Success seems to revolve around the thought that successful people do what unsuccessful people aren’t willing to do, this thought is so simple yet so foundational. But have we ever realize that success does not only come to people who work hard and push boundaries but also to those who have a social standing, fame and are admired as personalities through media and entertainment industry. It’s not new how celebrities have been moonlighting into becoming entrepreneurs, finding individual spaces to thrive their business though most of them are mediocre they are pretty successful, which makes us think, What makes celebrity entrepreneurs different from mainstream entrepreneurs?
There are various pros and cons of owning a brand under your name when you are already famous. To begin with the pros of it, when a celebrity ties its name to a brand in terms of ownership, there is a certain amount of responsibility and fear that comes with its market popularity. Most of the brands owned by celebrities work very hard on authenticity and customer satisfaction for the very reason that its direct effects will reflect upon the owners image, which to celebrities is substantial and non-negotiable. And for this reason, the name of the star attached to a product becomes something to look forward for. Secondly, promoting a brand owned by Rihanna, Deepika Padukone and George Clooney is next to unnecessary as the social image of the owner is used as a yardstick to promote and judge the brand. These brands earn fast recognition, win customers who are already very fond of them and attain trust with their very name attached on the tag. Thirdly, these brands are aware of their social standing and readily glorify their line by igniting a sense of privilege and class in their customers. It definitely becomes easier to maintain the longevity of a brand when the customers have a sense of pride to carry a star’s name behind their backs.
As attractive as the pros might seem, there are a few underlying disadvantages that these celeb-businesses have to face and one among them would be failure to live up to expectations. Its certain that one’s fame carries with its self the expectations from people using and reviewing the products these popular faces are associated with, failure to live up to these presumed standards can cause grave injuries to the overall goodwill of the person itself. For these brands to be particularly extra-ordinary is important to make it look worth “Deepika”, “Sonam” or “Anushka”.
Having stated the advantages and disadvantages of owning and running a brand under a popular name, the more important issue to be addressed here is the over-emphasis on the durability and sustainability of these brands with the mere idea of their star-status. Brands by celebs are out in the market every other day from clothing, beauty, shoes, and accessories to coming up with their own restaurants and liquor lines. Comparing the goodwill and popularity that these brands have obtained with smaller, less famous brands stands way below on the scale. For entrepreneurs and brands that are less popular, grabbing customer attention and recognition is a process requiring ample amount of effort. They constantly struggle to build a brand name, commercialize their lines and work extra hard to earn customer satisfaction. On the other had celebrity brands seemingly get away with this already built image. Not to imply that these brands don’t work hard or put efforts on their products but to say that having a brand owned by a well-known personality does win one some brownie points. The point is that most of the celebrity brands in mainstream aren’t even as good as they are expected to be, clearly overshadowing smaller brands that are less expensive and worthy of recognition and growth. Sometimes the celebrities are mere investors putting zero effort in planning, executing and building the brand but promote the brand in a fashion that mentally convinces the customer to believe that the product is an outcome of that ‘famous person’s’ efforts, which then naturally draws limelight on the person himself/herself as well as the brand.
Celebrity brand hence have a wider platform to market their goods and services. They are not only widely accepted but are available to a larger section of the society across the country. Celebs not just have fans but also have access to other famous people. One celebrity’s brand becomes like a celebration to the whole industry they are associated with. Hence promotion through word of mouth, stylists, co-stars, crew members becomes very feasible and fast. When Rhea and Sonam Kapoor launched Rheason, it gained popularity even before it was out in stores for their customers, only and only by the virtue of social media promotion. Every other actor donned including the star sisters themselves clothes from their line; from airport looks to brunch looks everyone was obsessed with the collection. This to happen with a less popular brand in this speed is hardly possible.
Moreover designers and vendors are more prone to be attracted to being linked with a star owned brand, firstly because they any day have better resources hence offer better pay. Secondly, working for a celebrity brings with itself social acceptance, fame, recognition as well as respect. Lastly, working with influential personalities help them build connections and expand their trade. Small entrepreneurs have lesser avenues that lead them to experienced and capable professionals; hence in this case social position does in some way fetches the celeb brands a better team.
To sum it up, celebrity entrepreneurs have proved to be exemplars of individuals who have succeeded in an increasingly competitive environment because they are purported to have provided higher levels of and more creative forms of leadership. They are beholders of larger resources, marketing spaces, readily available and loyal customers and a stronger foundation owing to its investments, employees, channels and media engagement. Thus, these benefits owned by celebrity brands in some way or the other puts smaller but more promising brand under a cloak, making harder for them to win a sustainable market position.