Breaking News! Celebrity Ads Don’t Really Sell!

Tiger Woods has another dishonor to add to his awful 2010: He was the worst celebrity endorser of the year.

Woods possesses what researchers call “negative lift.” That means his mere presence in a TV commercial not only won’t sell the product he’s hawking, it’ll hurt it. So last year’s Nike commercial – called “Did You Learn Anything?” – didn’t teach customers to buy sneakers. Or so says an exhaustive new study into celebrity endorsements.

“Tiger’s ads in 2010 did very little to inform consumers about the products he was endorsing – they were all about Tiger,” says Peter Daboll, CEO of Ace Metrix, an advertising research firm. “This was confusing to consumers. At the end of the day, his endorsement likely cost his sponsors much more than just the fee for his services.”

Last week, Daboll’s company released a 16-page report called Celebrity Advertisements: Exposing a Myth of Advertising Effectiveness. It concludes that, with only a handful of exceptions, all celebrities have “negative lift,” not just Tiger Woods.

“This research proves unequivocally that, contrary to popular belief, the investment in a celebrity in TV advertising is very rarely worthwhile,” Daboll says. “It is the advertising message that creates the connection with the viewer in areas such as relevance, information, and attention, and this remains the most important driver of ad effectiveness.”

Basically, it’s the age-old ad problem: If Betty White is funny in the Snickers commercial that debuted during last year’s Super Bowl, does that sell more Snickers or just sell Betty White? After all, she parlayed that commercial into a career revival.

Ace Metrix says that was the problem with other celebrity endorsers last year, from Lance Armstrong (RadioShack) to Donald Trump (Macy’s). Only one celebrity bucks the trend. Oprah Winfrey. Whether it was Liberty Mutual or Progressive insurance, Oprah can sell stuff just by mentioning it. Explains Daboll…

“What’s important about Oprah’s performance as a spokesperson was that each of her ads delivered a highly relevant message: ‘don’t text and drive.’ Her ads were not selling or pushing a particular product, but discussing a highly relevant and information-laden topic. Oprah, coupled with this message, not surprisingly, performed very well across all gender and age groups. The most effective ads do not merely appeal to a single target audience but across a wide, general audience. Celebrities are often polarizing, even within demographic targets, which creates additional uncertainty and risk beyond the campaign message.”

After studying 2,600 TV commercials and ranking them according to a complex scale, Ace Metrix deduced, “Fewer than 12 percent of ads using celebrities exceeded a 10 percent lift versus average industry norms, and nearly 20 percent of celebrity ads yielded negative lift scores in excess of 10 percent.”

But Oprah had a lift of 27 percent – which Ace Metrix calls “a spectacular result, especially considering the product she was promoting was insurance.”

Sign up for our free newsletter

Like this article? Sign up for our newsletter and we'll send you a regular digest of our newest stories, full of money saving tips and advice, free! We'll also email you a PDF of Stacy Johnson's '205 Ways to Save Money' as soon as you've subscribed. It's full of great tips that'll help you save a ton of extra cash. It doesn't cost a dime, so why wait? Click here to sign up now.

Check out our hottest deals!

We're always adding new deals and coupons that'll save you big bucks. See the deals to the right and hundreds more in our Deals section.

Click here to explore 1047 more deals!

Comments & discussion

We welcome your opinions, but let’s keep it civil. Like many businesses, we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone. In our case, that means those who communicate by name-calling, racism, using words designed to hurt others or generally acting like an uninformed bully. Also, comments that include links to email addresses or commercial websites typically aren't posted. This isn't a place to advertise your business.

  • Anonymous

    When will these companies wake up and stop their ridiculous $$$ endorsements for nothing. If the advertising community(some, not all) was not so lazy they would create a valuable ad campaign that would truly benefit the consumer. They pay for research and then jump to celebrity endorsements as the easy way out. How shallow can we be? We, the consumer, ultimately pay for these outrageous payments when we buy a product, whether it was due to a celebrity endorsement or not!!! I call it not fair…

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6READ4TRHBCZ4BZ6AH2CRI3XM Mickey

    “Basically, it’s the age-old ad problem: If Betty White is funny in the Snickers commercial that debuted during last year’s Super Bowl, does that sell more Snickers or just sell Betty White? After all, she parlayed that commercial into a career revival.” +++++ No, she parlayed a career revival into a snickers ad. Betty’s been back awhile!

  • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_R6READ4TRHBCZ4BZ6AH2CRI3XM Mickey

    What’s not considered here is if the viewer will watch a commercial if there’s not a celebrity endorsing it. So even though someone could care less that Joe Flacco majored in accounting at the U. of Delaware and should know something about money, they might watch the bank commercial he does just because they like him as the home team quarterback and hear something in the message that makes them like the bank. So yes, it is “the advertising message that creates the connection” but ONLY if the viewer hears/sees the advertising message. A catchy phrase like “Where’s the beef?” or jingle also works by getting the viewer/watcher/listener to pay attention to the commercial.