Comments on: The trouble with Tiger

By: Dan Wool

Dan Wool — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 06:35:15 +0000

By: Linda VandeVrede

Linda VandeVrede — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:53:01 +0000

If I’m ever caught chasing my husband with a golf club at 2:30 a.m., I want Len to represent me.

By: Tiger Woods, Frankenstein, and Monty Python :: VandeVrede Public Relations, LLC

Tiger Woods, Frankenstein, and Monty Python :: VandeVrede Public Relations, LLC — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 03:41:33 +0000

[...] A third perspective is that Tiger owes no one an explanation, has committed no crime, and by coming forth he is “breaking into jail.” You can see a good rundown of differing opinions on my fellow blogger Len Gutman’s post, The Trouble With Tiger. [...]

By: Dan Wool

Dan Wool — Thu, 03 Dec 2009 00:29:47 +0000

I never said don’t get in front of it. That’s always what you attempt to do. (See previous comment). Every crisis is different and always depends on the situation.

If you don’t think his lawyers and agents (fellow golfers?) already knew about his sexcapades you’re smoking something. They all knew. They always know. But you can’t take the bait and play into the media’s hand. Could it have been handled better (faster)? Sure, but we’re not privy to all the details and in many cases, some things are better left unsaid and unexplained. He couldn’t get in front of this one, so it was about being truthful while limiting the damage. We got what we got.

So, you protect the client and must think long-term. Yes, this sucks now but it’s temporary — and it’s not up to us. Depending if there’s a divorce, etc. it should go away relatively quickly. And once Tiger wins a tournament or two, it goes away completely (see Bryant, Kobe — and he did MUCH worse). In a couple years he’ll be earning more money than now. They’re doing all right.

By: Leslie Gutman (AKA Len's wife!)

Leslie Gutman (AKA Len's wife!) — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 22:50:58 +0000

So this is the last I am going to say about all the great minds of the “PR World” here in Phoenix. Anyone who said it is a private matter, and that he need not get out in front of this (um. Dan that would be you) is wrong. The reason the guy got into a car crash was because his wife found out about the affairs, they got in a fight, and he stormed out of the house. The story was that he avoided the media after the crash.
It could have been simple. He simply acknowledged that he had an argument, left the house and got in a car accident. Wow, we would be concerned. Poor Tiger so upset that he hit a tree and look he has scratches on his face to show it. Our heart hurts—not. Next, when a reporter asks him a follow up question about the fight, it is simple. “Marriage is difficult and hard, we have been working some problems out that I wish to keep private. I love my wife and my kids and feel upset that I have caused so many people to worry about my accident. We would appreciate some time and privacy to work it out. “Umm, Mr. Woods a follow up question if I may? Were there any other women involved? That is a very private matter, between my wife and me, but since you asked yes. While I understand your desire in wanting to know, please understand that my wife has feelings and emotions and we have had enough of the spot light in the past 48 hours. Out of respect for all involved we ask that you drop this matter and let me concentrate on my family and my very important charity event this weekend which will serve to help thousands of children in this country. I ask that all of you follow me to this event this weekend as we try to help so many needy children.
The story would have been tied in to every other story this weekend– Black Friday, holiday shopping, and the crisis in Dubai. It was a travel weekend and people were not home watching TV. A good PR crisis manager would have asked Tiger “are there emails, text messages, or voice mails that we need to be concerned with—or perhaps another blue dress? But instead he did what every other man has done in this situation does—hid in the closet.
So here is a good bet that I am wondering if anyone out there is willing to make? Tiger made $10 million on golf and $90 million in endorsements. Who out there wants to bet me that in 2010 he will make less than the 90 million in endorsements?

By: Amanda Blum

Amanda Blum — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:53:06 +0000

Further to Dan’s point… are these your opinions as moral human beings or as PR people? Because if they’re not the same (and I’d be embarrassed if they were) then perhaps you should think about it.

Here is someone living his life. I HIGHLY doubt that the 100m means a thing to Tiger vs his privacy. Infact, not only do I feel he owes us nothing, but shame on us all for assuming we deserve anything. He has specifically stayed out of the limelight when possible. He deserves his privacy.

By: Dan Wool

Dan Wool — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 18:40:47 +0000

I'm sorry Len, if you were Tiger's PR rep, you would have been fired. Like you and everyone else, I believe it's best to get out in front of crises. But there's managing the client and managing the media and these are most often mutually exclusive. **You must always do what's best to protect your client.** It would have been far more shocking and salacious if at the outset of a minor car crash he blurted out that this was all because he was having an affair(s). Their team is correctly taking each event one step at a time and responded appropriately to give Tiger and Elin time to breathe and contemplate next steps. So today's statement wasn't a real surprise now was it? If it didn't happen soon enough for the public, that's their problem -- but you don't gild the lilly and break into jail, particularly with potential legal implications. Long term -- and those are the REAL risks you you have to think about in these situations -- this does little to nothing to Tiger's image. He'll take his lumps and move on. Righteous doesn't mean right.

By: Tiger Woods lectures us on ‘tabloid scrutiny’ «

Tiger Woods lectures us on ‘tabloid scrutiny’ « — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:46:07 +0000

[...] to the media. Most PR have said that remaining silent was not a good way to handle this crisis. (Interesting discussion here at ValleyPRBlog, where I also blog.) I beg to [...]

By: Linda VandeVrede

Linda VandeVrede — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:28:52 +0000

Len, I’m saying you were right.

By: Angelo Fernando

Angelo Fernando — Wed, 02 Dec 2009 17:16:13 +0000

I’m reading this ‘apology’ very differently. It sounds over the top about ‘transgressions’ etc.; the real meat is his defense of privacy.