New commercial : Through the Eyes of... Roger Federer Moët & Chandon

CCPass

Semi-Pro
Interesting. Federer not playing, but not retired, either. And the $$$ keeps popping.
He purposely postpones his retirement while having every excuse in the book not to play a single match, and yes, money is the sole reason why as being a retired player is not as lucrative as an active one.
 

The Fedfather

Hall of Fame
Can't believe it. They are just going to string the fans along. I guess it's business and all.
String fans along how? If fans want to buy something now because of Federer's endorsement, it means that for the majority Roger playing tennis is not an important factor in the purchase decision.
 

Devtennis01

G.O.A.T.
String fans alone how? If fans want to buy something now because of Federer's endorsement, it means that for the majority Roger playing tennis is not an important factor in the purchase decision.
So you don't think Federer not retiring has nothing to do with him and his sponsors working out that he's more valuable while people think he's still playing?
 

The Fedfather

Hall of Fame
So you don't think Federer not retiring has nothing to do with him and his sponsors working out that he's more valuable while people think he's still playing?
I previously said that while getting more money is a bonus Federer is for sure happy with, it is very unlikely to be the driving motivation for not retiring. He's earned a billion, will continue earning millions in retirement. I can hardly imagine Roger and his agent coming up with stories to spin about why he's not retiring so he can earn a couple more millions.
 

BeatlesFan

Bionic Poster

CCPass

Semi-Pro
I previously said that while getting more money is a bonus Federer is for sure happy with, it is very unlikely to be the driving motivation for not retiring. He's earned a billion, will continue earning millions in retirement. I can hardly imagine Roger and his agent coming up with stories to spin about why he's not retiring so he can earn a couple more millions.
If you think rich people will not think about getting richer, you are very naive.
 

T007

Professional
He purposely postpones his retirement while having every excuse in the book not to play a single match, and yes, money is the sole reason why as being a retired player is not as lucrative as an active one.
Why it pisses you off???He has so many lined up for next decade. 300 million $ deal from Uniqlo till 2027 even if he quits playing tennis.

May you or your idol are not paid enough.
 

Permitlady

Rookie
"He has 20 grand slams. Why would failing to win another bother him?"

Rich people try to keep up with the Jones' too. And Federer aims to feed and lavish his family for generations.
 

The Fedfather

Hall of Fame
If you think rich people will not think about getting richer, you are very naive.
Naivety is relative. I'm not cynical, for sure. Thinking about getting richer and trying to get richer by any means possible is different. I don't believe Federer would lie to the fans or force himself to stay on the tour for the sake of money. And you won't convince me he would without proof.
 

Permitlady

Rookie
Naivety is relative. I'm not cynical, for sure. Thinking about getting richer and trying to get richer by any means possible is different. I don't believe Federer would lie to the fans or force himself to stay on the tour for the sake of money. And you won't convince me he would without proof.
Playing, if you want to call to that, at the unprecedented age of 40 is sufficient evidence that he is playing for his sponsors i.e. money.

The moment he retires every institution around him will take a huge hit.
 

CCPass

Semi-Pro
Naivety is relative. I'm not cynical, for sure. Thinking about getting richer and trying to get richer by any means possible is different. I don't believe Federer would lie to the fans or force himself to stay on the tour for the sake of money. And you won't convince me he would without proof.
Naive it is.
 

Permitlady

Rookie
Naive it is.
Very naive. It's the same argument that federer isn't playing for slams. So he's not playing for slams and he's not playing for money. He's just playing for the love of the game? And he's doing stupid commercials like this for the love of advertisements?
 

The Fedfather

Hall of Fame
Playing, if you want to call to that, at the unprecedented age of 40 is sufficient evidence that he is playing for his sponsors i.e. money.

The moment he retires every institution around him will take a huge hit.
Evidence? This is speculating and assuming. :rolleyes:
 

Lleytonstation

G.O.A.T.
Alot of ads are contigent upon the player being active. For the same reason Federer dyes his hair. Didn't Agassi spell it out... image is everything
He will be doing so many more projects with Uniqlo, Wilson, Rolex, Mercedes, and ON when retired. People are not going to just forget about the most popular tennis player for the past 20 years.
 

The Fedfather

Hall of Fame
Very naive. It's the same argument that federer isn't playing for slams. So he's not playing for slams and he's not playing for money. He's just playing for the love of the game? And he's doing stupid commercials like this for the love of advertisements?
Why bring commercisls into this? We were talking about what Federer's motivation for not retiring was. Nobody is saying not Roger never does anything with the purpose to earn money.
 

Permitlady

Rookie
He will be doing so many more projects with Uniqlo, Wilson, Rolex, Mercedes, and ON when retired. People are not going to just forget about the most popular tennis player for the past 20 years.
Oh yes they will. Federer isn't even as popular as NBA players that ride the bench
 

Permitlady

Rookie
Why bring commercisls into this? We were talking about what Federer's motivation for not retiring was. Nobody is saying not Roger never does anything with the purpose to earn money.
Exactly. He has more money than God and wants more money. So long as we have they understanding as an agent we can determine the best way for him to make the most money.
 

Permitlady

Rookie
Evidence? This is speculating and assuming. :rolleyes:
You said nothing would convince you short of proof. Unfortunately you conflate proof with evidence because proof does not exist. Furthermore evidence can be strong or it can be weak. Inference to the best explanation is evidence. You can reject the evidence and it seems you have.
 
Top