Unit III paper

The Decline of Golf: The Tiger Woods Effect

Tiger Woods is arguably the most recognized golf player in the history of the PGA. His multitude of fans, sponsorships, and accolades has truly made him one of the most successful players not just in golf, but in the sports world. As a result, Woods has earned an estimated personal net worth of over five hundred million dollars. His effect on golf goes beyond attendance and ticket sales, directly affecting the Associations sponsorship deals and TV ratings. After going pro in 1996, Woods immediately started making a name for his self. When he won his first major, the 1997 Masters, he won in a record breaking performance by twelve strokes which instantly propelled him into stardom. By June of 1997 he had ascended to the number one ranking in the world. Following a scandal in 2009 and a decline in performance, Tiger fell to his lowest ranking of fifty eight by November of 2011. After winning the Arnold Palmer Invitational in March of 2013 he again ascended to the number one ranking, where he currently sits today.
In 2009 when the news broke of Tiger Woods’ “unmoral” activities, Tiger saw a flight of sponsors. Nike was one of the few that stuck by him, and still continues to sponsor him to this day. While a multitude of experts expected the company’s golf business to sink, Nike in fact reported two million dollars in sales of Tiger Woods merchandise in the days and weeks following the scandal. The effect for the rest of the industry was not as pleasing. With its biggest star absent, the overall category of golf merchandise lost an estimated ten million dollars in revenue during the absence of Tiger. That fact that Woods had that kind of impact speaks volumes of his effect on golf – the fact that his absence or presence can cost the industry millions of dollars, regardless of whether he wins or loses. Nike Golf president Cindy Davis put its best by saying “He elevates the energy around golf as a whole. Look at the television ratings, with and without Tiger. Look at the PGA tour, attendance with and without him.” (www.cbsnews.com)
2014 marked the first Tiger-less Masters since 1994, and the negative impact was astounding. Not only has his absence affected attendance, but it has directly affected revenue for the PGA. The day after Woods announced that he would not be participating, Stubhub reported a twenty percent decrease in ticket prices, and spokesman Carmen Papp was quoted as saying that “no athlete in the world has more of an effect on ticket prices than Tiger Woods.” Secondary ticket supplier, TiqIQ, reported a sixty six percent decrease in the price of admission for the first round of The Masters. Goviva, a company that provides hospitality services to clients to attend the Tournament, reported a thirty to thirty five percent decrease in the number of corporate bookings to The Masters, and a twenty five percent drop on the hospitality services side of their business, which includes housing, tickets, and transportation. (www.cnbc.com)
The negative impacts have not been strictly limited to ticket sales, and attendance, but have affected TV ratings as well. According to Golf Digest, ESPN reported a 1.5 rating and two million viewers for the first round of the 2014 Masters. Conversely, the first round of the 2013 Masters drew a 2.0 rated with an estimated 2.8 million viewers. Woods has routinely created a tremendous buzz for the networks that telecast the tournament, and has created the most excitement and buzz for the Masters, despite going winless in Augusta since 2005. Sponsors have also felt the pinch of his absence. According to CNBC, the 2013 Masters generated twenty five percent more value per second for player sponsorship than the next closest major on the PGA tour. Tiger’s absence means less airtime for the company’s that sponsor him. Data from Nike, a Woods sponsor, indicated that the company received three times the amount of exposure for Woods endorsements than the company’s next biggest endorsee, Roy McIlory. Translate that to the absence of Woods from the 2014 Masters, and it translates to approximately three to four million dollars of lost exposure for Nike. In a usually mature and competitive market, Nike has been able to go from not having a golf business before 2000 when they signed Woods, to controlling roughly eight percent of the market today. (www.cnbc.com)
One area that appears to be “Tiger-proof” is Woods’ merchandise line. According to Dick Sullivan, the CEO of the PGA Tour Superstore, no noticeable decline in merchandise sales has been noticed, and the Tiger line of merchandise continues to grow as an overall percentage of the stores business. This fact put Tiger Woods in an exclusive category of athletes. Compare his affect to that of the late Dale Earnhardt on NASCAR. Thirteen years after his death, Earnhardt is still arguably the biggest star of NASCAR, and his legacy continues to draw fans and drive up merchandise sales. One can only wonder if Tiger will have this sort of effect once he is absent from the sport for good? (www.golfdigest.com)
In closing Tiger Woods’ effect of the golf industry as a whole may never truly be known. He has propelled companies into the Golf business that otherwise would have never entered it, and has even designed his own courses. He has cemented himself in golf immortality by becoming one of the most successful men to ever pick up a golf club. His ability to directly influence ticket sales, TV ratings, sponsorships, and overall exposure is unmatched by no one. To the average observer it would appear that Tiger has truly made the PGA what it is today, and its success is directly linked to his presence and his absence. Tiger does not need to win in order to create buzz, he simply has to show up.

Advertisement

Once Act Play

Texting and its effect on society today

Character Guide

Juliet Capulet: Juliet is the female protagonist and one of two title characters in William Shakespeare‘s romantic love tragedy Romeo and Juliet. Juliet is the only daughter of Capulet, the patriarch of the Capulet family. Within this play, Romeo and Juliet show their love for one another through their constant texting habits between the two of them.

David Crystal:  A professor at the University of Wales and is known for his work in English language studies and linguistics. He has published more than 100 books and also works on Internet applications and is the inventor of an app for searching databases.

Romeo Montague: A teenager who is in love with a girl named Juliet. The only problem with these two is that their families the Montague’s (Romeo) and the Capulets (Juliet) hate each other. However this does not stop these two from sneaking around and doing anything that they can to try and be lovers. Romeo is a brave soul but however stubborn both in Shakespeare’s version and Roz Chast’s version.

Dennis Baron: A Professor at the University of Illinois at Urbana. He has written numerous books and articles on language, literacy, and the technologies of communication. He is the author of A Better Pencil (2009), and a commentator for CNN, BBC, National Public Radio, and other television and radio shows discussing issues of language use. He also has his own website, The Web of Language, where he is a regular blogger on language topics.

The scene is set on Romeo and Juliet sitting beside each other during class as they Instant Message back and forth.

Juliet Capulet: “Romeo u there?” Juliet types on the screen anxiously waiting for a reply from her lover.

Romeo Montague: “Yo wassup?” Romeo types in response to Juliet.

JC: I love instant messaging. It’s deff the greatest invention since N’SYNC. I love instant messaging almost as much as I love Romeo and that is so so so much! Like, OMG, I just love Romeo.

RM: Well I hope that you like me more than you like instant messaging.

JC: “Nothin, u?” Juliet types in reply to Romeo.

RM: “Scool sucked 2day.” Romeo types in reply to Juliet.

JC: I totally think that instant messaging is helping kids learn so much better! Like, instant messaging is just an awesome tool to use in school.

RM: Like, it helps kids learn to spell things right and junk.

JC: “Heard Wylander got mad at u.” Juliet types in reply to Romeo.

JC: Take me for example; I totally spell everything so right. Like, I’m so smart. Thank God for instant messaging cause it made me that way!

RM: “What a jerk I used purpl ink on the sci test. He g5ot so pissed be lookjs like jimminy crickt.”

JC: “lol” Juliet types in reply to Romeo.

JC: Take me for example; I totally spell everything so right. Like, I’m so smart. Thank God for instant messaging cause it made me that way!

David Crystal and Dennis Baron walk into the room.

David Crystal: “Are you two really Instant Messaging while you’re right beside each other?”

RM: “Uhhh… Yeah.”

Dennis Baron: “It’s true that the Internet connects people, and it’s become an unbeatable source of information. The telephone also connected and informed faster than anything before it, and before the telephone the printing press was the agent of rapid-fire change” (330-31).

RM: “Going to nicks party?” Romeo types in reply to Juliet.

DC: “Some people dislike texting. Some are bemused by it. But it is merely the latest manifestation of the human ability to be linguistically creative and to adapt language to suit the demands of diverse settings.”

JC: . “Can’t I’m grounded.” Juliet types in reply to Romeo. I totally think that I.M.ing is THE best, like OMG

 

DB: “All new means of communication bring with them an irrepressible excitement as they expand literacy and open up new knowledge, but in certain quarters they also spark fear and distrust” (332).

DC:  “Popular beliefs about texting are wrong. Its graphic distinctiveness is not a new phenomenon, nor is its use restricted to the young. There is increasing evidence that it helps rather than hinders literacy. In one American study, less than 20% of the text messages looked at showed abbreviated forms of any kind-about three per messages” (337-38).

RM: “y?” Romeo types in reply to Juliet. I really only like IM’ing because I can talk to Juliet all the time.

JC: “Cardoza called home, sez im failig Spanish btw both my rents hate U.” Juliet types in Reply to Romeo.

RM: “Mine hate U 2.” Romeo types back to Juliet.

DC: “The children who are better at spelling and writing used the most textisms. And the younger they received their first phone, the higher their scores.”

DB: “After all, when the libraries are burning, the phone lines get cut, the newspaper is shuttered, tanks surround the television station, and the Internet goes down, there is always sneakernet to get the message out” (333).

DC: “There’s no disaster pending. We will not see a new generation of adults growing up unable to write proper English. The language as a whole will not decline. In texting what we are seeing, in a small way, is language in evolution” (345).

Chast, Roz. “The I.M.s of Romeo and Juliet.” “They say/I say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing: With Readings. 2^nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstien, and Russell Durst.  New York: Norton, 2012. 347. Print.

Crystal, David. “2b or not 2b?” “They say/I say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing: With Readings. 2^nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstien, and Russell Durst.  New York: Norton, 2012. 335-345. Print.

Baron, Dennis. “Reforming Egypt in 140 Characters?” “They say/I say”: The Moves That Matter in Academic Writing: With Readings. 2^nd ed. Ed. Gerald Graff, Cathy Birkenstien, and Russell Durst.  New York: Norton, 2012. 329-334. Print.

 

 

 

 

 

           

How I met Your Mother Annotated Bibliography

 

How I Met Your Mother (Carter Bays, Craig Thomas)

          How I Met Your Mother is one of my favorite television shows ever. It began airing in 2005 and this year will be the show’s final season. The show is centered around the main character (Ted) telling his children, in the year 2030, how he met their mother. He goes through this journey with his four best friends while living in New York City while sharing laughs and also heartbreak. I began watching this show the year it first aired and have seen every season since then. I am creating this bibliography to show how television shows don’t affect brain in negative way but may actually stimulate and help critical thinking skills and how this may have a bigger impact on your life then you may expect.

Annotated Bibliography

Johnson, Steven. “Watching TV Makes You Smarter.” “They Say, I Say” New-York: W.      W. Norton &, 2006. 277-94. Print.

          Steven Johnson goes completely against what educators or scientist may believe, he disagrees with the idea that watching television ruins the brain. In Everything Bad Is Good For You, where “Watching TV Makes You Smarter” came from, Johnson explains that watching television actually stimulates brain and is a good activity to engage in daily. As a TV lover and huge fan of certain shows I couldn’t agree more with Johnson, I do not believe television has ever interrupted my mental abilities or learning capability. Johnson is a very well known writer and is currently an editor for Wired.

          After reading Johnson’s thoughts on television and the positive affects it may have on a person’s brain, it made me feel better about watching television. People that watch TV all day everyday are frowned upon and thought to be lazy. This may be true and I believe for Johnson’s beliefs to be true then the TV watcher must be fully aware of what they are watching and be engaged with the show. The avid TV watcher cannot throw garbage on the screen and then take a nap and expect to learn or improve their critical thinking skills.