Tiger Leaves Shareholders in the Rough
 |
|
“While most media discussions of the economic impact of [the Tiger Woods scandal] have focused on Mr. Woods' diminished earning prospects, our estimates suggest that the losses incurred by sponsors' shareholders are at least as great as those sustained by Mr. Woods, and may be much greater.”
So sayeth Victor Stangel and Christopher Knittel, two economics professors from the University of California, Davis, in a report released yesterday.
Stangel and Knittel compared stock market returns for Woods’ sponsors between the November 27 car accident -- which set in motion the ensuing sex scandal -- and December 17 -- seven days after Woods announced he'd be taking an open-ended leave from golf.
The methodology used was described as an “event study” which is “commonly used in economics and finance to measure changes in shareholder value following unanticipated events." The researchers go on to state that “it seems plausible that the events beginning on November 27 materially affected shareholder value.”
How much did shareholders actually lose?
The data suggest a number in the range of $12 billion, or about 2.3% on average in the six publicly traded companies that had endorsement deals with the embattled golfer:
- Nike (NKE)
- Electronic Arts (ERTS)
- Gatorade/PepsiCo (PEP)
- AT&T (T)
- Gillette/Procter & Gamble (PG)
- Accenture (ACN)
Electronic Arts, manufacturer of the Tiger Woods PGA Tour Golf video game; PepsiCo, manufacturer of an entire line extension of Tiger Woods-branded Gatorade; and Nike, manufacturer of just about everything Woods could possibly lend his name to, were hit hardest.
Taking into account the companies’ diminished share prices compared with the 2.4% gain in the S&P 500 during the same period, the net losses were as follows:
Nike:
November 27: $65.05
December 11: $64.16
Net loss: -3.8%
Electronic Arts:
November 27: $17.01
December 11: $16.43
Net loss: -5.8%
Pepsi:
November 27: $62.30
December 11: $60.98
Net loss: -4.5%
Messrs. Stangel and Knittel wrote:
Nike and other premier sports-related sponsors are special for an athlete like Tiger Woods. They are themselves powerful brands that add value to Tiger’s brand and create other financial opportunities for him. This gives a premier sports sponsor the bargaining power to capture some of the profits generated by an endorsement deal with Woods -- so that if the Tiger brand is tarnished, those profits may decline. Our study measures that decline.
(This) pattern of losses is unlikely to stem from ordinary day-to-day variation in their stock prices.
The non sports-related companies with ties to Woods didn’t fare as badly, but -- with the exception of Accenture -- still slid lower:
AT&T:
November 27: $26.15
December 11: $26.60
Net loss: -0.68%
Procter & Gamble:
November 27: $62.48
December 11: $63.01
Net loss: -1.55%
Accenture:
November 27: $40.51
December 11: $41.96
Net gain: +3.58%
As for Accenture and why the consulting firm didn't suffer the same losses as the others in the group studied, Knittel said:
Economic theory would predict this. For Tiger Woods, having a firm like Accenture as a sponsor probably does not enhance the overall value of the Tiger brand very much, giving Woods a lot of bargaining power when negotiating that deal. If the company therefore ends up paying Woods something close to its extra profit from his endorsement, it isn’t much worse off without him than with him.
Will Tiger Woods ever return to the salad days he once enjoyed? That’s anyone’s guess. But, the next time someone says he didn’t hurt anyone other than himself -- and you own a sizeable chunk of PepsiCo stock -- just show them your monthly statement.
Copyright 2010 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Are there no marketing gurus here? Come on....Viagra, Cialis, Levitra and Extenze.
Call Tiger's agent, these male vitality and enhancement drugs. Here is my Tiger commercial:
Tiger looks into the camera: then says. "Whether I'm driving it down a neatly manicured fairway, or saving par from the deep rough, still damp with the early morning dew, or just sinking those tricky putts on the back nine.
I sometimes need a little something extra to keep my game in focus."
Then Tiger winks at the camera, while he holds his hand to his head in the telephone motion while silently saying, "Call me."
Last time I say that this year. I promise.
How about an I-Phone app that scrambles all contact info into gibber jabber for security, with Tiger using it?
Thanks for the article, and research. This one will extend into the new year, as the Chinese calendar changes from the OX to the Tiger.
He's just an image. I highly doubt anyone drinking Pepsi on a regular basis thought - "Well, I thought this was a wholesome product, but it turns out that Tiger Woods may or may not be sleeping around there's just no way I can drink it now." It doesn't compute...
Correlation is not causation. It's quite possible that the stocks in question would have gone down anyway.
It's obvious, at least to me, he has no (zilch, nada, zero) respect for his wife. He should close that book, and move on, try to be a great Dad and put this tabloid nightmare in the past. Or not, maybe a few appearances on Letterman, with Michael Jordan, they could all compare notes and numbers. OR Maybe Magic Johnson should give a call to ask him, Yo dude, how do you think I got HIV positive...bagging birdies, just like you?
Just because Elin is a babe, doesn't mean she's a saint. For all we know, she could be an AU DIGGER, snow leopard beeeeaahhch from H E double toothpicks.
I dunno, I'm just sayin... I gotta go do the laundry before the lil woman gets mad! ;-)
He's probably a player and she's probably impossible to live with (the clash of 2 egos). I suspect I might not want to hang out with either one of them on a personal level. And now they've reproduced....I only feel sorry for the kids in those kinds of situations. :(
It absolutely IS possible that the stocks would have gone down anyway, and you are correct. The researchers noted in their paper (it's linked to in the article) that there are obviously many factors at play, but they noticed this interesting correlation during only the time period they studied. In my past life as an ad man, I was repeatedly reminded that there's no way to accurately measure the effectiveness of image advertising because generally, people will reach for a product without much conscious thought, i.e. "Oh, that's the brand that so-and-so endorses, so I'll buy it" but they may reach for it (or not) because of an ad or commercial they could have seen months earlier--and don't necessarily even remember seeing--that appealed to them. I am very interested in the value added, lost, or some combination of both, in the world of endorsements. Not making any recommendations on stocks based on Tiger Woods' life. However, I did find the study to be pretty fascinating.
Regards,
Justin
