Is Michael Vick Marketable?
Sponsoring QB or the Philadelphia Eagles May Attract Customers -- or Alienate Them
 | |
| Marc Brownstein | |
When a high-profile athlete is signed in a new city, the debate is usually about the level of the athletic impact on the team. In this case, most of the verbal fire -- with good reason -- is around the fact that Michael Vick abused animals. Websites to rally people against the recently-released-from-jail QB, such as www.sackvick.net and www.petsitusa.com/blog/, are certainly getting increased visibility now. And several polls taken by local Philadelphia news organizations revealed that most of the people in the Philly area are opposed to the Vick signing, while Eagles fans, specifically, are split right down the middle.
So it begs the question: Can Michael Vick ever be a spokesperson again, or is he forever toxic?
First, cooler heads need to prevail. It's easy to say never. However, the shock of the signing with this team ("character guys only") is beginning to wear off. And the process of seeing whether Vick can play football like he used to is setting in. I believe it is important to see ahead -- three or six months, or even a year down the road -- and make sponsorship decisions about Michael Vick based on whether he can rehabilitate his own brand image. Some celebrities have done it reasonably well; others can't shake their past. I remember when Allen Iverson was involved in a messy, all-too-public domestic dispute (involving weapons), most marketers wrote him off. But as it turned out, Iverson gained "street cred" from the incident, and sales of his signature Reebok basketball shoes skyrocketed. Go figure.
Point is, the knee-jerk reaction to Vick is that no company should go near him. For most companies, that is probably smart. But I believe the right brand can still gain incredible visibility -- controversy and all. A brand like Nike or Gatorade, for example. Or a brand that has gone through tough times itself, and is on the mend. Our domestic automakers come to mind, but I don't think they are a fit. And the message would have to be painfully honest. No hype. Just some straight talk from a guy who's made some terrible mistakes, is trying to make amends, and put his life back together.
And should the Eagles' sponsors second-guess their association and investment with the team, for fear Vick's polarizing name will rub off on their brands?
Anyone who knows even a little bit about Philly sports knows that we are kinda passionate about our teams. Scratch that. Philly fans are wildly, out-of-our-minds passionate about our teams, and this is a football town. Sponsors that aligned with the team gained significant goodwill over the years, and my gut says that will not change with the newest member of our team. Sure, the blogs are buzzing, trying to rally animal rights protesters into boycotting the Eagles' sponsors. And it's still early to tell if they are going to be successful. But I have my doubts, as there were only a dozen or so protesters outside of the press conference announcing the signing of Vick. And even fewer the next day at pre-season practice. As horrible as Vick's crimes were (and as a dog owner and animal lover, I truly believe they were), the NFL knew it was time to move forward. They had a plan for Vick's re-entry, by making sure he came to the right team, with strong ownership (Jeffrey Lurie), a strong coach (Andy Reid), and a close friend and starting quarterback in Donovan McNabb. Comments made at the press conference by those three were tough, sensitive and intelligent, which seemed to have had a calming effect on the city. Lurie, in particular, plans to hold Vick accountable when he stated: "In spending the time with Michael, I think he deserves that opportunity [for a second chance]. He's going to have to prove it in actions, not in words."
As an agency owner, I think the Eagles' brand is stronger than Michael Vick. From a public relations standpoint, the team strengthened its brand by handling this hand grenade perfectly. And I would not advise my clients to stay away from sponsoring the team. One of my clients already is an Eagles sponsor, and I will advise them to stay the course.
This morning, I turned on the TV, and sports coverage is already focusing on how Vick's arm looks surprisingly sharp. Only a few days after the bombshell signing, it seems like we are moving on. My teenage son, James, summed up the situation best when he said, "If Michael Vick helps the Eagles win, fans will embrace him. That is what a real sports city does." And sponsors will likely follow.
RSS Feed›› Advice for the Small Marketing and Advertising Agency: Small Agency Diary
Most Recent Posts 
- Going Mobile for Hopenhagen
- What Do Matt Lauer, Social-Media Experts and My Kid Have in Common?
- Jamming for the Hungry
- We Still Have Plenty For Which to Be Thankful
- American Cancer Society Builds on Birthday Effort
- Google, This Side of $100 Billion
- We're Raising Superheroes, So Can You
- Sorry Rupert, News Content Is Not a Google Killer
- Tipsy Turkey Brought to You by Georgi Vodka
- AOL Kicks Running Man Out Of Bed
- 'Giving Thanks': Helping the Hungry
- More Asians in TV Spots? It's About Time
- Is the Promise of Viral Success Holding the Ad Industry Back?
- JC Penney's 'Doghouse' Returns
- Autism Speaks Hosts Chicago Fundraiser
White Paper
The New Female Consumer: The Rise of the Real Mom
This Advertising Age and JWT white paper explores what multiple generations of American women want when it comes to family, work and life in the 21st century, decades after the women's liberation movement.
Bob Garfield
Verizon Exiles IPhone to Island of Misfit Toys for the Holidays
Too-Cool Apple Now Finding Itself on the Receiving End of Competitor Ridicule
Special Report
America's Hottest Brands
Advertising Age Honors the Top Brands of the Year -- and the Brains Behind Them
3 Minute Ad Age Video
Wal-Mart CMO Reflects on The Chaos of 2006
Marketing Side Was 'Out of Control' He Says
Special Report
Marketer of the Year: Hyundai
The carmaker won handily in our reader poll, besting Walmart, McDonald's, Lego and Amazon
Ad Age Video
Eddie Murphy's Long-Term Effect on Ad Agency Diversity
The Video Story of Dallas' Marcus Graham Project
Weekly Online Poll
Will small digital-production shops working directly with clients turn big digital agencies into unnecessary middlemen?
White Paper: 2010 America
What the 2010 Census Means for Marketing and Advertising
2010 America explains what you need to know about the biggest consumer market-research project of the decade: the 2010 U.S. census. Demographics expert Peter Francese, author of this highly readable Ad Age white paper, analyzes what the census will reveal about the changing face of consumers.
Most Read Most E-Mailed
Most Read Most E-mailed
Be part of the celebration at The Ad Age Media Mavens Awards Luncheon
Sponsored by ESPN. Join the world's leading media strategists for a celebration of creative thinking, innovation and a look at how the best are preparing for 2010. More
(What is RSS?)
Pete rose deserved a second chance but could not get one.
I'm an avid football fan. Miami Dolphins. However, if they signed Vick, I would no longer be a fan, wouldn't watch their games and would not purchase any items from their sponsors and/or advertisers. It's a shame that a town that prides itself as being a "football town," puts a sport as its priority. Your teenage son summed it up quite nicely.
If everyone deserves a second chance then so does Charlie Manson.
Killing is killing. Torturing is worse.
Is Vick rehabilitated? I don't know. He keeps on saying he is, but from what had been said on th all the coverage around this issue, Vick has not done anything to show that he is truly sorry for what he did.
If you say everyone deserves a second chance, then ask yourself, did Vick give a second chance to those dogs he killed and tortured because they lost a fight? In short, does Vick deserve a second chance?
And if you're a Vick supporter and believe that he only killed and tortured dogs so it does not count, for you, I quote two lines from an old Carpenter song, "Bless the beasts and the children, for in this world they have no voice."
I will be the voice of the dogs that Vick killed and tortured because they cannot speak and cannot defend themselves.
Well, here's something that is close to Vick, something he will understand - SLAVERY IS WRONG!!! It was part of the American culture for a long time. People grew up with "slaves" at one point in time in American history. But, though it was "acceptable practice," Abraham Lincoln was brave enough to say enough is enough!
Maybe, you and Vick should go back in time when slavery was still "acceptable practice" so that you can see how wrong it is first hand. Then you can come back to the 21st century and realize that what Vick did to those dogs is UNACCEPTABLE behavior!
Your son's comment hit the mark, but furthermore the legacy of the franchise outweighs the legacies of the players every single time. It's someone's personal choice and right if they want to stand up in protest and sell their tickets, ban the team and their sponsors, etc. However, those actions will fall well-short of having any devastating impact on the intended parties. What Michael Vick did was despicable and atrocious, but there are many examples of those that have committed far worse crimes, paid for them (or paid to get out of them) and have gotten second chances.
Although the court of public opinion is split right now, his on-field actions will ultimately determine the long-term effect on his brand (as well as the team's) probably more than his off-field contributions to the community and animal rights groups. Of course the latter is important and I am keenly interested to see if his actions can speak louder than his words.
The debate on whether this was a good or bad move will soon be decided. Given the winds have already shifted and the media attention is slowing by the day, my guess is short of a whopper of a mistake on his end, both brands will win out at the end of the day. If by some stroke the Eagles' decision was wrong, Michael Vick will be gone and forgotten and after the "I told you so's" the Eagles' brand will continue to fly. And if they get that elusive ring this year, even better.
All of you have forgotten that he served his time for his crime. His actions DID COST HIM. And now he has paid for it. This article is about branding. Have all of you not forgotten that we are a society of underdog lovers.
Personally, I loved watching Vick play before the world knew he was a criminal. I was disgusted by what he did.
But he has now done his time and has to keep paying for it because he is Mike Vick. Did anyone watch 60 minutes last night??? As a samll agency owner and the owner of a dog walking business, I should be appaulled at the thought of Vick making his comeback so easily. But consider why this MIGHT, JUST MIGHT actually have a positive outcome for Vick. Brownstein said it right. Vick could associate himself with some sponsors who are in-line with his brand right now. Yes, it could be a disaster but if done properly and gently, this could about face itself. BTW, CNN.com doesn't even have Iraq on it's landing page..because we Americans forget so quickly and have super-short attention spans.
Bush screwed all of us and there are no lynch mobs after him anymore.
If it's about branding and the Eagles have made their decision, then it only makes sense to try, cause if you don't someone will. Hey Brownstein, if you don't try to sign Vick as a client, I just might.
So does that mean you no longer want to be an American? We Americans tortured, wait for it...are still torturing a lot of people in Iraq and other places. Read Naomi Klein's SHOCK DOCTRINE and you might reconsider remaining a Dolphin fan if they had signed Vick.
http://dearadvertisin.blogspot.com/
When AdAge first reported the story, here was my comment:
Stories of forgiveness and redemption can be as powerful and influential as the critical mistakes that were made preceding them. Public contempt towards Mr. Vick is completely understandable, and I am one of those folks who is incensed by athletes and other privileged celebrities who have foregone their position as role models for self-indulgent excesses and political grandstanding. However, most people deserve a second chance, and if Mr. Vick can prove his worth to society, his athletic achievements - as well as his marketability - will fall in line.
Here is a link to a post I wrote as a follow-up:
http://welcometonow.blogspot.com/2009/08/michael-vick-greatest-marketing-story.html
Let me know what you think.
Gunther Sonnenfeld
@goonth
Some people can not be redeemed because they are considered off the charts evil. Osama Bin Laden could never find redemption here even if he helped save 1000 children from a burning fire. I bet most Democrats feel Bush/Cheney/Rove/Rumseld are a lot worse than Michael Vick ever could be.
And population segments matter also. The Alan Iverson note is a perfect example. It all comes down to how many people you have hurt or affected. And with all businesses if they know they can make $3 for every $1 they lose from a decision they will choose the $2 difference.
Family friendly programming?
@gaylefluster
The question is whether or not Michael Vick is still marketable after his crimes. So let's approach this from a marketing perspective, rather than a football-fan or dog-lover perspective, and break down audiences, brands and endorsement potential:
1. In general, the consumer market (the American public) is often at odds with itself:
- Although we rarely admit it openly, we love seeing successful people fail
- We don't forgive easily, if at all (apparently we don't believe that anyone is capable of actually apologizing - we always believe that all they are really sorry for is getting caught)
- We love a good comeback story
The Vick situation is one of those rare instances that potentially touches on all of the above (the 'comeback story' will be fulfilled when Vick throws a touchdown pass in the last two minute of the Superbowl in a come from behind victory).
2. Not every brand requires a squeaky clean image. Regardless of whether or not he completes the comeback story, Vick won't likely be endorsing Kellogg's (if you give an Olympic swimmer the boot for smoking pot, you're not going to be hiring a football playing dog killer). But there are brands that feed off controversy, like Burger King, for example, and there are marketing directors who understand that where Vick goes, so go the headlines.
3. He's attractive, he's (kind of) well spoken, he's recognizable, and he's not shying away from the elephant in the room. A particularly clever creative director will be able to use those qualities to simultaneously improve his image and sell their brand.
Peta, who fights relentlessly on behalf of animals, recently ran a billboard the basically calls overweight women whales (http://bit.ly/Dp3Du). They grabbed attention, got some people laughing, some people upset, but it doesn't matter who they offend - they'll do it again because it grabs headlines.
We love to say that marketing is all about stirring emotion - and it is, on the client side. Good, bad or ugly, its our job to get people feeling...something. But on the brand side, it's also about the numbers, and whether or not any effort will move the needle. I guarantee some brand will find that Vick posts numbers to their bottom line as easily as he does to the scoreboard.
Jason Miletsky
CEO, PFS Marketwyse
Author, 'Perspectives on Marketing' and 'Perspectives on Branding'
http://www.getperspectives.com
http://twitter.com/jaymiletsky
Interesting enough, in truth, the posted most comments are not about the guilty person, they about a guilty society. Most people, human nature, indulge in criticizing others without "forgiveness" because they feel better about bones in their closet. The same "forgiveness" most have experienced at some point and expect to get when speeding, trying drugs, etc.
Many eat meat with no diligent investigation into how the animals were mistreated-prior to my meal. Although we would likely refrain from those who engage in the grossly inhuman, at some point we rationalize and sleep well after eating meat! It is not dog-fighting and drowning dogs but we support the enablers in some way none-the-less.
Mike Vick should pursue his future by making peace with God, make an honest attempt at doing the right things and let God deal with the consequences of those two actions and the hypocrites that disguise their jealousy of forgiveness as opinions.
Whether Vick is marketable is another question. Having lived in Atlanta during his years with the Falcons, I thought he seriously lacked personality, leadership and maturity. And that these deficits significantly limited his marketability even then. I'm not sure he's changed that much, other than now having an awareness that his treatment of dogs was cruel and criminal. Personalities aren't easily changed. And leadership requires a great deal of effort, experience and perspective. Maturity is more easily gained, but also requires a willingness to change. Again, only time will tell. Until then, I wouldn't put Michael Vick anywhere near my products. He has a lot to prove if he wants that kind of acceptance. Iverson and others like him may have "bad boy" cred, but Vick is the good kid gone terribly wrong. That's a completely different image.