A player performs, he gets endorcements, if a player does not perform he will not get endorsements.
A company will not risk its product advertisement by being ridiculed by having a unsucessful player endorsing it.
Secondly if someone remembers about Kobe Bryant a couple of years ago, In a matter of few weeks of a rape allegation, a shoe company terminated their contract with Kobe.
It would have made sense for the BCCI to say that no time-off for endorsements say 21 days before a match etc, but limiting the # endorsemts a player can have is plain senseless
It does not help/hurt a player, he is just going to hike his price of an endorsement, highest bidder gets me(Secondly there is something called as individual rights, I guess no-one really cares about them anymore π ) But the company will not have to shell out more for a player.
Actually what this does is hands over more control of the endorsement negiotiation to the player. Say player X is playing great right now, Pepsi wants him, he can say this is my price and this is the length of the contract, there is hardly any leverage left to Pepsi, what is Pepsi going to counter with? Hey we will get Amitabhπ?
What next? How many restaurants someone can own π ?
This is a classic Kneejerk reaction by the BCCI and people who want "something" to be done, are extremely happy with "something" happening
Wrong/right/senseless who cares?
Edited by sareg - 17 years ago
comment:
p_commentcount