Some Pros manage themselves while many use an agent or manager to sort through the business end so they can focus on racing and training. But what makes an agent an asset or a burden?
Before I worked in this editorial capacity I was the marketing director for a couple popular bike brands from 1997 until 2007 and dealt with Pros and agents as part of that job. And virtually every time an athlete back then then told me that he/she was thinking about taking on a manager, my heart would sink, because I have had mostly negative experiences with managers leading up to that time. I for one always enjoyed the one-on-one contact with the athletes and still do to this time, and thus having someone in the middle felt a little like talking to your best friend or spouse through a shrink or a divorce attorney.
Clearly not all relationships were this tight, but I was very close to most of the athletes I sponsored during that time. That personal connection gave us as a brand great feedback and allowed me to get closer to the athlete and understand their concerns better. In some cases it was actually more helpful to speak to the manager or have the manager make sure that certain stuff happens. Sadly though, those situations were less common.
My biggest gripe about the manager situation however was that I often wondered about the actual skills and ambition of said managers and that is still true today. Many seem to simply shake down the existing endemic sponsors a little more, and a little more - versus trying to go after some bigger non-endemic brands where the marketing budgets are much larger. It doesn't really matter how much pressure a manager puts on the sponsor, the budget is only a certain amount and won't really change even if the emails and proposals get tougher.
The likely scenario is more as follows. Let us assume the budget for an athlete is $15,000 and that includes product and bonuses, but now the manager requires a 20% commission. Where do you think those $3,000 come from? That is certainly not extra money that the sponsor will bring to the table, that often just means that the budget for the athlete has now shrunk to $12,000. In certain cases where an athlete does not want to deal with contracts etc, that is fine, but for others who have already set up the relationships, it is not a good deal.
A good manager/agent should be finding unique new sponsors for his protege and bringing new brands to the sport. But that is a difficult task and easier said than done. It goes without saying that logos from Chobani yogurt, Nationwide Insurance, Nature's Path Organic, American Express, Pepsi, UPS etc would look great on the kit of various Pros, but for a manager getting the foot in the door of those types of companies is indeed a challenging task. But that is in my view what they are hired for. Mention $50,000 to a wetsuit, bike or running shoe brand and you will likely have to get some smelling salt for those brand managers. But that is not the case for larger non-endemic brands. However there has to be a strong value proposition and clear idea of the ROI.
When looking closer at the kits of the top 15 male and female Pros in Kona, the triathlon industry sponsors completely rule those kits, with the Belgian uplace brand, and the German Erdinger group being somewhat of an exception. And that is actually sad. But does that mean that the managers are not doing a good job attracting new sponsors or is it simply the case that the sport of triathlon is not interesting enough to sponsors?
I doubt though that the latter scenario is true and my advice thus to Pro athletes now is to task a manager to bring in new sponsors and not touch the relationships already established. Managers need to think outside of the box - it is in their own interest and it helps the athletes and the sport too.
The image above was taken at Interbike 2008 in Las Vegas when Simon Whitfield said he would no longer have an agent, and I offered to be his bouncer - mock agent
