8 richest athletes at the olympics, how did tennis do?

Tennis has two players in the top 5, oddly one of them is not Rafa Nadal. Federer is #2 and Djoko is #5. 5 of the 8 players are basketball players and one track guy Usain bolt. Still shows how US sports dollars are just crazy especially for golf, racing, and basketball. Kobe and Lebron both over the million dollars a week salary. Of course the footballers would have a player or two break the list for certain if they had full rosters of professionals at the olympics. Just an interesting side note on the business of sports, as I say always follow the money.


See link below:

http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Articles/2012/07/31/The-8-Richest-Athletes-at-the-2012-Olympics.aspx#page1

SoCal
Rafa wasn't at the Olympics. Pretty sure he'd have been on the list somewhere between Fed and Djoko.

We covered something similar a few weeks ago, and I found a list from Forbes that showed the top 50 sports earners for what I assume was 2010 (the article was from the early part of 2011) - Tiger Woods was top (despite abject form and his ex taking him to the divorce courts), but Fed was in the top 5 and Rafa was well in the top 25. The other tennis player who made the list was MaSha, mostly on the strength of her endorsements and advertising work. Obviously Novak has climbed the list in the last 18 months on the strength of his improved performances, but I doubt he pulls in quite the same money from endorsements as Roger and Rafa.

no he had 12 mill in prize money which is astounding last year. Unheard of that figure for prize money alone. I guess it helps to win 5 masters and three slams.

socal1976 wrote:no he had 12 mill in prize money which is astounding last year. Unheard of that figure for prize money alone. I guess it helps to win 5 masters and three slams.

Yeah, probably keeps the bank manager reasonably happy.

BTW, from my recollection of the other article it stated that Nadal won about $10 mill in prize money, and his overall earnings for the year were in the $25-30M range. Shows how important the other income streams are for these top earners (and as I commented earlier, my suspicion is Rafa has a better track record than Djoko in picking up the endorsement money in part from image and in part from being a more established star).

socal1976 wrote:no he had 12 mill in prize money which is astounding last year. Unheard of that figure for prize money alone. I guess it helps to win 5 masters and three slams.

Socal, honestly, even you should know that prize money forms a smaller part of the earnings of these top tennis stars, especially the top 3. Despite finishing the year 3rd last year and winning no slams, Fed still earn over $50 million which dwarfs the prize money Djokovic won and the bulk of that was from endorsements not prize money. Fed himself won over $10 million in 2007 which is probably worth more than what Djokovic earned if you take into account the higher level of inflation, so Djokovic's figure isn't unheard of for prize money alone.

I don't really understand why you sound almost offended when someone points out that Djokovic gets a lot less in overall income than Federer or Nadal, even last year when he did better than them: he's a less established sports star, it's expected. Federer has been around a lot longer and the same with Nadal, Djokovic only really burst on the scene last year when he won a slam away from what we might term his 'home' slam'. Winning 3 slams in a year certainly established him, and he's going to need to win a few more slams at least before he gets close to earning similar figures from endorsements that Nadal earns, let alone Federer.

Lucius, I think you've read that wrong. I think Socal was agreeing with Dummy Half's point that Novak is earning more off the back of improved results but is still lagging behind Roger and Rafa in endorsement.

But, just for the record, Fed's $10 million is not worth $12 million today when adjusted for infation.
(but I take no pleasure in offering such a nerdy correction! )

Lucius, I didn't get offended, you are the one who seems to get offended. I think as murdoch pointed out you misread the thread, I did not disagree in fact agreed with the fact that Roger and Rafa got more endorsements.

http://www.therichest.org/sports/forbes-highest-paid-athletes/

An interesting list, if we are doing Listmania.

The tone of your post does sound offended, why otherwise inject with 'no he has 12 mill in prize money' otherwise? You're disagreeing by saying no, not agreeing. Why would I be offended socal? Nearly all your posts lately have been about knocking down other players and promoting Djokovic! You were so rabid I even called you Djokovic's PR man prior to the Wimbledon semi, which he lost rather easily (when you predicted an easy Djokovic win in '4 routine sets').

The figure is pretty similar, 11.5 mill or so (adjusted) vs 12 mill, which I think most would agree is virtually the same unless you like counting the pennies HM Murdoch!

Lucius now you are reading my mind and telling me what I think, all your posts lately have been directed at attacking me. Name one thing negative I have said about Nadal or Murray. Or retract your second lie about my position on this thread. Retract both your critiques or frankly I lose a great deal of respect. 1. I was agreeing with the man and murdoch figured that out BUT YOU ARE ACTING TOO DENSE AND AGGRESSIVE TO ADMIT WHEN YOU ARE WRONG 2. I have said squat but positive about Nadal or Murray. Just because I mentioned the FACTS about Roger's draws and favoritism you as a fed fan have become completely unhinged. don't worry I am used to it. Fed is inviolate. I gave 5 percent of what you guys give to Nadal, Djoko, and Murray; back to fed with honest criticisms and points and you are all committing hari kari and hopping off cliffs like lemmings. So no I wasn't disputting his position agreeing with him. LIE 1. Lie #2 that have been saying negative things about other players, no, just one player Saint Roger the uncriticizable.

So that is two lies of yours exposed on this thread lucius you want to try for a third?

luciusmann wrote:
The figure is pretty similar, 11.5 mill or so (adjusted) vs 12 mill, which I think most would agree is virtually the same unless you like counting the pennies HM Murdoch!

If only I were as precise with my own money!

But Djoko's 2011 prize money was a clear record:

Fed 2007 prize money: $10,130,620
Inflation adjusted to 2012: $11,193,900
(source: http://www.usinflationcalculator.com/)
Djokovic 2011 prize money: $12,619,803

Difference: $1,425,903

That's almost a whole grand slam win more money!

I wouldn't normally be such a pedant but I can't let people diminish one of the few records Novak does currently have over Fed and Rafa!

mmm, reckon you should look at inflation rates of tennis prize money rather than just overall inflation.

e.g. wimbledon prize money 2007: £700K. In 2011: £1.1m
us open prize money 2007: $1.4m. In 2011: $1.8m

If you take all tourney's I suspect tennis prize money inflation is a lot higher than "normal" inflation ...

sorry, trying to outdo your pedanticism!

Maybe someone will recalculate Djokovic's 2011 prize money across all tournaments using 2007 figures (or recalc Federer's 2007 prize money in 2011 figures), but they'd have to be a bit mental (altho think there are a few of them about).

HM Murdoch, I think yellowgoatboy makes the point well regarding inflation and in fact I must admit I'd overlooked the fact that prize money inflation is even higher than general inflation! Just using the stats for the prize money difference in 2007 (for USO & Wimbledon) to 2011 just goes to show that as much as Djokovic's $12 million looks impressive, if you adjust it by prize money inflation then indeed Fed's 10 million probably is equal if not more than Djokovic's prize money last year.

One negative thing about Murray or Nadal socal? Well the fact you constantly harped on about how Djokovic getting Federer in draws was somehow an injustice is shown up by the fact that when Djokovic did get Murray at the Olympics, Murray dismissed Djokovic in str8 sets. Not to mention it's disrespectful to suggest that somehow Murray is somehow less of a challenge (especially given that Murray pushed Djokovic to 5 sets @ the Aussie Open).

My posts have attacked your positions socal, not you personally. How have I denigrated you personally? It is well known that you are one of the more vocal Djokovic fans on here and I by no means dislike Djokovic, so it's disingenuous to dismiss my views because I'm primarily a Fed fan. I've happily spoken up in favour of Djokovic on many occasions and if I'm such a rabid Fed fan, why would I bother? You arn't mentioning facts about Federer's draws and alleged favouritism, what facts are these that you talk of? You got conclusive prove of draw rigging? Let's see it please?

The way you phrased your first point is open to being misconstrued, that much I will acknowledge. So I'm happy to retract that with no issue. However, on the second point, in you're quest to make out Djokovic deserves more slam success than he's achieved, you have been more than happy to stamp all over Murray, that is not something I will be retracting at all.

Fine that was a much more reasonable post lucius, I have not slated murray at all. You can not find a more positive neutral on murray week in and week out. That doesn't mean I always am positive on him but by far more positive than negative, the same goes with Nadal. In fact I haven't even really been critical of fed per se either. I criticized his cupcake draws, that is a lot different than slating the player.

Name one negative or unfair attack I have made on any player other than Roddick, and Roddick doesn't count because he is frat boy impresonator and not a tennis player. Everyone has a right to someone who annoys them. In fact, I have been quite appreciative of Roger's efforts and talents and have always maintained he is as credible a threat on any given day as ever. I just questioned the gift draws from my perspective he has been getting that has been the only thing I have done that has peed off so many federer fans.