Saturday, 24 February 2007

A reversed effect of celebrity endorsement

Although I am oblivious to celebrity endorsing advertisements, I am amused by the following case as a perversion of marketing when it is all the rage to pay celebrities to endorse their products.

I recently read an article about Charlize Theron who was paid a handsome amount of money by Weill to endorse their watches.
The brand, claiming to having spent over 10 Millions USD for the campaign with Ms Theron, is suing the Oscar winner actress for breach of contract.

It seems quite evident to me that celebrities endorse products ONLY because of the huge amount of money they are getting paid for, certainly not because they actually like the products. This is probably why I would especially not buy such products because they become too commercial and lose of their genuity...
But furthermore, even if they did like the products, they endorse, sensible famous people - if there is one of a kind - would not accept an exclusivity clause that tie them for a certain period of time. Ms Theron gladly accepted that clause that would bring more money and thus, was supposed to wear solely Weill Watches for a mere 11 months. But she didn't care for the product and didn't bother respect the contract she signed for...

Ms Theron also has/ had a contract with Dior perfume J'adore. She probably was required to wear Dior gowns at events as well since she was seen in Dior Haute Couture many times. But she also wore DIor watches while under contract with Weill.

This is actually hilarious: Weill pays Ms Theron to wear their watches and she still favors another brand!
I am not sure whether people do pay attention so much or not but the situation is quite comical and I feel sorry - sort of - for Weill.


No comments: