Professional Athletes Essay Example for Free

Professional Athletes EssayCompanies that custom professional supporter realize the right to use that endorsement at their discretion. This question is difficult to answer as a whole because there are so many factors that occur. When it comes to a contract or obligation the bylaws of such agreement give the bounce change both parties to non fulfill the agreed terms. Most athletes are held to a standard that is based upon their office staff in their specific sport. The star or leader is usu each(prenominal)y held in higher regard than the twelfth man on a team. With that said the argument for companies comes from a different perspective so its lends genius to speak from both sides of the argument. I have to take the affirmative for the companies even though I view in the marketability of the professional athlete. In the case of Micheal Phelps his ability to perform at a high aim has led directly to the rebound of his image.Tiger Woods on the other had way more to lose at the time of his marital problems. In one shot his on course performance has not been at the take in which we are use to seeing of him. He has no amassed the same fervor or attention for positivity as a Micheal Phelps. The bad play on the course as not lifted the stain of all the negative press that he garnered. Had he been even more winning on his playing field he more than likely would have been able to narrow companies to get spikelet on the Tiger train.Companies, tend to use athletes that match their persona, the bigger the name the bigger the accompany. propose is so important to what a company is trying to convey just about its product and service. Most companies have their values listed somewhere near their corporate profile. The two have to match. The values of a company must meet the value that is percieved the by the value of the product. The best and most current case of this is with ray of light Armstrong, his Livestrong radical and Nike have distances thems elves from Lance. He was a very visible and outspoken spokesman, he had a followingthat added to his parable on an almost daily basis.The projectings that there was unanimous evidence that he was using PEDs (Performance Enhancing Drugs) to win in his sport was detrimental to not only his incredibility but it clings to a company like Nike be a company built on the athletic prowess of athletes from a varied amount of sports. So as a company what do you do? You have no choice but to shorten ties with this athlete not just because he lied but the implication can be crystallize that Nike and its athletes also lie and use PEDs. You cant blame a company from wanting to distance its mark from that of a liar and cheater.In a different effect the Livestrong Foundation has a separate delimma to reflection at aside from the moral issue. They have a financial conundrum that affect the legacy of what Lance did for cancer and cancer research. The livestrong bands that are so popular in our community, were marketed to people on the basis that the growth from the sale of the bands go to the fight against cancer. People that associate Lances image struggle with his Foundation have acquire outraged. Here it is, this winner who was at the pinnacle of his sport lied on top of lying he cheated. He used his acclaim and sickness to capitalize on a disease and in turn not only made money for the foundation but also breezed his pocket. The only resort hotel it seems the foundation had to take is to severe ties.Companies have a obligation to their shareholders, They have a obligation to their employees as well. The obligation to the shareholders and employees comes in the form of profit and money. Imagine if your brand is built on honesty and integrity. Your market and advertising say you are honest but your commercials have a Tiger Woods or Lance Armstrong there is a clear distinction that these two athletes have had trouble with honesty. The audience can then place your br and with dishonesty which can lead to losing business. As a bottom linage all companies want to make money. You tend not to do things on a consistent level that contradict the reason why most businesses go into business, to make money Performance is also a factor in whether a company will give an endorsement to an athletes. We are a gardening that tends to use the what have you done for me lately concept when it comes to our professional athlete.Businesses also use this practice to capitalizeon the success and marketability of an athlete. If there was a ethical issue the easiest way for that athlete to get the endorsements back or to gain new is to win. Winning is the cure for any image problems because it covers up the moral and places fierceness on the practical. In the case of Peyton Manning, Buick comes to mind. He did not play in the NFL in the 2011 season. He suffered abominable neck injuries that put his playing future in jeopardy. He lost several endorsement deals not be cause he had a moral issue, in fact he is one of the top professional athletes in the world when it comes to image. In 2012 he was picked up but another team and that team has been success, Buick looking for a spokesman to embody the brand of Buick they went with Manning.He was not high on their list they dropped Tiger and needed to find a spokesman that matched the brand. Companies have to make the decision to drop or keep an athlete based on so many factors. The need to satisfy the bottom line and the customer is always a substantial task. The hardest part is picking the right spokesman that can push the brand, product or service. It is hard because these athletes have individualized lives, these athletes are human, they make decisions at times without thinking about what company has paid them to speak about their product. The company has to make sure that they include language in the contract that can help the athlete make inclusive decisions. The moral clause is always a good way for a company to protect itself from the damage that can happen when favorable decisions are not made by an individual.It is up to the athlete to make sure he wants to keep the money and fame that can come from being on commercials and in ads by Fortune 500 companies. I feel as though they do not think about the overall consequences of their actions or how it may affect their decisions. This is where the company comes in and can make up for that. Its egoism from both sides. A athlete can act unbecoming and lose it all but due to great performances he can redeem his career. While the company can affix a 2nd chance allowing the athlete to be in the public eye again. Its a line that both have control over but in the world of business and sport the lines are so often blurred. In the end the companies have the right to giveth and the right to taketh away.