Celebrity Sponsorships Have Never Made Sense to Me
What if all this media hysteria surrounding Tiger Woods isn’t necessarily true? What if it was a Buick Enclave that bumped into the tree and fire hydrant? And what if it all happened while he was trying to drive, shave with a Gillette razor and talk on his cell phone using AT&T minutes?
What a great way to promote your product using a celebrity frontman!
The sidebar to all this craziness has been what this will mean for Woods’ endorsement deals? My question, is why do companies tie their brands to celebrities — with good or bad reputations — in the first place?
Some endorsement deals do make perfect sense. I can understand why Titleist and Nike would associate with the best golfer in the world. Whether it’s valid or not, who doesn’t want to use a golf ball that’s played by the best golfer in the world—even though it’s not going to change your game one bit. And if I stretch my imagination and realize how celebrity-crazed our society is I can see why the consumer may hold Gillette top-of-mind when they see Woods holding a Mach3.
But Accenture and AT&T? I don’t understand those. What exactly does Woods know about business consulting or wireless plans? It’s a lot of money thrown at a name — regardless of all that unfolded this past week. As far as I’m concerned, it’s more a waste of money than a lot of money.
To me, using a celebrity to pitch your product is lazy. Throwing a ton of money at a problem lacks about as much creativity as a company that regurgitates the “Got Milk” of I (heart) NY” campaigns for their own purposes.
As you can see on Accenture’s site, Woods is still front and center with an interesting tagline: Opportunity isn’t always obvious. Hmm.