Gambling is big business; the market is worth tens of billions of dollars in the US alone. Established markets, such as the UK, are similarly large. With thousands of online casinos and sportsbooks competing for market share, advertising is an important part of running a successful brand.
According to a recent YouGov survey, celebrity endorsements, which have long been relied upon as a guaranteed way of drumming up bettor interest, may have lost some of their effectiveness.
When celebrity endorsements … worked
Celebrity endorsements and advertising campaigns are nothing new. Pear's Soap, and its 1882 advertisement featuring West End actress Lillie Langtry, is widely credited as the first celebrity endorsement ad campaign outside royal charters.
Ladbrokes, in the UK, was one of the first gambling companies to take a similar approach. Its 2007 TV ad campaign featured a plethora of stars, including: Ian Wright, Chris Kamara, Kirsty Gallacher and Jimmy Hill. More recently, Jamie Foxx has featured as the face of BetMGM, and Kevin Hart has promoted DraftKings.
Initially, celebrity endorsements helped normalize the concept of online gambling through social proofing – the idea that individuals will follow the actions of prominent social figures.
If Ross from Friends is endorsing online poker, I'm bound to enjoy it too.
In the early days of online gambling, celebrities provided a sense of legitimacy to a market that a lot of consumers were still wary of.
In the 1990s and even the early 2000s, there was a public perception that the industry was, at best, unreliable and, at worst, untrustworthy.
Celebrities weren't just used to promote individual platforms; they brought a sense of trustworthiness to the industry as a whole.
As the industry has matured and markets have become more regulated, trust has grown. Still, gambling brands have to promote a sense of trustworthiness and quality.
The Super Bowl cometh
With the Super Bowl approaching – the Big Game takes place on February 8 – a lot of attention will be paid to high-profile gambling ads that appear during the campaign.
We can expect to see dozens of celebrities rolled out to promote sportsbooks across the country.
The Super Bowl is the second biggest gambling event of the year. The Grand National is the largest, but it only attracts around 10 million viewers in its home country, while the Super Bowl attracts 120 million domestic viewers.
Despite ad regulations varying by state, the huge TV crowd makes the Super Bowl the most significant global sporting event for gambling advertisers.
But those ads don't come cheap.
Recent estimates suggest companies pay $8m for a 30-second ad slot. Add to that the cost of producing the advert and paying celebrity fees, and a single Super Bowl ad can easily cost tens of millions.
Famously, BetMGM's 2024 Super Bowl ad cost $50m and featured the likes of Tom Brady, Wayne Gretzky and Vince Vaughn.
All of which suggests gambling companies still view celebrity-fronted ad campaigns as being relevant. But, do celebrity-front advertisements really attract bettors? Or are they nothing more than a glorified cash sink?
A recent YouGov survey of US consumers suggests public perception may have swung against celebrity endorsements...
A favorable opinion
When asked, 42% of gamblers said seeing a gambling ad featuring a celebrity made them view the company somewhat positively. Roughly one in eight gamblers, or 14%, said it made them view the company very positively.
However, the figure is much lower among the general public. Only 12% of consumers said the same thing, suggesting celebrity ads could encourage gamblers to bet more, or even win customers from other brands.
That is backed up by the fact that more than 40% of gambling respondents said they would be more likely to consider a brand that benefited from celebrity endorsements. However, they may not help attract non-gamblers.
When considering all Americans, the overall perception of such campaigns is one of neutrality. Or even disinterest.
Negative perception
However, 70% claimed celebrity campaigns do not alter their perception of the brands in question. Only 12% said the campaigns actually make them view the company negatively, which at least suggests celebrity endorsements will not have too negative an impact on a brand.
Respondents were asked to say how much they agreed with certain statements and one third of gamblers said they agreed that celebrities give the perception that a brand is more responsible.
Roughly the same number said they disagreed or did not believe it was significant one way or the other.
Of general consumers, 13% said celebrity endorsements make brands seem more responsible. Nearly a third (30%) said they neither agreed nor disagreed with the statement, but 47% disagreed with the statement.
Ads being 'overly promotional'
When presented with the statement: "Using celebrities makes the brand appear less authentic or overly promotional", a surprising 46% of gamblers agreed, with just 23% disagreeing. And 38% of general respondents agreed, compared to 18% who disagreed.
Choosing the right celebrities is important.
More than four in 10 (41%) of gamblers believed athletes and gambling professionals are the most appropriate endorsements. Only 28% believe the same to be true of reality TV stars, with 40% explicitly stating they are not appropriate.
One of the key aspects of a good advertising campaign is exposure, and celebrities can help brands get spotted and ensure they're remembered.
Results also showed that 43% of bettors agreed with the statement: "celebrity appearances make me more likely to notice a betting brand", although only 22% of all individuals agreed. In fact, 40% of general respondents disagreed with the statement.
