Tiger, Tiger, Going down!

For brand, image is everything. More so if the brand doesn't have any 'tangible' characteristics on which consumers can evaluate them. Like say, how can a Pepsi or a Coke be evaluated on objective terms? Most 'buys ins' to such brands are based on psychological evaluations, on how the brand can maybe aid the consumer 'project' or 'live' a certain identity. When Pepsi runs 'My Can' commercials it tries to appeal to youth living lives on their 'own' terms.

So if image is everything, is it surprising that brands are now abandoning the Tiger Woods bandwagon? After all, his image rubs off on the brand. And so if his image is taking a nosedive, brands don't want to go down with him.

Despite what Gatorade says, that's exactly why they have dropped Tiger. Also note, according to data from Nielsen Co., advertisements featuring Tiger Woods have disappeared from prime-time broadcast television and many cable channels following reports of his extramarital affairs. The last prime-time ad featuring the 33-year-old golfer was a 30-second Gillette Co. spot on Nov. 29. Woods also was absent from ads on a number of weekend sports programs, including NFL games.

Rats abandoning ship? I don't think so. Its brands doing whatever, to matter to consumers. And that's all that counts.

Comments

I searched on your blog for anything related to brand image, and when i could not find any, i cam up with the tiger fiasco. Do read it and let me know. http://cognitive-emotion.blogspot.com/2009/12/brand-ambassadors-and-personal-life.html
Prof.Ray Titus said…
Ashutosh,

On the contrary, I've written about it -

http://buyerbehaviour.blogspot.com/2008/03/countering-country-of-origin-effects.html

http://buyerbehaviour.blogspot.com/2008/03/are-consumers-swayed-by-celebrity.html

http://buyerbehaviour.blogspot.com/2007/06/bigger-brand-amitabh-or-rajni.html
Thank you for the links Sir.
Prof.Ray Titus said…
Welcome..A,

'n Ray suits jus' fine :)

Popular Posts