Tiger's Bogey

So everyone has been talking about Tiger Woods this holiday season. One of the most widely known icons in the sports world has had his image severely damaged in such a short period of time. Tiger confessed betraying his wife and family. Hopefully, he will learn from these mistakes and not make the same mistakes again. What is interesting though is that Tiger is still the best golf player despite having numerous women on the side. How does Tiger do this?

Woods holds the record for most career earnings for the PGA. As of December 2009, he has made more than $92 million in earnings. In addition to his earnings Tiger had numerous endorsement deals that were worth around $100 million per year. Around October 2009, Tiger hit the $1 billion mark (not bad for someone who went to Stanford trying to get an economics degree) Not only has he made himself a lot of money he has also increased the wealth of Nike. In particular, Nike Golf which was basically unheard of before Tiger came onto the golfing scene is now a $600 million business. So how could the man that had money, fame, and power succumb to the power of one-night stands?

In a interview from 1998 with Larry King when asked about dating Tiger’s response was something along the lines of “Well I am busy so often playing golf so I really don’t have enough time to get to know someone really well”. If you were an international super athlete how much time would you have available to your family, friends, and loved ones? What seems obvious are trade-offs in life. There are trade-offs to everything in life. In this case, Tiger seemed to value other women more importantly than his family and wife. Now it seems as if Tiger is paying the price for his infidelities. It seems as if Tiger has more than an 18 whole course ahead of him.

Markets in Everything: Hair Loss

Over the past year or I have become interested in the market for hair loss. Looking at old pictures of family members and noticing some slight hair loss I wondered if I would have the hair loss gene as well. Millions of Americans lose their hair every year. Around 40 million men are affected by male pattern baldness. Male pattern baldness is what people typically think of a receding hair line. In addition to this, there can be loss of hair in the crown (also known as the vertex area).
Two people that have really influence my thinking are Dr. Sam Lam and Dr. William Rassman. Both are board certified hair transplant surgeons and take hair transplantation very seriously. Dr. Lam has posted numerous videos on YouTube, educating people on hair loss and hair transplantation, and does an exceptional job at taking complex ideas and turning them into simple understandable videos. From his videos Dr. Lam stresses the importance of education on the patient side. I completely agree with his approach. Why should you pay for anyone’s services unless you truly understand the value they are providing? Remember knowledge is power. Dr. Rassman maintains a daily journal for hair loss (BaldingBlog) with close to 8,000 entries that answer hair loss questions. I commend both gentlemen for educating not only me but thousands of others. What I have learned from my research is that hair loss occurs primarily due to DHT(Dihydrotestosterone). Genetics also plays a factor as well. From what I understand DHT plays a significant role in hair loss. The hair follicles start out as thick terminal hairs and then overtime miniaturize to the point where they can’t be seen anymore. Dr. Rassman stresses mapping out the miniaturization process. Individuals can look at their own individual miniaturization by purchasing a handheld digital microscope. The microscope allows the user to take magnify the hairs and take pictures which can be stored to the computer. This could be helpful in tracking hair loss over time.
Drugs such as Propecia and Rogaine try to slow down or reverse the miniaturization process. I should point out that both drugs were discovered by accident (Rogaine through blood pressure medication and Propecia through prostate medication). Although, there is no cure for hair loss Propecia and Rogaine are the only proven medical treatments to preserve hair. The patent for Propecia expires November 2013 which will help bring down the price. Avodart a drug commonly used for men with an enlarged prostate has seemed to show promise for hair loss in clinical trials. However, it should be pointed out that sterility was an issue in the trials. Avodart is currently not approved for hair loss treatment. What would be interesting though is if Avodart can help with BPH (enlarged prostate), hair loss, and increase sterility (less likely to have kids) wouldn’t it be the blockbuster drug for men over 50? I did a little research and wondered if DHT was a problem why not find a drug that greatly reduces DHT? A drug called acyline strongly reduces DHT to very low levels. Although, this approach might be extreme acyline is currently being studied for prostate cancer and as a contraceptive. Aside from medical intervention hair transplantation is also another way to restore hair. Hairs are transplanted from the back of the head (genetically programmed not to be lost) and individually placed into the balding areas. The process can take hours and is very labor intensive. There is actually a voluntary group of hair transplant surgeons known as the International Society of Hair Restoration Surgery. These surgeons are well trained and knowledgeable in performing hair transplants. I think it’s interesting how there is can be markets many things including hair loss. This industry still is most likely in the growing stage, and has made significant strides in such a short period of time. Perhaps one day hair loss will be a thing of the past.

Below are the links for Dr. Lam and Dr. Rassman
http://www.hairtx.com/
http://www.baldingblog.com/

NCAA: It's In The Game

College football is a big deal. Every Saturday afternoon thousands across the nation flock the stands to see their favorite college team play. While many more watch their favorite team on television it is pretty obvious that college football is a big deal. The NCAA is a voluntary organization that involves over 1,281 institutions. In essence the NCAA sets rules for colleges to follow in regards to sports athletic programs. For instance players that are going to be recruited to play college sports can’t take gifts or money from booster clubs or schools. Two movies that illustrate this are “Blue Chips” and “Johnny Be Good”. College sports are a big business. In 2008, the total revenue generated by the FBS (Division 1 schools for football) was over $41 million. Clearly, this is as much as some publicly traded companies make. Although this seems like a lot on average each school loses around $2.46 million dollars. Right now there are 120 Division 1 schools. No one really talks about this though. In a way it could be seen as the darker side of the NCAA. I wonder why no one talks about this darker side of college sports. It should be pointed out that large schools such as the University of Texas and Ohio State are the only few that produce a large revenue stream for their schools. Most of the revenue comes from licensing and merchandising.

The general viewpoint is this romantic notion that college athletes go to these “football factories” and somehow get an education while at the same time supporting their school on the field with their displayed skills and talents. In addition to this, college players receive very little compensation for their work. Yes, these players get scholarships and maybe room and board but aren’t they providing something of value to consumers. For instance, people pay to see minor league baseball teams and players get part of that in the form of their contract. College players however don’t get paid for their performance even though the minor league players and college players are similar. While the college might provide scholarships and room and board to star players the marginal cost to the school is close to zero. Why not have a market for college players to compete and get paid for their services? Paying players would also reduce the number of scandals in recruiting. If players could sign contract with colleges they would have less incentive to take bribes from booster clubs or school officials. Also many of these players don’t go on to a professional career (even if a player gets drafted a very small minority turn out to be good). Under a contract system players could get paid and save up money to prepare for life after football. The book “Friday Night Lights” shows what happens to student athletes after high school. One of the main characters” Boobie” Miles is one of the most sought after high school players in the country. Unfortunately, Boobie gets injured and tears his ACL and blows his dreams of playing college football. In addition to Boobie, most of the players in the book really didn’t think about life after high school football (Brian Chavez is the expectation who goes to Harvard). These players are only left with the highlights their glorious playing days and really don’t have limited options regarding life after high school. If college contracts were possible it might give these student athletes more of an incentive to go to school.

Although, it would be nice to see the NCAA give high school athletes contracts I doubt it would ever happen given the NCAA would like to believe that their players are on the field to get an education and support their school. If anyone looks at history though clearly this is not true given the scandals in college sports. The biggest example of this was SMU and the payola scandal in the 1980’s which forced the NCAA to give them the death penalty (not allowing SMU to compete for the 1987 football season). I don’t know how many programs engage in this behavior but I believe the NCAA underestimates the amount of side deals that are made because college players aren’t allowed to sign contracts.