I make it a point in every initial conversation with a potential client, to tell them that I am not in the business of making promises.  When a current client asks me what the entity on the opposite side of the bargaining table will come back with as an offer, or if he will come to us with an offer at all, I always tell him that I am not a fortune teller.  I will do all the work necessary to put my clients in the best situations possible, but I cannot predict the future, nor can I ultimately guarantee success.  There are too many factors out of my control, including the objective talent of the athlete and subjective wants, needs, and thoughts of scouts, coaches, and executives, that making predictions or guarantees is downright stupid and unethical.

But agents do it…over and over again.  Because my profession is so competitive and cutthroat, agents, especially newcomers, find that they have to make promises to athletes just so that they can be considered in the running as someone who may be hired.  There are two major problems with this tactic: 1) The agent does not have the player’s best interests in mind.  By promising the world to a player when the world is not really available, the agent is not fulfilling his fiduciary duty to be honest to his client. 2) Short-sidedness.

In any Sport Marketing class, students will be taught the value of Relationship Marketing over Database Marketing.  Database Marketing is concerned with the simple one-time transaction while there is short-term interest in the consumer.  Relationship Marketing refers to a long-term and mutually beneficial arrangement wherein both the seller and consumer focus on value enhancement with the goal of providing a more satisfying exchange. This approach attempts to transcend the simple purchase-exchange process with the customer to make more meaningful and richer contact by providing a more holistic, personalized purchase, and use the consumption experience to create stronger ties.  It is about personal, long-term relationships.

How do those marketing terms apply?  While there is not technically a buyer and seller in the principal/agent relationship between a sports agent and an athlete, upon the agent’s recruitment of an athlete, it really does seem like the agent is selling his product (services) to the athlete (eventual buyer).  Many agents do not think long-term and will do whatever is necessary (including making promises) in order to get that one big client.  If that agent happens to follow through on those promises (often by chance), then congratulations to him.  If he doesn’t, that short-sidedness should lead him right out of the industry.  If it doesn’t, then the competition is losing out on an opportunity to hold something against another agent in the future recruitment of athletes.

Instead of that approach, agents should focus on the relationship building, which means that false promises and short-sidedness must be thrown out of the window.  With the ultimate concern being the well-being of the player and the personal relationship created, agents would focus on creating value to the player instead of primarily value to himself.

I like this particular paragraph by Abbott:

Anyone who claims to know now what will happen then is lying. An honest agent will promise to try. An honest agent will show you what they have done in the past. But an honest agent will not promise ideal results, because that’s impossible.

We Should Not Be In The Business Of Empty Promises from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules

After the whole Tim Donaghy scandal, it would be smart if athletes decided to stop gambling, at least for a while.  Since the Donaghy story broke, we have heard about Charles Barkley and Adam Jones (formerly known as Pacman) getting sued by Las Vegas casinos for not paying their gambling bills.  This week we now hear that Alonzo Mourning is also charged with having an unpaid bill at a Vegas casino.

Barkley has been quoted saying that he [Charles] has a gambling problem, but he has the money to afford it…another great Barkley quote. Zo apparently owes $50,000 to the same casino that Barkley owed his money.  However, reports say that Zo’s debt was not from casino gambling but from reserving a dining room for his charity during last year’s all-star break.

Although Zo might not been in Vegas gambling away his money, why do he and other athletes not pay their bills?  It only costs them more money and hassle in the long run by running away from debt. This gives the athletes a bad image in the media and can hurt their careers.

If they want to keep their gambling habits out of the media and not under the microscope, athletes should pay their checks and avoid going to court.  These athletes are not bums like Tim Donaghy who have much less money and make deals with the Mafia.  They could easily pay their bills and should do so before they leave Vegas.  As the amended saying goes, what happens in Las Vegas should stay in Las Vegas.

Gambling With Your Career from Sports Agent Blog - Sports Business, Sports Law, Sports Negotiations, NCAA Rules