Posted at 10.26.2018
Well known for having a successful modelling profession, Kate Moss has made an appearance in many endorsed advertising campaigns, such as, Chanel, Louis Vuitton and Versace, to name only a few. Moss' endorsement career has already established its pros and cons. In 2005, a drug scandal hit the headlines, with pictures of Moss snorting cocaine. This history put many of her endorsements at risk. When the news headlines story was announced she lost major contracts with Roberto Cavalli, Chanel, Burberry & H&M. However, Rimmel required benefit of the publicity that she was getting in the mass media and made a decision to include the image in their television set advertising. The advertisement confirmed her partying forever, then making use of their new recovery foundation before arriving to work looking fresh and rather. Matching to Bussey 'sales rocketed' (Bussey, 2005) after release of the advert. Coty Beauty, who works the Rimmel brand, made a decision to keep Moss because she experienced made a general population apology. 'They will stand by the model after she apologised and promised to 'overcome her problems' (Sky Information, 2005)
There is not any real evidence showing whether keeping Moss made an impact on the sales of Rimmel products. When the author contacted Coty Beauty and JWT, these were not willing to give any information regarding Rimmel's sales from the years 2006/2007.
Below is a comment made by Peter Knowland, Director of the Rimmel bank account at JWT.
'They (Rimmel- Coty Beauty) have no want to look backwards. They are extremely worked up about the category of Rimmel faces they may have today - Coco Rocha, Georgia May Jagger, Sophie Ellis Bextor and Kate Moss. They all have another but important part to experiment with in the advertising of the Rimmel London brand. '
Glyn Thompson, who works in consumer affairs for Coty Beauty, explained:
'Unfortunately, we are unable to be of assistance on this occasion even as are an exclusive company and we do not release annual sales report'
Twelve months after the scandal hit the news, Moss had acquired back again many endorsement contracts 'Roberto Cavalli (again), Stella McCartney, Virgin Mobile (who used the scandal in their plan), Burberry (again) and Louis Vuitton to name a few' (Bussey, 2006) Corresponding to Bussey, 'Autumn/Winter 2006 season was one of Kate Moss' most successful- and profitable' (Bussey, 2006)
This case study defines the offer 'any promotion is good publicity'. Although Moss was getting bad promotion when the scandal premiered, it performed to her edge as well as Rimmel's for sticking by her. 'David Golding, Planning Director at Rainey Kelly Campbell Roalfe/Y&R says: "You must think to what magnitude has her image been tarnished by these testimonies. The bigger history was just how many companies decreased her and then got her back. To me this is confirmation that she actually is a great brand icon. "' (Bussey, 2006)
'TIGER WOODS SCANDAL COULD COST Marketing AND SPONSORS $220 Mil' (campaignlive, 2009)
Prior to reports of the scandal released in Novemeber 2009, Woods got estimated annual earnings of $100 million in endorsements.
Tiger Woods is an excellent example of how over using a superstar could jeopardise brands when a scandal breaks. Many marketers used Woods for his clean-living general public image. When the scandal broke about the alleged string of affairs, it was reported that many of Woods's endorsement products would drop him from other advertising. What became apparent was that many of his big sponsors did not drop him, instead they suspended any adverts that he made an appearance in using their campaigns. 'Procter and Gamble's Gillette and Swiss watchmaker Tag Heuer, have looked after their connections but aren't offering him in current advertising' (SkyNews, 2010). Gillette was the first major sponsorship to distance themselves from the golfer over his private life, the company mentioned this in a news release following a scandal,
"Amid a difficult and regrettable situation, we respect the action Tiger is taking to revive the trust of his family, friends and enthusiasts. We fully support him stepping back again from his professional career and taking the time he needs to do what matters most. We wish him and his family the best. As Tiger takes a break from the general public eyesight, we will support his desire to have privacy by restricting his role in our marketing programs. " (Norton, 2009)
However, Accenture and AT&T decreased Woods as soon as the scandal broke, saying that 'he is no longer seen as the ideal, clean-cut promotional vehicle' (Timesonline, 2010). However, Woods also released his 'Indefinite Leave from golfing, shareholders of companies that Mr. Woods endorses lost $5-12 billion in riches' (Knittel & Stango, 2010:1). Woods' decision to leave golf for some time to concentrate on his personal life also left his endorsements at jeopardy.
Since the storyplot broke, there were certain companies which have made a large loss. 'Buyers in three sports-related companies - PADRAIG HARRINGTON PGA Tour Golf, Gatorade and Nike - fared the most detrimental, experiencing a 4. 3 percent damage, or about $6 billion'. (Talmazan, 2009). This evidence shows that a lot of his sporting endorsements have suffered the worst. Whether it is because his images in the advertisements are of him as a sportsman- which is what he is well-known for, whereas other advertising are using him because of his 'nice man' image.
Unlike the prior research study, this account is recent, so it is difficult to analyse whether these results will be long term or similarly to the Kate Moss tale, the result on his endorsements may only be short-term. A recent poll was created by Sport Business to see what the general public believe may happen to Woods's endorsements.
The results show that 56% of respondents believe the consequences of the scandal is only going to be short term, 27% think that there will be no effects whatsoever, whilst 17% believe the effects will be lasting. If these results are correct, then the effects of the scandal is only going to be short term and, like Moss, Woods may recover some of his lost endorsements.
Jamie Oliver is most beneficial known as the 'nude chef', this is the name of the programme that Jamie appeared in, where he went out shopping for elements to prepare food a meal for friends, the programme's strategy was via an 'informality, friendliness and an easy- heading, relaxed format' (Byrne, 2003:1). He was announced as the new face of Sainsbury's in 2000; it was the 'first time a movie star chef has fronted a significant supermarket marketing campaign. (PRNewswire, 2000) The reliability of the celebrity was one of the reasons that Oliver was a perfect movie star for the brand, 'Abbot Mead Vickers the advertising firm responsible for the campaign, sensed that:
'We wanted to generate a brand strategy and develop vision for the brand. Essentially we wanted to re-emphasise the brand's concentrate on quality and position the brand as a leader in the field in conditions of quality. Therefore using Jamie Oliver who's renowned for quality would help us reposition on quality which is what the adverts are conveying to the client. In essence everything we are doing is borrowing his prices and transposing these to the brand' (Byrne, 2003:6/7)
The decision to do this links with the idea that McCracken advises, the endorsement must be right, the star has to web page link with the product, and for it to be a success the merchandise needs to catch the attention of the buyer. What this data does show is the fact Oliver has a good image by which to portray the brand and what they have to offer, because of his image within the public attention, his success as a chef and the grade of food that he uses. This will allow the general public to assume that the products he uses are good, which will be reflected in their purchasing decisions.
One concern that the company had, was they felt that Jamie 'would not charm to the 45 plus years group' (Byrne, 2003:7) However, scheduled to his informal style, his son nearby and every day image, it includes allowed many consumers to relate with him.
Since bringing out Oliver as the face of Sainsbury's, the advertising and sales has gone from durability to durability, 'Corresponding to new research, the 41m put in by Sainsbury's on promotions using Jamie Oliver produced a supplementary 1. 12bn of turnover - overall turnover was 17bn. Oliver was single-handedly in charge of 200m of Sainsbury's 535m income in the past two years. ' (Evening Standard, 2002)
Kate Nicholson, Mind of Sainsbury's advertising, made this comment '
'Jamie has far exceeded our expectations. It does seem like a lot of money but we know he really has produced these more sales because we have researched it meticulously. . . Jamie has been a crucial part in our turnaround, I don't think other people could did it' (Evening Standard, 2002)
Jamie Oliver is a good example of what sort of celebrity endorsement could work, offering you have the correct celebrity and brand match.
Before the start of Lineker as the facial skin of advertising for Walkers, it appeared that the product wasn't near the top of the sales ladder in its market field. The endorsement of the legend has been one of the very most successful steps Walkers could have made.
This type of celebrity endorsed advertising has sought to maintain the emotional connection between product and consumer, as a consumer we think that the merchandise must be good if celebrities are advertising on their behalf.
Figure 4 shows the change of Walkers' sales since launching Lineker to the brand. 1996 noticed a significant climb in sales after Lineker came out in the adverts. What's visible is the constant rise in sales since Lineker joined up with. By the end of 2004 it was noticeable that Walkers experienced over half of the market show of clean sales.
A spokesman for Walkers stated that after 2 yrs with Lineker as the face of Walkers Crisps it 'has helped to market enough crisps to repay the whole of Holland' (Greedystar, 2003)
Figure 5 shows the sales that Walkers experienced in 2002/03. That they had a great success, gaining more than 30m well worth of sales, Persil were second. What's also evident is that there are no other crisp brands on the table, clearly outlining the actual fact that Walkers supports most of the market share for sharp brands in the united kingdom.
Since the introduction of Lineker, that has made an appearance in over 100 adverts, many other celebrities have signed up with him in adverts as well, like the Spice Young ladies, Charlotte Chapel, Paul Gascoigne and Females Aloud. Walkers created a famous campaign that saw Lineker's favorite flavour rebranded to 'Sodium 'n' Lineker'. This was an advertising ploy that would help the sales increase for a certain flavour. This is a good way to create brand recognition as well concerning incorporate the type of the movie star in the product's advertising campaign. Since the launch of the advertising campaign, sales had increased from '14. 5% to 17. 8%. Average sales in grocery stores within the first 12 months of the plan were 23% through to the previous 12 months' (Marketing, 2005)
What's interesting to see with this advertising campaign is the fact, unlike Jamie Oliver, that has a web link with Sainsbury's, Lineker does not have any real hyperlink with Walkers Crisps, What they efficiently did was to include Lineker within the product, so their advertising experienced the tag type of 'No More Mr Nice Man'. What's also interesting, as Martin mentions, is the fact that 'young people are a goal for snacks. . Making football a reasonable choice- Regardless of Mr. Lineker's nice guy image' (Martin, 1996:43)
McCracken (1989) thinks that providing meanings is an excellent way to portray a good image by using celebrities in promotional initiatives. With regards to this theory any difficulty. most of the case studies above show evidence of this, Jamie Oliver can be an obvious prospect for Sainsbury's as he's a chef, therefore the meanings that were portrayed in the advertising became successful and relate to what McCracken believes. The evidence above demonstrates a celebrity's recognition within the marketing impacts the sales of something, whether in a good or a terrible way, Rimmel's decision to keep using Moss was a good example of how advertising attention can be an advantage. The elegance and similarity that they portray within the advertisement by using Moss was visible to the audience. As Kamins implies (outlined in the literature review), a superstar fronting a campaign can result in the buyer being drawn to the product.
The following charts will summarize the results of the questionnaires which were conducted to find the consumers thoughts of movie star endorsement advertising. Overall 70 respondents completed the questionnaires, half Feminine and half Guy. In order to gain a good set of results it was important for the respondents to be a variety of different age ranges. The results were inputted onto a data source giving opportunities for different studies to be created. These results will form a disagreement that will seek to discern whether the consumer's response to super star endorsement advertising is equivalent to that of the experts. The results from the questionnaire are a sample as this is a tiny research project, whilst it is indicative; it isn't big enough to show an absolute answer.
It is important to discover whether consumers are influenced by advertising, this will show proof how a lot of the populace are influenced by advertisements, which will then allow us to see what human population that are influenced by advertising are also influenced by star endorsed advertising. Statistics 6 shows facts that a most respondent's purchasing decisions are influenced by advertising.
However, Physique 7 implies that not as many people are affected by star endorsed advertising.
This graph is interesting as it shows hook contradiction; not many respondents have brought a product because a celebrity is in the advertisements. However, most them believe using superstars in advertising is successful.
It seems that many of the respondents assume that a superstar brings understanding to a product, however the consumer doesn't invariably buy something because a celebrity 'uses' it. One respondent wrote this statement about how precisely they are not influenced by star endorsed advertising.
'I feel that most adverts have superstars in them but I wouldn't buy something just because I love the superstar, probably more to do with the product'
However, this respondent, when responding to yes to the question, do you really think that using celebrities in advertising is prosperous, stated this;
'Because you feel a feeling of admiration for some of these, and if they're using certain beauty products that make them look so good, then people would want to use them too. '
In relation to Erdogan's theory in the literature review, a disadvantage of using celebrity endorsements is if indeed they over-shadow the brand, however and benefit of using celebrity's is increased identification of the merchandise.
These are results from the questions which were asked to the respondents to determine whether they understood what the celebrity's brands were.
It was interesting to note that only 1 respondent incorrectly responded to PADRAIG HARRINGTON name. Kate Moss was another recognisable movie star with only 6 people who clarified improperly. John Terry and Kerry Katona each experienced 8 people incorrectly answer their brands. However, it was interesting to observe that 4 people didn't know John Terry's name, but recognized him as a sports player.
The next set of charts will show if the respondents know certain celebrity's and what they keep in mind about them. This is important to find whether they keep in mind positive or negative traits about the celebrity's to be able to get a varied set of results; there were no multiple choice possibilities. These charts will analyse what consumers think of the adverts that are super star endorsed, giving an opportunity to see if they bear in mind more about the super star or the product that had been advertised.
Overall, most respondents keep in mind Kate Moss on her behalf career (Modelling). However, it is interesting to observe that 21 respondents also stated that they remember her for taking drugs. Rimmel, a product that she endorses, was the 3rd most popular thing appreciated about her.
When asked if the respondents understood of any adverts that Kate Moss had starred in, 51 of them said 'Rimmel' Body 11 shows what they keep in mind most about the advertising campaigns. Please be aware, these email address details are not simply for Rimmel.
A most the respondents bear in mind the tagline of the merchandise, 'Get the London Look'. What's more interesting to see is that the respondents keep in mind Kate for being in an advert, but cannot bear in mind the name of the product being marketed.
Figure 12 shows the particular respondents thought John Terry was most well-known for. It would appear that due to his recent media attention after an alleged affair, lots of the respondents recognised him for sleeping around. There have been 3 respondents who didn't recognise him whatsoever.
A majority of respondents didn't know of any adverts that John Terry had starred in. Samsung was typically the most popular brand that was shown. The next page describes what they appreciated most from the adverts he made an appearance in. Not absolutely all respondents wrote an answer for this question as they could not remember the advertisement.
Figure 13 evidently outlines that many respondents remember the advert since it was football related, what's interesting to see is the fact that they also bear in mind it more because other celebrity's also appeared in it.
These results show that most of the respondents keep in mind Kerry Katona on her behalf singing career; the second most popular thing that people bear in mind about her is her reported drug taking. Unlike prior celebrity's, respondents experienced more to state about Katona, whether this is due to negative press attention in the past or the actual fact that she actually is famous for more than one thing.
Figure 15 demonstrates the primary reason people keep in mind the advert is due to how irritating it was. Whether this is because they thought Katona was irritating, or that the advert itself was. What's also interesting is that lots of respondents don't forget her starring alongside other celebrity's in the advert.
All respondents understood what Tiger Woods is famous for. What was interesting is that, just like John Terry, over fifty percent of the respondents acquired put down that he is also well-known for sleeping around.
Figure 17 shows what respondents remember most about the adverts that Woods starred in. By far the most remembered attribute was the tagline of the merchandise that he endorses 'The best a guy can get'. This suggests that unlike Terry, they remember more about the merchandise then the star promoting it.
In conditions of whether individuals are influenced by star endorsement advertising, romantic relationships between movie star and product is important, A respondent published this declaration when the question: What romance do you think using a celebrity's name to sell a product has on sales? Was asked.
'I think it probably has a confident influence on sales as consumers build connections with superstars, see them as role models and idolise them. If a super star such as Cheryl Cole helps bring about a product which she uses herself, as she actually is known for being a style icon to numerous, then this will encourage consumers to buy it in the trust of looking like her. ' (Time bracket14-25)
However, a respondent who's in an alternative era category has a similar opinion;
Possibly younger generation may be more willing to buy products endorsed by a star because they tend to research to models or activities stars etc. I don't really take much notice of who's wearing/using what. ' (Generation 36-50) '
The questionnaire results are interesting, as much individuals are aware that companies are employing celebrity's for advertising, many of the respondents have never purchased a product due to a super star being in the advertising, yet they still believe celebrity's are successful within advertising. What they performed notice was that many companies are employing celebrities as brand acceptance, a way of attractive to the general public. This research shows that many consumers bear in mind negative capabilities about celebrity's, rather than keeping in mind what positive things they may have achieved, which indicates that individuals are more willing to be effected by negative characteristic's of a celebrity instead of the positive things. This research has also proven that younger consumers are influenced more by super star culture; they are really more willing to really know what attire Cheryl Cole has been seen in as well as how to do their head of hair like hers. That is why more companies are using these kinds of celebrity's within their advertising campaigns, to get the market of consumers who are vunerable to that type of advertising.
This section of the data research can look at the expert's opinions. Three interviews were conducted, as well as a recording of any debate on superstar culture that the writer went to. The respondents were interviewed about two different strategies of using celebrities as well as the advantages and drawbacks of using superstars. These results will build up an argument to see whether the professionals have similar views of super star endorsements as that of the consumers.
Using a superstar in an marketing campaign could be a risqu decision. It would appear that many advertisers get it wrong in the selection process. Ogilvy has written that 'Superstars get high recall ratings, but I have stopped with them because readers remember the superstar and your investment product. . . they assume that the movie star has been bought, which is usually the case' (Ogilvy, 1983: pg, 83).
Many individuals are aware that the super star does not really use the merchandise they advertise, instead they have been 'bought' as the facial skin of the advertising campaign. If this holds true, why do marketers continue steadily to use stars in their campaigns?
Alan Jarvie, Director of London Advertising, is convinced that using a celebrity:
'Gives you some popularity, it offers you some memorability, so long as the personality doesn't overshadow the merchandise. Sometimes you get promotions where in fact the only thing that you remember is the superstar, therefore you can't remember what the product is, we ensure that the celebrity takes on second fiddle to the product that we're advertising. ' (Alan Jarvie, London Advetising- Appendix 5)
Jarvie thinks that provided that the celebrity does not overshadow the merchandise, then a plan can achieve success since the personality is definitely an attraction for the product.
From previous research, if the celebrity is receiving bad publicity in the advertising, then the product and brand will undergo. However, Jarvie thinks that many products can use the celebrity to their advantage. For example, many marketers have ended their deals with footballer John Terry due to his recent negative marketing attention. However, Jarvie is convinced that some marketers could use this as an advantage in their marketing ploy;
'I think it all is determined by what the product is, I believe if your product is focused on being, you know good and clean and righteous then certainly that would be problems, but if you are product is merely about being truly a normal bloke or someone that makes blunders, or a person who's every man, then I don't feel that it should harmed them in any way. ' (Alan Jarvie, Giraffe Advertising- Appendix 6)
Jim Shannon, Creative Director for Giraffe Advertising, thinks a brand would suffer if a celebrity were to get negative press attention, 'If the individual behaves in a manner that detracts from the brand (even outside the house promotional activities), the brand suffers' (Jim Shannon- Appendix 6) However, Jim Shannon will go on to state that marketers could use the media publicity as an edge 'Only in a 'knowing' way ' (i. e. , in the promotion of products that may tacitly endorse his/her behavior)'. Noreen Jenney, Director of Super star Endorsements, feels that marketers should be careful about who they select for their advertising campaigns. 'Advertisers have to be careful to do their homework when hiring a celebrity. Whenever a superstar gets bad publicity, it demonstrates on the advertiser's product and company. (Noreen Jenney, Appendix 7)
Trevor Beattie got a fascinating point when he brought up in a super star argument that Gillette's advertising hasn't inspired his purchasing decisions;
I think Gillette has produced probably the worst advertising a man can get and the worst advertising on television set, and I use Gillette products at least double every day. I'm not put off by their totally shit advertising and I discover that a bit odd. As much as I want to be put off by their advertising, I'm not, therefore i blank it out. Their circulation is amazing and their product is extremely good. Their advertising sucks. So there is a strange triangle taking place, and for all their money and everything the worthiness, then they go and hire the three people who they feel are the worthiest celebrities on the globe, individuals who are superstars actually, who are incredibly good at their chosen sport. (Trevor Beattie, Appendix 8)
Beattie also mentioned how using endorsements can achieve success;
I think you can fail, if you obtain it right, like they performed with Gary Lineker and, for everyone his failings, he's an excellent spokesperson for the brand and he took Walkers from nothing to a major brand and he's received his money, I think, and he's done an excellent job. Jamie Oliver, do not like the bloke, think he's a git, but, he's done an excellent job for Sainsbury's, really has, then they have got it right, it is just a gamble. (Trevor Beattie Appendix 8)
Is it a gamble, or do promoters believe there is certainly strategy to making a perfect match between super star and product? Bergstrom & Skafstad (2004) in their research study of Superstar Endorsement asked professionals what type of theories they would employ when selecting a super star in advertising. I have employed this same technique within this research study to see whether the results from different experts are they same, or whether they have their own opnions on what they consider is a good way of selecting stars for endorsement advertising. Exactly what will be taken under consideration is the difference between different stars for different campaigns.
The research procedure will be analysed against Shimp's TEARS model from the literature review, professionals were asked what order they believe that is the correct way of choosing a superstar for an advertisement.
All practitioners explained that they cannot give a precise decision as it depends upon which product these are advertising. The graphs below outline what they imagine is right for a general marketing campaign.
It's interesting to note that 'Trustworthiness' ranked the highest in making a conclusion when selecting a movie star in adverts. Both Shannon and Jenney believed that 'Expertise' was the next aspect that is important when choosing a personality. Jarvie, however, placed that previous in his selection. What's interesting to see is the fact that although McCracken feels in his theory that there needs to be a so this means behind the endorsement, some kind of connection between superstar and brand, this evidence has show that almost all of the experts assume that Similarity is much less important in the selection process as the Standing of the superstar.
The result from the expert research implies that using a superstar in advertising is successful providing it works and the superstar doesn't over shadow the merchandise. 'Trustworthiness' performs an important part in selecting the celebrity that was interesting, 'Similarity' between your brand and product had not been essential when nearing a superstar for the advertising. It really is interesting to see that marketers do not really have a specific way of choosing superstar endorsements; they don't run by any theory, its more about whether the star is right for the brand and vice versa.