Althouse: Was all that sex worth $12 billion?

December 29, 2009

Was all that sex worth $12 billion?

That's the loss to the shareholders in the companies whose advertising relied on the image of the disgraced supergolfer Tiger Woods.

32 comments:

Opus One Media said...: Oh bullroar. Nike and Gatorade are probably worth that in the market but Tiger Woods isn't the market (stock) and if you tell me neither will survive without Woods then I've got a bridge to sell you.

The public sees Woods for what he is...a superb golfer - maybe the best in a long history - with huge flaws which can or can't be forgiven - but they are human flaws nonetheless.

He defintely has a difficult future. The sponsors...naw.... there is no way they knew or supported him in his extra-curricular endeavors so their hands are clean....well not exactly clean because this story has been out for a year not a month and they had to turn a blind eye not to see it sooner.; 12/29/09, 6:55 AM
KCFleming said...: For him, mebbe so.

For investors, well, they got stiffed.

So to speak..; 12/29/09, 6:56 AM
ricpic said...: The little head knows no bounds in its pursuit of heaven's gate. The other side on the other hand is always calculating calculating calculating. It's an unhealthy relationship!*

*It's an unhealthy relationship! Reference to a scene in On The Waterfront in which the Rod Steiger character is trying to cover for the Marlon Brando character who has come under suspicion by the Lee J. Cobb character. I know, I know: what's he talking about? That's what it is to get old, you're in another place. It's all right, you can go back to your petting parties now.*

*Go back to your petting parties is a reference to Endgame by Sam Beckett.; 12/29/09, 7:11 AM
Anonymous said...: If Tiger Woods was a stock now would be the time to buy. No matter what happens in his personal life the dude can focus. He will still excel as a golfer. People will still be amazed at his championship winning ways. Fans will love him. Advertisers will benefit from hiring him.; 12/29/09, 7:20 AM
Fred4Pres said...: It is all relative Ann. If I cheated on my wife, trust me, it would cost me a lot. And while it might not be $12 billion, it would hurt just as much. And most of that is temporary stock set backs for the sponsors.

I doubt the money is the primary concern for Tiger right now.; 12/29/09, 7:27 AM
Fred4Pres said...: Pogo, "stiffed" excellent comment!; 12/29/09, 7:29 AM
vet66 said...: I don't support Wood's lack of morality, ethics, values, or personal discipline regardless of how well he plays golf. He is a failure when it comes to personal responsibility. Redemption may be his at some point in the future but he has tainted himself and broken the bond of trust with the public and those who marketed his "hopeandchange" persona.

I do not respect him or those who would rehabilitate his image as something along the line as it's a guy thing. Do not underestimate the damage he has done to those who looked up to him as a role model. He can ask for forgiveness using the "I HAVE SINNED" mantra but trust is fragile and once broken loses it's lustre.; 12/29/09, 7:31 AM
Cedarford said...: I second Opus One Media calling bullshit on the associate prof claiming that a small 4% downward blip in the Tiger Woods "basket" of immensely large firms with almost a 300 billion market cap represents a "loss" of some 12 billion directly attributable to Woods.

This bozo is an economics prof and there are methods to see if increased or decreased revenue is a function of advertising effectiveness or some other factor...but he didn't use any in his "study" of Wood's bottom line impact on firms like AT&T, Nike..; 12/29/09, 7:53 AM
Michael Haz said...: This must mean that the WeinerBomber has worn out as a blog-worthy topic. I thought that it'd last at least one week.; 12/29/09, 8:01 AM
The Crack Emcee said...: "The public sees Woods for what he is...a superb golfer - maybe the best in a long history - with huge flaws which can or can't be forgiven - but they are human flaws nonetheless."

Certain types keep laying this "human" line out there like it means something profound. It doesn't. Tiger is an asshole who showed more inhumanity than anything else.

Just because you've been a perpetually unthinking horn dawg, as well, doesn't give anyone a pass.; 12/29/09, 8:28 AM
Michael Haz said...: Just because you've been a perpetually unthinking horn dawg, as well, doesn't give anyone a pass.

Michael Jordan keeps getting passes, as have quite a few athletes in other sports.

The big difference between those athletes and Woods is that the other guys didn't have a public image as carefully manicured as was Woods's. And their incomes from endorsements weren't greater than their incomes from their sport.

Woods earned a lot of money playing golf, and much more money from his endorsements. The golf money will still be there when he returns to the PGA tour. The endorsement money, maybe, but a lot of it will go elsewhere.

Tiger Woods isn't traded on any stock exchange. The losses, if any, incurred by the companies that have endorsed him aren't his losses. They belong to the endorsing companies who over payed for Wood's services in the first place.

As an example, look at Buick. Buick (and GM) paid Woods a lot of money to have his photos taken driving or standing next to Buicks. Buick was a PGA tour sponsor. Buick displays littered every golf course where PGA tournaments were played. Buick and GM incurred substantial losses which had everything to do with the economy, competition from other manufacturers, bad corporate decisions, too-high overhead, etc. None of that was Wood's fault.

Tagging Woods with $12 billion cost for his extra marital sex is nonsense.; 12/29/09, 8:45 AM
Known Unknown said...: With Tiger, everyone gets screwed.; 12/29/09, 8:53 AM
Nichevo said...: $12 billion? Sounds like it would have been worthwhile to whack Elin and maybe those other broads and the National Enquirer too, before things got out of hand.; 12/29/09, 8:54 AM
save_the_rustbelt said...: Pogo - post of the day!; 12/29/09, 9:15 AM
save_the_rustbelt said...: Apparently it never occurred to Tiger there existed a world beyond his immediately needs, he cared not much for his wife, his children, his employees or his sponsors.

This was not an affair, this was a serial orgy of incredible proportions. We don't even know much about the 1 nighters arranged by Rachel U. in the VIP lounges.

Mrs. Rustbelt: "Most men are dogs, and few of them are house broken."; 12/29/09, 9:18 AM
Nichevo said...: Waah waah waah. Do any of you care about Woods as a human being? I don't. I only care about him because of his ability to hit a ball. As such I oppose anything interfering with this.

Did anyone really think the Woodses were so great together? Look at her, she is an interchangeable part. This could have been foreseen long ago, and ignored. Really - who cares? Actually I don't even like golf. I just think it's a pity to waste talent.

Perhaps, for the nth time, this will teach people to stop caring about celebrities and people they see on TV!

Oh, and Cedarford, you've been posting a lot of gag-a-maggot stuff lately, but as long as I'm here...if you know effective scientific formulae to calculate the effectiveness of advertising, you are badly needed by industry. However, you don't, so stay in your cave.; 12/29/09, 9:42 AM
amba said...: I detect a Theme of the Day ...; 12/29/09, 10:07 AM
amba said...: This must mean that the WeinerBomber has worn out as a blog-worthy topic.

Not at all. We're still talking about a wienerbomber.; 12/29/09, 10:08 AM
AllenS said...: Even if his wife takes half of his worth, I doubt that Woods needs to play golf or make another ad again. There will be plenty of money left.

Having said that, I wonder if he'll play professionally again. This has to be terribly embarassing for him.; 12/29/09, 10:20 AM
William said...: Many, and not just women, wish to see the Tiger Woods story as some type of morality tale. The hope is that Tiger will suffer a punishment consistent with his sins. While castration would be the ideal denouement, some form of econonomic emasculation would make an acceptable substitute. Dream on......After the divorce, Tiger will be alone with his demons and every model in America who wants to fool around with a studly billionaire. In ten years time he will have exorcised his demons (so to speak) and will be ready to settle down again. His next wife will be as pretty as Elin, but twenty years younger. This marriage will be a success....But what of the children? They will pick up a few neuroses, but their daddy's rich and their ma's good looking. They will muddle through to a life that your children would envy.... This is a story of the transient unhappiness of highly blessed individuals. The tragedy of life is that virtue and happiness have only a chance correlation. Luck, the ability to drive a ball four hundred yards, and symmetrical features are much better predictors of success in life than virtue.; 12/29/09, 10:24 AM
Michael Haz said...: Amba - this is just the prelude to Weiner Wednesday.; 12/29/09, 10:37 AM
AllenS said...: Tuesday Weiner Roundup.; 12/29/09, 10:39 AM
AllenS said...: Have you seen Charlie Sheen's latest mug shot? Remind you of anybody?; 12/29/09, 10:42 AM
vbspurs said...: William's hard-knocks of reality paragraph is almost sure to be proven correct in future, but then, he might've written something similar about the Prince and Princess of Wales in 1992, after their hugely embarrassing recordings and Squidgy letters.

For all the sadness experienced by her first marriage and subsequent divorce, Diana would end up marrying a fabulously wealthy billionaire, bearing him a brace of sons of his own, and leading the same kind of social high life enjoyed by the Duke and Duchess of Windsor.

Ahh. But you see. Life has a way of mowing down even the most fabled and rehabilitated of creatures, and we never know just how much pain is yet in store for Tiger.

If William's morality tale is believable, that all this loss of shareholder revenue and public embarrassment is a mere blip in an otherwise charmed life, I say beware of drunken chauffeurs.

Cheers,
Victoria; 12/29/09, 10:57 AM
Kirk Parker said...: Actually, forget the $12 billion--I'm having trouble understanding why celebrity endorsements are worth even a penny...; 12/29/09, 11:43 AM
Joe said...: Back when Michael Jackson got that massive contract from Pepsi, someone ran the numbers and found that Pepsi didn't net a dime from that endorsement. I seriously doubt Nike is really making bank [net] with Tiger--I suspect it's much more an ego thing and a chance for executives to hob nob with their favorite celebrity.

I read somewhere recently the cynical, though I think largely correct, comment that big advertising agencies aren't really interested in selling product, but in one-upping each other and winning awards which lets them charge more money. Landing big celebrities is part of this charade.

Years back, Wendys improved their profits more using their ex-founder Dave than celebrities. I'd say that McDonalds would improve their profits more by simply improving their food than in lining up celebrities and lame movie deals. (Interestingly, I no longer eat at Wendys because the quality of their food and service has gone way down. I can't even remember the last Wendys ad I saw.); 12/29/09, 12:35 PM
traditionalguy said...: Associating the image of a celebrity in the public's mind with your product is a blessing that keeps on giving whenever his image pops up...unless the celebrity's image also brings up a strong negative emotion at the same time it brings up your product. Then it becomes a curse that keeps on giving.; 12/29/09, 1:21 PM
Cedarford said...: Nichevo - Oh, and Cedarford, you've been posting a lot of gag-a-maggot stuff lately, but as long as I'm here...if you know effective scientific formulae to calculate the effectiveness of advertising, you are badly needed by industry. However, you don't, so stay in your cave.

Actually, I do. Just another area I know something about and you don't. I wouldn't characterize it as "scientific formulae", but yes, advertising and marketing have business calcs used to judge effectiveness of a pitchman, a promo. Advertising exposure and impressions are documeted, and the gold standard is change in sales volume as a function of exposure - once other variables are accounted for.
And, what drives some in biz crazy, is that there is the "art side", and subjectivity, and judgment - on top of the cold, hard numbers.

Many skilled professions combine things that way, Nichevo. But perhaps not yours, so it is harder to see..; 12/29/09, 2:33 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Was all that prudish over-reaction worth $12 billion?

This is how much investors lost because of the companies' feckless decisions.

Anything Woods could be said to have lost would be much less than that.

Thanks Gillette! (Apparently not the best a man can get).; 12/29/09, 4:14 PM
Ritmo Re-Animated said...: Many, and not just women, wish to see the Tiger Woods story as some type of morality tale.

Why, William? Does the boredom in your relationship(s) lead you to be enticed by the thought of cheating?

Negative reinforcement is so much less powerful than positive reinforcement.; 12/29/09, 4:16 PM
KCFleming said...: "Negative reinforcement is so much less powerful than positive reinforcement."

Well, not counting the atomic bomb.
Or momma spanking you for whatever.

'Cept those two.
And touching a hot stove.; 12/29/09, 4:51 PM
kentuckyliz said...: Pity, the hoors didn't get paid part of that $12b.; 12/31/09, 10:36 AM