Risks of Celebrity Sponsors
Companies are using actors, prominent sports figures and other celebrities to endorse their products more than ever before.
However, while they may generate lots of publicity around a product or service, not all of it is good publicity.
You only have to open up a copy of the newspaper to read about scandals engulfing stars such as Bill Cosby, Brian Williams or Tom Brady with the New England Patriots’ ‘deflate-gate’ saga.
Sponsors have reacted by withdrawing their support, most notably in the NFL, where domestic violence allegations hanging over the sport prompted Procter and Gamble to pull the plug on a deal to supply players with pink mouthguards during Breast Cancer Awareness Month and cancel all on-field marketing.
The risks for any sponsor associated with this type of negative publicity are infinite, said experts, often resulting in the cancellation of lucrative advertising and marketing contracts, ultimately costing the company millions of dollars in lost revenue.
Worse still, the sponsor may be forced to pull its product from the market altogether, with the end result that millions of dollars are wiped off its share value.
The main risk of hiring a celebrity to endorse a product is the unexpected or disgraceful behavior of that individual, or unforeseen events such as death. — Lori Shaw, executive director, entertainment practice, Aon Risk Solutions
Lori Shaw, executive director of Aon Risk Solutions’ entertainment practice, said the main risk of hiring a celebrity to endorse a product is the unexpected or disgraceful behavior of that individual, or unforeseen events such as death.
“The first step is to analyze the potential risks, discuss ‘what if’ scenarios; outline the financial consequences; and to be aware of the risks that can be avoided, those that can be transferred contractually to the celebrity or talent, those that can be transferred to insurance and the risks that must be retained,” she said.
Shaw said that companies need to take a holistic approach to their branding and marketing activities in order to assess the potential impact of any adverse publicity on their balance sheet.
Nir Kossovsky, CEO of Steel City Re, a corporate reputation measurement and risk management specialist, said another major problem of negative publicity is the damage to a company’s reputation.
“The primary risk is that an adverse behavior at an event or by a celebrity will be viewed by stakeholders as a reflection of that company’s culture, values or operational ineptitude,” he said.
“In this situation where the stakeholder holds the company culpable for any such action, often they will respond by altering their future expectations and exercising their financial clout, usually to the company’s detriment.”
Kossovsky said that, rather than calculate the potential risk, sponsors need to first determine the value gained from the sponsorship deal, and the costs of acquiring that value.
Then they must assess the costs of communicating to stakeholders the steps it took to mitigate against any adverse events and publicity that may occur, he said.
“There are two instances when a company should walk away from a deal,” he said.
“The first is if the costs of a parallel communication strategy coupled with the direct costs of sponsorship outweigh the value of the expected gain.
“The second is if, on objective reflection, there is a compelling case that the average stakeholder will hold management culpable for an adverse event no matter what the management says to the contrary.”
To mitigate against these risks, corporations are increasingly turning to specialized insurance plans and writing clauses into their contracts allowing them to cancel a deal if the celebrity is considered to have acted in an inappropriate manner that may damage the company’s brand.
Recently, AIG launched a new policy protecting sponsors that hire celebrities to endorse their product.
Celebrity Product RecallResponse is triggered by any “actual or alleged criminal act or distasteful conduct” from the celebrity that has a significantly adverse impact on a company’s product.
It covers certain costs incurred by companies to remove or recall those products bearing the celebrity’s name and image, as well as the costs of removing advertising.
“In this age of social media and instant news,” said Jeremy Johnson, president and CEO of Lexington Insurance Co., which provides the policy, “reports of indiscretions by celebrities or high profile athletes can spread worldwide instantly, with swift, adverse implications for products or brands associated with the individual.”
Unseen Costs of Measles Outbreak
By now, we have all heard about the measles outbreak in California. We have heard both sides of the vaccination “controversy,” even though all of the evidenced-based research findings are uncontroversial.
What you probably haven’t heard much about is the immense time, effort and expense expended by health care providers and the public health department to respond to a known or suspected case of measles.
When a person begins to experience the signs and symptoms of measles, it is likely that they will seek medical care.
If the medical staff is aware that the patient may have measles they can take precautions like masking the patient and physically isolating them from others to prevent the spread of infection.
In reality, however, the health care providers might not suspect a patient is infected until a medical professional has performed a physical examination and taken their history.
A known or suspected measles exposure triggers a cascade of response activities.
Facility staff must identify the infected patient (the index case), interview the patient to determine where he or she has been, who they might have come in contact with, and whether or not they were masked, and at what point.
Any person who has shared air space with an un-masked measles patient is considered at risk of exposure.
The response costs to a potential measles exposure have been calculated at as much as $100,000 per event in lost productivity and remediation expense.
While waiting one to two days — or up to a week — to get results from measles serology and PCR analysis, facility or public health department staff compile a list of any patients who likely shared air space with the index case.
These are primarily patients who had appointments proximal to the time and location of the index case and for one hour afterwards, who may have shared a waiting room area.
Obviously, this is an incomplete list, as it cannot possibly include contact with individuals in public places like elevators, restrooms, etc.
If measles is confirmed, every patient who is at risk of exposure must be contacted. The clinic or public health department may offer prophylactic MMR vaccinations to any exposed patient who can’t produce documentation of immunity, but that is only effective for 72 hours post-exposure.
If an exposed patient can’t produce proof of immunity and can’t obtain a prophylactic vaccination within the 72-hour time window, the public health department may order them quarantined for 21 days.
The response costs to a potential measles exposure have been calculated at as much as $100,000 per event in lost productivity and remediation expense.
It introduces cost and inefficiency into the health care system, a system that many already criticize as being costly and inefficient. Measles is on the rise, from under 200 documented cases in 2013 to nearly 650 in 2014, and 102 documented cases in January 2015 alone.
An exponential increase in measles will tax the system to the point where it will not be able to respond effectively, leaving our most vulnerable at risk.
And unfortunately, those most at risk from an exposure are exactly the types of people most likely to be found in hospital and clinic waiting rooms.
Think You Don’t Need Environmental Insurance?
“I don’t work with hazardous materials.”
“My industry isn’t regulated by the EPA.”
“We have an environmental health and safety team, and a response plan in place.”
“We’ve never had an environmental loss.”
“I have coverage through my other general liability and property policies.”
These are the justifications clients most often give insurers for not procuring environmental insurance. For companies outside of sectors with obvious exposure — oil and gas, manufacturing, transportation — the risk of environmental damage may appear marginal and coverage unnecessary.
“Environmental insurance is not like every other insurance,” said Mary Ann Susavidge, Chief Underwriting Officer, Environmental, XL Catlin. “The exposure is unique for every operation and claims don’t happen often, so many businesses view coverage as a discretionary purchase. But the truth is that no one is immune to environmental liability risk.”
Every business needs to be aware of their environmental exposures. To do that, they need a partner with the experience to help them identify exposures and guide them through the remediation claims process after an incident. The environmental team at XL Catlin has been underwriting these risks for 30 years.
“Insureds might not experience this type of claim every day, but our environmental team does,” said Matt O’Malley, President, North America Environmental, XL Catlin. “We’ve seen what can happen if you’re not prepared.”
Susavidge and O’Malley debunked some of the common myths behind decisions to forego environmental coverage:
Myth: My business is not subject to environmental regulations.
Reality: Other regulators and business partners will require some degree of environmental protection.
Regulatory agencies like OSHA are more diligent than ever about indoor air quality and water systems testing after several outbreaks of Legionnaires disease.
“The regulators often set the trends in environmental claims,” Susavidge said. “In the real estate area it started with testing for radon, and now there’s more concern over mold and legionella.”
Multiple hotels have been forced to shut down after testing revealed legionella in their plumbing or cooling systems. In addition to remediation costs, business interruption losses can climb quickly.
For some industries, environmental insurance acts as a critical business enabler because investors require it. Many real estate developers, for example, are moving into urban areas where their clients want to live and work, but vacant lots are scarce. Those still available may be covering up an urban landfill or a brownfield.
“We’re able to provide expertise on those sites and the development risks so the contractor can get comfortable working on it. It’s about allowing our clients to stay relevant in their markets,” O’Malley said. “In this case, the developer is not an insured with a typical environmental exposure. But if there is a contaminant on the worksite, they could inadvertently disperse it. In a high-population urban area, the impact could be large.”
Banks also quite often require the coverage specifically because developers are turning to these locations with higher potential environmental risk.
“Though it’s not a legal requirement, insurance is a facilitator to the deal that developers really can’t operate without,” Susavidge said.
Myth: The small environmental exposure I have would be covered under other polices.
Reality: Environmental losses can result from exposure to off-site events and are excluded by many property and casualty policies.
Environmental risks on adjoining properties can lead to major third party losses. Vapor intrusion under the foundation of one property, for example, can unknowingly underlie the neighboring properties as well. The vapor intrusion can then seep into the surrounding properties, endangering employees and guests.
In other words, your neighbor’s environmental exposure may become your environmental exposure.
O’Malley described a claim in which a petroleum pipeline burst, affecting properties and natural resources 10 miles downstream even though the pipeline was shut off two minutes after the rupture. The energy company that owns the pipeline might have coverage, but what about the other impacted organizations? Many other property policies exclude environmental damage.
Sometimes the exposure is even more unexpected. In 2005, for example, a train carrying tons of chlorine gas crashed into a parked train set sitting in the yard of Avondale Mills — a South Carolina textile plant. The gas permanently damaged plant equipment and forced the operation to shut down.
“It’s not always obvious when you have an environmental exposure,” Susavidge said.
“When there is a big loss or a pattern of losses, the casualty market will typically move to exclude it,” said O’Malley. “And that’s where the environmental team looks for a solution. Environmental coverage has been developed to fill the gaps that other coverages won’t touch.”
Myth: We already have a thorough response plan if there is an incident.
Reality: Properly handling an environmental event requires experience and expertise.
In addition to coverage, risk managers need experience and expertise on their side when navigating environmental claims.
“For many of our clients, their first environmental claim is a very different experience because the claimant is not always a typical third party – it’s a government agency or some other organization that they lack experience with,” Susavidge said. “Our claims team is made up of attorneys that have specific domain experience litigating environmental claims issues.”
Beyond its legal staff, XL Catlin’s claims consulting team and risk engineers come with specialized expertise in environmental issues. 85 to 90 percent of the team members are former environmental engineers and scientists, civil engineers, chemists, and geologists.
“Handling environmental claims requires specialized expertise with contaminants and different types of pollution events,” O’Malley said. “That’s why our 30 years of experience makes a difference.”
Thirty years in the business also means 30 years of loss data.
“That informs us as a carrier how to provide the right types of services for the right clients,” Susavidge said. “It gives us insight into what our insureds are likely to experience and help us determine what support they need.”
Insureds also benefit from the relationships that XL Catlin has built in the industry over those 30 years. When the XL Catlin team is engaged following a covered pollution event, the XL Catlin claims team can deploy seasoned, experienced third party contractors that partner with the insured to address the spill and the potential reputational risk. And they receive guidance on communicating with regulatory bodies and following proper reporting procedures.
“The value of the policy goes beyond the words that are written,” O’Malley said. “It’s the service we provide to help clients get back on their feet, so they can focus on their business rather than the event itself.”
For more information on XL Catlin’s environmental coverage and services, visit http://xlcatlin.com/insurance/insurance-coverage/casualty-insurance.
The information contained herein is intended for informational purposes only. Insurance coverage in any particular case will depend upon the type of policy in effect, the terms, conditions and exclusions in any such policy, and the facts of each unique situation. No representation is made that any specific insurance coverage would apply in the circumstances outlined herein. Please refer to the individual policy forms for specific coverage details. XL Catlin, the XL Catlin logo and Make Your World Go are trademarks of XL Group Ltd companies. XL Catlin is the global brand used by XL Group Ltd’s (re)insurance subsidiaries. In the US, the insurance companies of XL Group Ltd are: Catlin Indemnity Company, Catlin Insurance Company, Inc., Catlin Specialty Insurance Company, Greenwich Insurance Company, Indian Harbor Insurance Company, XL Insurance America, Inc., and XL Specialty Insurance Company. Not all of the insurers do business in all jurisdictions nor is coverage available in all jurisdictions. Information accurate as of September 2016.
This article was produced by the R&I Brand Studio, a unit of the advertising department of Risk & Insurance, in collaboration with XL Catlin. The editorial staff of Risk & Insurance had no role in its preparation.