“EXCLUSIVELY YOURS” Commentary on Media Contracts by Poptart

**Admin** · 01-13-2015, 11:57 PM

“EXCLUSIVELY YOURS” Commentary by Poptart

**Joe Pietaro** · 01-14-2015, 12:16 AM

My view on this is that if a bodybuilder is signed to a specific supplement company, that is like the comparison with Michael Jordan exclusive to Nike. But once the media is involved, pigeon holing an athlete to one specific publication makes it a negative.

**swingslammer** · 01-14-2015, 08:39 AM

I thought Gail used to post all these articles?

Where is Gail, she hasn't been seen around here in a while?

**guruhonza** · 01-14-2015, 09:24 AM

Originally Posted by swingslammer

I thought Gail used to post all these articles?

Where is Gail, she hasn't been seen around here in a while?

#whycutback

**Musclepapa John** · 01-14-2015, 10:21 AM

Quoting lawyerly ex Rx'er the Big Sexy this morning, "MD will probably have athletes but I'm sure the contracts will be changed or renegotiated to reflect the state of exclusivity in bodybuilding. No one is going to turn down 1000's a month"

Its free money for the handful of people involved. The mags that are doling it out aren't fearful of anti-trust suits or responsible for the interests of this handful of athletes beyond the terms of the contracts where they dole out this free money.
I think Rx should actually do more with Species sponsored athletes requiring they interact with fans here as with the gnashing of teeth at MD over Evan's possibly departure it shows the value to a web forum having such interaction of a popular top pro. Heck, fans there are even calling for Singerman to start his own forum, which he might. ALL THE PLAYERS need to do more not less to be competitive. #whycutback?

**guruhonza** · 01-20-2015, 10:00 AM

So.... Is Gail part of cutting back?

**Musclepapa John** · 01-20-2015, 11:33 AM

She was still promoting Rx on Jan 10th on her Facebook page AND was alive based on postings on FB as recently as Jan. 17.
https://www.facebook.com/GailHAuerba...ocation=stream

Originally Posted by guruhonza

So.... Is Gail part of cutting back?

**run4td** · 01-20-2015, 11:42 AM

The problem with doing away with exclusivity is the athletes lose out on money! A portion of top guys were getting 6 figures from the magazines. The you had the others taking in 20-70k a year. Find me one athlete that wouldn't want an additional 20k a year just to do a little blogging and answer q&a for one magazine? They are not going to get that without an exclusive contract. They do a photo shoot and your lucky to get 200-250 for the shoot. That not even worth missing a days worth of work for me hence why I started passing up a lot of opportunities with M&F, IronMan, and MMI.

**Poptart** · 01-20-2015, 12:10 PM

Run4td: As my commentary states, exclusivity does work in some instances. The point of the article was that athletes need to know what they are signing and what to expect. Signing an exclusive contract is not necessarily a guarantee for future or further success.

To give you an analogy, I used to work in the music industry. I can't tell you how many times a young band thought just b/c they got signed to a record deal that they had made it. What a surprise when they actually understand the contract and that this was just the beginning.

I'm all for athletes making money if someone wants to pay them just understand what you are getting and giving up for that compensation.

**Musclepapa John** · 01-20-2015, 12:18 PM

Originally Posted by run4td

The problem with doing away with exclusivity is the athletes lose out on money! A portion of top guys were getting 6 figures from the magazines. The you had the others taking in 20-70k a year. Find me one athlete that wouldn't want an additional 20k a year just to do a little blogging and answer q&a for one magazine? They are not going to get that without an exclusive contract. They do a photo shoot and your lucky to get 200-250 for the shoot. That not even worth missing a days worth of work for me hence why I started passing up a lot of opportunities with M&F, IronMan, and MMI.

Agreed! Free money is good Brad, but the problem is the mags can't afford it anymore. The top athletes if they are doing their marketing right have better social media numbers than the magazine's social media sites. Plus, after the mags shoot a video and upload it half a dozen or more sites steal them and reformulate with their own watermarks and the damn mags to be honest don't do anything to plug the holes in the value of what they just paid to produce.
Meanwhile, the athlete like even Michelle Lewin a bikini competitor puts up a vid on her social media and it gets 1.3 million views in 10hrs. None of these exclusive contracts are going to prohibit the athlete from doing their own marketing or additional marketing with other sponsors.
They are ONLY exclusives to prevent another industry magazine from doing interviews or video and photoshoots with them. The other mags can run all their stage photos, etc as much as they want which is another loop hole and the fed website has access to everyone. Everything is so convoluted related to photo and video these days with peeps being able to produce good quality content with a cell phone that there is no return in my view to the times of old

The mag contracts in this day and time where the tools to produce your own content and build your brand are so democratized that those mag contracts simply aren't the windfall profit that they were a decade ago. I'm happy if Steve and Mr Pecker want to buy the top guys homes in the Hollywood Hills. Is it good business for them in this day and time? That's another story.

**Chris Aceto** · 01-20-2015, 03:03 PM

Originally Posted by run4td

The problem with doing away with exclusivity is the athletes lose out on money! A portion of top guys were getting 6 figures from the magazines. The you had the others taking in 20-70k a year. Find me one athlete that wouldn't want an additional 20k a year just to do a little blogging and answer q&a for one magazine? They are not going to get that without an exclusive contract. They do a photo shoot and your lucky to get 200-250 for the shoot. That not even worth missing a days worth of work for me hence why I started passing up a lot of opportunities with M&F, IronMan, and MMI.

Exclusives not only work but they are great, they pay more!!
I had an exclusive at one time with both MD and FLEX can't say anything bad about those agreements.

**Curt James** · 01-20-2015, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by Musclepapa John

Meanwhile, the athlete like even Michelle Lewin a bikini competitor puts up a vid on her social media and it gets 1.3 million views in 10hrs. None of these exclusive contracts are going to prohibit the athlete from doing their own marketing or additional marketing with other sponsors.

You keep singing this refrain yet those numbers mean nothing without someone willing to write a check.

And, of course, contracts may stipulate that an athlete not work with other sponsors. There are few Jay Cutlers out there. And even Jay wasn't under contract to MD and Flex at the same time.

**Musclepapa John** · 01-20-2015, 03:28 PM

Originally Posted by Curt James

You keep singing this refrain yet those numbers mean nothing without someone willing to write a check.

Point of the numbers is the athletes can get better numbers on their own IF the athlete is worth anything. That video on any of the mag sites wouldn't have generated a fraction of those numbers. Comprende teacher?

Originally Posted by Curt James

And, of course, contracts may stipulate that an athlete not work with other sponsors. There are few Jay Cutlers out there. And even Jay wasn't under contract to MD and Flex at the same time.

MD & Flex contracts typically don't claim that an athlete can't be sponsored by Monsta Clothing, the local coffee shop, whatever. The sponsorship world extends beyond "magazines," but that's the only media outlet they are typically restricted from being sponsored by at the same time. Evan's sponsorship with MD or Prime means more to him in terms of money and promotion? MD for money and Prime probably at this point for promotion.

**Curt James** · 01-20-2015, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by Musclepapa John

Point of the numbers is the athletes can get better numbers on their own IF the athlete is worth anything. That video on any of the mag sites wouldn't have generated a fraction of those numbers. Comprende teacher?

Every athlete has worth. Some are more popular than others. But, again, popularity doesn't always translate to a paycheck. And, as pointed out by another member, stats don't always paint an accurate picture.

And Evan, like Jay, is a different animal.

**Musclepapa John** · 01-20-2015, 03:38 PM

Originally Posted by Curt James

Every athlete has worth. Some are more popular than others. But, again, popularity doesn't always translate to a paycheck. And, as pointed out by another member, stats don't always paint an accurate picture.

And Evan, like Jay, is a different animal.

Agreed, some are worth a shit for instance. Some aren't worth a shit, but something less I reckon.
The worth should match the paycheck or someone's getting screwed in the deal.
The deal has to be good for both sides in a free-market system even though I realize that concept isn't likely taught in public schools.