Nike Tiger Ad Fails To Score

Nike Tiger Woods ad

If  the aim of Nike's new ad featuring Tiger Woods was to cause confusion and skepticism, it's a hole in one. 

Perhaps more importantly, a survey of 600 U.S. viewers by Flemington, N.J.-based HCD Research, also noted the controversial commercial's "favorability" for the Nike brand has dropped off, falling from 92% to 79%.

But favorability over Woods himself declined only slightly to an average of 3.5 (on a scale of 1-7) from 3.7. The results say 29% viewers are less likely to purchase products endorsed by Tiger Woods after viewing the spot.

Some 65% says effects of the commercial yielded no change in their decision to buy products endorsed by Woods; 6% said they would likely buy more products associated with Woods.

HCD asked respondents about a number of emotions concerning the commercial, with "confusion," "skepticism" and "disturbing" topping the list. On the low end of emotions were "inspiration" "pride" and "happiness."

 

Total

 

Anger

10%

 

Inspiration

9%

 

Sadness

26%

 

Skepticism

37%

 

Confusion

44%

 

Disturbing

25%

 

Embarrassment

13%

 

Pride

3%

 

Happiness

1%

 

 

 

 

The Nike-Tiger Woods commercial showed Woods in a static black-and-white shot listening to the voice of his late father Earl Woods, who is apparently quizzing his son about extramartial affairs, asking: "Did you learn anything?"

 

Recommend (4) Print RSS
2 comments about "Nike Tiger Ad Fails To Score".
  1. Eric Hampleman from Univision Radio New Mexico , April 12, 2010 at 11:49 a.m.

    It wasn't a commercial. It was a public whipping or humbling of Tiger by his largest and maybe oldest sponsor. They collaborated on this and agreed it needed to be done. He's really a partner with Nike helping to design clothing and golf equipment. This is just part of his process as he hits bottom and begins his plan to change his life.

  2. Tom Barnes from mediathink , April 12, 2010 at 5:06 p.m.

    The opposite of love isn't hate (or discomfort or embarrassment)--it's indifference. This ad had a very narrow target. Unless that target made up most of the sample-- the data is useless.

    "Intent to purchase" may be the most inaccurate measure still used in research. People are very poor predictors of their own behavior.

    The ad forwarded the brand meaning and supported the return of the brand's most important (and expensive) spokesperson. Athletes fall. We love it. If we're athletic at all, we understand failure. The spot is memorable and generates conversation and awareness. That's a win in a saturated media environment.

    Test recall, test awareness, measure sales. Consumer emotional self-awareness and stated intent are the most flimsy datapoints ever.