It would be an understatement to say that Tiger Woods is screwed. Accenture ended their contract with him and are no longer going to endorse him. The superfast and, thanks to the media, thrilling debacle of the tiger is actually an inspiring story for someone who wants to re-brand or de-brand himself.
Wiki defines a brand as a distinguishing name or symbol that determines your product or service. But brand is definitely much more than a flashy logo, a jazzy company name and a million dollar Ad campaign. For a company, its basically ‘who’ the company is. If its about a business, you are getting branded every minute – pick up the phone with a frown and a grumpy hello – you are branded, work harder to deliver on time – you are branded, default on loans – you are branded, don’t pay salaries on time – you are branded, communicate fair and honestly – you are branded, roll out a bad batch of products – you are branded, don’t do what you said you will – you are branded, have an untidy, unclean office/shop – you are branded, smile at your customer – you are branded, laugh behind his back – you are branded. So your brand is basically ‘who’ you are.
Its clear that Tiger Woods had lost his brand value. But the funny thing is, he is still what he is – he is still the bloody best golf player in the world. That’s what has made him what he is. That’s what Accenture signed him up for. I hope they didn’t sign him for “Not sleeping with wrong women”.
So you can have a flashy logo, jazzy name and be the best in the business – ‘screw’ up and you are screwed ;). And when God decides to set a freaky sensuous babe called destiny to screw you – all you have to do is just knock at the backyard of your own home, with your own car, having your own family in it, to unravel the deep secrets hidden in the hearts of god knows how many mistresses to the entire world.
Go to Bed – and you are branded ;).
Posts
5 comments:
It all started with the car crash.. btw, gooooooood writing!
Accenture partners claim that the company enforces high ethical standards but the facts shows differently.
Douglas Scrivner responded to a SEC related to the reestructuring costs that http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1143908/000095013706000977/filename1.htm
“The partners did not pay the tax liability at the time of the reorganization transaction because the Company and its external advisors felt there was a reasonable possibility of a favorable outcome. The Company and its external advisors believed the tax positions related to the restructuring transactions were appropriate and supportable under local tax law and the Company intends to defend, as needed, tax positions taken by the partners. A favorable outcome is still possible through either issues not being identified on audit by tax authorities, a successful defense of the position, or expiration of the statute of limitations, so it is not appropriate to pay the tax liability at the time of the transaction, or at any time, unless administrative and legal processes have concluded and resulted in an actual unfavorable outcome.”
In page 16 of the "NOTICE OF THE 2010 ANNUAL GENERAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS"
( http://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1467373/000119312509251604/dpre14a.htm ) is stated:
"Senior Executive Tax Costs
The Company has informed approximately 2,500 of our senior executives that if the senior executive reported for tax purposes the transactions involved in connection with our transition to a corporate structure in 2001, the Company will, in certain circumstances, provide a legal defense to that individual if his or her reporting position is challenged by the relevant tax authority. In the event such a defense is unsuccessful, and the senior executive is then subject to extraordinary financial disadvantage, the Company will review such circumstances for that individual and find an appropriate way to avoid severe financial damage to that individual."
In the newspaper el Mundo there was informed that Accenture (and therefore all shareholders) have paid 110 million euros, plus the penalty related with the unpaid taxes of the 100 Spanish Partners in 2001 reestructuring.
http://www.elmundo.es/mundodinero/2008/06/20/economia/1213922650.html
If now as declared there are 2500 senior executives that might be in the same situation, it is stright forward to have a direct correlation of the possible personal tax impact on former senior executives that Accenture is commenting it might be paid by the company and therefore by all Accenture shareholders.
@ Nandu : Knock in the backyard = car crash ;)
@ anonymous : Please translate in civilian language !
tiger woods is too much..im sure bill clinton must have given him some tips.
or rather can say that many women are getting inspired by Monika Lewinsky ;)
Post a Comment