Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You are the one that's not bright to think Apple signed a guy without doing their own research on character and how they think he can help their brand.

How much research did Apple do before hiring Browett? A much more important hiring than this short term piece of PR. It's not as if Apple hasn't got form. Having said that, I would wait for confirmation of this story before speculating further considering its source.
 
Really. So because I hate Chelsea I would not buy a Samsung tv. Laughable if you can't back it up.

A guy who won a Sega Dreamcast in a radio phone-in competition refused the prize, because being a Spurs fan, he refused to have something 'Arsenal' in the house (Sega being Arsenals sponsors at the time)

Sales of Sugar Puffs fell through the floor in Sunderland, when the then Newcastle manager Kevin Keegan appeared in an advert for them.

I'm afraid it is possible for a boycott effect to happen when a company sponsors a rival club.
 
  • Like
Reactions: mojolicious
I can't help but think that 250,000 pounds per year could be better spent on just about anything else other than making this guy a "brand ambassador". But hey, it's Apple's money so they can spend it however they'd like.

Actually, a reasonable argument can be made that it is the shareholder's money and Apple appears to be wasting it at every turn. The huge new Spaceship building currently running $2 billion over budget, more buildings being leased around San Jose and other Bay Area locations, pissing money away on global ambassadors (for what???).

One would think that with all these people and buildings we would have seen some really game changing new products by now - but such is not the case.
 
You of course are quite right. 89 minutes of endlessly passing a ball with your feet without being able to score any points is a riveting afternoon. It's no wonder that everyone goes insane when a ball manages to somehow slip in there. Unfortunately, it always happens while I am draining the spit from my vuvuzela.

But seriously, I have no problem with it being the most popular sport in the world or taking off in the US, but I've seen plenty of games (we have the Real in SLC) and my brother-in-law is from Mexico and often invites me to come watch important games with him, but it's just not going to take for me. I'll stick with my "throw" football.

its hand egg and a touch down is still 1 score and your average score is 3-2 which is not much different then 2-1 in real football, still atleast it gives your diabetic fatties something todo eh
 
You of course are quite right. 89 minutes of endlessly passing a ball with your feet without being able to score any points is a riveting afternoon.

America does seem to have a problem with sports that don't end up with a score of 48-37, or end up in a draw.

Wonder how you'd get along with test cricket, five days long, and often no winner? :)
 
Actually, a reasonable argument can be made that it is the shareholder's money and Apple appears to be wasting it at every turn. The huge new Spaceship building currently running $2 billion over budget, more buildings being leased around San Jose and other Bay Area locations, pissing money away on global ambassadors (for what???).

One would think that with all these people and buildings we would have seen some really game changing new products by now - but such is not the case.

I don't know if you've been paying attention, but Apple have had excess money for many years now. It actually becomes sensible for them to throw it around a lot more and spread their investments.

The new building, for example, will be very expensive - but it's also an asset. Apple is going to save loads of money they currently spend renting office space, they'll have space to expand and invest in new employees, and at the end of the day if they ever need to liquidise those funds, they'll get a good price because it's so iconic. Land in the Valley isn't going to lose much value, is probably going to continue to increase over the next 20-30 years, and there are always massive corporations with deep pockets looking to expand in the area. Let's say Apple declines and there's some new tech giant taking over the world - the spaceship is going to be the most premium location on the market.

Lots of tech companies in California have recently been doing the same. It's a good place to stick your cash and it even helps your day-to-day business. Got to do something with all that money you didn't pay to global tax authorities, amiright?
 
  • Like
Reactions: maxsix
They should go for:

Zlatan_Ibrahimovic_3333223b.jpg
 
Ambassadors are meant to be diplomatic. A quality Ibrahimović is sorely lacking in.
 



Apple is close to signing 21-year-old Raheem Sterling, a skilled forward for Premier League's Manchester City F.C. and England's national football team, as a global ambassador, according to British newspaper The Sun.

Sterling-Raheem.jpg

Manchester City forward Raheem Sterling (Image: PA:press Association)

Sterling, who has not played since suffering a groin injury in a match against Manchester United on March 20, will join the likes of American professional tennis player Serena Williams, FC Barcelona forward Neymar, and Golden State Warriors star Stephen Curry as brand ambassadors for Apple.

Sterling will earn around £250,000 per year from the deal, which is contingent upon him returning from injury in time for the Euro 2016 championship in France. Fortunately, his imminent return appears likely, as local media reports claim the winger could resume play as early as this weekend versus Chelsea.

The report claims that Sterling "has been lined up to be the figure-head of Apple's promotional work around the European Championship this summer," which could involve Apple or Beats television commercials and product endorsement, predominantly in the United Kingdom. Euro 2016 takes place between June 10 and July 10.

Article Link: Apple to Sign England's Raheem Sterling as Global Ambassador
Apple is now in the throes of a sickness that warps judgement and brings on the approbation of all sentient individuals in a gathering wave of scorn.
Apple is blind to the fact that all customers are ambassadors for their products. Paying abberations like Sterling and Williams simply compounds the error.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
I don't know if you've been paying attention, but Apple have had excess money for many years now. It actually becomes sensible for them to throw it around a lot more and spread their investments.

The new building, for example, will be very expensive - but it's also an asset. Apple is going to save loads of money they currently spend renting office space, they'll have space to expand and invest in new employees, and at the end of the day if they ever need to liquidise those funds, they'll get a good price because it's so iconic. Land in the Valley isn't going to lose much value, is probably going to continue to increase over the next 20-30 years, and there are always massive corporations with deep pockets looking to expand in the area. Let's say Apple declines and there's some new tech giant taking over the world - the spaceship is going to be the most premium location on the market.

Lots of tech companies in California have recently been doing the same. It's a good place to stick your cash and it even helps your day-to-day business. Got to do something with all that money you didn't pay to global tax authorities, amiright?

I'm not sure if you have been paying attention - Apple is not a real estate investment company. My point is simply that Apple has been adding people, over paid / under performing executives (i.e. Angela / Eddy "the slob" Cue), leasing properties, and yet we have seen very little in the new game changing products space. Homekit / Healthkit / Apple TV - streaming video / Apple Watch / etc. are not moving the needle on stock price. AAPL is trading at $108 - a dismal 2%/year appreciation over where it was almost 4 years ago. Throwing crap at the wall hoping something sticks is not where we want to be.
 
Last edited:
News to me too.
I know not everybody is squeaky clean these days (tennis included) but they could have chosen better I think.
Serena Williams Is a good choice..not sure who I would have gone for.
Maybe Kei Nishikori (in Japan at least) would have been a good choice.

But does Stirling have international appeal? (Honest question..) as stated by some of the Americans here they don't care too much about the world's most universally popular sport.
And from what I gather he is not particularly popular in England (or the UK as a whole.)
Roger Federer would be the obvious choice. He's like heaven sent or something.

Yeah I don't know or care much about soccer (European football :D). I've watched a couple World Cup games and they were extremely uninteresting to me. I'd watch the US Women's National Team though, for obvious reasons.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Benjamin Frost
Fortunately, I live in the US so your "Football" essentially doesn't exist for me. <dons flame retardant virtual suit and prepares for attacks>

Just stick to what you call "world championships" in those ridiculous dresses. North Americans are simply too fat for playing a game that is not being paused every couple of seconds.
 
Just stick to what you call "world championships" in those ridiculous dresses. North Americans are simply too fat for playing a game that is not being paused every couple of seconds.

Real sportsmen don't have a chance against the kiwis and the aussies at the olympics.
Would be interested in finding what the odds are of All-blacks rugby 7s winning the gold medal and the Wallaby rubgy 7s getting the silver medal.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.