4 ms·
Question to anybody who works in advertisement: Are people less likely to buy Nike apparel because for example Tiger Woods was caught with escorts and drinking
by JumpinJack_Cash 3y ago
Question to anybody who works in advertisement:
Are people less likely to buy Nike apparel because for example Tiger Woods was caught with escorts and drinking booze?
I am asking because from a distance it seems not a business decision as much as an opportunity for a CEO to dunk on an athlete/famous person
- beej71 3y agoI'm not an expert, but I'd suspect that people were more likely to buy Nike because they cut Woods loose. Lots of press there.
- JumpinJack_Cash 3y agoA sport apparel company abandoning an athlete is the type of press that sells shoes?
- beej71 3y agoI'm just speculating from the "no such thing as bad press" dept.
- kube-system 3y agoBrand image is a complicated concept but it consists of a lot of different pieces over a long period of time that build a public perception. Often, good or bad brand images are not due to any one single thing, but the totality of things that the public knows about a brand. While a single bad apple might not sink a brand, if it starts to become a pattern, it can ruin brand image over time.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- swores 3y agoMost people: no. Some people: yes. If Tiger Woods was the only way Nike could think of advertising then they likely would've considered him worth keeping, but when they have so many alternative good options for sponsorships it tips the balance in favour of not sponsoring somebody that even 0.1% of your customers might think badly of you for.