We've launched the new forums! Read more here

$10 million a year for 5 years

$10 million a year for 5 years

cbaker2882 said:
Lol I guess Nike feels differently than everyone. Aren't they already paying him $10mill a year for 10 years?
Click to expand...

They had every logo on everything outside of the bag. With a major goal to sell soft goods. In this scenario, there are no soft goods side of things and virtually no logos anywhere outside of Headcovers.
 
Last edited:
Not unless he actually changed his name to Taylor Made (btw if they are reading this, I'm 100% willing to change my name to Taylor Made for just a lifetime sponsorship on clubs)
 
I would do it now. I think the reward far out weigh the risk!
 
JB said:
They had every logo on everything outside of the bag. With a major goal to sell soft goods. In this scenario, there are no soft goods side of things and virtually no logos anywhere outside of Headcovers.
Click to expand...

Oh I get that completely, and the use of the word everyone was off base and an exaggeration. Just some of the responses sounded like he isn't worth that at all. I might just be misinterpreting them though.
 
How much have TM forked out to Tiger?

Sent from my LG-H815 using Tapatalk
 
mpeterson said:
I don't think so - maybe if I'm a company that has a big presence in Europe, since he does play in a lot of Euro tour events. But I'm wondering if that money would be better spent on more guys in that second tier who are going to win a tournament here and there, and still be on TV Sunday afternoon more often than not.
Click to expand...

This is what I would do as well.

JB said:
I assume under these circumstances he is still head to toe swooshed out?
Based on what Spieth got from Titleist after shopping every other brand, no chance in the world.
Click to expand...

What did Spieth get?

emart2173 said:
Yes still full Nike head to toe
Click to expand...

Definitely not if still head to toe Nike - the hat is high value real estate
 
The swoosh head to toe is a huge factor. I'd struggle with 5M per year tbh
 
JB said:
So would most companies honestly.
Click to expand...

With good reason I'd think. That's a LOT of eggs in one basket with broken ribs....and what is now what could be the beginning of a series of injuries.

Oh yeah, and the basket doesn't believe it's his job to "grow the game" These companies need someone to grow the game, they need new clients all the time. That's a LOT of money to spend on one player, and unless I missed something Nike has had the world #1 golfer on their payroll for a lot of years, and they couldn't seem to make money selling clubs. I don't think the WGR position matters as much as a lot of other things.
 
dazeedmonds said:
With good reason I'd think. That's a LOT of eggs in one basket with broken ribs....and what is now what could be the beginning of a series of injuries.

Oh yeah, and the basket doesn't believe it's his job to "grow the game" These companies need someone to grow the game, they need new clients all the time. That's a LOT of money to spend on one player, and unless I missed something Nike has had the world #1 golfer on their payroll for a lot of years, and they couldn't seem to make money selling clubs. I don't think the WGR position matters as much as a lot of other things.
Click to expand...

I definitely would disagree with some of this. The world ranking does matter and signing Rory is a big deal. He is still probably (outside of Phil and Tiger) the most talked about player and rightfully so. However, like Spieth before him (last year or so), getting top dollar for playing the clubs, when you won't have a single logo on your persons, make's the money go down quite a bit in my opinion. Spieth has UA thrown up all over him, an AT&T bag and wanted top dollar for the clubs too. He did not get that. Rory does command a higher price than Spieth would right now, but that could change, but I would venture to guess the club dollars are far lower than most would imagine based on the lack of logos and soft goods marketing.
 
Nope

call me a curmudgeon, but i don't think anyone is worth 5 mil a year for putting their name on a product. I can't say i've ever bought an ounce of golf merchandise (or any other kind) because of who has endorsed the product. to be honest, aside from Tiger with Nike, Phil with KPMG? and Bubba wearing a Ping visor, i couldn't tell you who endorses what... nor does it matter... i understand it's all about brand awareness and visibility, but i just don't notice it myself...
 
JB said:
I definitely would disagree with some of this. The world ranking does matter and signing Rory is a big deal. He is still probably (outside of Phil and Tiger) the most talked about player and rightfully so. However, like Spieth before him (last year or so), getting top dollar for playing the clubs, when you won't have a single logo on your persons, make's the money go down quite a bit in my opinion. Spieth has UA thrown up all over him, an AT&T bag and wanted top dollar for the clubs too. He did not get that. Rory does command a higher price than Spieth would right now, but that could change, but I would venture to guess the club dollars are far lower than most would imagine based on the lack of logos and soft goods marketing.
Click to expand...

I'd agree that the world ranking matters, but I wouldn't think it would matter as much as other things. (I may be waaay off base, I'm not a marketing guru by any stretch of the imagination) I too would think that soft goods with many lots of logos would command higher dollars, especially considering the markup in soft goods compared to clubs. I think Titleist probably made the right call in not giving Jordan a dump truck of money, seeing as how I couldn't tell you a single club he's playing (He's still playing Titleist I assume?) So I certainly won't be heading to my local Golf Galaxy to try out his new clubs. Granted there is a lot more to the sponsorship deals than wearing logos, I know that Omega sponsored Rory for quite some time, and I knew Nike was his sponsor because he wore their clothes, so I assumed he was playing their clubs, but I don't know what clubs he played, but I do know that he wore that ridiculous semi-collar shirt a lot last year.

From another angle I'll say that was more willing to give a certain golf ball a try because I saw it in some trick shot videos, even though they were clearly sponsored by the company, hearing those guys talk about the ball made me more willing to try it. Better sponsorship dollars for that company there than giving them to a tour player. I think the entire landscape of sponsorship is changing. I would venture that a well done commercial campaign and sponsoring a couple of youtube brothers who like to goof around and make funny videos is better money spent than dropping millions on a tour player and hoping that they play well enough for their gear to get screen time.
 
In the minority here but I probably would, with a few caveats.

1. He'd have to at least wear a hat of my company, I know he's locked down with Nike but I'd need a hat in the mix. Side logo on Nike hat at worst.

2. He'd have to play in the higher profile tournaments that aren't majors in the United States and that may conflict with his want to play in European tour events he likes.

3. Obviously you get the commercials and all that too.

4. No soccer

Here's the deal, there really aren't that many truly spectacular, head turning golfers out there right now that also have personality and marketability that are in Rory's stratosphere. He's best years should be right now and people can say what they want but on some level, you look at what the pros play. If you watch a lot of golf, maybe even subconsciously. I'm not saying that makes you go out and buy "x" driver because so and so won at Riveria with it, but people look so it may be worth it. I guess it would also depend on the OEM and how big of a marketing risk they could and would want to take vs return.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Not for that $ unless he is only wearing our logo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Wicked Cool Bearded Man said:
Not for that $ unless he is only wearing our logo.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Yeah, I kind of agree, but everyone would know what clubs he was gaming and that's the goal right?

Although to your point it would probably help apparel sales too your way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I've been 50/50 on the money with him being under nike contract for apparel. For a non full 14 club, no bag and no ball it doesn't make sense but I would probably run the risk of over paying now than try to get him under contract at the start of next year when it could cost me more
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top