Kelly Slater at the 2017 Outerknown Fiji Pro. Hey, who can blame the fella from supporting possibly the best event on tour? But it does feel a little funky for a competitor to essentially own an event. Photo: WSL/Ed Sloane
On April 27, 2017, the World Surf League reported that Kelly Slater’s apparel company Outerknown would be the title sponsor of the Fiji Pro for 2017, 2018, and 2019. My initial reaction to this announcement was that it had to be “fake news” or some sort of extremely tardy April Fool’s joke.
After realizing that the report was, in fact, accurate, I immediately searched for the public outcry surrounding what feels to me like an obvious conflict of interest. Namely, a partnership between the sport’s governing body and a company owned by a competitor seems off base. After all, Kelly Slater is the greatest legend our sport has ever celebrated and remains a top competing surfer on the World Championship Tour. The Fiji Pro is event #5 on said Championship Tour. So the question keeps ringing in my head, where is the public outcry? Or, at the minimum, does anyone find this strange?
A conflict of interest is defined by Merriam-Webster as “conflict between the private interests and the official responsibilities of a person in a position of trust.” It seems crystal clear to me that when a company owned by a current competitor sponsors an event, it’s a conflict of interest. It is my feeling that decision-making will be steered to do what is in the best interest of both the WSL and Outerknown. That’s what partnerships do, right? They work together to mutually benefit involved parties.
From my viewpoint, this partnership between the WSL and Outerknown is not in the best interest of professional surfing so long as Kelly is competing on the WSL. Real or imagined, fans have long expressed concerns about team riders from companies sponsoring events on the WSL Tour (think Rip Curl Pro, Quiksilver Pro, Hurley Pro, Billabong Pro) receiving more favorable judging than non-event sponsored surfers. To me, the Outerknown Fiji Pro only reinforces the issue.
I feel that it is impossible for Kelly not to receive an unfair advantage over his rivals in this event. It’s literally his event.
As such, this sponsorship undermines the credibility of the sport – or at the least – seriously challenges any perceived veil of impartiality. As much as we all love and respect Kelly, I cannot fathom how a competing surfer can also be a title sponsor of an event and maintain the integrity of the governing body of the sport.
Editor’s Note: Opinions expressed by contributors are their own.
