admit that had Anna Kornikova won some majors or any title for that matter, it would have softened the insult to those who were winning and not getting the kinds of endorsements she got simply because someone deemed her looks nice enough to represent the Tennis World and sell some products. When I think about Tennis Pros and Endorsements, it appears the two hardly ever meet at the same time.

Andre Agassi, made more money before he actually won a major with his Canon Contract. John McEnroe had a brief period of success with Schick Razors but this was long after he was his last Championship. Venus & Serena had already made an impression on the Tennis World and had to sustain that reputation before the endorsement money started flowing.

Andy Roddick, got his first deal before he won the US Open and then it continued long after even though he hasn't won another since. At one time, only Champions of Wimbledon were allowed to endorse Rolex but Roddick seems to be the face of Rolex these days even though Federer has captured his 4th straight. And then there's Sharapova, who endorses everything under the Sun, plus her clothing line and her perfume line, etc. but still other than her last Wimbledon Championship, can't seem to reach that top level anymore.

So my question is, does Sex Sell more than Champions Sell ?

[Rhino]

Sex always sells. People like things that are nice to look at, it's no mystery. Kournikova will always sell better than Justine Henin because of the hot factor.
Guys don't have to be quite as hot though. Federer and Nadal will sell more because they are champions and they are not ugly, better than say Lopez who doesn't win a lot but is better looking.
If you can get a person who is hot and wins then obviously that is where the real money is, like Sharapova.

[isuk@tennis]

Originally Posted by BluBarry

So my question is, does Sex Sell more than Champions Sell ?

yes

and fed won 5 straight wimby

[phoony]

Originally Posted by Rhino

Sex always sells. People like things that are nice to look at, it's no mystery. Kournikova will always sell better than Justine Henin because of the hot factor.
Guys don't have to be quite as hot though. Federer and Nadal will sell more because they are champions and they are not ugly, better than say Lopez who doesn't win a lot but is better looking.
If you can get a person who is hot and wins then obviously that is where the real money is, like Sharapova.

Hey Rhino, which Lopez are you referring to???

[Rhino]

Originally Posted by phoony

Hey Rhino, which Lopez are you referring to???

Feliciano Lopez

[phoony]

Originally Posted by Rhino

Feliciano Lopez

Okay, he's Nike boy .

[saram]

Not sure if Agassi made MORE prior to winning a slam. Three years ago, he was making more than Federer in endorsements. He was making $28 million a year just prior to swithching to Adidas. He took less with Adidas as they would furnish funds to his philanthropy concepts and Nike would not.

[saram]

And yes, sex sells. Sells a ton. No one is buying what Stepanek uses just because he uses it....

[Fedexeon]

Not only sex, but image, nationality... everything... They are all factors.

[Rhino]

Originally Posted by Fedexeon

Not only sex, but image, nationality... everything... They are all factors.

I think if someone is a champion and great looking then nationality doesn't matter. Kournikova being Russian isn't a problem; which nationalities were you thinking of?

[Fedexeon]

Nationality doesn't matter? Not only nationality, but race too take into consideration. If Tiger Woods is not a black, you think he would be so popular out there? Try to imagine that Federer is from America.

[bluetrain4]

Interesting topic.

My answer to the intial question is "no," champshionships should not be the only criteria for endorsements. First, it's a ridiculous notion that could not be enforced. Companies invest in players hoping to expand their market share and/or increase the visibility of their products. Championships are obviously very visible and make a player visible, but there are a lot of other factors.

Most top tennis players can sell top line tennis equipment and apparel to hardcore tennis fans. It's interesting when they are used to sell something other than tennis equipment. I like Fed, but I'm not running out to by those razors he's selling. But, someone probably is.

Some female players have commented that it's not "fair" that people like Kournikova get huge endorsements while more accomplished, less-attractive players don't. But, that's life and business reality.

[Rhino]

Originally Posted by Fedexeon

Nationality doesn't matter? Not only nationality, but race too take into consideration. If Tiger Woods is not a black, you think he would be so popular out there? Try to imagine that Federer is from America.

You are thinking as an American. Federer NOT being American actually arguably makes him more popular outside of America. Keep in mind America is only about 5% of the world. The other 95% couldn't care less.

Tiger Woods is only 1/4 black, 1/2 Thai and 1/4 American Indian.

[beernutz]

Originally Posted by Ssanti

Tiger Woods is only 1/4 black, 1/2 Thai and 1/4 American Indian.

It's not even that simple. From Wikipedia:

Earl [Woods], a retired U.S. Army lieutenant colonel and Vietnam War veteran was of mixed African American (50 percent), Chinese (25 percent) and Native American (25 percent) ancestry. Kultida [Woods] (nee Punsawad), originally from Thailand, is of mixed Thai (50 percent), Chinese (25 percent), and Dutch (25 percent) ancestry.

This makes Woods himself one-quarter Chinese, one quarter Thai, one quarter African American, one-eighth Native American, and one-eighth Dutch.[5] He refers to his ethnic make-up as Cablinasian (a portmanteau term he coined from Caucasian, Black, American-Indian, and Asian).[6]