Because he was, as you say, a rising star. Rising stars are nothing compared to stars. Once Federer and Nadal were made complete lock-outs so far as clothing/shoe sponsorship goes the next rung down were a dime a dozen punts - most of which haven't paid off. The companies entering into these arrangements know most deals wont pay off in a huge way but it's the cost of business they have to pay if they want to snare the next big thing which also includes an element of keeping them out of their competition's hands also. Once Murray had some level of success I imagine he got other offers, or just the one, that Fred Perry simply couldn't match (or, in the least, justify in their budget).
Thanks for the "non-biased" summary of the thread.
Sales-people always think they're in marketing. The bigger the industry and the more specialised the product the more it is the case. They are but a single cog of what marketing is - which is why I surmise your self-professed expertise in marketing is in fact very niche. Notwithstanding your debating points on this specific topic demonstrate that to me - as someone with 20 years in an almost pure marketing field - I read your explanations on this topic and scratch my head. Examples as fundamentally flawed and simple as you espouse may make sense, but they most likely don't. imo.
Correct. Why then, in the past, have you used this to bolster the weight of your argument on a number of occasions when it means nothing?
The occasion your were you would not - when you were so sure and supported the guy who claimed Djokovic was signing with Nike. It ended with the story morphing into "it'll happen in early 2013 now".
Because it is, basically, the trump card - one which makes more sense than any variation of the scenarios you've suggested.
We've been over the obvious reasons for this dozens of times. You just have myopia when it comes to reasoning which doesn't fit your already firm views.
Irrelevant imo. Unless he was in the league of top players comparing his sort of sponsorship to that of a top player folly. These are deals which require head-office buy in and form the centre-point for their entire global marketing campaigns. A coach or coaching clinic is, at best, a local arrangement. Even the Bollitieri academy's sponsorship deals in the late 80s and 90s were irrelevant in the scheme of things. And they were possibly the best known tennis academy in the world at that stage.
Details and scenarios which have been covered many times already.
Gold! You're the cliff note specialist. :lol:
Djokovic definitely advertises Adidas shoes.
THis is showing on Serbian media as taken today (01/31/2013)
Sometimes the federations make deals with manufacturers for their team competitions. It's usually just for the team warm-up suits. An example is Russia and their Bosco Sport deal--Maria Sharapova wore Bosco Sport warm-ups in her Fed Cup matches even though she is a Nike girl. It is very common. The Serbian federation could have made a multi-year deal with ST that is still in effect. The Czech Republic Davis Cup teams wears Alea warm-ups.
