As the public demand more from everyone and everyone, we find out more about celebrities and sports stars than our own families and friends. So it can become increasingly difficult to sponsor a 'good guy'. The one brand I think who has suffered the most by making wrong sponsorship choices has to be Nike.
Unfortunately for Nike, it has sponsored some bad guys. Although, now not sponsoring Lance Armstrong or Oscar Pistorius. Does having these 'bad guys' really damage a brand? Did Nike make a mistake sponsoring these guys? Or is Nike just really unluckily in their pick of sport stars?
I think the letter, there's no way Nike could have known any of this, unless they have mystic meg n their team too. Maybe sponsors should start doing back ground and personality checks to see what's the percentage of a possible bad mistake/action a prospective sport star could make?
As far as it hurting the brand, I think it can do quite some damage. But as Nike is a well established brand and has three bad guys within about five years, and they are still doing ok. So I think it depends on how big the brand is to how well it can absorb those losses through these bad public figures.
Mostly, all the news would be about these people and the things they have done that has made them loose the sponsorship in the first place. Rather than the band being criticized for sponsoring these people. Good for the band, bad for those athletes.
Well I hope Nike can find a good guy soon, 3 is certainly enough bad press for one brand!
Charlotte x
No comments:
Post a Comment