Using Celebrities in an Ad Campaign Is a Poor Way to Stimulate Brand Appeal Essay Example
Using celebrities in an ad campaign is a poor way to stimulate brand appeal
Using celebrities as brand ambassadors has become very popular and is one of the more common communication strategies employed by companies today in order to market their products. Marketers pay millions of dollars to celebrities in the hope that their star magic would make the product more appealing and successful. But all celebrities glitter is not gold. There are many reasons as to why using celebrities in an ad campaign can turn into an ugly affair, sometimes enhancing attitude change towards the product altogether. In this report, I will list the disadvantages of using celebrities in ads and the reasons behind why they are a poor way to stimulate brand appeal.
1) Price
It is very expensive for companies to hire a celebrity as its brand ambassador. It is important for companies to note that when they do decide to take the brand ambassador route, they should be willing to shell out millions of dollars, and sometimes even lose it. Nike signed Tiger Woods on a 5 year $ 125 million contract, Reebok signed Venus Williams for $40 million and more recently, Pepsi teamed up with Shaquille O'Neal for a reported $25 million. For big companies such as Nike, Reebok and Pepsi, the financial implications of the deals involved would probably not affect them as much as smaller ones.
With this in mind, it is also important to note that consumers today are becoming more advertising savvy. They read about the multi-million dollar deals as well. This leads to more consumers asking, “Are we buying the product, or the celebrity?”
2) ‘Vampire Effect’
A common marketing term, this refers to the point where the celebrity in question overshadows the brand itself. Marketers face this problem when they pick an extremely popular star, and the audience’s attention is drawn to the celebrity rather than the product. A very popular example of this scenario occurred when Cable
Using celebrities as brand ambassadors has become very popular and is one of the more common communication strategies employed by companies today in order to market their products. Marketers pay millions of dollars to celebrities in the hope that their star magic would make the product more appealing and successful. But all celebrities glitter is not gold. There are many reasons as to why using celebrities in an ad campaign can turn into an ugly affair, sometimes enhancing attitude change towards the product altogether. In this report, I will list the disadvantages of using celebrities in ads and the reasons behind why they are a poor way to stimulate brand appeal.
1) Price
It is very expensive for companies to hire a celebrity as its brand ambassador. It is important for companies to note that when they do decide to take the brand ambassador route, they should be willing to shell out millions of dollars, and sometimes even lose it. Nike signed Tiger Woods on a 5 year $ 125 million contract, Reebok signed Venus Williams for $40 million and more recently, Pepsi teamed up with Shaquille O'Neal for a reported $25 million. For big companies such as Nike, Reebok and Pepsi, the financial implications of the deals involved would probably not affect them as much as smaller ones.
With this in mind, it is also important to note that consumers today are becoming more advertising savvy. They read about the multi-million dollar deals as well. This leads to more consumers asking, “Are we buying the product, or the celebrity?”
2) ‘Vampire Effect’
A common marketing term, this refers to the point where the celebrity in question overshadows the brand itself. Marketers face this problem when they pick an extremely popular star, and the audience’s attention is drawn to the celebrity rather than the product. A very popular example of this scenario occurred when Cable