Tiger breaks the 100 million dollar mark!

[ClayHbg]

Originally Posted by Aquaguru

I don't feel that this should be a big news story.  $100 million doesn't go as far as it would of for Snead.  Yes its alot of money but you have to look at it in comparison.  The price of everything as gone up.  I'm sure the money that Snead and Hogan won was alot back then too

I see your point, but there really is no comparison.   $100 million dollars twenty years from now will still be generational wealth.  And remember, Tiger is only 36.

[dsc123]

The gap is pretty impressive.  Interestingly though, compared to other sports, that's nothing.  Considering that Tiger Woods is to the game of golf.

In the last 15 years of Arod's career, he will have been paid $401M.  And he will probably only hit .275 with 20 home runs for the last 5 years of that contract.  Arod may be the closest comparison in talent to Tiger, but his ability to move the needle and what he means to the game cannot compare to Tiger.

The Nationals pay Ryan Zimmerman $100M for only 6 years.

Tiger's annual salary is about $6.7M.  That's about the same as a baseball player that is good enough to have a long career, but never really stands out, such as Jack Wilson, Brandon Phillips, and Ramon Hernandez.

I know Tiger earns a ton of money on endorsements and all that, but purely from the perspective of earnings from the sport itself, its amazing how far behind golf is.

And if the Dodgers are going to make $300M a year from their TV contract, and others follow suit, baseball players salaries will explode again before long.

[newtogolf]

The LPGA needs to market their brand better.  Tiger was/is a phenom, the LPGA has teased us with a few potentials (Wie, Yani) but they haven't had the dominance Tiger did.

From a U.S.marketing perspective it's hard to gain local excitement for their tour given it's dominated by non-US players.  Until they figure out a marketing program that will attract attendees and sponsors their incomes will be limited.  Maybe a grass roots effort to attract average male golf fans might work, emphasizing the more attractive female golfers and suggesting the golf they play is closer to what we play compared to the PGA.

Originally Posted by ThominOH

Now if only Tiger can do the same with the LPGA.. There is a league that gets no lovin..  100th rank PGA men's tour makes about 800k a year..... Ladies 100th ranked player gets less then 40K..  Something to think about..

[David in FL]

The LPGA needs to market their brand better.   Maybe a grass roots effort to attract average male golf fans might work,..... ........suggesting the golf they play is closer to what we play compared to the PGA.

That's the problem though....if I, as an average male golfer, want to watch someone closer to my own ability play golf, I go out and play with my buddies. When I watch golf on tv, or spend money and time to go to a tournament, it's because I want to see something amazing. Something I can't begin to comprehend, even though I've been around the game my whole life. Watching someone, male or female, hit a 7 iron 155 yds just doesn't do it.....nor does "going for it" on a 490 yard par 5. The ladies are great golfers. But they just play a much better version of the same game a lot of us play. The men play a COMPLETELY different game. All the marketing in the world isn't going to change that.

[turtleback]

Originally Posted by ThominOH

Now if only Tiger can do the same with the LPGA.. There is a league that gets no lovin..  100th rank PGA men's tour makes about 800k a year..... Ladies 100th ranked player gets less then 40K..  Something to think about..

Now how could Tiger do that?  Get a sex change operation?

[newtogolf]

The same could be said for womens tennis but they seem to do a better job marketing, plus the Williams sisters are phenoms in their sport.

I enjoy watching the LPGA from the point that it's much closer to the game I play and I like to see how they approach the course and the distances that are relative to mine.  What I miss is having a rooting interest in particular players that are competitive on a regular basis.  Yani might be a very good golfer, but her and most of the pacific rim golfers have very little personality or appeal to make you want to be a fan of theirs.

Originally Posted by David in FL

That's the problem though....if I, as an average male golfer, want to watch someone closer to my own ability play golf, I go out and play with my buddies.

When I watch golf on tv, or spend money and time to go to a tournament, it's because I want to see something amazing. Something I can't begin to comprehend, even though I've been around the game my whole life. Watching someone, male or female, hit a 7 iron 155 yds just doesn't do it.....nor does "going for it" on a 490 yard par 5.

The ladies are great golfers. But they just play a much better version of the same game a lot of us play. The men play a COMPLETELY different game. All the marketing in the world isn't going to change that.

[David in FL]

The same could be said for womens tennis but they seem to do a better job marketing, plus the Williams sisters are phenoms in their sport.  I enjoy watching the LPGA from the point that it's much closer to the game I play and I like to see how they approach the course and the distances that are relative to mine.  What I miss is having a rooting interest in particular players that are competitive on a regular basis.  Yani might be a very good golfer, but her and most of the pacific rim golfers have very little personality or appeal to make you want to be a fan of theirs.

If the only golf on tv was the LPGA, I might agree, but any given weekend they're up against 3 or more different professional men's tours competing for that viewership. While I don't discount the reason you enjoy watching the ladies, most golfers are going to watch the tournament that gives them the biggest entertainment bang for their buck/time. Tennis......heck, you're lucky to find it televised at all unless it's a major. Tennis fans ( I'm one too) have to take what they can get a lot of the time. You touched on one other difference too. Tennis is "mano a mano" competition between two people and much faster paced, no matter who you're watching. It's easier to get into a match and cheer for one or another. That helps make it more engaging for a lot of people, even non-tennis players. Very few non-golfers spend a lot of time watching golf.....