I believe that using celebrities in advertisements causing both risk and reward. There is no doubt that celebrities come at a high cost but does that cost go further than just the dollar sign? A very known celebrity that caused more cost is Michael Phelps and that was with Subway and Kellogg. When companies choose to use celebrities they are looking for their spokesman to have a positive influence on their target market. However it is a great gamble to use such a well known spokes person because they are now the face of your product and people now will associate your product with that person. In the case of Michael Phelps, his incident being caught using a bong, Subway and Kellogg hit a bigger cost. They used an Olympian who failed to be the role model and positive influence that the companies had anticipated and therefor he lost all credibility. Any buyer who was really turned off by the incident may not want to purchase from the companies that Michael Phelps was the face of.
On the other hand, some companies would never have any recognition unless it was for the face of their payed celebrity. A great example of this is Kim Kardashian and the weight loss supplement Quick Trim. Both her and her sister Khloe advertise for this company and it has become a quick hit solely because these sisters are so popular. With this product I'm assuming that the sales of this supplement have by far outweighed the cost of hiring the Kardashians.
No comments:
Post a Comment