The encyclopedia · Advertising & PR · Marketing decision · 2016
Nike ended its eight-year Pacquiao deal in a day; sponsors for his April fight backed out
Nike's statement called the boxer's comments 'abhorrent'; the deal died in a day, and the YouTube apology that followed repeated his position.
Nike · 2016-02-17
What happened
Manny Pacquiao had endorsed Nike for a little more than eight years — ring shorts with the swoosh, one of the biggest commercial faces in boxing. The deal was an image bet: Pacquiao was a Philippine national icon, a congressman since May 2010 and a strong contender for a Senate seat, and Nike was paying to be associated with that image.
Asked about same-sex marriage in an interview with a Filipino television station, Pacquiao said: 'Have you seen any animal having male-to-male or female-to-female relations? If you have male-to-male or female-to-female [relationships], then people are worse than animals.' On 17 February 2016 Nike terminated the contract. Its statement read: 'We find Manny Pacquiao's comments abhorrent. Nike strongly opposes discrimination of any kind and has a long history of supporting and standing up for the rights of the LGBT community.'
Pacquiao apologised on Twitter within hours — 'I'm sorry for hurting people by comparing homosexuals to animals' — but the apology did not close the story. The next day he stood by his opposition to same-sex marriage and said he was happy that 'a lot of people were alarmed by the truth'; in an Instagram video he repeated his stand 'because of what the Bible says'. His promoter Bob Arum said that if he had been running Nike he would have made the same decision, and that several sponsors who had been ready to finalise deals for Pacquiao's 9 April fight against Timothy Bradley had pulled out.
The cut had precedent: Nike had already severed ties with Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Oscar Pistorius and Lance Armstrong. What the company lost was an eight-year association that collapsed overnight, and what the boxer lost was the endorsement market — the sponsor pipeline for his next fight dried up in the same week. Pacquiao went on to win a Philippine Senate seat in May 2016; the career outlived the deal.
Why it happened
- The bet was the image, and the image carried a dated position: Pacquiao had opposed same-sex marriage since 2012, so Nike was one viral moment from endorsing a view its LGBT-rights history rejected.
- The apology was aimed at the sponsors, not the position: Pacquiao apologised for the comparison within hours but restated his opposition the same week, so the news cycle never closed.
- Precedent made the decision cheap: Nike had already cut Ray Rice, Adrian Peterson, Oscar Pistorius and Lance Armstrong — keeping Pacquiao would have been the exception.
- The single name carried the whole asset: the deal had no product, design or campaign between the brand and the man, so one interview collapsed eight years of association overnight.
The lesson
An endorsement is priced by what the endorser might say next. Pacquiao's views were on record for years; the viral comparison ended the deal in a day. Re-read the on-record views before signing.
Aftermath
Pacquiao apologised again in the following days but never changed his position on same-sex marriage. His 9 April 2016 fight against Timothy Bradley went ahead, and in May 2016 he won a Philippine Senate seat — the political career outlived the endorsement that Nike ended in a day.
Sources
- Nike dumps Manny Pacquiao sponsorship over 'abhorrent' anti-gay comments — CNBC, 18 February 2016
- Nike ends endorsement contract with Manny Pacquiao — ESPN, 18 February 2016
- Manny Pacquiao — Wikipedia (Bradley fight, Senate election)
spotted an error? The club wants to know.
More like this
A Cupshe staffer emailed 'we would not collab with black people' — hired four days earlier
Growth Cave sold 'AI software' that automated almost nothing — the FTC made it pay $48.6M
Equinox's AI ad showed an Asian woman's head mounted on a stand — it ran for months
Somewhere, someone solved the problem this company failed at. 2nd Opinion →

Comments · 0
Sign in to join the comments.