You've reached professional status, would you accept a sponsorship of something you don't like?

[Valleygolfer]

I wondered this after seeing Spieth's deal with Coke and I don't like any of their products. I don't not drink soda, sugary drinks and I do not care for hyper-filtered water but the cash amount I am sure is staggering. I am a pretty straight up guy and it would be hard for me to say how great something is when I don't feel it. Maybe some of you guys deal with this.

I am not sure I could use equipment that is inferior or performs that way either, and it seems like some pros relegate to doing that when they not as desireable.

[SavvySwede]

I don't drink soda and wouldn't endorse if I was in Speith's position. I might endorse other products I don't feel strongly about if I didn't see the harm. Depends on the product.

[JxQx]

For me it would depend on the product and how much they are giving me. There are some things I would never promote but that list is somewhat small.

[billchao]

Put me in the depends on the product group. I can't endorse something I absolutely wouldn't support, but if it something I might not use but would, I could do it.

For example, if Pepsi wanted to sign me to a deal even though I drink Coke, that's not the end of the world. They both sell similar products.

If I were a vegetarian and McDonald's came knocking on my door, then I'd have to say no, regardless of how many Brink's trucks full of cash they back down my driveway.

[Lihu]

I don't drink Coke or Pepsi, but I don't really feel strongly enough against anything not to endorse stuff.

However, it seems like to endorse something you should have already been using it and are just making it public. It seems a little dishonest to endorse something you've never used before?

We'll also have to assume that whatever is being endorsed is acceptable to the general golfing public or the public in general.

[Patch]

I voted "depends....." I would never knowingly sponsor something that might be harmful to others. On the other hand I might sponsor something I did not use with the thinking someone else might get some good out of it. 

Truth be known I am in the minority that doesn't pay much attention to what's on peoples' shirts, or otherwise advertised.  Especially in the golf industry. 

[ppine]

Not if you are an ethical person.  

[nevets88]

Any company, especially after it passes a certain threshold in size - "does harm" in a way, it's inevitable. To a segment of people, the environment, whatever. Whether a company is a palatable endorsement is all relative.

I know this. I sure as hell ain't endorsing 5 Hour Energy. 

[disaster]

Depends ... ;)

Not only on the product though, but also on my current status as a player. If I had just reached the tour and was fighting for the card and actually needed the money (touring is expensive ..) I certainly would have a lot lower bars than if I were a world number 1 already and didn't really need it.

[djfajt71]

It would depend on the product.  If it is something I have used/would use, I would be more than happy to have my name attached to the product and cash those checks!

[jamo]

It depends on the amount of money, if there are any competing offers, and the downside to endorsing that product. Between Coke and Pepsi or Gatorade and PowerAde, there's essentially no downside. But if Halliburton wanted to emblazon my hat with a logo, that might be different.

[Jeremie Boop]

I think the key phrase in the title for me is "don't like". That's not the same thing as saying you don't use it. If you don't like something, how can you endorse it. "Hey, I don't like Coke, but maybe you will!" So, for me, I would not endorse something I don't like.

[Avalanche]

1 hour ago, Valleygolfer said:

I wondered this after seeing Spieth's deal with Coke and I don't like any of their products. I don't not drink soda, sugary drinks and I do not care for hyper-filtered water but the cash amount I am sure is staggering. I am a pretty straight up guy and it would be hard for me to say how great something is when I don't feel it. Maybe some of you guys deal with this.

I am not sure I could use equipment that is inferior or performs that way either, and it seems like some pros relegate to doing that when they not as desireable.

True.  OTOH, Spieth's involvement with Coke isn't as bad as some other golfer's involvement with coke.  Just sayin.. 

[Valleygolfer]

6 minutes ago, Avalanche said:

True.  OTOH, Spieth's involvement with Coke isn't as bad as some other golfer's involvement with coke.  Just sayin.. 

I know that those who have dealt with "coke", still highly endorse it...

[Natural Patrick]

1 minute ago, Valleygolfer said:

I know that those who have dealt with "coke", still highly endorse it...

They said it was not about the way it tasted, but more about the smell.

[Avalanche]

Just now, Natural Patrick said:

They said it was not about the way it tasted, but more about the smell.

Oh, so that's what they're doing.  They're just smelling it.  Really hard.  

[sarena1594]

I'm not sure that'd I'd ever reject a golf company's endorsement, as I assume any club or apparel company can custom fit stuff for a pro.  If it was non-golf related, it would definitely depend on the product and how much their paying.  Although, the rejection list is small.  Just because I don't drink Coke or use any of their products doesn't mean I wouldn't let them pay me to represent them.  But sure, if I had a huge moral issue against a certain product, of course I wouldn't take the deal.

In the end, it's easy for us to debate, but if someone actually put a deal for millions in front of our face, a lot of us might think twice about rejecting it.

[jkelley9]

In my mind, if I'm a tour player playing golf as my profession... I'm probably not going to care much about my image regarding endorsements. If Pampers came up to me with a fat check, I don't think I'd say no, I'm pretty sure I'd say "for an extra $X,XXX,XXX I'll even wear the diaper!". The larger the check, the higher chance they would have with me. But it would be a calculated value to my future. I wouldn't be terribly concerned with "fans" and "image" because the reality is that I'm trying to get more money. These folks that are "fans" of the Tiger, Speith, McIlroy... you should be their fan because they are GOOD and are ENTERTAINING and you are in AWE of their skills. Not because of their incomes, habits, personal stuff. I never understood that.