No he didn't. You are off by 10X.
Diadora and Marathon Sports to Award $40,000 to First HS Athletes to Break 4:00 and 4:35 Mile
High School Running
Distance
-
11
-
law of the land wrote:
No he didn't. You are off by 10X.
Even if it's "only" $100,000, that's a friggin' good deal for a HS kid.
10 -
Blurred Lines wrote:
Wait.. I thought NIL money stood for "name, image, and likeness"? I thought being paid for performance was not permitted.
I'm going to assume the contract is after the performance and thereafter.... so that's when the NIL kicks in, though there was that stipulation.
Thinking that wholesale profit is near 1/4 of retail price.... that is only selling (616) pairs to break even on ROI
10 -
It is also possible you could run sub-4 sub4:35 and choose NOT to sign the NIL deal
40 -
law of the land wrote:
No he didn't. You are off by 10X.
Care to elaborate a bit and explain how you know?
00 -
runBUCKS wrote:
Blurred Lines wrote:
Wait.. I thought NIL money stood for "name, image, and likeness"? I thought being paid for performance was not permitted.
I'm going to assume the contract is after the performance and thereafter.... so that's when the NIL kicks in, though there was that stipulation.
Thinking that wholesale profit is near 1/4 of retail price.... that is only selling (616) pairs to break even on ROI
Yes.
Why is it so hard for people to grasp this concept.
Would it have been easier if Diadora said "We are going to hold an NIL selection contest. The first "3" HS athletes to run under 4.00 for boys and 4.35 for girls go into final selection round to be selected based on their now apparent running ability for an NIL deal from our brand, that is now completely independent of the mile performances that were only part of a preliminary screening process".
And then you pick the first one to do it.
Would everyone feel better if there was a waiting period after the performances? Would a month "cool down" period designate it wasn't being paid for literal performance?
I have to admit, it's starting to feel like it might even be Diadora employees here on this thread manufacturing the controversy because right now this is a 5 page thread about a relatively low NIL amount for only two HS kids, something which other brands have and are doing on much greater volume around the country. So if that's the case, well played.
50 -
Diadora brings me back to my high school soccer days, top-tier soccer shoes and tennis gear. Seeing them push into the U.S. running scene now is pretty cool.
30 -
The Spike looks good.
10 -
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
runBUCKS wrote:
I'm going to assume the contract is after the performance and thereafter.... so that's when the NIL kicks in, though there was that stipulation.
Thinking that wholesale profit is near 1/4 of retail price.... that is only selling (616) pairs to break even on ROI
Yes.
Why is it so hard for people to grasp this concept.
Would it have been easier if Diadora said "We are going to hold an NIL selection contest. The first "3" HS athletes to run under 4.00 for boys and 4.35 for girls go into final selection round to be selected based on their now apparent running ability for an NIL deal from our brand, that is now completely independent of the mile performances that were only part of a preliminary screening process".
And then you pick the first one to do it.
Would everyone feel better if there was a waiting period after the performances? Would a month "cool down" period designate it wasn't being paid for literal performance?
I have to admit, it's starting to feel like it might even be Diadora employees here on this thread manufacturing the controversy because right now this is a 5 page thread about a relatively low NIL amount for only two HS kids, something which other brands have and are doing on much greater volume around the country. So if that's the case, well played.
40k feels like a lot for a HS track athlete . It isn't a sport like wrestling that has a bunch of rich alumni pouring millions into it .
And yes this has been a great campaign to build brand awareness for a company nobody cares about.
40 -
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
Yes.
Why is it so hard for people to grasp this concept.
Would it have been easier if Diadora said "We are going to hold an NIL selection contest. The first "3" HS athletes to run under 4.00 for boys and 4.35 for girls go into final selection round to be selected based on their now apparent running ability for an NIL deal from our brand, that is now completely independent of the mile performances that were only part of a preliminary screening process".
And then you pick the first one to do it.
Would everyone feel better if there was a waiting period after the performances? Would a month "cool down" period designate it wasn't being paid for literal performance?
I have to admit, it's starting to feel like it might even be Diadora employees here on this thread manufacturing the controversy because right now this is a 5 page thread about a relatively low NIL amount for only two HS kids, something which other brands have and are doing on much greater volume around the country. So if that's the case, well played.
You are missing the fact that the athlete must not only run fast, but do it in the Diadora shoes.
If I pull the year end time list, and focus my search for an NIL athlete on all the sub4 milers, I normally have no idea what shoe brand the kids wore.
12 -
wrong issue wrote:
Salvitore Stitchmo wrote:
Yes.
Why is it so hard for people to grasp this concept.
Would it have been easier if Diadora said "We are going to hold an NIL selection contest. The first "3" HS athletes to run under 4.00 for boys and 4.35 for girls go into final selection round to be selected based on their now apparent running ability for an NIL deal from our brand, that is now completely independent of the mile performances that were only part of a preliminary screening process".
And then you pick the first one to do it.
Would everyone feel better if there was a waiting period after the performances? Would a month "cool down" period designate it wasn't being paid for literal performance?
I have to admit, it's starting to feel like it might even be Diadora employees here on this thread manufacturing the controversy because right now this is a 5 page thread about a relatively low NIL amount for only two HS kids, something which other brands have and are doing on much greater volume around the country. So if that's the case, well played.
You are missing the fact that the athlete must not only run fast, but do it in the Diadora shoes.
If I pull the year end time list, and focus my search for an NIL athlete on all the sub4 milers, I normally have no idea what shoe brand the kids wore.
You are right that's a fact. I don't know how that's relevant to the breaking of NIL rules in this country at all.
Then let's rephrase it again.
"We are going to hold an NIL selection contest. The first "3" HS athletes to go out and purchase a pair of our new mezzofondo spike and then run under 4.00 for boys and 4.35 for girls go into final selection round to be selected based on their now apparent running ability for an NIL deal from our brand, that is now completely independent of the mile performances that were only part of a preliminary screening process"
If at the time of said mile performances they are not contractually representing the brand (Diadora) this is all that matters. I think it's so clear cut I don't get the conjecture. You don't think this is the first thing their legal team made sure was okay? This isn't a group of dudes running a brand out of their basement.
Also you've just answered the question as to why they are doing this, because know when you pull that year end time list and you see a sub 4/sub 4.35, there is a good chance those athletes were wearing Diadora and one of them most likely now has a nice NIL deal for doing so.
00
1 post was removed from this page.
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.