Gatorade Drops Tiger--Only Nike is Left

Gatorade, a Pepsi brand, announced that it was discontinuing its relationship with Tiger Woods, leaving only Nike as a major sponsor. Actually, the announcement was most surprising in that most people didn't know that Tiger endorsed Gatorade. Pepsi has so mismanaged the brand that it is becoming a shadow of its former self in the category. The CEO of Pepsi, Indra Nooyi, even was on TV and said that Gatorade is for athletes so they expected a bit of a drop in their market share. Okay, so you want to further narrow the market for your already withering brand?? Surprising, but, okay, if you insist, I will not consider this is the future because you have told me it is not for me. Guess I'll go for Powerade or some other brand. You're told me the brand is not for me. Hope you make up the difference in volume with athletes. I imagine that Pepsi will be supplying lots of Gatorade to the teams it sponsors in hopes of getting a bump from their association.

PepsiCo Inc. first announced it was partnering with Tiger in October of 2007, to develop a branded drink for its Gatorade line called Gatorade Tiger. The drink, which launched in March, 2008, came in three flavors “inspired and selected by Tiger.”

Since that time, Gatorade has changed a great deal. We do not really know if Tiger has changed or has always been a "skirt-chaser". Gatorade certainly cannot claim to be hurt by Tiger's off-the-course problems. The brand, which has since rebranded itself "G" to get more street-cred with the athletic types Pepsi wants, is certainly not looked at or positioned as being pristine. Look at the ads for Gatorade. They look like they are trying to win over the street ball and skate-board crowd. They want to be edgy and urban in their appeal. Few people would believe that the athletes Gatorade touts as being associated with them are pure and simple folk. Tiger certainly is not. I believe that Gatorade dropped Tiger because he is not actively playing golf and so has no monetary value for them. It has, I believe, nothing to do with values. Gatorade said it would continue to support Tiger's foundation--probably a loop-hole in getting out of its contract or a way for Gatorade to protect itself if is consumers balk.

Nike will likely continue to support Tiger. There would not be Nike Golf if it were not for Tiger. Nike defines its brand as being for athletes, and if you have a body, you are an athlete. In other words, unlike Gatorade, Nike is for everyone who wants to be active and do better at what they do--run, play basketball, golf, etc. Their brand is defined "between the lines", so to speak. It occurs on the playing field one chooses. So Tiger's indiscretions do not impact the Nike brand quite like they have other brands that borrowed his persona to equate with their own (e.g., Accenture). Nike sponsored John McEnroe, even though at the time he was considered the "bad boy" of tennis. His on-court performances, though, were outstanding and that's what Nike cared about. Accenture, on the other hand used the phrase: "Come on, be a Tiger", suggesting that it was his total package that the firm would help one emulate. When the chuckling from clients began, Accenture was out.

Brands are about symbols, attributes and associations. The associations with Tiger's private life were too much for Accenture; the attributes are what matter for Nike. Who knows what matters to Gatorade anymore?!

Gatorade Pulls Its Tiger Connection

Pepsi, the owner of Gatorade, has decided to drop a drink named after Tiger Woods. The timing is curious. Gatorade said it was decided before the whole "Tigergate" incident; many think the timing is more than coincidental.

The truth is likely somewhere in between. Gatorade is a product that is in trouble. It had a good market position and then, like the other Pepsi brands, was rebranded last year. Gatorade became "G", I would imagine to give it "street cred". The ads are harder-edged which supports my contention. Somehow, Pepsi decided it had to make the product more current and hip. The results have not been good. Reports have indicated that "G" has lost market share. This comes on the heels of Tropicana, another Pepsi brand, which had to reintroduce its old packaging after customers strongly objected to the new package design. The logo for the Pepsi product, which changes depending on the product, was criticized for being curiously similar to the Obama campaign logo--Pepsi said it was pure coincidence.

This has been a terrible year for Pepsi brand management. It did not have to be so. In the new world, Pepsi could have co-created the package designs with customers and gotten strong customer buy-in. Pepsi, instead, acted like it was pre-Internet days and did its branding in secret between the chief marketing officer and an outside branding agency.

Companies are not in control anymore. Brands are shared and are part of customer experience. They always have been but now customers can act on their likes and dislikes more aggressively. Pepsi needs to wake up to the new world. It claims to be the brand for a "new generation" but acts like it is managed by the old one.

Back to the question of whether or not the dropping of the Tiger brand was preplanned or is in reaction to his marital infidelities. As noted, I think the truth lies somewhere in between. Gatorade is in trouble and is looking for ways to reconnect with its original customer base which it is loosing. Tiger is an expensive endorsement and likely too expensive for a brand in trouble. The problems Tiger has had likely pushed the decision to the front burner.