Marketers have traditionally followed a formula when creating and communicating their brand – the “what, how and why”, in that order. Our computer is the best. It’s the fastest. We made it for busy people like you. But in the past decade, marketing visionaries such as Steve Sinek have turned this norm on its head. Start with the “why” and follow with the “how” and then the “what”.
The key to successful celebrity endorsements has always been relevance. From Wedgewood’s adoption of the royal warrant 250 years ago to Nike’s use of Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan in recent times, the best partnerships have been where the product and the person make sense together. The china teaset the Queen uses, the shoes Michael Jordan performs in – simple and effective ways to reinforce the product’s quality.
According to AFR Weekend’s Top 50 Australian sports earners last year, David Warner and Steve Smith earned just over A$8m between them. It was from a combination of their Australian contracts, IPL contracts and brand endorsements. After the infamous Cape Town ball-tampering incident, they’ll earn next to nothing over the ensuing 12 months, as their playing contracts have been suspended and their endorsement contracts annulled.
They’ve also lost their personal brand reputations. And Cricket Australia’s brand has taken a hit too. Subsequently they too have an income issue, with major sponsor Magellan walking away from a 3 year A$24m sponsorship deal.
The question is, can the players’ and the organisation’s brand reputation be restored, and in turn once again attract major sponsors?
Andrew was interviewed by Ross Greenwood on his 2GB Money Show about the sponsorship implications for Australian cricketers Steve Smith and David Warner following the ball tampering incident in the 3rd Test between Australia and South Africa.
