Back to the archive

The encyclopedia · Strategy & Leadership · Strategic decision · 2012–2013

Livestrong built its brand on Lance Armstrong; his fall halved its revenue in two years

Livestrong's brand was one man: when USADA's 2012 report ended him, donations fell 34% in a year and revenue halved in two.

Livestrong Foundation · 2012-10-17

What happened

The foundation's brand was one man. Founded in 1997 as the Lance Armstrong Foundation, it became one of the most visible cancer charities in America through the yellow Livestrong wristband it launched with Nike in 2004: more than 80 million bands sold, about $25 million raised in the first six months alone, and a fundraising engine that ran on Armstrong's credibility as a survivor and a seven-time Tour de France champion. By 2011 the charity took in $48.8 million a year.

On 10 October 2012 the US Anti-Doping Agency published its reasoned decision: the team Armstrong led ran 'the most sophisticated, professionalized and successful doping program that sport has ever seen'. He received a lifetime ban and was stripped of his results from 1998 onward, and in January 2013 he admitted the doping himself in a television interview.

The sponsors left within a week. Nike, the partner that had built the wristband, ended a relationship worth about $7.5 million a year on 17 October, citing 'the seemingly insurmountable evidence that Lance Armstrong participated in doping and misled Nike for more than a decade'. Armstrong resigned as Livestrong's chairman the same day 'to spare the foundation any negative effects', and Anheuser-Busch, Trek, Honey Stinger and RadioShack cut ties within days. In May 2013 Nike ended the Livestrong product line itself, closing a nine-year partnership that had raised more than $100 million.

The foundation paid in donations rather than contracts. Revenue fell 22% to $38.1 million in 2012, then donations fell another 34% to about $15 million in 2013 as sponsorships were cancelled or simply not renewed. It severed its remaining ties with its founder in November 2012, but the brand had been him: a charity built on a single face shrank deliberately to a fraction of its former scale — and survived, though its decade of $40-million-plus budgets did not return.

Why it happened

  • The brand and the man were the same asset: the foundation's name, story and fundraising engine were one person's credibility, so when that asset was voided, the whole model went with it.
  • The trigger was official and total: a regulator's finding followed by the man's admission left donors no ambiguity, so the response was one-way — settled fact forces everyone to move at once.
  • There was no fallback: fifteen years of fundraising had keyed the donor base, the corporate partnerships and the product line to one person, so one reputation collapse emptied the entire funnel.
  • The exits were contagious: once Nike — the partner that made the wristband — cut ties, every other partner's silence read as endorsement, and donors proved less forgiving than a brand's customers.
What it costRevenue halved in 2 years; donations −34% in 2013costly

The lesson

A brand built on one person is a single point of failure: trust is the product, so the fall is total and the recovery never comes. The only hedge is an institution that outlives its founder.

Aftermath

Livestrong severed its ties with Armstrong in November 2012 and carried on under new leadership, but at a fraction of its former scale: Nike stopped making the wristband in 2013, ending the yellow band that had sold about 87 million units. The foundation still runs cancer-support programs today, including Livestrong at the YMCA, but the era of $40-million-plus annual revenue did not return. For marketers the case became the standard example of single-image dependency — the wristband was the campaign, and the campaign was the man.

Sources

spotted an error? The club wants to know.

Comments · 0

    Sign in to join the comments.

    More like this

    Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →