Wiggins Talked To KU About Shoe Affiliation Agassi Back With Nike After Eight Years Adidas' Boston Tribute T-Shirt Selling Fast Nike Unveils Kobe Injury Campaign UConn Addresses Reasons Behind New Logo Nike Signs Second Deal With U.S. Figure Skater Nike Struggles To Retain Ad Edge UConn Introduces New Logo Cal, Nike Team For New Uniform, Logo Unveil Ashworth, Puma, Nike Debut Masters Outfits
Upcoming Conferences and Events
SBD/26/Sponsorships Advertising Marketing
L.A. TIMES LOOKS AT FREE AGENCY IN THE SPONSORSHIP MARKET
Published September 26, 1997
While "there are solid reasons" why players "stick with
their corporate partners," that doesn't mean they can't
"sign with a direct competitor," according to Greg Johnson
of the L.A. TIMES. Williams & Connolly's Lon Babby, the
agent for Grant Hill, who helped negotiate his recent $80M
Fila deal: "There's nothing endemic in an endorsement
contract that prevents movement. In the vernacular of
sports, you would be a free agent." Babby said that Hill's
deal "doesn't include a non-compete clause" and that any
such language "would push up the value of an endorsement
contract." Babby: "That is going to be factored in, because
you're talking about tying up a significant portion of a pro
athlete's playing career." Babby added, however, that Hill
"recognizes that continuity benefits both sides." While
Johnson noted that some "well-known names have jumped ship
to sign with a direct competitor," including Michael Jordan
from Coca-Cola to Gatorade and Chris Webber from Nike to
Fila, such a switch "can backfire." Consumers may view
switches with "cynicism," figuring players are looking to
simply "grab a bigger bag of money," while corporate
sponsors may not forgive an athlete who "jumps ship to pitch
a competing product" (L.A. TIMES, 9/25).




