|Image Source: businessweek.com|
Athletes need sponsors to help fund their training and equipment, entrance to various competitions, food, housing, and other necessities as they strive for excellence in sports. The 2012 London Olympics is among the many events that show how lucrative sponsorship deals offset the high cost of sports. The International Olympic Committee’s Rule 40 prevents athletes from wearing logos of non-sponsors to prevent the so-called ambush marketing, which Olympic athletes deemed to be limiting their potential to receive sponsorships that were crucial in paying off the high fees. For the non-sponsors, the rule afforded them less exposure which affected their bottomline.
|Image Source: nike.com|
In any competition, there should be a balance between the rights of the respective parties, says Paul Geoghegan, senior solicitor at Morton Fraser, LLP. The partnership benefits both the sponsor and the athlete, but these benefits entail hard work. Sports committees should help both parties experience these benefits without the expense of neither. Athletes are expected to perform well and do their duties such as endorsing products, attending PR events, and everything that will enhance the reputation of the sponsor; or else they may suffer what Lance Armstrong went through because of his doping issue.
While it is money, not talent that can pay for their necessities, athletes should never disregard their public image in signing deals. They need to ensure that the brands they signed on with don’t alter their image, but rather promote it. NFL Super Bowl Quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s deal with Brad Pyatt’s athletics company MusclePharm is an example of a sponsorship that truly complements the public image of the athlete and of the brand as well.
|Image Source: musclepharm.com|
MusclePharm Founder & CEO Brad Pyatt said that Kaepernick’s reputation as a workout fanatic coupled with his amazing physique makes him an ideal fit for the brand. Visit this