PDA

View Full Version : American Companies chose Maria over WS


cirelowe
Jun 4th, 2005, 01:58 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????

Why, Serena Williams, the single most unreliable, unprofessional, tennis player in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT, who is American, has only inked 1 deal in the last 2 years!

Pathetic!


Cire

Sam's Slave
Jun 4th, 2005, 02:01 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????

Why, Serena Williams, the single most unreliable, unprofessional, tennis player in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT, who is American, has only inked 1 deal in the last 2 years!

Pathetic!


Cire


it wasn´t austin powers who did this....

Pureracket
Jun 4th, 2005, 02:01 PM
LOL!!!!!

I just checked your other posts. I see your motives. You're from Julia's, Doraemon, and Martian Kfc's camp with your posts about nobody but Venus and Serena.

Have fun, and happy posting

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 03:44 PM
Cirelow is a hater from the ESPN boards. Ahh the old days.........

ginger_fish668
Jun 4th, 2005, 03:48 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????

Why, Serena Williams, the single most unreliable, unprofessional, tennis player in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT, who is American, has only inked 1 deal in the last 2 years!

Pathetic!


Cire


WTF? Right, attack Maria. It's all her fault.

I'm pretty sure the companies did their research. They must have concluded that Maria would help them be more profitable. Hence they signed her.

Why this is related to Serena and Venus, I dunno. Why leave out Lindsay, Jennifer, Monica...etc?

Junex
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:16 PM
Cirelow is a hater from the ESPN boards. Ahh the old days.........


well you just shut the door off her with a big bang in the ass!!!!

it seems the trolls of old had find a tiny hole to sneak into this GM.

TonyP
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:22 PM
What is the point of this thread? Is is bashing Maria or Serena or just everyone. The reasons why certain players get commercials all come down to one thing --does the sponsor think that being associated with that player will help move product off the shelves.

Getting commercial sponsorships is not some kind of reward that you are entitled to for great performances, high moral character, political correctness, friendliness or even good hygene. Anyone see the Paris Hilton spot for Carl Junior's? Did Paris earn the spot on merit? Does Paris earn anything on merit? Does anything think it is in any kind of good taste.

nicky007
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:30 PM
3 words - tall, white, blond.

ginger_fish668
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:36 PM
3 words - tall, white, blond.


Tall, white, blonde, easy on the eyes, AND talented. :)

Smackie
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:37 PM
Wait until she loses Wimbledon in QF or SF (beaten by Venus/Justine/Serena...you name it) and early exit in USO (by Kim) and not a lot in between. Then big slump next year..... Enjoy it while she can.

nicky007
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:38 PM
Tall, white, blonde, easy on the eyes, AND talented. :)

serena is talented and charismatic also. so the difference between maria and serena are being blonde and white ....

ginger_fish668
Jun 4th, 2005, 04:45 PM
serena is talented and charismatic also. so the difference between maria and serena are being blonde and white ....


Talented and charismaatic...so is Venus.
But this really isn't just about Maria and the Williams sisters alone. Maybe it should be comparing Maria against the entire wta.

Although a thread like this is clearly by a t-r-o-l-l.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:05 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????

Why, Serena Williams, the single most unreliable, unprofessional, tennis player in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT, who is American, has only inked 1 deal in the last 2 years!

Pathetic!


CirePoor Serena, isn't it terrible.
she has no endorsements, she's not on any of the magazine covers, no personal appearances, living in poverty. I really feel bad for her, don't you.

Martian Willow
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:06 PM
serena is talented and charismatic also. so the difference between maria and serena are being blonde and white ....

American companies were throwing money at both sisters when they were winning. Now they are throwing it at Maria. No difference.

Julia1968
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:08 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????
Cire

Well, if you look how much money the "Bush's" invested into Nazi Germany before WWII, you wouldn't be that amazed.

Julia1968
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:09 PM
American companies were throwing money at both sisters when they were winning. Now they are throwing it at Maria. No difference.

Actually, both Venus and Serena received multi-million dollar endorsements long before they ever won a grand slam title. Maria had to win her first before she got a piece of the pie.

Rocketta
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:09 PM
Poor Serena, isn't it terrible.
she has no endorsements, she's not on any of the magazine covers, no personal appearances, living in poverty. I really feel bad for her, don't you.

Yeah I cry everynight for her. :sobbing:

I have a Jar on my desk at work for donations. :(

G1Player2
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:11 PM
Actually, both Venus and Serena received multi-million dollar endorsements long before they ever won a grand slam title. Maria had to win her first before she got a piece of the pie.

This is true but they were both strictly enforced that they MUST remain in the Top 10 once for their endorsements to continue...

fammmmedspin
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:20 PM
3 words - tall, white, blond.

Agree. In one word not 3 - Kournikova2

Stamp Paid
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:25 PM
This is true but they were both strictly enforced that they MUST remain in the Top 10 once for their endorsements to continue...

yes, and the payouts on most of their major contracts was performance based....Maria's endorsements are just gravy.

Fingon
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:26 PM
Wait until she loses Wimbledon in QF or SF (beaten by Venus/Justine/Serena...you name it) and early exit in USO (by Kim) and not a lot in between. Then big slump next year..... Enjoy it while she can.

most of Maria's endorsements are long term contracts, so it doesn't matter how she does in Wimbledon.

do you really think Motorola or Canon really make decisions on a tournament by tournament basis?

Canon is just launching its campaign and so are Motorola and Palmolive.

Justeenium
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:32 PM
sex sells, god forbid these companies thinking about their own incomes and choosing Maria :hearts: over Serena :barf:

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:34 PM
Isn't in Amazing!!!!????? Maria, a self-proclaimed Russian (we know better), born to a communist-influenced father, can wiggle into America, as an 8 year old, and pick up nearly 25 million (holding my finger like Austin Powers) in endorsements!!!!????????

Why, Serena Williams, the single most unreliable, unprofessional, tennis player in the HISTORY OF THE SPORT, who is American, has only inked 1 deal in the last 2 years!

Pathetic!


Cire

No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:41 PM
Actually, both Venus and Serena received multi-million dollar endorsements long before they ever won a grand slam title. Maria had to win her first before she got a piece of the pie.

Well it's not like Maria and her people did not try :rolleyes: They have been building her image and public awareness, positioning her for big-dollar endorsments since lONG before she won anything, even played a tour match. She was being pimped before she was old enough to go to junior high :lol:
(Now before you mention Venus and Reebok , this statement is true of virtually ALL exceptionally talented players in the post-Capriati era.)

Topic related--- Maria's people are paid to hype her so they toss in everything she's been OFFERED no matter over how many years.
They make it look like she's totally eclipsed everyone ever. The thing they're not honest about is the way the deals are structured, you're never exactly sure how much players are making--- don't foget the little word called incentives :tape:
As for Venus and Serena, I wouldn't go shedding any tears for them at this point in ther careers :rolleyes:

Stamp Paid
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:42 PM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..

Appeal to dominant culture is not equal to universal appeal...

I guess only if you are a white supremacist, though, then that may be true.

Paneru
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:49 PM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..

What an insult! :rolleyes:


Why is it that when White people behave a certain way it's just them but if a black person behaves a certain why assholes like you are all but too quick to bring up their race!

Sharapova has made comments and behaved in ways exactly like Serena but gets a pass on the whole because of her color and looks. Or even if she is taken to task never once is race mentioned or is their even a undertone of it!

Thank God Richard Williams prepared his girls for the real deal because just like you their are many in this tennis world just like you!


Just like Ashe vs. MacEnroe & Connors.

Arthur uderstood the bigotted mentality of this society and especially this tennis world and no matter how he felt internally could never have thought to behave like John & Jimmy because just as now, even more so then and more out in the open his race would've been front and center in the conversation if he even dared to behave like them!

Don't seem to remember JM/JC's "behavoir and
appearance much underlining their race".

And people wonder why Richard Williams has brought up race on some many occassions concerning his daughters, because it fits. And simply because people try and pretend it doesn't exist doesn't mean is does. People are just wiser about going about it.

One thing I could say is that I'd prefer and opened and acknowledged bigot/racist as opposed to one that simply tries to put on for show!

Atleast you both know where you stand.

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:50 PM
Actually, both Venus and Serena received multi-million dollar endorsements long before they ever won a grand slam title. Maria had to win her first before she got a piece of the pie.

Venus got hers at 14 years old because of her potential and because Reebok probably wanted to scoop up a black tennis player early before they missed the boat. She made a huge splash in her first tournament being a set and a break up against world #2 before losing. Serena got hers at 16 years old having already defeated 3 top ten players within her 2nd main draw WTA event. For some reason I guess they thought Venus would be better than Serena which she was for awhile, but now we see she wasn't.

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:53 PM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..


They say IGNORANCE is bliss right?? :rolleyes:

Paneru
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:56 PM
Venus got hers at 14 years old because of her potential and because Reebok probably wanted to scoop up a black tennis player early before they missed the boat. She made a huge splash in her first tournament being a set and a break up against world #2 before losing. Serena got hers at 16 years old having already defeated 3 top ten players within her 2nd main draw WTA event. For some reason I guess they thought Venus would be better than Serena which she was for awhile, but now we see she wasn't.


Venus was the first out of the gates to make a big
splash before Serena because she was older.

And no one can blame them for thinking the older
one would be better when little to none thought
you'd have to Sisters who would reach the top.

Richard said Serena would be the better player
from the start because she was meaner.

And Venus would beat anyone when she
decided she wanted to play.

Richard knew his girls. :)

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:58 PM
Appeal to dominant culture is not equal to universal appeal...

It is.. We live in a certain civilization - whether you like it or not - and appealing to a majority is what universal appeal is about.. Of course, there are exotic cultures. You can always choose to appeal to them.. It is always a choice..

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 05:59 PM
They say IGNORANCE is bliss right?? :rolleyes:

Denial is ignorance. Trying to understand and explain is not.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:05 PM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..:tape: :tape: :tape:

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:06 PM
Denial is ignorance. Trying to understand and explain is not.

Keep taking that powerful acid :tape:

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:08 PM
What an insult! :rolleyes:


Why is it that when White people behave a certain way it's just them but if a black person behaves a certain why assholes like you are all but too quick to bring up their race!

Sharapova has made comments and behaved in ways exactly like Serena but gets a pass on the whole because of her color and looks. Or even if she is taken to task never once is race mentioned or is their even a undertone of it!

Thank God Richard Williams prepared his girls for the real deal because just like you their are many in this tennis world just like you!


Just like Ashe vs. MacEnroe & Connors.

Arthur uderstood the bigotted mentality of this society and especially this tennis world and no matter how he felt internally could never have thought to behave like John & Jimmy because just as now, even more so then and more out in the open his race would've been front and center in the conversation if he even dared to behave like them!

Don't seem to remember JM/JC's "behavoir and
appearance much underlining their race".

And people wonder why Richard Williams has brought up race on some many occassions concerning his daughters, because it fits. And simply because people try and pretend it doesn't exist doesn't mean is does. People are just wiser about going about it.

One thing I could say is that I'd prefer and opened and acknowledged bigot/racist as opposed to one that simply tries to put on for show!

Atleast you both know where you stand.I'm glad you responded because I would have gotten banned if I had responded to that idiotic post.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:12 PM
They say IGNORANCE is bliss right?? :rolleyes:
Pathetic isn't it.
:lol: :lol: :lol:

random fan
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:18 PM
Tennis is mainly white people sport, and not even player-wise, but mainly fanbase wise. So it is understandable that white player is more marketable worldwide. It is really simple as that.

*JR*
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:20 PM
One point no one has mentioned (surprisingly) is the TYPE of endorsements. The W/S got shoe deals and McDonald's (where they probably haven't eaten in years). :tape:

Sharky is indeed a successful player, not just an agency hyped blonde (like the ova-exposed one who was making $10 million a year with ummm, I forgot how many singles titles). So Canon wants to employ Sharky, fine.

But anyone who thinks that race wouldn't have made such a non-sports merchandise/Gatorade/fast-food/hip-hop clothing, etc. deal VERY hard for a black American athlete to land is living in a fantasy world.

And I know Tiger Woods has Buick, but he's bleached out being perceived as black (figuratively) almost as effectively as Michael Jackson bleached it out physically! :o

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:22 PM
Tennis is mainly white people sport, and not even player-wise, but mainly fanbase wise. So it is understandable that white player is more marketable worldwide. It is really simple as that.

Golf is even "whiter" sport.. Yet Woods's appeal is quite universal. The same goes with Jordan in a "black" sport of basketball. The same goes with Pele or Maradona or Beckham with game of football. It's not about the colour of your skin.. It is still about that very simple - "I am one of all of you" as opposite to "I am one of some of you"

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:31 PM
Golf is even "whiter" sport.. Yet Woods's appeal is quite universal. The same goes with Jordan in a "black" sport of basketball. The same goes with Pele or Maradona or Beckham with game of football. It's not about the colour of your skin.. It is still about that very simple - "I am one of all of you" as opposite to "I am one of some of you"

Tiger is not 100% african-american though and that has been known since day one. It's not the same when you have V and S who are 99.9% African-American and have been touted as coming from Compton and being rough and tough. Yes they came from Compton, but obviously they don't fit into the stereotype of the people from Compton. And this "I am one of all of you instead of "I am one of some of you" bullshit is really disrespectful so I hope you can rethink what you are saying. What exactly are you saying about Serena and Venus??

Calimero377
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:51 PM
....
Just like Ashe vs. MacEnroe & Connors.

Arthur uderstood the bigotted mentality of this society and especially this tennis world and no matter how he felt internally could never have thought to behave like John & Jimmy because just as now, even more so then and more out in the open his race would've been front and center in the conversation if he even dared to behave like them!

...


Ever heard of Muhammad Ali?

Or Dennis Rodman?

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:51 PM
Tiger is not 100% african-american though and that has been known since day one. It's not the same when you have V and S who are 99.9% African-American and have been touted as coming from Compton and being rough and tough. Yes they came from Compton, but obviously they don't fit into the stereotype of the people from Compton. And this "I am one of all of you instead of "I am one of some of you" bullshit is really disrespectful so I hope you can rethink what you are saying. What exactly are you saying about Serena and Venus??

Knizzle, you should really excuse ys's ignorance although the fact that he believes all the crap he spews is quite troubling. His head is so far up his posterior ,I'm embarrassed for him :lol:

VS Fan
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:55 PM
I would be willing to bet that Serena's endorsements are more than DOUBLE what Maria got this year. Anybody game??

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 06:58 PM
Ever heard of Muhammad Ali?

Or Dennis Rodman?

First of all Muhammed Ali never acted like McEnroe or Connors.

Get that straight.

Rodman did act crazy, but he wasn't in the stuffy, country club sport of tennis either.

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:00 PM
I would be willing to bet that Serena's endorsements are more than DOUBLE what Maria got this year. Anybody game??


It's pointless-- there's absolutely no way to gauge incentives, but there's no doubt that Serena had incentives kick in for winning the OZ.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:01 PM
I would be willing to bet that Serena's endorsements are more than DOUBLE what Maria got this year. Anybody game??

Right.. It was Serena whose face we saw all Roland Garros.. Right? I turn on TV - it is Sharapova with Canon there during every changeover.. I go shopping to the big mall, and who is on the cover of the brochure about the stores of the mall, the brichure that is in every store? Sharapova with Tag Heuer.. She is freaking everywhere..

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:03 PM
Right.. It was Serena whose face we saw all Roland Garros.. Right? I turn on TV - it is Sharapova with Canon there during every changeover.. I go shopping to the big mall, and who is on the cover of the brochure about the stores of the mall, the brichure that is in every store? Sharapova with Tag Heuer.. She is freaking everywhere..

OK that's good for Maria, but it's not like Serena or Venus haven't had the same thing. It wasn't all about Maria at OZ was it?? Her commercial is new so it should be used more than any other players. Just like Graf and Andre's commercial.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:05 PM
OK that's good for Maria, but it's not like Serena or Venus haven't had the same thing. It wasn't all about Maria at OZ was it?? Her commercial is new so it should be used more than any other players. Just like Graf and Andre's commercial.

Do you honestly expect to see less of her during Wimbledon? :lol:

Calimero377
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:06 PM
Right.. It was Serena whose face we saw all Roland Garros.. Right? I turn on TV - it is Sharapova with Canon there during every changeover.. I go shopping to the big mall, and who is on the cover of the brochure about the stores of the mall, the brichure that is in every store? Sharapova with Tag Heuer.. She is freaking everywhere..


Sharapova is a mix of Serena and Kournikova.

Talent-wise AND endorsement-wise exactly in the middle ...

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:07 PM
Do you honestly expect to see less of her during Wimbledon? :lol:

No, Wimbledon is only 2 weeks away also. It would make sense for the commercial to be used there also. Wouldn't it?? By US Open time though it will probably be someone else's turn.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:07 PM
Sharapova is a mix of Serena and Kournikova.

Talent-wise AND endorsement-wise exactly in the middle ...

I'd say, she is probably closer to the total of the two in both departments.. :lol:

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:09 PM
I'd say, she is probably closer to the total of the two in both departments.. :lol:

She has to show it on and off the court. We haven't seen it yet.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:18 PM
She has to show it on and off the court. We haven't seen it yet.

I thought we did.. The last time she played on the greatest tennis court of all.. :lol:

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:21 PM
I thought we did.. The last time she played on the greatest tennis court of all.. :lol:

You thought wrong. I think some stats are in order. Where is Cali when you need him.

bandabou
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:23 PM
Great for Maria then no...no problemo. No surprise here....Serena was never good for the sport anyways.

harloo
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:24 PM
Maria's one commercial that aired 100 times per match is an indication that american companies chose Maria over the Williams Sisters. We got it, Maria is the greatest blond female endorser ever, not prettier than Anna though. LOL

xan
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:33 PM
So much bitterness and bile in this thread! :rolleyes:

Masha and Serena have big endorsement contracts because they are talented and popular. End of story.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:52 PM
Golf is even "whiter" sport.. Yet Woods's appeal is quite universal. The same goes with Jordan in a "black" sport of basketball. The same goes with Pele or Maradona or Beckham with game of football. It's not about the colour of your skin.. It is still about that very simple - "I am one of all of you" as opposite to "I am one of some of you"Because you have decided that Serena does not have universal appeal doesn't make it a fact.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 07:56 PM
Because you have decided that Serena does not have universal appeal doesn't make it a fact.

People vote with their money, and big companies act as their electoral college.. :)

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:26 PM
People vote with their money, and big companies act as their electoral college.. :)What does that have to do with your statement that Serena has no universal appeal? How do you know that for a fact? I have any things I could ask you but why bother? Serena has plenty of endorsements/

*JR*
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:30 PM
@ least Sharky has won a Slam and a YEC (though Serena was certainly not competitive in that LA final due to injury). Anna remains the 2nd biggest fraud ever foisted on professional tennis (in the Open Era @ least) after the so-called "Battle of the Sexes" between 30 y.o. BJK and 55 y.o. Bobby Riggs. Worse still, both frauds are way ova-sold in importance, to this day.

BJK didn't put women's tennis on the map in a lasting way, Chrissie vs. Martina did in an 80 match contrast of styles between 2 great players that lasted about 17 years. Anna didn't create the Russian Revolution, Yeltsin's commitment of money did. By the time she became famous in the late 90's, all but the youngest we talk about here were well along in their training.

Cybelle Darkholme
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:39 PM
Its funny but I dont see Justine, Kim, Lindsay, Mary, Jen, All the other russians or anyone else mentioned in these threads.

Why does it always come down to maria vs serena? Actually I think it should be Maria and Serena vs everyone else because I dont see the other players doing much in the way of endorsements.

Justine has four slams and where exactly is she in the endorsement world? Where is her universal appeal?:rolleyes:

Where is Jen and lindsay? Isnt "russian" maria stealing there "american" endorsement money?

This thread is pathetic, ignorant, race baiting.

Jubilee
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:40 PM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubilee

Cybelle Darkholme
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:43 PM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubilee

Oooops. I guess some have egg on their faces. Maybe it will make a good meal for them.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:43 PM
Anna didn't create the Russian Revolution, Yeltsin's commitment of money did.


You are clueless.. having no idea what you are talking about..

By the time she became famous in the late 90's, all but the youngest we talk about here were well along in their training.

We had equally talented youngsters in early 90s, who vanished.. Likhovtseva would have been much more than she is, should she have had a better sponsor, and better access to world class coaching and training facilities earlier in her career. Anna showed the sponsors in Russia and abroad that investing money into Russian tennis players can really pay off big.. I am sure, after Anna-mania of 1997 other 2 out of big 4 from the first wave of Russian players ( Dementieva and Myskina ) found it quite easier to get sponsorships..

harloo
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:44 PM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubilee

:haha: :haha: :haha: Thanks jubilee!

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:57 PM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubileeNuff said. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Tennisaddict
Jun 4th, 2005, 08:58 PM
:yawn: Why is everybody getting worked up over the endorsments Sharpie and the WS get, and who overtakes who? Fact is that they're loaded with money and that they're known worldwide. I think the WS are globally more known than Sharpie for the time being btw.

They couldn't care less about what we have to say about this matter, and this thread was obviously started by a troll whose main objective was to stir up nonsense.

Ys isn't ignorant btw. people, he/she is a narrowminded nationalist who can only idolize players of his country by belittling Venus and Serena by trying to talk them down with prejudiced comments. Keep your inferior observations to yourself because your simplistic attitude used to be laughable but has become boring now since it always has the same tune :rolleyes:.

Venus and Serena have given women's tennis an enormous boost and attracted a very big audience of all races. Sharpie is also appealing to a large audience but I don't think she will ever overtake the tv ratings the WS brought in when they played their slam finals.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:04 PM
:yawn: Why is everybody getting worked up over the endorsments Sharpie and the WS get, and who overtakes who? Fact is that they're loaded with money and that they're known worldwide. I think the WS are globally more known than Sharpie for the time being btw.

They couldn't care less about what we have to say about this matter, and this thread was obviously started by a troll whose main objective was to stir up nonsense.

[QUOTE]Ys isn't ignorant btw. people, he/she is a narrowminded nationalist who can only idolize players of his country by belittling Venus and Serena by trying to talk them down with prejudiced comments. Tennisaddict, isn't a person that is narrowminded, belittling other people, make prejudice comments, ignorant?

lizchris
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:08 PM
Look, we all know that because Maria is white she is going to be sought after by corporations to endorse products as she is the "new face of tennis". But the fact is when it comes down to the nitty gritty, that the only color that businesses care about is GREEN. And if Maria doesn't bring it in and doesn't perform well at big tournaments (as I am pretty sure her contracts stipulate), she will get dropped just like any other athlete. In additon, she has morals clauses in her contracts. If she breaks them, she will be dropped as well. Right now is the time that will tell if she has what it takes to be that superstar athlete that Tiger, Michael, Shaq, Andre, Venus and Serena are or were. I say right now because when you metnion her name to someone who doesn't follow tennis, they are like "who the fuck is that" whereas if you mention Venus and Serena, they know who the hell you are talking about (and I am not talking about black people either). In addition, this was the time last year that it all started for her. The question is can she recapture the magic and get to the number one ranking or will be just be considered another Anna clone, but one who can win titles.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:14 PM
Ys isn't ignorant btw. people, he/she is a narrowminded nationalist who can only idolize players of his country by belittling Venus and Serena by trying to talk them down with prejudiced comments.


And where exactly am I "belittling" Venus or Serena and their achievements? Give me an example.. :lol:

Keep your inferior observations to yourself


Inferiority complex is your second nature, not mine.. On genetic level, it seems..


because your simplistic attitude used to be laughable but has become boring now since it always has the same tune :rolleyes:.


No one is here to entertain you, so STFU with your whinging..

Tennisaddict
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:20 PM
Tennisaddict, isn't a person that is narrowminded, belittling other people, make prejudice comments, ignorant?[/QUOTE]

No it means that somebody who has zero knowlegde about a certain topic is behaving ignorantly, while I doubt that this is the case with Ys. He/she chooses to make narrowminded, prejudiced and disrespectful comments simply because they're from another race, which makes him/her stupid since he/she seems to do it on purpose :rolleyes:.

*JR*
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:24 PM
You are clueless.. having no idea what you are talking about..



We had equally talented youngsters in early 90s, who vanished.. Likhovtseva would have been much more than she is, should she have had a better sponsor, and better access to world class coaching and training facilities earlier in her career. Anna showed the sponsors in Russia and abroad that investing money into Russian tennis players can really pay off big.. I am sure, after Anna-mania of 1997 other 2 out of big 4 from the first wave of Russian players ( Dementieva and Myskina ) found it quite easier to get sponsorships..

Sorry tovarisch, Yeltsin did increase the funding for tennis drastically. And those other Big 2 you mentioned trained in Russia, where Boris put the rubles (into facilities like Spartak in Moscow) NOT in Florida, like Anna. They were coached by Marat & Dina's Mom (Raousa Islanova) as kids.

(If you want to credit Kournikovarated for IMG giving Sharky a full scholarship to Bollettieri, OK). But Anna has propagandists @ Octagon to handle little details like teaching her to LIE about her marriage to Federov, which would have hurt sales of her pictoral image to (literal) jerkoffs. :p

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:25 PM
Tennisaddict, isn't a person that is narrowminded, belittling other people, make prejudice comments, ignorant?

No it means that somebody who has zero knowlegde about a certain topic is behaving ignorantly, while I doubt that this is the case with Ys. He/she chooses to make narrowminded, prejudiced and disrespectful comments simply because they're from another race, which makes him/her stupid since he/she seems to do it on purpose :rolleyes:.[/QUOTE]


:worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship: :worship:

Infiniti2001
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:30 PM
Inferiority complex is your second nature, not mine.. On genetic level, it seems..





It must be a miserable existence to be so motivated by hate. PITIFUL :rolleyes:

Tennisaddict
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:37 PM
And where exactly am I "belittling" Venus or Serena and their achievements? Give me an example.. :lol:
Inferiority complex is your second nature, not mine.. On genetic level, it seems..
No one is here to entertain you, so STFU with your whinging..

Reading is obviously difficult for you. I never said you belittled V and S's achievements, however you were making suggestions that Sharpie appeals to a larger audience and V and S don't. I find those comments belittling, untrue and wishful thinking on your part.

You don't know anything about my nature so don't even try your pathetic stone age assumptions on me. Your comments on genetics and race tells me enough though, that you are indeed a person with inferiority problems since
you divide players by race and base your comments on it.

You sure as heaven are not entertaining, no one asked that from you and I doubt you can be, but you don't post anything constructive.
That was very eloquent, but don't think I will shut up just because a lowlife like you said so :rolleyes:.

You're really making an effort out of being stupid with "whinging" btw :lol:.
I guess that's what happens when a mind gets rusty from focusing on unrewarding hateful issues.

RVD
Jun 4th, 2005, 09:40 PM
LOL!!!!!

I just checked your other posts. I see your motives. You're from Julia's, Doraemon, and Martian Kfc's camp with your posts about nobody but Venus and Serena.

Have fun, and happy postingArggghhhh...not another one. TCH!!
Thanks for the warning!! :wavey:

Calimero377
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:01 PM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubilee


Alex Rodriguez definitely is highly sought as a spokesperson in Europe ...
:lol:

RVD
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:18 PM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..It is.. We live in a certain civilization - whether you like it or not - and appealing to a majority is what universal appeal is about.. Of course, there are exotic cultures. You can always choose to appeal to them.. It is always a choice..ys, I'm not suggesting that you are, but you make the same arguments as many white supremists groups here in the states. Again, I'm not suggesting that you are one, it's just that the similarities are uncanny! :eek:

Anyway, I just wanted to point out one simple fact that you seem to be overlooking. No one, but no one, ever maintains worldwide appeal for very long unless they are constantly winning in their particular sport. And even then, the novelty of that universal appeal weras off rather quickly. and YES, Serena did have universal appeal. Many ethnicities enjoyed her and her abilities, talent, desire, and HER LOOKS! Just because you didn't just says something about you---not the rest of the world. Do you understand?

If what you said had any validity whatsoever, then Wilsons Leather, Reebok (Venus); Puma, Nike (Serena); Avon, Sega video games, Wrigley, Nortel Networks, AquaClara, McDonalds (Jointly) would NEVER have picked them up. You see, these firms all conduct what's called marketing research, the results of which are popularity driven (a.k.a.: UNIVERSAL APPEAL).
And of these above businesses, two stand out as being EXTREMELY conservative in who they endorse. 1) Avon, mainly because of their demographics, as well as never ever having using a celebrity as image endorser, for the first time ever selected two! Guess who they were. And though Avon isn't considered as world wide as Nike, they are just as concerned with their 'bottom-line' as any successful company would be. And the other 2) IS Nike, which is very image driven. Their expectations of athletes are the highest of any other sports apparel company, because they are so big. A sports personality not only has to have mass appeal, but they also must exhibit certain acceptable morals (hence the reason why they jettisoned Kobe Bryant even before they trail began to determine his guilt or innocense). In other words, they take no chances on their personality. If universal appeal wanes, then you are out of their QUICK!
So whereas many here (including you) say that Serena and Venus do not have mass appeal, these very successful companies tend to believe otherwise and have invested millions as proof.

Your turn. ;)

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:40 PM
Sure.. But lets not talk about past contracts. A lot of past contracts of V & S could be attributed to the situation when two other most marketable tennis players left the scene - Hingis and Kournikova.. For few years Williams sisters was all tennis marketing was left with in women's tennis. Now, with Sharapova it is different ballgame. I would not even compare the total of current endorsements. I would compare just those signed in last 12 months. Because before last Wimbledon Sharapova was non-factor and now she is clearly snowballing them.

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:42 PM
Serena just signed a 60 million dollar contract with Nike. If Maria was so big wouldn't she have gotten a contract that big instread of Serena??

Kart
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:43 PM
Pathetic!


Cire

You needn't have bothered with the rest of your post - you've pretty much summed it up at the end.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:49 PM
Serena just signed a 60 million dollar contract with Nike. If Maria was so big wouldn't she have gotten a contract that big instread of Serena??

Multi-layered lie.

"just" = 2 years ago, when Sharapova was not even in picture. How could she even gotten it.

60 million dollars = 20 fixed million dollars over 8 years with up to 35-40 million of performance related bonuses. Meaning, that she will get all those 35-40 million if she racks up another half a dozen of Slams and ends year at #1 at least several times.. Otherwise.. it is just 2.5 million an year.. Pittance for an athlete of this caliber..

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:54 PM
Multi-layered lie.

"just" = 2 years ago, when Sharapova was not even in picture. How could she even gotten it.

60 million dollars = 20 fixed million dollars over 8 years with up to 35-40 million of performance related bonuses. Meaning, that she will get all those 35-40 million if she racks up another half a dozen of Slams and ends year at #1 at least several times.. Otherwise.. it is just 2.5 million an year.. Pittance for an athlete of this caliber..

I never said it wasn't performance related, but I doubt you relaly know the conditions of the contract so don't act as if you do. Serena is the face of Nike tennis, Maria is just one of the clones.

bandabou
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:56 PM
And then the next question comes: Of course Maria is in now because she is the new thing, she has won the YEC and Wimbledon....but what if she fails to build on that start? What if get more ´05 oz opens, ´05 french opens?

RVD
Jun 4th, 2005, 10:56 PM
Sure.. But lets not talk about past contracts. A lot of past contracts of V & S could be attributed to the situation when two other most marketable tennis players left the scene - Hingis and Kournikova.. For few years Williams sisters was all tennis marketing was left with in women's tennis. Now, with Sharapova it is different ballgame. I would not even compare the total of current endorsements. I would compare just those signed in last 12 months. Because before last Wimbledon Sharapova was non-factor and now she is clearly snowballing them.But even you have to agree that there is only a certain number of endorsements that any one player can handle, along with running outside businesses? I remember watching a documentary on V&S where they said they had to literally turn down tons of endorsements. :shrug:
As far as Hingis and Kournikova's relationship to V&S's endorsements, how would you say that these two influence anything that the marketing consultants research. They are no longer active in the sport. And though I have seen both ladies endorse products in magazines, I've not seen their world-wide even here in the U.S. in the last 12 months (as you stated). Maybe I'm not understanding your point concerning Hingis and Kournikova though.

ys
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:05 PM
If Serena is so big with Nike.. why is that .. that huge Nike posters during hanging everywhere during Australian Open didn't have Serena on them. Neither they had Federer or Hewitt.. They had Sharapova.

bandabou
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:11 PM
Wow...maria is really big! she even has her own line...

Pureracket
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:12 PM
If Serena is so big with Nike.. why is that .. that huge Nike posters during hanging everywhere during Australian Open didn't have Serena on them. Neither they had Federer or Hewitt.. They had Sharapova.You saw alot of Nike posters with Maria Sharapova on them. Yeah, that must mean Nike likes her better.:rolleyes:

Then again, you did suggest that Maria Sharapova is genetically disadvantaged because of her white skin to the heat, right? You never really addressed that issue after the AO Open.

mykarma
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:23 PM
If Serena is so big with Nike.. why is that .. that huge Nike posters during hanging everywhere during Australian Open didn't have Serena on them. Neither they had Federer or Hewitt.. They had Sharapova. :yawn: :yawn:

bandabou
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:24 PM
:lol: didn´t you know Maria was disadvantaged at IW, at Miami, at Berlin, at Rome, at RG as well? Sun, wind, this and that?

jacobruiz
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:26 PM
So much bitterness and bile in this thread! :rolleyes:

Masha and Serena have big endorsement contracts because they are talented and popular. End of story.


I've never understood why some people are so into "my fav makes more money than your fav".:shrug: Both Maria and Serena are making and will make a ton of money in endorsements. Good for tennis, and them, of course, but it's just how star-powered advertising operates and I'm not really interested in celebs raking in the dough.


But if I may ask a question of Liz. Since you seem to know a lot about the conditions of Maria's contracts - what exactly are the moral clauses you mentioned? Are they just for Maria or does Serena have them, too?:confused:

Knizzle
Jun 4th, 2005, 11:53 PM
If Serena is so big with Nike.. why is that .. that huge Nike posters during hanging everywhere during Australian Open didn't have Serena on them. Neither they had Federer or Hewitt.. They had Sharapova.

Were you there??

There was huge hoopla of Serena's new line of clothes with Nike at OZ.

*JR*
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:01 AM
I hope that if Sharky falls in love and gets married, IMG celebrates it, instead of doing what Octagon did re. Anna & Sergei Federov: run a coverup worthy of Watergate.

Any timing related to the revelation last week of Deep Throat's identity is purely intentional, since it was taken from the name of a porno movie, the way the ova-exposed one has been is still marketed.

Actually, the words "has been" wouldn't need a strikethrough if we were talking about tennis ITT. Which won't prevent the usual pointless threads about the WTT exhibition matches she plays this summer, of course. :lol:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:20 AM
No, that is natural.. Maria behaves not like she is a Russian, or an American.. She behaves just like another human being, no different from others.. Serena's behavior and appearance is very much underlining her race, she likes doing that, she finds it natural, and I suppose it is OK.. But the result is, Maria has universal appeal with no race boundaries - whites, Asians, African Americans, while Serena appeal goes to a very limited audience with not that great buying ability.

To appeal you need to be able to say with your image - "I am one of you".. That's what Maria successfully does. In opposite, Serena only says - "I am one of some of you"..

And I am saying that while admittedly I don't like Maria all that much.. But also , admittedly, I like Serena even less..
:lol: That is such crap. Maria screams white anglo saxon elite. She is NOT, I repeat not marketable to anyone but whites. She does not come off as "I am one of you", but "I am better than you, don't you want to be like me".

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:25 AM
:lol: That is such crap. Maria screams white anglo saxon elite. She is NOT, I repeat not marketable to anyone but whites.


Many of her Chinese and Japanese fans would most certainly object. She has a huge following in Asia.

She does not come off as "I am one of you", but "I am better than you, don't you want to be like me".

That's OK, that line is fine with me too.. Very encouraging line, inspiring people to strive.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:31 AM
People vote with their money, and big companies act as their electoral college.. :)
You're right, McDonalds is a larger company than Canon and more people buy McDonalds everyday than Canon cameras. Canon cameras are not universal appeal, but to a very elite market. McDonalds is universal, so I guess the electoral college has spoken. :)

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:34 AM
@ least Sharky has won a Slam and a YEC (though Serena was certainly not competitive in that LA final due to injury). Anna remains the 2nd biggest fraud ever foisted on professional tennis (in the Open Era @ least) after the so-called "Battle of the Sexes" between 30 y.o. BJK and 55 y.o. Bobby Riggs. Worse still, both frauds are way ova-sold in importance, to this day.

BJK didn't put women's tennis on the map in a lasting way, Chrissie vs. Martina did in an 80 match contrast of styles between 2 great players that lasted about 17 years. Anna didn't create the Russian Revolution, Yeltsin's commitment of money did. By the time she became famous in the late 90's, all but the youngest we talk about here were well along in their training.
I have to disagree with you here. You need to research what BJK did for womens tennis and I think you will change your mind here. It may not have been on the court, even with 22 Wimby titles, but it was behind the scenes and Chrissie and Martina will be the first to tout her accomplishments for the women in tennis.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:37 AM
MSNBC.com
Tiger remains most popular athletic spokesman
Woods easily outdistances Armstrong among men
The Associated Press
Updated: 3:17 a.m. ET March 5, 2005

NEW YORK - For the second consecutive year, Tiger Woods and Serena Williams are the most highly sought athletes to serve as spokespersons.

In a survey of professionals in the public relations and marketing industries conducted by Alan Taylor Communications, Inc., Woods easily outdistanced Lance Armstrong among the men. Williams beat Annika Sorenstam among women.

Also high on the survey were two Hispanic athletes, Alex Rodriguez and Oscar de la Hoya.

© 2005 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
© 2005 MSNBC.com

URL: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7095827/

Tiger and Serena are laughing ALL the way to the bank
:) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :) :)

jubilee
:o :tape: :haha: :haha: :haha:

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:38 AM
You're right, McDonalds is a larger company than Canon and more people buy McDonalds everyday than Canon cameras. Canon cameras are not universal appeal, but to a very elite market.
Not very, but quite elite, I agree.. using Canon technology requires some bare minimum of brain cells which is not being possessed by everyone, but by those you call elite. Top 30-40%, I would say.

McDonalds is universal

No. All of my friends used to go to McDonalds. None of us have been there in last 5 years at least. At some point, once you are at some level of self-respect and some level of income you just feel that you now can afford to refuse to eat cheap junk. So, it is not universal.. It's probably bottom 30-40%..

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:39 AM
I have to disagree with you here. You need to research what BJK did for womens tennis and I think you will change your mind here. It may not have been on the court, even with 22 Wimby titles, but it was behind the scenes and Chrissie and Martina will be the first to tout her accomplishments for the women in tennis.Very true. Wasn't it BJK who lobbied for and created the WTA? I could be wrong, but if not for her, we'd probably see women's tennis every other leap year are so. :lol:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:43 AM
Reading is obviously difficult for you. I never said you belittled V and S's achievements, however you were making suggestions that Sharpie appeals to a larger audience and V and S don't. I find those comments belittling, untrue and wishful thinking on your part.

You don't know anything about my nature so don't even try your pathetic stone age assumptions on me. Your comments on genetics and race tells me enough though, that you are indeed a person with inferiority problems since
you divide players by race and base your comments on it.

You sure as heaven are not entertaining, no one asked that from you and I doubt you can be, but you don't post anything constructive.
That was very eloquent, but don't think I will shut up just because a lowlife like you said so :rolleyes:.

You're really making an effort out of being stupid with "whinging" btw :lol:.
I guess that's what happens when a mind gets rusty from focusing on unrewarding hateful issues.
:o :tape:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:44 AM
Very true. Wasn't it BJK who lobbied for and created the WTA? I could be wrong, but if not for her, we'd probably see women's tennis every other leap year are so. :lol:
There would be no WTA without BJK. :)

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:45 AM
There would be no WTA without BJK. :)

True. There would be no cars without Henry Ford..

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:50 AM
There would be no WTA without BJK. :)That's what I thought. :lol:
I swear, how can anyone who watches tennis not know this?! :confused: :shrug:

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:51 AM
True. There would be no cars without Henry Ford..Hmm..? no chocolate without Hershey's. :haha:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:52 AM
Not very, but quite elite, I agree.. using Canon technology requires some bare minimum of brain cells which is not being possessed by everyone, but by those you call elite. Top 30-40%, I would say.

I say elite, because amateur and serious photographers who buy Canon technology are in a very small group who have the money to invest in the equipment. It has nothing to do with social status. You can have money and not be socially acceptable, but I'm sure you're familiar with that sort since Yeltsin was your president at one time.



No. All of my friends used to go to McDonalds. None of us have been there in last 5 years at least. At some point, once you are at some level of self-respect and some level of income you just feel that you now can afford to refuse to eat cheap junk. So, it is not universal.. It's probably bottom 30-40%..

The mere fact that an American cheap junk food like McDonalds is even sold in Russia says a lot about its universal marketability. It's a worldwide corporation making billions everyday. The fact that you and your friends used to go there, but don't any more is irrelevant. Because you and your friends are irrelevant in the vast scheme of things. :wavey:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:54 AM
Hmm..? no chocolate without Hershey's. :haha:
And no class/social status inferiority on this board without ys. :D

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:58 AM
Sure.. But lets not talk about past contracts. A lot of past contracts of V & S could be attributed to the situation when two other most marketable tennis players left the scene - Hingis and Kournikova.. For few years Williams sisters was all tennis marketing was left with in women's tennis. Now, with Sharapova it is different ballgame. I would not even compare the total of current endorsements. I would compare just those signed in last 12 months. Because before last Wimbledon Sharapova was non-factor and now she is clearly snowballing them.
Yeah, but Maria is wearing Serena's Nike designs. :o Probably because she's the most recent slam winner of the two. ;)

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 12:59 AM
And no class/social status inferiority on this board without ys. :D:haha: I wish there was black smilie web site out there, cuz then I could select an appropriate response smilie where I'm covering my mouth and stomping my feet and saying "OOooooo!" :lol:
Hmm..? Maybe I should create that site. ;)

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:00 AM
Multi-layered lie.

"just" = 2 years ago, when Sharapova was not even in picture. How could she even gotten it.

60 million dollars = 20 fixed million dollars over 8 years with up to 35-40 million of performance related bonuses. Meaning, that she will get all those 35-40 million if she racks up another half a dozen of Slams and ends year at #1 at least several times.. Otherwise.. it is just 2.5 million an year.. Pittance for an athlete of this caliber..
I take it you've read the contract. :hehehe:

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:00 AM
I say elite, because amateur and serious photographers who buy Canon technology are in a very small group who have the money to invest in the equipment.


Every second person that I know uses Canon.. Digital Canons are quite cheap - from around $200. Anyone can afford it..

It has nothing to do with social status. You can have money and not be socially acceptable, but I'm sure you're familiar with that sort since Yeltsin was your president at one time.

That piece I didn't understand..





The mere fact that an American cheap junk food like McDonalds is even sold in Russia says a lot about its universal marketability. It's a worldwide corporation making billions everyday. The fact that you and your friends used to go there, but don't any more is irrelevant. Because you and your friends are irrelevant in the vast scheme of things. :wavey:

Sure, we are irrelevant.. Sure it is about money.. About conscionce too.. Fast Food companies like McDonalds are one of the biggest enemies of America, responsible for millions of cases of obesity, heart disease, digestive problem and many many more, addicting youngsters to this crap from very young years with all those french fries and kid's specials.. They are responsible for Americans being the fattest nation in the world. This is extremely low quality, cheap production. Any decent person would only advertise on a product that you would use yourself on regular basis. I don't beleve that Williams sisters are ready to have a meal in McDonalds even once a week. It's a lie for money. Nothing to be proud about. I have nothing against Nike or Puma commercials. Good for them. But them agreeing to advertise McDonalds really sucks.

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:03 AM
Hmm..? no chocolate without Hershey's. :haha:

You got it! :)

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:07 AM
Many of her Chinese and Japanese fans would most certainly object. She has a huge following in Asia.

I would agree. That's where she played all of her Tier III's. And, we all know what a marketing capital Asia is. :rolleyes:


That's OK, that line is fine with me too.. Very encouraging line, inspiring people to strive.

I wouldn't doubt it is very encouraging to you, seeing what an elitist wannabe you are. :lol:

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:10 AM
Sure, we are irrelevant.. Sure it is about money.. About conscionce too.. Fast Food companies like McDonalds are one of the biggest enemies of America, responsible for millions of cases of obesity, heart disease, digestive problem and many many more, addicting youngsters to this crap from very young years with all those french fries and kid's specials.. They are responsible for Americans being the fattest nation in the world. This is extremely low quality, cheap production. Any decent person would only advertise on a product that you would use yourself on regular basis. I don't beleve that Williams sisters are ready to have a meal in McDonalds even once a week. It's a lie for money. Nothing to be proud about. I have nothing against Nike or Puma commercials. Good for them. But them agreeing to advertise McDonalds really sucks.Again, ys, you need to be careful how you word your responses. McDonalds contributes to the obesity problem world wide, not just America. And as far as being "...low quality and cheap", I believe that there are far more of these restuarants world wide not named McDonalds and not being a fast food place. Even major/chic restaurants cut corners IF they can get away with it.
Lastly, since Venus and Serena have signed on with McDonalds and the release of 'Supersize Me', McDonalds has embarked on a healthy foods campaign. Personally, I haven't eatten at McD's for over 8 years, and neither have my family, but there are items on the menu that are delicious and healthy now.

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:14 AM
I would agree. That's where she played all of her Tier III's. And, we all know what a marketing capital Asia is. :rolleyes:

Exactly. 60+% of world populations. Being popular in Asia soon will be way more important than being popular else where.




I wouldn't doubt it is very encouraging to you, seeing what an elitist wannabe you are. :lol:

Striving is an attribute of any good person. For just about everyone , except for those who think that striving is meaningless because whinging and finding someone to blame in all your problems is the only way to be. :)

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:16 AM
Every second person that I know uses Canon.. Digital Canons are quite cheap - from around $200. Anyone can afford it..
Is this just narrow-mindedness or a display of your ignorance?




That piece I didn't understand..

Feigning ignorance is a good tactic for not having a reply. But, in case you really don't understand, you categorized Canon as being TOP 30-40% because I used the word elite. I assumed you used the word "top" to describe the social status of the people who buy Canon. Again, just because a person has money doesn't mean they have any social status, but like I said you probably wouldn't understand because of the social structure of your country in the last 100 years.




Sure, we are irrelevant.. Sure it is about money.. About conscionce too.. Fast Food companies like McDonalds are one of the biggest enemies of America, responsible for millions of cases of obesity, heart disease, digestive problem and many many more, addicting youngsters to this crap from very young years with all those french fries and kid's specials.. They are responsible for Americans being the fattest nation in the world. This is extremely low quality, cheap production. Any decent person would only advertise on a product that you would use yourself on regular basis. I don't beleve that Williams sisters are ready to have a meal in McDonalds even once a week. It's a lie for money. Nothing to be proud about. I have nothing against Nike or Puma commercials. Good for them. But them agreeing to advertise McDonalds really sucks.
Nice try, but that's not the issue in this topic. Therefore, it deserves no response.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:17 AM
You got it! :)
Yes and chocolate has universal appeal. :)

ys
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:18 AM
Again, ys, you need to be careful how you word your responses. McDonalds contributes to the obesity problem world wide, not just America.

I never said that the damage is limited to America only. It's just most visible in America.

And as far as being "...low quality and cheap", I believe that there are far more of these restuarants world wide not named McDonalds and not being a fast food place. Even major/chic restaurants cut corners IF they can get away with it.


Sure, McDonalds is just one of many, the biggest one probably.

Personally, I haven't eatten at McD's for over 8 years, and neither have my family, but there are items on the menu that are delicious and healthy now.

Why don't you go? Why don't THEY go and have a Big Mac before a Grand Slam tennis match? Perhaps because it is not the most comfortable of feelings - having to run feeling similar to having a brick in your stomach.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:23 AM
Exactly. 60+% of world populations. Being popular in Asia soon will be way more important than being popular else where.

Yeah right :rolleyes:



Striving is an attribute of any good person. For just about everyone , except for those who think that striving is meaningless because whinging and finding someone to blame in all your problems is the only way to be. :)
You're exactly right. Black people have had to strive to survive all of our existence. It takes a lot of striving to overcome 300 years of slavery and 100 years of Jim Crow and be on equal footing intellectually and financially as our white counter parts. The only people I see whining and trying to find someone to blame for their problems here in the US are white supremists. :wavey:

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:27 AM
I never said that the damage is limited to America only. It's just most visible in America.No, you just specified 'America', so I replied to that.
Why don't you go? Why don't THEY go and have a Big Mac before a Grand Slam tennis match? Perhaps because it is not the most comfortable of feelings - having to run feeling similar to having a brick in your stomach.It probably has something to do with my kitchen skills. :lol: I'm not kidding. The family, and relatives always tell me that my cooking tastes better than the restaurants'. What can I say except I've got 'skillz'. :lol:

harloo
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:29 AM
And no class/social status inferiority on this board without ys. :D

:lol:

*JR*
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:29 AM
This BJK thing is taken out of context. Yes, she was instrumental in using the blood money of Philip Morris to create the Virginia Slims Tour, which became the WTA as a specific organization. But this was @ the high point of the women's liberation movement in the US.

Meaning she could have gotten a "cleaner" title sponsor had she tried a little longer. But as she served from '99-'02 on their Board of Directors after all the '90's revelations of their coverups, this must not bother her. (As I said during the '02 Fed Cup Follies in Charlotte: Jen never killed anybody).

Leaving her moral hollowness aside, there was no way (again, with "women's lib" a catchphrase) that the others would continue to play for about 1/4 of what the men got. Marvin Miller organized the baseball players, and someone (a lawyer like him, a player, a Gloria Steinem type activist, or some combination would have done so re. women's tennis).

For Chrissie and Martina to say "here's how it happened" is fine. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't have anyway. And perhaps without the conflicts of interest that let an IMG and an Octagon be both "employers" @ tourrnaments, while also representing "employees" (the players).

Which led directly to the "Best 17" ranking system that encourages "play till you drop" (as even the ultra-flexible Kim eventually found out). And causes the season 2B too long. And led to the charade that surely caused both Kim and Momo much stress, in being "number one" without a Slam trophy.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:42 AM
This BJK thing is taken out of context. Yes, she was instrumental in using the blood money of Philip Morris to create the Virginia Slims Tour, which became the WTA as a specific organization. But this was @ the high point of the women's liberation movement in the US.

Meaning she could have gotten a "cleaner" title sponsor had she tried a little longer. But as she served from '99-'02 on their Board of Directors after all the '90's revelations of their coverups, this must not bother her. (As I said during the '02 Fed Cup Follies in Charlotte: Jen never killed anybody).

Leaving her moral hollowness aside, there was no way (again, with "women's lib" a catchphrase) that the others would continue to play for about 1/4 of what the men got. Marvin Miller organized the baseball players, and someone (a lawyer like him, a player, a Gloria Steinem type activist, or some combination would have done so re. women's tennis).

For Chrissie and Martina to say "here's how it happened" is fine. But that doesn't mean it wouldn't have anyway. And perhaps without the conflicts of interest that let an IMG and an Octagon be both "employers" @ tourrnaments, while also representing "employees" (the players).

Which led directly to the "Best 17" ranking system that encourages "play till you drop" (as even the ultra-flexible Kim eventually found out). And causes the season 2B too long. And led to the charade that surely caused both Kim and Momo much stress, in being "number one" without a Slam trophy.
It's speculation to say that it would have happened anyway and by whom and what means. This is the way it happened, whether you like BJK or not. What stemmed from it cannot be completely blamed on BJK. She was one on a board of several with equal voting power. How can you judge her? You never once played or walked in her shoes nor the hundreds of women who were playing tennis then and before her. Sometime you have to take money from the only source available. It wasn't about waiting, it was about then and there. It had to happen when it did. Those women didn't have time to wait. They had bills to pay. Who else offered to sponsor them? No one. I like you and your posts a lot Roger, but please it seems you have no idea of what you speak or what it was like back then for women. It seems to be a very personal issue for you, as it is obvious there is for you no love lost for BJK. This is a very personal issue for me as well, as I see her as a hero. I'd like to leave this off as us agreeing to disagree on this subject.

starr
Jun 5th, 2005, 01:55 AM
Plus, the public wasn't as aware of the real evil of cigarettes in the seventies as we are now. 30 years has made us a lot more knowlegable.

There's always a danger in looking back and judging someone by latter day standards. It distorts. Few people realize how difficult it was to get sponsors for a professional womens tour. The early day professionals were living hand to mouth. BJK built what is now the WTA through guts, determination, and sheer force of personality. Everyone owes her a giant debt. Yes, compromises were made, unholy alliances were formed. It wasn't perfect. No accomplishment is. Even pennicillin has a horrible downside, but thank god someone perservered to invent it.

*JR*
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:07 AM
Denise, I never criticize ppl in ways that are "hate speech". I don't speculate about Rainer Hofmann's grandparents and WWII, I don't insult Russians because of Anna, and I don't care about BJK's orientation. (I also respect that she chose not to "come out of the closet" back then). But on the "public record" conduct (past and present) of public figures and their close associates (like Rainer re. PP) I think its fair to express our opinions.

*JR*
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:11 AM
Plus, the public wasn't as aware of the real evil of cigarettes in the seventies as we are now. 30 years has made us a lot more knowlegable.

True. That's why I made the point that Lady Tobacco was a paid board member of Murder, Inc. Philip Morris from 1999-2002. ;)

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:19 AM
Denise, I never criticize ppl in ways that are "hate speech". I don't speculate about Rainer Hofmann's grandparents and WWII, I don't insult Russians because of Anna, and I don't care about BJK's orientation. (I also respect that she chose not to "come out of the closet" back then). But on the "public record" conduct (past and present) of public figures and their close associates (like Rainer re. PP) I think its fair to express our opinions.
I wasn't referring to her orientation, I was just referring to the way things were back then and the fact that she did what she had to do for womens tennis. I'm not sure I understand what you're talking about here regarding Rainer Hofmann and BJK.

Sure, it's fair to express our opinions, but let's talk facts without speculation.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:23 AM
True. That's why I made the point that Lady Tobacco was a paid board member of Murder, Inc. Philip Morris from 1999-2002. ;)
It's better than volunteering. Maybe she needed the money.

starr
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:28 AM
I'm sure she does need the money.

And you don't know how she votes on that board.

Even so, I would wish she weren't on it.

harloo
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:29 AM
Regardless if the tour was sponsered by Virginia Slims BJK was courageous for going against the grain and forming the seperate tour when Chris Evert and a few other players dissed the idea and her openly.

I don't believe that things would of just fallen into place especially considering how the commentators and tennis analyst alike still disrespect female players and women's tennis in general.

I don't feel Serena, Maria, Lindsay or anyone would get those big checks if BJK did not put her neck on the line for something she was passionate about. She should be respected for what she did because their would be no profitable WTA Tour without her sacrifice.

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:30 AM
Regardless if the tour was sponsered by Virginia Slims BJK was courageous for going against the grain and forming the seperate tour when Chris Evert and a few other players dissed the idea and her openly.

I don't believe that things would of just fallen into place especially considering how the commentators and tennis analyst alike still disrespect female players and women's tennis in general.

I don't feel Serena, Maria, Lindsay or anyone would get those big checks if BJK did not put her neck on the line for something she was passionate about. She should be respected for what she did because their would be no profitable WTA Tour without her sacrifice.
:worship: :worship: :worship:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:30 AM
Plus, the public wasn't as aware of the real evil of cigarettes in the seventies as we are now. 30 years has made us a lot more knowlegable.

There's always a danger in looking back and judging someone by latter day standards. It distorts. Few people realize how difficult it was to get sponsors for a professional womens tour. The early day professionals were living hand to mouth. BJK built what is now the WTA through guts, determination, and sheer force of personality. Everyone owes her a giant debt. Yes, compromises were made, unholy alliances were formed. It wasn't perfect. No accomplishment is. Even pennicillin has a horrible downside, but thank god someone perservered to invent it.
:worship: :worship: :worship:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:31 AM
I'm sure she does need the money.

And you don't know how she votes on that board.

Even so, I would wish she weren't on it.
She's not on the board any more, but you're right, we don't know how she voted.

mykarma
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:33 AM
I say elite, because amateur and serious photographers who buy Canon technology are in a very small group who have the money to invest in the equipment. It has nothing to do with social status. You can have money and not be socially acceptable, but I'm sure you're familiar with that sort since Yeltsin was your president at one time.





The mere fact that an American cheap junk food like McDonalds is even sold in Russia says a lot about its universal marketability. It's a worldwide corporation making billions everyday. The fact that you and your friends used to go there, but don't any more is irrelevant. Because you and your friends are irrelevant in the vast scheme of things. :wavey::worship: :worship: :worship:

mykarma
Jun 5th, 2005, 02:38 AM
I take it you've read the contract. :hehehe:You're on a roll. :lol: :lol: :lol:

dreamgoddess099
Jun 5th, 2005, 03:22 AM
I would be willing to bet that Serena's endorsements are more than DOUBLE what Maria got this year. Anybody game??
Oh I'd put money on it too. The difference between Serena and Maria is the average amount they make per endorsement. Where Serena makes an estimated 15 million a year from 3 endorsements, Maria (supposedly) makes 22 million a year from 9+. Sure Maria makes alot of money, but she needs a lot of small 2 or 3 million dollar endorsements to do it. I don't see anybody offering to pay Maria 10 million a year like they are Serena. Also Serena's already worth about 80 million already, and has a clothing line and two lingerie lines. If Serena wanted, she could easily add just two more endorsements on and topple Maria, but shes thinking much further ahead. She'd rather build her own brand of products and make Martha Stewart type money (billions) instead of being a marketing ho for everybody else's products while making a few million.

Fingon
Jun 5th, 2005, 03:27 AM
You're right, McDonalds is a larger company than Canon and more people buy McDonalds everyday than Canon cameras. Canon cameras are not universal appeal, but to a very elite market. McDonalds is universal, so I guess the electoral college has spoken. :)

sorry but that's utter crap.

do you really judge the size of a company by how many stores they have?

McDonalds sales: 19 billion dollars
Canon sales: 29 billion dollars.

McDonalds sells burgers and fries, Canon is a technology leader, their products a little, just a little bit more expensive.

would you consider McDonalds bigger than General Electric? after all there aren't GE stores everywhere.

I am not saying that having a sponsorship deal with Canon is better than with McDonalds, as I don't know the terms of their contract but to try to argue that McDonalds is bigger is just bullshit.

BTW, you can check the numbers here

http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=18&passYear=2005&passListType=Company&searchParameter1=unset&searchParameter2=unset&resultsHowMany=100&resultsSortProperties=%2Bstringfield2%2C%2Bnumberf ield1&resultsSortCategoryName=name&fromColumnClick=true&bktDisplayField=stringfield2&bktDisplayFieldLength=3&category1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=&resultsStart=1101

Shane54
Jun 5th, 2005, 04:12 AM
Maria-Maria-Maria

Say it loud and proud!

Love ya

lizchris
Jun 5th, 2005, 04:57 AM
I've never understood why some people are so into "my fav makes more money than your fav".:shrug: Both Maria and Serena are making and will make a ton of money in endorsements. Good for tennis, and them, of course, but it's just how star-powered advertising operates and I'm not really interested in celebs raking in the dough.


But if I may ask a question of Liz. Since you seem to know a lot about the conditions of Maria's contracts - what exactly are the moral clauses you mentioned? Are they just for Maria or does Serena have them, too?:confused:


Every athlete or celebrity who endorses a product has a morals clause in their contracts. For example, when actress Melanie Griffith was caught having an extramarital affair with actor Antonio Banderas, she was signed to endorse Revlon's over 40 cosmetic line at the time. Becuase of the negative publicity surronding the affair and her divorce from acton Do Johnson, Revlon let her contract laspe and signed actress Julianne Moore to replace her (a good addition I might add). When Kobe Bryant was charged with rape and admitted to an extramarital affair, all but a few of companies he endorsed for dropped him. Michael Jodrdan was quitely dropped as a spokes man for Hnaes and Coca Cola (Gatorade) when a woman accused him of fathering her child during a relationship they had. He dened that he was the father of the child (and a DNA test later proved he wasn't the father), but he did not deny having an affair with this woman.

I used to work f an addvertising company. That is why I know about these things.

Rocketta
Jun 5th, 2005, 05:04 AM
Michael Jordan is still the spokeperson for Hanes. :confused:

Although I agree that people get dropped for questionable moral behavior....It would've had to been a grave act by Michael to get dropped by Hanes...Hanes is a NC company and Michael is NC's greatest athlete...no way Hanes is dropping that relationship over a child out of wedlock and an affair.

http://www.gotagless.com/

lizchris
Jun 5th, 2005, 05:11 AM
Michael Jordan is still the spokeperson for Hanes. :confused:

Although I agree that people get dropped for questionable moral behavior....It would've had to been a grave act by Michael to get dropped by Hanes...Hanes is a NC company and Michael is NC's greatest athlete...no way Hanes is dropping that relationship over a child out of wedlock and an affair.

http://www.gotagless.com/


If they saw that the negative publicity was hurting their sales, they'd drop him. Another example of this is when Britney Spears was signed to be a spokesperson for Pepsi products and she was continuously caught with Coca Cola products and this added up to negative publicity for Pepsico. When her contract was up, they dropped her and replaced her with Beyonce.

RVD
Jun 5th, 2005, 05:14 AM
Every athlete or celebrity who endorses a product has a morals clause in their contracts. For example, when actress Melanie Griffith was caught having an extramarital affair with actor Antonio Banderas, she was signed to endorse Revlon's over 40 cosmetic line at the time. Becuase of the negative publicity surronding the affair and her divorce from acton Do Johnson, Revlon let her contract laspe and signed actress Julianne Moore to replace her (a good addition I might add). When Kobe Bryant was charged with rape and admitted to an extramarital affair, all but a few of companies he endorsed for dropped him. Michael Jodrdan was quitely dropped as a spokes man for Hnaes and Coca Cola (Gatorade) when a woman accused him of fathering her child during a relationship they had. He dened that he was the father of the child (and a DNA test later proved he wasn't the father), but he did not deny having an affair with this woman.

I used to work f an addvertising company. That is why I know about these things.Thanks for the info Lizchris. :wavey:

Denise4925
Jun 5th, 2005, 05:56 AM
sorry but that's utter crap.

do you really judge the size of a company by how many stores they have?

McDonalds sales: 19 billion dollars
Canon sales: 29 billion dollars.

McDonalds sells burgers and fries, Canon is a technology leader, their products a little, just a little bit more expensive.

would you consider McDonalds bigger than General Electric? after all there aren't GE stores everywhere.

I am not saying that having a sponsorship deal with Canon is better than with McDonalds, as I don't know the terms of their contract but to try to argue that McDonalds is bigger is just bullshit.

BTW, you can check the numbers here

http://www.forbes.com/lists/results.jhtml?passListId=18&passYear=2005&passListType=Company&searchParameter1=unset&searchParameter2=unset&resultsHowMany=100&resultsSortProperties=%2Bstringfield2%2C%2Bnumberf ield1&resultsSortCategoryName=name&fromColumnClick=true&bktDisplayField=stringfield2&bktDisplayFieldLength=3&category1=category&category2=category&passKeyword=&resultsStart=1101
Not only do I not judge the size of a company by how many stores they have, but I also do not judge the size of a company by sales volume alone. McDonalds has other brand restaurants such as Boston Market and Chipolte Mexican Grill, so it's not just burgers and fries. The article does not expressly state what fiscal year or years these numbers are based on, so I can only assume that these numbers are for 2004. Also, the sales volume does not take into account the companies debt. As you can see the numbers between Canon and McDonalds are not that stark of a difference, so your argument that technology being more expensive than burgers and fries which should translate into higher sales, thus a larger corporation is crap, especially since Nestle, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo are ranked much higher on the list than Canon.

Canon =
29.77 Sales ($bil)
2.57 Profits ($bil)
28.46 Assets ($bil)
46.94 Market Value ($bil)

McDonalds =
19.06 Sales ($bil)
2.28 Profits ($bil)
25.53 Assets ($bil)
41.59 Market Value ($bil)

pigam
Jun 5th, 2005, 06:42 AM
Appeal to dominant culture is not equal to universal appeal...

this is just the MOST intelligent answer.
It has it all. It's brief, clear and very striking! I mean this. :yeah: