His cause is over your head.
MikeEM wrote:
On a Steve Prefontaine doc I saw Nick was quoted as admiring Pre's rebel side - the diff is Steve fought for legitimate causes - and loved to give back to the sport that was his passion - Nick makes lots of bucks thru track - shut up and quit whining and give back to the sport...making a few appearances is something you can survive...unlike the American Ninja course...which wore you out ...
This is the best post yet 10+
hulksmash wrote:
Appreciate the response Roj, although you don’t address the central point: If athletes are prevented from representing their sponsors during *non-team* activities then they need to be compensated. A hotel room and plane ticket aren’t comp, this is a business expense. As a general rule, companies doesn’t clawback an employee’s travel expenses from payroll after a business trip. The IAAF and affiliated national orgs provide travel for the athletes to the championship event to be certain that there is an event. Nike athletes, USATF staff, board members, coaches, trainers, wives and significant others, VIPs, etc get hotel and plane tickets too and it’s not in exchange for loss of income. Nor are these attendees prevented from conducting business at any time during championship week.
Athlete compensation would include service contracts, appearance fees, and prize money. In this instance non-Nike athletes must effectively suspend their service contracts during team competition. It’s unreasonable to extend that suspension to non-team related activities, but this appears to be what USATF is requiring. The more obvious result is that this necessarily creates an uneven playing field with Nike athletes.
Your side arguments about profit sharing in college sports are scattered. Tuition and room/board are marginal costs for a university, yet you value them at sticker price. A head football coach at a university receives housing allowances many times greater than any student-athlete, *plus* a salary, *plus* incentive bonuses and on and on. The disparity there has grown beyond all proportion. Track athletes will never have access to revenue sharing on this scale but they should get a much bigger piece of the pie than they currently receive. At the most basic level they should be able to contract with sponsors without USATF crowding them out at every opportunity.
I'm late to the party, but a ton of people have made a big deal about how much money USATF spends to send all of these athletes to Worlds...
The LOC actually covers airfare and hotel for the athletes. Not USATF, not Nike money.
http://www.iaaf.org/eventbidding/iaaf-events/iaaf-world-championships
"• Pay travel and full-board accommodation costs for the quota athletes (approximately 2,000) for a maximum of 13 nights in a 4* hotel;"
USATF still does spend plenty of money on the athletes. Obviously the training camp would not be covered by the LOC, and they have to send a lot of coaches/doctors/administrators/etc to the meet.
One of the issues here is that USATF is really only providing athletes with competition gear, yet requiring them to basically wear only Nike stuff for an extended period of time. I know it seems like a lot when you make your first team, but it's really not that much stuff... definitely not enough stuff to train in leading up to Worlds. It's a BS move to require athletes to train in Nike gear and not give it to them, when you KNOW that a good chunk of these athletes have other sponsors and literally do not own anything that meets your requirements.
In other news, Nick says that the date with Paris Hilton was a publicity stunt, this is not:
'
RIAA analogy WRONG wrote:
So, Brainiac, you think less than $17.00 is a fair royalty return for 1 Million Plays of an artists song?
You dont know much. Those artists wouldnt have gotten much money anyway. One of the reasons it gets a million plays is because of the availability, which again reduces illegal downloading. Without spotify and similar people would still have been downloading illegally as before.
Also, the artists have always earned most by concerts. CD sale etc leaves little left for the artist.
polevaultpower wrote:
One of the issues here is that USATF is really only providing athletes with competition gear, yet requiring them to basically wear only Nike stuff for an extended period of time. I know it seems like a lot when you make your first team, but it's really not that much stuff... definitely not enough stuff to train in leading up to Worlds.
This is a really good point.
I saw a Clayton Murphy quote that said, “I am not going to deny the spot…but I’m going to be disappointed if he can’t represent the United States like he should be able to."
I think he should deny the spot and send an even bigger message. Nick needs to do some organizing to get his fellow 800m runners to have his back. It would be great if USATF could only send 2 runners to Worlds because everyone else denied after Symmonds. I know Murphy is 20 and it would be a dream come true but he's got to be able to take a step back and stand with Nick, see what Nick is trying to fix for him and those to come in the sport.
FightFor15 wrote:
I saw a Clayton Murphy quote that said, “I am not going to deny the spot…but I’m going to be disappointed if he can’t represent the United States like he should be able to."
I think he should deny the spot and send an even bigger message. Nick needs to do some organizing to get his fellow 800m runners to have his back. It would be great if USATF could only send 2 runners to Worlds because everyone else denied after Symmonds. I know Murphy is 20 and it would be a dream come true but he's got to be able to take a step back and stand with Nick, see what Nick is trying to fix for him and those to come in the sport.
I see where your heart is, but Murphy would be making a huge mistake by turning it down. He's got to think about his future earning potential, and competing at Worlds, especially competing well, can multiply that.
The small people still need to worry about themselves first and foremost. It would be like an undrafted rookie in the NBA getting Lebron's back in a dispute with the player's union which could ultimately keep him out of the league. Let Nick fight this fight for the people (he is getting some support on social media from peers).
You Know Me wrote:
The small people still need to worry about themselves first and foremost. It would be like an undrafted rookie in the NBA getting Lebron's back in a dispute with the player's union which could ultimately keep him out of the league. Let Nick fight this fight for the people (he is getting some support on social media from peers).
Scabs.
Everyone could alternatively refuse to sign/abide by these restrictions and see if USATF relents. Of course, I think more than half the team has no quandry at all because they have individual deals with Nike (or none at all) so they either have no reason to want to fight this, or they have every reason to not fight this.
On a serious note, I fully support Nick Symmond's position vs USAT&F. Only slightly less seriously, here's a Tweet I could see a non-Nike athlete posting from Beijing: "greetings from Beijing. I'm taking an official Nike dump at the moment - just doin' it"
dougruns26 wrote:
To me, the key question is: What if Nick signs the agreement, but is in breach of the agreement? What are the penalties for being in breach? If there are none specified in the agreement, then who cares. The letter requesting that athletes not pack any non-Nike branded gear is irrelevant if it is not part of the agreement. Go have coffee in your Brooks gear Nick and have fun with this.
So you are suggesting the doctor commit fraud?
wejo wrote:
Gurgle wrote:In the NY Times article he says he is okay with wearing the uniform at "official team functions [which] include competitions, awards ceremonies and news conferences." He's objecting to wearing them at other times during the championships. I agree that the USATF may be going overboard, but how the hell is he going to monetize wearing Brooks gear while getting coffee in the morning? Brooks is not paying him one cent more for wearing their gear to get breakfast. What they are happy with though is his ability to drum up publicity over this absurd controversy.
Nick is of course getting free publicity for his company. That is what a smart marketer does.
He is also showing the absurdity of someone at USATF telling athletes not to pack non Nike branded gear. Neither side is going to monetize the hotel coffee and that is why it is more absurd someone at USATF suggested that athletes have to wear Nike at a coffee. USATF employees do not work for Nike, they work for USATF. The letter shows how some at USATF do not get it.
But as someone pointed out, Nick can easily go to events in Beijing outside of USATF in Brooks gear or do a videocast from his hotel room.
As shown at the official practice interview (team sport) Lebron is in team gear, that is when he is at an official practice.
****
People said adidas and others couldn't pony up the money. Under Armour is growing way faster than Nike and might have had the money to bid vs Nike but I don't think they were given the opportunity.
I spoke to Spencer Nel of adidas earlier this year and he said adidas was very interested in sponsoring USATF, and "we made it clear" to USATF that adidas was interested. USATF then went and signed with Nike without bidding it out to adidas. That happens from time to time but there are questions about whether a non-profit should be doing that, especially a non profit where the CEO's racing team and charity were sponsored by NIke and the now Chair of the Board used to work for Nike. In theory the board signs off on all of this, but Max should have never let Nike sponsor his racing time or his charity (even in a nominal amount( because it reeks of conflict of interest.
it'd be nice to have a real legal opinion as to if that racing team thing is a conflict of interests.
wejo wrote:
Gurgle wrote:In the NY Times article he says he is okay with wearing the uniform at "official team functions [which] include competitions, awards ceremonies and news conferences." He's objecting to wearing them at other times during the championships. I agree that the USATF may be going overboard, but how the hell is he going to monetize wearing Brooks gear while getting coffee in the morning? Brooks is not paying him one cent more for wearing their gear to get breakfast. What they are happy with though is his ability to drum up publicity over this absurd controversy.
Nick is of course getting free publicity for his company. That is what a smart marketer does.
He is also showing the absurdity of someone at USATF telling athletes not to pack non Nike branded gear. Neither side is going to monetize the hotel coffee and that is why it is more absurd someone at USATF suggested that athletes have to wear Nike at a coffee. USATF employees do not work for Nike, they work for USATF. The letter shows how some at USATF do not get it.
But as someone pointed out, Nick can easily go to events in Beijing outside of USATF in Brooks gear or do a videocast from his hotel room.
As shown at the official practice interview (team sport) Lebron is in team gear, that is when he is at an official practice.
****
People said adidas and others couldn't pony up the money. Under Armour is growing way faster than Nike and might have had the money to bid vs Nike but I don't think they were given the opportunity.
I spoke to Spencer Nel of adidas earlier this year and he said adidas was very interested in sponsoring USATF, and "we made it clear" to USATF that adidas was interested. USATF then went and signed with Nike without bidding it out to adidas. That happens from time to time but there are questions about whether a non-profit should be doing that, especially a non profit where the CEO's racing team and charity were sponsored by NIke and the now Chair of the Board used to work for Nike. In theory the board signs off on all of this, but Max should have never let Nike sponsor his racing time or his charity (even in a nominal amount( because it reeks of conflict of interest.
it'd be nice to have a real legal opinion as to if that racing team thing is a conflict of interests.
Not Impressed wrote:
I think that perhaps he is injured and knows he won't do squat in China, so he's taking the opportunity to make an a** out himself again and continue his campaign to be the most obnoxious publicity junkie in the sport. Just my opinion.
An injured guy would not be racing a 400m at Flotrack Throwdown today.
Barakus Obama wrote:
RIAA analogy WRONG wrote:So, Brainiac, you think less than $17.00 is a fair royalty return for 1 Million Plays of an artists song?
You dont know much. Those artists wouldnt have gotten much money anyway. One of the reasons it gets a million plays is because of the availability, which again reduces illegal downloading. Without spotify and similar people would still have been downloading illegally as before.
Also, the artists have always earned most by concerts. CD sale etc leaves little left for the artist.
I know the band/s personally, and I know what royalties they got before the internet radio law changes.
Also, my girlfriend wrote a hit song, before this streaming radio low royalty laws, and he made $100k for 1million plays and is a member of ASCAP.
FightFor15 wrote:
I saw a Clayton Murphy quote that said, “I am not going to deny the spot…but I’m going to be disappointed if he can’t represent the United States like he should be able to."
I think he should deny the spot and send an even bigger message. Nick needs to do some organizing to get his fellow 800m runners to have his back. It would be great if USATF could only send 2 runners to Worlds because everyone else denied after Symmonds. I know Murphy is 20 and it would be a dream come true but he's got to be able to take a step back and stand with Nick, see what Nick is trying to fix for him and those to come in the sport.
Why should Murphy make the sacrifice when we know damn well Nick wouldn't and didn't make the sacrifice for him?
This language is NOT NEW. Nick had no problem with Nike and the USATF forcing athletes to wear Nike or unbranded clothes at worlds when he was a NIKE runner. He had no inclination to stand up for them. Now when the shoes on the other foot, he makes it out to be a cause.
Like someone said. Nick is an entitled selfish turd. .
I hope Murphy does go and does well.
You Know Me wrote:
FightFor15 wrote:I saw a Clayton Murphy quote that said, “I am not going to deny the spot…but I’m going to be disappointed if he can’t represent the United States like he should be able to."
I think he should deny the spot and send an even bigger message. Nick needs to do some organizing to get his fellow 800m runners to have his back. It would be great if USATF could only send 2 runners to Worlds because everyone else denied after Symmonds. I know Murphy is 20 and it would be a dream come true but he's got to be able to take a step back and stand with Nick, see what Nick is trying to fix for him and those to come in the sport.
I see where your heart is, but Murphy would be making a huge mistake by turning it down. He's got to think about his future earning potential, and competing at Worlds, especially competing well, can multiply that.
The small people still need to worry about themselves first and foremost. It would be like an undrafted rookie in the NBA getting Lebron's back in a dispute with the player's union which could ultimately keep him out of the league. Let Nick fight this fight for the people (he is getting some support on social media from peers).
No real pros are supporting him. Mostly oiselle wannabees and high school kids. Quite a dream team.
Honestly sometimes people on Letsrun are so f'ing stupid, I don't know if they are really that stupid or just USATF trolls.
It doesnt mean jack that he didn't do this while sponsored by Nike. Before Nick didn't have a world championship silver medal and the clout that he does know. Before USATF never told him not to wear his sponsor's logo while drinking coffee in a hotel. Before USATF wasn't screwing over his primary sponsor. Before he was new to the international track scene, now its not the end of the world if he doesn't go to the world champs. Before he didn't have other revenue streams to support himself, now his financial situation is not dependent on running.
He is still likely sacrificing a lot in (a) money and (b) a really cool opportunity, for something that is likely to benefit future generations of track athletes much more than him. Doing so is just more realistic now considering the stage of his career and how USATF treats him now that he is no longer sponsored by Nike. At this point really the best case scenario for him is that he gets a little pr, he runs in the world champs, and he gets to wear brooks while drinking coffee in his hotel without being harassed for it. Is that really worth the more likely outcome of losing a spot on a world championship team? Hell no, but it will help future generations of track & field athletes and he doesnt like taking other people's bs, so it is a stand he is making. And in case you have forgotten, he does have a long history of protesting against broken rules, even while he was with Nike, which is probably part of the reason why he is no longer with Nike.
99th percentile wrote:
Honestly sometimes people on Letsrun are so f'ing stupid, I don't know if they are really that stupid or just USATF trolls.
It doesnt mean jack that he didn't do this while sponsored by Nike. Before Nick didn't have a world championship silver medal and the clout that he does know. Before USATF never told him not to wear his sponsor's logo while drinking coffee in a hotel. Before USATF wasn't screwing over his primary sponsor. Before he was new to the international track scene, now its not the end of the world if he doesn't go to the world champs. Before he didn't have other revenue streams to support himself, now his financial situation is not dependent on running.
He is still likely sacrificing a lot in (a) money and (b) a really cool opportunity, for something that is likely to benefit future generations of track athletes much more than him. Doing so is just more realistic now considering the stage of his career and how USATF treats him now that he is no longer sponsored by Nike. At this point really the best case scenario for him is that he gets a little pr, he runs in the world champs, and he gets to wear brooks while drinking coffee in his hotel without being harassed for it. Is that really worth the more likely outcome of losing a spot on a world championship team? Hell no, but it will help future generations of track & field athletes and he doesnt like taking other people's bs, so it is a stand he is making. And in case you have forgotten, he does have a long history of protesting against broken rules, even while he was with Nike, which is probably part of the reason why he is no longer with Nike.
Now Nick is trolling letsrun?
Sick come back bro
Somewhere in there it's suggested that they need Team USA or unbranded gear.
I think he needs to scramble to get a lot of old Reebok USA gear, really stick it to them.