SportDownUnder.com.au

Just out of school, I had aspirations of working in athlete management. I remember telling anyone who listened, that I was going to manage athletes for a living, “just you watch” I said. No one believed me and I don’t blame them. Getting into sports management seemed a million miles away at the time.

Fast track to 2010 and I can say I got there. In fact it was nearly 8 years ago that I took the management reins of my first client. Since that time, I’ve been involved in the personal management of Australia’s biggest sporting stars including Ian Thorpe, Leisel Jones, Libby Trickett, Alisa Camplin, Cadel Evans, John Aloisi, Lucas Neill, Mark Bresciano, Vince Grella, Brett Emerton, Torah Bright, Matthew Mitcham, Marcos Ambrose, Matt Hall, Geoff Huegill and more recently Shane Watson plus many more.

It’s been an incredible ride with some amazing memories. A time in my life that I’ll never forget.

I’ve worked across major areas of business including client management, public relations and sponsorship sales and servicing. I’ve been there for two Olympic Games, two Commonwealth Games, three World Championships, countless National Titles, and the biggest sporting events to grace our shores.

I’ve experienced the personal highs and lows of my client’s careers, the controversies, the revelations and the feel good stories. I’ve managed the delicate relationships with athlete family members, coaches, sponsorship managers, fans, club officials, and every single major news outlet in the country. I’ve witnessed the money and politics that drive sport behind closed doors, I’ve had special access to sponsors’ products and a free ride to the best seats in the house. I’ve attended countless VIP events, stayed a lot of hotels, travelled business class and enjoyed the over-the-top hospitality that celebrity attracts. I’ve had parties, dinners, dates and weekends interrupted at all hours of the day by journalists chasing a story. I’ve even felt the adrenaline and pride of cheering home a client in a packed stadium (a special feeling). But none of these experiences matches the amazing close friendships I’ve formed with the people around me such as the athletes, business contacts and my teammates – the staff alongside me.

I’m telling you all this because today is my last day as an athlete manager.

In order to be the best administrator in Australian sport I need to seek a new challenge, one that is going to further challenge me and grow my credentials. From next week I begin work with one of Australia’s best institutions for producing the sporting superstars of tomorrow. It’s an exciting next step and one I’m really looking forward to.

I started this blog to share my knowledge of an industry few really get to experience. I really hope readers have benefited from the insights.

I will endeavour to keep posting (quality over quantity) content on this blog but for now I need a little space to settle into a new role.

Let’s meet again soon.

Established brands should be wary when it comes to licensing deals leveraging the name of a celebrity.

I’m talking about brands that name products after celebrities. This strategy often fails because the idea is un-believable. Not everything a celebrity touches turns to gold.

There are a few exceptions to the rule. Classic examples include the “George Foreman Grill” or “Nike Air Jordan” basketball shoes.

The George Foreman Grill worked because George Foreman endorsing a grill is believable. The public knew George didn’t invent the grill but he represented the grill’s perfect customer. A big guy with a big appetite who loves his meat but doesn’t like complicated cooking.

Nike Air Jordan worked because the “shoe” was part of Jordan’s performance equipment. It was believable Jordan had input into the design and features. So it was ok to name the shoe after him.

On the other hand, we have a product like “Tiger” Gatorade. This failed because Gatorade was already an established brand – it didn’t need to hi-jack a celebrity’s name. I was always more inclined to buy Gatorade because it’s Tiger’s choice of drink. Not because it was named after him. There is a big difference.

Look at Emporio Armani underwear and its ambassor David Beckham. The brand could choose to bring out “David Beckham” underwear under the Emporio Armani label, but they don’t because they know it wouldn’t work. Why? Because people buy Emporio Armani because the brand is an expert at making great underwear. David Beckham is an expert a playing football. Where’s the connection? Naming a range after Becks would only cheapen the product and ridicule the intelligence of Armani customers.

Licensing is done best when both the celebrity and product are a perfect fit for each other. Anything less than perfect just doesn’t work.

PS. Was anyone really surprised by Tiger Woods’ shooting 68 on the opening day of the Masters tournament? I wasn’t. This is the first time Tiger has ever entered a tournament without the expectations of winning it. Given his preparation, it was ok if he didn’t perform. What a huge weight off his shoulders! He has nothing to lose. And that makes him very very dangerous.

The sporting media is at the ready for the Tiger Woods press conference tomorrow.

Tiger will obviously have a prepared statement, although I do hope he speaks from the heart and not a sheet of paper. The public will appreciate an honest and genuine Woods as opposed to a commercially sensitive scripted robot Woods.

Honestly, I really expect Tiger to present himself well and win back some fans or at least start the healing process.

Some PR experts are slamming Tiger’s management group for not allowing questions, but if you think about it, a Q&A would create a circus. Tiger has a message he wants to get out and the best way to control that message is to stop at questions.

The only messages you will read in the newspapers the next day are Tiger’s statements about his remorse and his comeback to golf as opposed to what club Elin was hitting his car with.

From Tiger’s point of view, the whole world now knows his story. He regards the complexities of this story to be private / part of his personal life. The only thing left to do is apologise, rebuild and move on.

As a fan of Tiger, I’m not interested in the gritty details of his scandal, I’m interested in what he’s doing to make amends, to be a better person. I want him to hold himself accountable, acknowledge he let down a lot of people including the sponsors who supported him. And I want to see genuine humility and an effort through action to rebuild the trust with the public.

That’s just me. The media on the other hand, they have a million questions they want answers for. Time will tell if they get those answers.

The tennis is pulling the crowds, but struggling for TV viewers, meanwhile cricket is doing the exact opposite, according to the Sydney Morning Herald.

This is an easy one to solve.

When choosing a sport to watch on TV, people look for an emotional investment that goes beyond the need to be ‘entertained’.

Most of the Australian Open coverage features non Australians and although they’re the best in the world, it’s hard to get emotionally vested in the outcome. We’ll flick to the cricket subconsciously because simply put, Australia is playing, suddenly we have someone or something to really barrack for.

So why are cricket crowds down then?

Cricket doesn’t attract new fans to games, it’s the same people every summer going through the turnstiles. It’s a mix of backyard, grade, park and retired cricketers who love the game. The problem is these people are the same people who attended the Twenty/20 Big Bash recently. And anyone who has been to a Twenty/20 game will tell you, it’s hard to go back and sit through a one day international after the fly by the seat of your pants of Twenty/20.

Cricket already knows how to capture TV eyeballs and bring people through the gates, it’s called Twenty/20. Cricket needs to tweak the packaging of Twenty/20 to meet the needs of broadcasters, advertisers, players and fans. Get the formula right and cricket won’t have to worry about crowd figures.

As for Tennis, it’s more difficult. It needs to produce more home grown talent, that we know, but it also needs more heroes and more villains, players to hate, players to love. Only then will it attract more TV viewers.