We've launched the new forums! Read more here

TW to Return?

JB said:
No, I think you are looking at it in a vacuum from the ad perspective rather than the global position. Not one of those publications you mention has a quote that I have seen from Accenture or TW, so just like most of their stuff, its commentary and fluff.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree with you. I will be quite interested to see what happens.
 
good stuff.... :popcorn:
 
Diane said:
I respectfully disagree with you. I will be quite interested to see what happens.
Click to expand...

Last time I checked, with the exception of THP (sigh), most sponsorships are there for one reason ONLY.
 
Puttin4Bird said:
See you're right, but how could Accenture recoup some of that lost revenue?
Click to expand...


Good point. According to TNS Media Intelligence, Accenture spent $50 million on advertising in the US last year, and Tiger appeared in 83 percent of those ads (far more than for any of his other major sponsors). They won't admit it publicly, but Accenture is drooling at the prospects of him coming back for their tournament.
 
If its true it is not much of an "indefinite" leave. What, one tournament that he would normally play in?

It would not be the first time he returns to the match play. After the knee surgery he came back there as well. I would not be surprised if he came back there.
 
Diane said:
I understand that, but I don't think you're looking at the big picture. Here is what I see -

Accenture lost major money by betting on Tiger.

Tiger was basically fired by Accenture.

I don't see Accenture wanting him there based on the past failed relationship and why would Tiger want to play in the Accenture?

Hey - you guys can all say I told you so if I'm wrong.
Click to expand...

Like I said before, Tiger hasn't announced that he's going to play there. It's all speculation. But I can say with a lot of confidence, that if he wants to play in that tournament, he will. If he doesn't play, it won't be because Accenture kept him out.

Are you saying you will be wrong only if he plays? Because I'm still not sure he's going to play anyway (see your "why would he want to") because he hasn't announced it yet. Again, in my mind, the only reason he wouldn't play is because he chose not to, or Elin told him he couldn't play yet, not because of anything Accenture did to keep him out. Unfortunately, unless Accenture comes out and says that they kept him out of the tournament is the only way you can be proven right here.
 
We have two reports, one says this tourny and the other says Bay Hill. We will see what happens.
 
JB said:
Last time I checked, with the exception of THP (sigh), most sponsorships are there for one reason ONLY.
Click to expand...

I understand that and I do hear what you are saying; however, I also think cutting ties with Tiger was a huge deal for Accenture. You and I look at this from two very different viewpoints so we're never going to agree. I think there is more at stake than the sponsorship of one golf tournament. As I said - I could be wrong.
 
Diane said:
I understand that and I do hear what you are saying; however, I also think cutting ties with Tiger was a huge deal for Accenture. You and I look at this from two very different viewpoints so we're never going to agree. I think there is more at stake than the sponsorship of one golf tournament. As I said - I could be wrong.
Click to expand...

We do look at it from very different standpoints. Having worked "with" them for a number of years, I respect what Accenture does. However they are not non-profit.
 
JB said:
We do look at it from very different standpoints. Having worked "with" them for a number of years, I respect what Accenture does. However they are not non-profit.
Click to expand...

Let me ask you a question. Knowing that they cut all ties with Tiger, do you think this is solely a business decision based on the profit from one tournament? That they would want him there to make money? I just can't wrap my head around that. They have to rebrand themselves so I can't see that this would be that important to the bottom line.
 
Diane said:
Let me ask you a question. Knowing that they cut all ties with Tiger, do you think this is solely a business decision based on the profit from one tournament? That they would want him there to make money? I just can't wrap my head around that. They have to rebrand themselves so I can't see that this would be that important to the bottom line.
Click to expand...

Do you think it would be the best publicity to be the sponsor who kept Tiger from playing? (Or, tried to)
 
There is a story posted on msnbc.com about it, I guess the report initially came from the Melbourne Herald Sun in Australia so I'm not sure... they do make a good point the article though, the match play event makes sense because if he plays bad it's 18 holes and he's done, he doesn't have to subject himself to the harassment that may or may not come from the gallery.

Sounds like he'll be coming back soon one way or the other, at this point I'm actually pulling for the guy to get his life back together and come back. The selfish side of me just wants him back on the golf course!!
 
Diane said:
Let me ask you a question. Knowing that they cut all ties with Tiger, do you think this is solely a business decision based on the profit from one tournament? That they would want him there to make money? I just can't wrap my head around that. They have to rebrand themselves so I can't see that this would be that important to the bottom line.
Click to expand...

It is all about the dollars in this equation. Accenture's brand is not tied up in TW as much as you think it is. Not like Nike or Gatorade. They have to rebrand from a commercial standpoint, but TW was not part of their world from a business sense. IMHO you are looking at this and saying "profit from one tournament", but I just do not see it like that. The name recognition they receive from the audience they will achieve can last a lifetime.
 
JB said:
It is all about the dollars in this equation. Accenture's brand is not tied up in TW as much as you think it is. Not like Nike or Gatorade. They have to rebrand from a commercial standpoint, but TW was not part of their world from a business sense. IMHO you are looking at this and saying "profit from one tournament", but I just do not see it like that. The name recognition they receive from the audience they will achieve can last a lifetime.
Click to expand...

Fair enough. Perhaps I am personalizing the relationship too much, but I'm still not 100% convinced.
 
Diane said:
Fair enough. Perhaps I am personalizing the relationship too much, but I'm still not 100% convinced.
Click to expand...

I completely agree there, you are looking at it as if they are close personal friends or something. I'm sure that Accenture is upset with everything, but I'm positive that they would not mind recovering some of that lost revenue by having the very man that cost them so much $ come to their event and in turn generate a hell of a lot of viewers!
 
JB said:
This is so wrong on so many levels. First of all, they do want him to play in it. So does the PGA and just about everybody else in the golf industry. Second of all it makes no difference what their personal thoughts are, or what they based their model after, it is not their choice. And lastly, if you really believe that a company of this size based their model on a professional athlete, you are sorely mistaken.
Click to expand...

I agree with you JB, and just because a golfer is golfing in an event sponserd by a certain company doesn't mean that they are associated with them correct?
 
Puttin4Bird said:
I completely agree there, you are looking at it as if they are close personal friends or something. I'm sure that Accenture is upset with everything, but I'm positive that they would not mind recovering some of that lost revenue by having the very man that cost them so much $ come to their event and in turn generate a hell of a lot of viewers!
Click to expand...

That's not what I meant by personalizing. I meant from a brand recognition POV.
 
Puttin4Bird said:
There is a story posted on msnbc.com about it, I guess the report initially came from the Melbourne Herald Sun in Australia so I'm not sure... they do make a good point the article though, the match play event makes sense because if he plays bad it's 18 holes and he's done, he doesn't have to subject himself to the harassment that may or may not come from the gallery.

Sounds like he'll be coming back soon one way or the other, at this point I'm actually pulling for the guy to get his life back together and come back. The selfish side of me just wants him back on the golf course!!
Click to expand...

what do you think the responce from the gallery will be? I can almost guarantee it will be a standing ovation, since this is the first step in getting his life back together that the public has seen.......
 
When does the Accenture event start what date?
 
Feb. 17-21.
 
Smallville said:
Feb. 17-21.
Click to expand...

I read the article at msnbc.com and it didn't seem to promising....yah it said there was speculation, and why it would be a good day for him to come back (day after Valentines day go figure) but nothing too concrete....
 
clg82 said:
what do you think the responce from the gallery will be? I can almost guarantee it will be a standing ovation, since this is the first step in getting his life back together that the public has seen.......
Click to expand...

I agree- I think people will go crazy in support of him, I still think before he plays he needs to sit down on TV and show remorse and contrition. Our society is so forgiving that before long he'll be as loved as he ever was. Look at Kobe Bryant and Michael Vick!!!
 
Why would Accenture care who plays or doesn't play in the event? The attach their name to the tournament in order to have as much commercial time as possible & have their name tossed out there hundreds of times. If Tiger is there it means huge ratings & millions more viewers will be seeing & hearing the Accenture name.

As a company they may not want to be tied to him anymore on a personal/business level. But if he can garner them XXX amount more in viewership they will welcome him with open arms.

PS..I seriously doubt he will play in this event anyways.
 
dynarider said:
Why would Accenture care who plays or doesn't play in the event? The attach their name to the tournament in order to have as much commercial time as possible & have their name tossed out there hundreds of times. If Tiger is there it means huge ratings & millions more viewers will be seeing & hearing the Accenture name.

As a company they may not want to be tied to him anymore on a personal/business level. But if he can garner them XXX amount more in viewership they will welcome him with open arms.

PS..I seriously doubt he will play in this event anyways.
Click to expand...

^^^ very well said! I don't think that him playing their will associate him with that particular company. That's what's different about golf, it's not like football where they are all wearing the same jersy. Eveyone that is playing in a tournament is their own "team". I still love your signature......priceless
 
dynarider said:
Why would Accenture care who plays or doesn't play in the event? The attach their name to the tournament in order to have as much commercial time as possible & have their name tossed out there hundreds of times. If Tiger is there it means huge ratings & millions more viewers will be seeing & hearing the Accenture name.

As a company they may not want to be tied to him anymore on a personal/business level. But if he can garner them XXX amount more in viewership they will welcome him with open arms.

PS..I seriously doubt he will play in this event anyways.
Click to expand...


Agreed, very well said and accurate IMO! And yes that is a funny and relevant signature, gotta love it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top