Rory Mac sues Horizon

First topic message reminder :

...apparently he was unhappy with the amount of commission taken by said sports management company, said to be £4.7 million.

This combined with the recent dissolution of 'Wozzilroy', one of sport's foremost power-couples, should ensure that midgetmac's game will stay in the doldrums for some time.

What do you make of Rory's most recent distractions?

Roller_Coaster wrote:

Who's the bigger earner at Nike out of him and Mr McIlroy? Bet Mr Woods still pulls more $.

As far as Nikes concerned, the only thing to make Woods a bigger advertising dream is if he were in a wheelchair! And a lesbian.

I would think that Woods by some way. Forgetting what you think of the guy he's won 14 majors to Rory's two and more importantly look at the viewing figures when Woods just plays a tournament compared to when he doesn't and compare that to when Rory does or doesn't. Also the USA is the biggest golf market in the world so while Rory has a decent profile there its going to be nothing like Woods's.

I would love to see how these contracts work as while I am sure that the headline figures can be reached I suspect that they are performance related and rarely attained but Nike actually want to let the top end figure slip out as it is yet more publicity. I bet loads of non-golfers caught wind of Rory signing for Nike but when Mickleson moved to Callaway it hardly made it to the mainstream press? And that was probably because he did it pre-Ryder Cup.

I'm not a big fan of Nike stuff but you have to hand it to their brand/marketing teams.

Really? They aren't anywhere close to being the top golf brand, probably not even in the top 3.

I'd say TM/Adidas are doing a far better job than Gola, sorry Nike.

Not saying that they make the best kit or even close but when you look at how big the brand is and how well known they are to everyone is what I mean. I think that Nike are very clever with the way that they market themselves. As said above, no additional brands on their players so just one message. Single brand for clothes and clubs so no confusion. The only real problem for them is that they are perceived to make low end gear which turns a lot of regular golfers away.

I also don't think that Nike sponsoring Woods and McIroy is just about selling golf gear. They both as well known outside of golf so are adding a whole lot more. I even had people sending me links to the Tiger and Rory driving range ad who have never played saying how cool it was.

289

You are absolutely correct. Latest financial filings show, for example, that Nike Group's turnover is almost double Adidas Group .

twoeightnine wrote:Not saying that they make the best kit or even close but when you look at how big the brand is and how well known they are to everyone is what I mean.  I think that Nike are very clever with the way that they market themselves.  As said above, no additional brands on their players so just one message.  Single brand for clothes and clubs so no confusion.  The only real problem for them is that they are perceived to make low end gear which turns a lot of regular golfers away.

I also don't think that Nike sponsoring Woods and McIroy is just about selling golf gear.  They both as well known outside of golf so are adding a whole lot more.  I even had people sending me links to the Tiger and Rory driving range ad who have never played saying how cool it was.

None of their "name" is down to Golf though. They are a relatively minor player in this "sport".
They have big name signings in Nine Chins and Pube Head, but it doesn't transfer to high sales in golf gear, hence their position in the golf market.

They used to have a much bigger share but their failure to move with the times as seen them go backward whilst more established OEM's have blown them out of the water.#


Look in any bag down at your club and I'll bet no more than 1 in 10 has Nike clubs. Whilst in clothing there are a lot more tasteful and technically advanced gear on offer.

They are a "jack of all trades" and I can't think of any sport where their products are market leaders as actual "go to" items of choice.

Maybe basketball.

North American sports probably number 1 and probably wherever those sports have spread in a big way. Football clothing is big due to replica kits (Barcelona, Man Utd, England massive ones for them off the top of my head, bet they have a lot in Asia too).

Struggle because of their sole brand hence the "jack of all trades" while Adidas are seen as a premium technology clothing/footwear brand they use Taylormade for the equipment (and now Adams and Yes putters) to get to the peak in golf. Puma are focussed on trendy (Cobra is now theirs isn't it?) and small fry except probably leisure clothing.

Nike may be top for new starters and that might be why they endorse the number 1 in sports? Bet there are (certainly were in his heyday) countless early start golfers that wanna be Tiger.

I wouldn't favour Nike gear in any sport in the same way I wouldn't buy a Ford or Vauxhall. I'm sure they are up to the task, but they just aren't inspiring enough and there are too many companies (like Asics in Athletics for instance) who do things much better.

I remember when Nike tried to make a mark on the snowsports industry, they got laughed out of town and had to rebrand, they're still around but very much a minor player.