The Cavinder Twins and Raising Cane's Owner & Founder on Success
"I don't think entrepreneurs are created — entrepreneurs are born."
So says Todd Graves, the billionaire owner and founder of Raising Cane's, the chicken finger casual dining chain with over 900 restaurants nationwide.
Graves joined twin sisters Hanna and Haley Cavinder, former University of Miami basketball players who became trailblazers in the NIL space, to talk about the drive it takes to succeed in business on a new episode of The Playbook.
On each episode of The Playbook, produced by Sports Illustrated and Entrepreneur, athletes and entrepreneurs come together to share advice and lessons they've learned along their paths to greatness.
Related: 'Hustle Like You're Broke': Michael Strahan Shares the Mindset That Drives His Success
Although their businesses might vary greatly — Graves runs a restaurant empire while Hanna and Haley are influencers who created the TWOgether fitness app and co-founded Hustle Beauty for athletes — there is crossover in how they pursue their passions.
It starts with showing up like an athlete. "It was very seamless when we got into the NIL space and then started our own business," Hanna says. "All of those traits from college athletics carried over. The discipline and routine and the commitment to give 100% because there are other people relying on you."
Graves feels the same way. "You might be tired one day, but people show up to our restaurants and are willing to pay good money, so you've got to deliver."
Graves, Hanna and Haley also believe in the power of connecting with customers through authenticity. "People love founder-driven businesses because a founder cares, and their business is an extension of them," Graves says. Haley adds that being positive and honest on social media has been the key to nurturing their community of millions. "That really helped us when we started the health and fitness side of things," she says. Putting out genuine content that spoke about mental health helped them build lasting relationships with their followers, and they say the feedback they've gotten keeps them fulfilled and eager to do more.
Related: "You Have to Grow Up Fast": How This College Athlete Became a CEO Before Turning 18
Watch the entire conversation to get these amazing entrepreneurs' insights on how getting a "no" can be the best thing to fuel your drive, and learn the pivotal moments that showed them that they were on the right path. As Graves notes, "Champions are always thinking, Hey, what can we do next?"
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
2 hours ago
- USA Today
College Sports Commission to allow NIL payments to athletes from collectives with scrutiny
Booster collectives will be able to continue paying college athletes, but with restrictions, after an agreement between the plaintiff's attorneys in the House vs. NCAA settlement and the new Collegiate Sports Commission. New guidance from the CSC went out to schools Thursday, July 31, replacing a July 10 memo that raised alarms with House attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Steve Berman and would have essentially put collectives out of business. Dozens of collectives had been lining up to file a class-action suit against the CSC and the power conferences had the original guidance gone into effect. The CSC was created to enforce terms of the settlement and the $20.5 million revenue-sharing cap and has been given the authority to nix deals that don't fall within certain parameters. At issue in this case was whether the NIL deals being offered by collectives met the CSC's threshold of a valid business purpose. The CSC's original guidance focused on whether the deal came from an entity whose business purpose was 'providing goods or services to the general public for provide.' The vast majority of collectives, whose primary function before the House settlement was simply to raise money to pay college athletes, did not meet that standard. The new guidance will not focus on the entity offering the deal, but whether the deal itself meets the standard of delivering the public a good or service for profit. In other words, a paid autograph signing organized by the collective would theoretically be approved as long as it falls within the standard compensation range for such events as determined by Deloitte, the firm hired by CSC to run its online NIL clearinghouse. As outlined in the House settlement, athletes whose deals get turned down can either rework the deal or appeal and enter an arbitration process. "The College Sports Commission will enforce the settlement as written," CEO Bryan Seeley said in a statement. "Pay-for-play will not be permitted, and every NIL deal done with a student-athlete must be a legitimate NIL deal, not pay-for-play in disguise." The net effect is that collectives will still have a role in paying college athletes beyond the revenue sharing cap, a reality the power conferences hoped to eliminate with the settlement, but will not be able to spend unaccountably as they did before. And, for now at least, the CSC will avoid a significant legal challenge although others are expected in the future around issues like Title IX and the allowable range of compensation for certain activities. A joint statement Thursday from the House plaintiffs and the power conferences confirmed that 'in evaluating such payments, the settlement's requirements focus on substance, not labels. Nothing in the Settlement prohibits an Associated Entity or Individual, including collectives, from making NIL payments to student-athletes, as long as such NIL payments have a valid business purpose related to offering goods or services to the general public for profit and fall within the range of fair market value compensation, as defined by the settlement.'
NBC Sports
2 hours ago
- NBC Sports
Deal on ‘valid business purpose' avoids threat of college NIL settlement heading back to court
The new agency vetting name, image and likeness deals in college sports reached an agreement Thursday that relaxes standards on player agreements with third-party collectives and avoids taking the issue back to court after years of legal wrangling. The College Sports Commission said it will now consider a third-party company that seeks to pay a player to have a 'valid business purpose' if the deal 'is related to the promotion or endorsement of goods or services provided to the general public for profit.' It did away with the concept that collectives established simply to pay players did not have a valid business purpose even if they sold products for profit. That guidance, issued earlier in July, threatened to fundamentally change the concept of third-party collectives, which were established in 2021 as the main source of NIL deals for players. With schools now allowed to pay players directly under terms of the industry-changing House settlement, the role of collectives was thrown into limbo. The CSC, in charge of vetting third-party deals worth $600 or more, was trying to make it more difficult for schools to use collectives as a workaround to the $20.5 million cap that the schools are allowed to pay players. Plaintiff attorneys threatened to take the case back to court, arguing the CSC guidance amounted to an incorrect reading of the lawsuit settlement that made the payments possible. The CSC's new guidance provides a more liberal view of what third-party collectives can do. The CSC's 'for-profit inquiry focuses on whether the sale of goods or services is for profit and not whether the entity itself is operating at a profit or a loss at any given time,' the CSC said in a news release. Part of the CSC's requirements include athletes needing to, in certain cases, provide documentation showing the entity's efforts to profit from the deal. In a joint statement, the defendants and plaintiffs reiterated that 'the traditional purpose of many NIL collectives — raising money to induce student-athletes to attend or play at an institution — does not satisfy the valid business purpose requirement.' But, the statement said, 'In evaluating such payments, the Settlement's requirements focus on substance, not labels' — an indication that the focus should not be on whether the organization making the deal is considered a 'collective,' but only whether it sells something to the public for profit. Parts of the arrangement that don't change are the CSC's task of determining fair market value for the goods and services provided and the collectives' ability to match athletes with other businesses offering NIL opportunities.
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
College Sports Commission informs schools that NIL collectives can pay athletes directly with limitations
In a revised memo sent to schools on Thursday, the College Sports Commission announced that booster-backed NIL collectives can, in fact, directly compensate athletes if the transactions meet certain 'valid business purpose' benchmarks. The one-page guidance replaces a memo sent to schools on July 10 where the CSC revealed that collectives would not be treated as valid businesses and denied many of their transactions with athletes. After weeklong negotiations with House plaintiff attorneys Jeffrey Kessler and Steve Berman, the College Sports Commission, operated by the power conferences, is adjusting its approach — an expected resolution that Yahoo Sports reported last week after the parties originally agreed on a joint statement that was finally released Thursday. The statement 'clarifies' what is permitted from collectives to athletes under the NCAA's landmark House settlement agreement, reversing the July 10 guidance by permitting collectives to strike deals with athletes as long as they 'have a valid business purpose related to offering goods or services to the general public for profit and fall within the range of fair market value compensation.' [Join or create a Yahoo Fantasy Football league for the 2025 NFL season] The College Sports Commission, the industry's new enforcement entity led by a former Major League Baseball executive in Bryan Seeley, is charged with determining the legitimacy of third-party NIL deals with athletes. Approved deals hold significant benefit for schools as third-party compensation does not count against the revenue-share cap that each school is working inside. According to the CSC's guidance, the entity is determining deal legitimacy not on the 'labeling' of businesses or payors, as it originally planned, but on the transaction itself. 'Whether or not payments to student-athletes by collectives are permissible under the settlement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis,' the statement said. Previously denied deals are being reevaluated to apply the new, revised guidance, the organization said in its guidance to schools. While the statement notes that traditional NIL collective pay-for-play deals remain prohibited, the change in approach paves the way for collectives to pay athletes if those deals satisfy three benchmarks: (1) deliver the public a good or service; (2) turn a profit beyond paying athletes; and (3) fall within a Deloitte-created 'compensation range' standard in the CSC's NIL Go submission platform. This provides a path for collectives to hold an assortment of events to pay athletes, including merchandise sales, autograph signings and athlete appearances at, for example, golf tournaments. The guidance distributed to schools focuses on the 'for profit' benchmark, even noting that the entity may require athletes or businesses to provide information and documentation 'to establish compliance' with the benchmarks. 'Refusal to provide this information or the provision of insufficient information to establish compliance may result in deals not being cleared by the CSC,' the guidance says. This is a notable line that was approved by the House plaintiff attorneys, Kessler and Berman. The resolution between the House plaintiffs and the power conferences operating the CSC may create what some coaches and administrators refer to as a 'soft cap,' certainly softer than the CSC's original approach to collectives. From his football media days earlier this month, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey said deeming collectives as any other business could result in a 'very different management system' and a 'softer cap,' a reference to the new revenue-share cap. Schools can directly share no more than $20.5 million with athletes in Year 1 of the concept, excluding compensation from CSC-approved third-party deals. Last week in an interview with Yahoo Sports, Big Ten commissioner Tony Petitti was asked about collectives finding ways to strike deals with athletes if restrictions were loosened. 'When something works, it gets copied,' he said. 'Things happening out there to provide additional NIL deals for student athletes that makes sense and are allowed under rules, you're going to see more versions of that.' The approach change also, at least for now, prevents a legal challenge from leaders of a group of NIL collectives who began drafting a lawsuit against the CSC's approach. Over the last four years, collectives have served as the driving force for schools to compensate athletes, raising millions in booster money to provide schools a way to recruit and retain players. Tom Mars, a well-known attorney representing the collectives, released a statement to Yahoo Sports about the resolution: 'It should be concerning that it took the four commissioners more than a week to agree on the language of the new guidance. That speaks volumes about their ability to agree on anything. Stephen King wrote a 219-page novel in less time than it took them to write up what was published today.' The CSC's original interpretation of the 'valid business purpose' definition, and resulting denials of collective deals, speaks to one of administrators' goals of the settlement — to shift athlete pay from these booster-run organizations to the schools, which are now permitted to directly share revenue with athletes under the capped system that began July 1. That said, many schools are still operating their collectives as a way to, perhaps, circumvent the system. 'We know that some people are saying, 'We're not worried because we don't think they can really enforce it!'' Ole Miss coach Lane Kiffin told Yahoo Sports earlier this month from SEC media days. 'They don't think NIL contracts are going to get kicked back (by the clearinghouse) or they think they're not going to be able to win long-term (legal challenges) because of players' rights.' Ultimately, Sankey suggested, schools hold authority to control their own affiliated collectives. 'For how long have people been begging for guardrails?' Sankey asked. 'Well, now we have guardrails. Those broadly across the country that claim they wanted guardrails need to operate within the guardrails. If you allow what's happened to continue to escalate, there would be a very small number of programs that would be competitive with each other and we'd not have a national sport or a national championship.' The resolution may not completely end what will likely be continuous negotiations over particular enforcement rules between the power leagues controlling the CSC and the House plaintiff attorneys, who hold authority and veto powers over various aspects of the settlement. Last week, Petitti cautioned that more such negotiations are expected in the future. 'I don't think it will be the last time that an issue comes up in the process,' Petitti said. 'The settlement approval came later than expected. It compressed the time period.' The guidance change may also not prevent future legal challenges over other enforcement aspects, including Deloitte's compensation range concept or the appeals arbitration system that athletes can use for deals denied a second time. The CSC, in its first month of existence, is reliant on athletes submitting deals. Athletes are required to submit any third-party deal of $600 or more to an NIL clearinghouse, NIL Go. Those deals flagged by NIL Go are sent to the CSC and its new leader, Seeley, to determine an enforcement decision. As of three weeks ago, more than 100 deals were denied and at least 100 more were under review. More than 1,500 deals had been approved.
