Hooked On Golf Blog

Ad Age says Tiger Woods is least effective endorser?

Written by: Tony Korologos | Date: Saturday, January 15th, 2011
Categories: Golf MediaMiscellaneousTiger Woods

Share HOG!Share on Facebook0Share on Google+0Tweet about this on TwitterEmail this to someonePrint this page

Attention all sponsors of Tiger Woods.  You may want to reconsider that $72 million (give or take a few) you are paying Tiger and consider paying it to me.

Tiger Woods Ad

Advertising revenue from Tiger Woods’ front tooth dropped 45% in 2010

According to Ad Age, celebrity endorsers are ineffective and can at time have as much as a 30% negative effect.

“From Tiger Woods to Donald Trump, we found that with rare exception, celebrity endorsements were largely ineffective and failed to yield the benefits popular wisdom promises.”

“Today’s consumer is a totally different animal than the consumer of even five years ago, meaning that what was effective and influential five years ago is not necessarily so today, as today’s consumer is more likely to be influenced by someone in their social network than a weak celebrity connection. Today’s consumer is informed, time-compressed, and difficult to impress, and they are only influenced by ads that are relevant and provide information.”

There it is right there.  Here’s where I drive my sales pitch for the $72 million home.  Today’s consumer is more likely to be influenced by someone in their social network than a celebrity or superstar athlete. Well this blog is in your social network.  I’m on twitter here and facebook here, and YouTube here.  Sign me up.

Comments are closed.

  • Social Networks



    HOG Twitter

    Tony Korologos Twitter

    Google Plus


  • Archives

  • Latest Golf Reviews