Are sponsors smart to ditch Tiger Woods now?

The media is all atwitter about the Tiger Woods story--and everyone is paying attention, more than a few are willing to offer an opinion.  Some are stunned at the revelations, many are glad to serve as sidewalk psychologists to account for such remarkable turn of events of a man who was thought to be sitting on-top-of-the-sports world; most seem to enjoy the speculation and are tuned to the latest Tiger developments. 

It's a good question to ask--and easy to answer.

So it's reasonable to ask the question "Should sponsors abandon their corporate and financial relationships--which collectively approach $1B in value--with Tiger?"  This question is especially relevant at a time when his story is so prominent in the news--after all, isn't that what sponsors are looking for in a spokesperson?

The answer to the question is easy to arrive at:  They absolutely should cut, if only for a while--but maybe for good--their claims to him.  Actually, it's not a very close call at all.  Here's why. 

Tiger Woods, that is until recently, offered what few other celebrities--and especially sports figures--could:  The clean image of a consistent, pre-eminent winner.  Indeed, he stood for being a champion [mostly on the golf course], he was thoughtful when he spoke and didn't say dopey, crazy things to the press; he was sophisticated in demeanor and presentation.  He was the quintessential public figure to stand as an endorsor of products. 

What Tiger used to do he doesn't do any more.

But that's all changed.  He's no longer perceived as a winner; while likely still a formidable golfer, he's been shown to have feet of clay in his personal life--which, some even speculate, will come back to bite him in his golf performance down the road.  In any case, he's no longer on an undisputed figure on the pedestal of success at either a personal or professional level. 

Instead of looking like a man apart from the rest of us, Tiger today is looking very much like ordinary people--well, at least, your ordinary, problem-plagued sports figure.  His foibles, while done on a grander scale than most of us are capable, seem to be very much like those of ordinary people we know and work with and read about who make bad life choices. 

It's a different Tiger now than they paid for before.

When he speaks to the press now, what he says is mostly press-release speak; when he talks to the media extemporaneously, he says stuff that doesn't sound like a man who has things under control. In short, Tiger Woods is increasingly looking very ordinary to most people--at best...and very flawed at worst. 

In the world of corporate sponsorships, powerful branding alliances are predicated one simple principle, the rule of favorable associations.  Executives in large, monied firms are eager to pay special people in the public lime-light large sums of money to confer positive meaning and favorable association, all to improve the image of things like the product, the brand, the company identity--it's no more complicated than than that.  And for a long time Tiger Woods, apparently by careful management of his image by various paid agents and handlers, was able to bring exactly that payoff to corporate sponsors. 

It's time to stop the corporate sponsorship madness.

But those days--at least for the time-being are over.  Tiger brings little favorability in the way of associations for a brand or a firm, at least associations that corporations and the marketing executives of those companies are or should be willing to pay much for--and that's the most optimistic assessment.  It could be argued that Tiger now appears to be a feable joke on the public stage; indeed, his image now is of an unfavorable type. 

It's time to stop the image and association madness and, by implication, the money as well.  Corporate sponsors don't have much choice to decide otherwise. 

BLOG FOLOW-UP NOTE on Dec14:  The WSJ on December 14, 2009, posted an article that explains that there's likely maneuvering going on in an attempt to preserve any mutual interests that remain between Tiger and his sponsors.  His declaration to temporarily depart golf--to repair family tears--can also be seen as giving his sponsors a face-saving way to cut back at a time they are likely most interested in doing exactly that!  

Sports marketers say the move, announced after negotiations with major sponsors also appears designed to give backers such asProcter & Gamble Co.'s Gillette, Nike Inc.,Accenture PLC and AT&T Inc., a face saving opportunity to scale back their associations with the golf superstar without abandoning him entirely.

Most of Mr. Woods's sponsorships and advertising campaigns are largely tied to his golf game, marketing executives say.

But pulling Mr. Woods from ads doesn't necessarily terminate a company's official pact with the golfer, a step that also could carry risks should the scandal blow over and Mr. Woods return to his game.

Here's full access to the WSJ article.  

_______________________________________________________________

To make sure you get a "tweet" with every new blog, follow "keithmurrayblog" on Twitter!  Think others might like to read this?  Re-TWEET it to your followers with the SHARE ARTICLE tab below!