The Tool Desk
Outbyte PC Repair FREEClear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Outbyte Driver Updater FREEFix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →There is no confirmed figure for how much Tiger Woods personally lost because of the 2009 infidelity scandal. Contemporary reports put his annual endorsement income at roughly $100 million to $110 million, but that was an estimate of income around the time—not a calculation of money he lost. The often-repeated $5 billion to $12 billion figure refers to estimated losses for shareholders in sponsor companies, not Woods’s personal finances.
What is known about Woods’s personal financial losses?
No audited or otherwise confirmed total for Woods’s personal losses caused by the scandal appears in the available reporting. Calculating one would require knowing the value of each sponsorship agreement, whether and when payments stopped, any contract terms or settlements, and what Woods would otherwise have earned. The reports cited here do not provide that accounting.
| # | Preview | Product | Price | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
Tiger Woods | $11.21 | Buy on Amazon |
| 2 |
|
Tiger Woods Biography: The Story of Golf Legend | $13.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 3 |
|
Tiger: A Biography of Tiger Woods | $18.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 4 |
|
TIGER WOODS: The Inspiring Journey of a Golf Legend ( A Biography Book for Kids) | $15.99 | Buy on Amazon |
| 5 |
|
Tiger, Tiger: His Life, As It’s Never Been Told Before | $15.29 | Buy on Amazon |
CBS News reported a contemporary estimate of about $110 million a year in endorsements, including estimates of $30 million annually from Nike, $5 million from Gillette, and $24 million from EA Sports. These were media estimates, not confirmed payments. More importantly, an estimate of annual income is not an estimate of the amount lost after the scandal. CBS News’s 2009 report supplies a snapshot of the endorsement business, not a personal-loss total.
Which sponsors ended or changed their relationships with Woods?
The companies’ responses were not all the same. Some agreements ended; other brands reduced Woods’s advertising role, while Nike and EA were reported as continuing their support or arrangement during the immediate fallout.
Do these 3 things before closing this tab:
1Scan for outdated or missing drivers - takes under a minute2Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errors3Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitches#1 Best Overall
| Company or brand | Reported action | What the report establishes |
|---|---|---|
| Accenture | Ended its agreement in December 2009 | The Los Angeles Times reported it was the first sponsor to completely cut ties. Accenture said Woods was no longer the right representative for its advertising. Los Angeles Times, December 14, 2009 |
| AT&T | Ended its sponsorship agreement | AT&T announced the decision on December 31, 2009. The Guardian, December 31, 2009 |
| Gillette | Paused or reduced Woods’s marketing role | Contemporary coverage described a limited role while he was away from public life, not an immediate contract termination. Los Angeles Times, December 14, 2009; The Guardian, December 31, 2009 |
| Gatorade | Discontinued the Tiger Focus drink | The Guardian reported that PepsiCo said the product decision had nothing to do with the scandal, so it is not evidence of a confirmed scandal-caused sponsorship termination. The Guardian, December 31, 2009 |
| Nike | Expressed support for Woods | Contemporary reporting described Nike as standing by him during the immediate fallout. Los Angeles Times, December 14, 2009 |
| EA Sports | Reported as continuing its arrangement | Coverage said the Tiger Woods PGA Tour game deal remained unaffected at that point. The Guardian, December 31, 2009 |
| TAG Heuer | Planned to reduce Woods’s advertising presence | The contemporary report described a downscaling, not a complete termination. The Guardian, December 31, 2009 |
These are reports of decisions during the immediate 2009 fallout, not a complete history of the companies’ later relationships with Woods.
What does the $5 billion to $12 billion figure mean?
It is an estimate of collective shareholder losses at sponsor companies—not money taken from Woods’s bank account or a valuation of his lost contracts. Economists Christopher Knittel and Victor Stango at the University of California, Davis, estimated that shareholders lost between $5 billion and $12 billion over a 13-trading-day event window from November 27 to December 17, 2009. The UC Davis account explicitly distinguishes that estimate from Woods’s personal endorsement income. UC Davis, December 28, 2009
Stango said, “Total shareholder losses may exceed several decades’ worth of Tiger Woods’ personal endorsement income.” That comparison concerns the scale of the estimated market-value impact; it does not mean Woods personally lost billions.
Independent reader supportYour contribution helps us test, update, and keep practical guides available for everyone.Why the sponsor changes do not add up to a loss total
- An ended agreement does not, by itself, reveal the remaining contract value or how much income Woods actually forfeited.
- A paused or reduced advertising role is different from a terminated contract; the reports do not quantify the financial effect of those changes.
- A product discontinuation that the company said was unrelated to the scandal cannot be counted as a confirmed scandal-caused loss.
- Brands reported as continuing their arrangements in the immediate aftermath should not be counted as lost endorsements for that period.
The documented sponsor decisions show that the scandal damaged some commercial relationships. They do not establish a reliable amount for Woods’s personal financial losses.
Quick Recap
Best Value
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
