USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane)

Running Head: CELEBRITY AND THE VALUE OF DEATH 1

Celebrity and the Value of Death

Aaron D. Settipane

Annenberg School for Communication and Journalism

University of Southern California

Paper submitted as partial fulfillment of requirements for

CMGT 597: Communication Research Practicum

Fall 2011

Copyright © 2011 Aaron D. Settipane – All Rights Reserved (TXu 1-813-229)

CELEBRITY AND THE VALUE OF DEATH 2

Celebrity and the Value of Death

Every society has forms of religion which are pervasive in most peoples’ lives. Legends,

time-honored tales and storied institutions featuring icons of those religions are being slowly

replaced in modern culture by more tangible heroes and heroines from common society. These

heroes are elevated to levels once only thought to be the domain of religious saints, with tales of

these heroes syndicated worldwide at speeds never before experienced in previous societies

(Ebert, 2010). Modern society has had celebrities for decades. However, the 21st century has

engaged celebrity in ways never seen before, where celebrities have become ubiquitous

worldwide icons through mass media. Advances in technology at rates not seen in the previous

100 years have created a societal anomaly (Kurzweil, 2001) which has aided in the mass-

manufacture of celebrity across societies around the world. These advances have made the

celebrity a larger-than-life figure, with far more detail about their personal lives available than in

past decades (Ebert, 2010).

Celebrities have always been “stars”. Given the popularity of new technology such as

social media and new forms of video and audio entertainment distribution (e.g., distribution of

media to devices other than the home television or terrestrial radio), modern celebrity has

transformed into a multi-media, multi-screen venture. Celebrities have now become “electronic

media superstars” (not just “stars” or “superstars”) due to the mass-transmission of the media

product in which they have become famous (Ebert, 2010, p. xix). Their ubiquity permeates

nearly all facets of society on a daily basis, which can elicit mass admiration, devotion and

dedication to the celebrity by its fans, or consumers. Such fanatical adoration, Ebert (2010)

argued, is a perception meticulously constructed through the celebrity’s public image by the

celebrity’s followers (and handlers), rivaling the levels of influence once held by religious


institutions. This fanatical devotion to the celebrity has been harnessed to transform the celebrity

from a merely famous person with a fan club, into a lucrative business, capable of mass-

exploitation on a global level.

The modern celebrity can be considered a product of both the entertainment industry as

well as the journalism and publicity industries working in concert with each other. They

generate value to the consumer (and salability of the celebrity) as they sell specifically structured

stories, which are exploited via various mass media outlets (Babcock & Whitehouse, 2005).

Regardless of how the celebrity originated, modern businesses see the living celebrity’s value in

terms of the audience response from which businesses (or more accurately, the brand of the

business) could potentially gain. Once celebrity is established in a person, the celebrity obtains a

tangible economic value. Many companies strive to capitalize on the economic value of the

celebrity’s opinion for their brands. Favorable opinions or positive reviews from a popular

celebrity can aid in the overall growth of a brand or product, as measured in raw sales numbers,

revenue figures and mass appeal (Agrawal & Kamakura, 1995). These endorsements can prove

to be economically powerful in the short-run for brands, such as the return of Michael Jordan

from baseball to basketball, which became a multi-million dollar event for brands related to

Jordan’s various endorsements (Mathur, Mathur & Rangan, 1997). Conversely, some celebrity

endorsements can damage a brand in the short-run. For example, international retailer H&M

terminated its relationship with British supermodel Kate Moss due to Moss’ publicized alleged

drug use (Silverman, 2005). The celebrity’s personal instabilities, in terms of their demeanor,

decorum, conduct, including criminality and/or civil disobedience may prove damaging to

brands (Petty & D’Rosario, 2009).


If a celebrity’s value can be measured in diverse ways (including but not limited to areas

of brand relationships and societal influence) and such value is derived from equally varied

ways, how can the value of the celebrity be cultivated? Further, does such value continue past

the living celebrity’s death, requiring additional preservation? The job of the manager, agent and

publicist, aside from keeping the celebrity actively employed and engaged, is to meticulously

craft the image of the celebrity in society through roles in feature film and television product, as

well as through strategic appearances and brand alliances – and maintain that image throughout

the celebrity’s career (i.e., control it, at a level where the value can continue to grow) (Turner,

2004). By managing the value of the celebrity responsibly and strategically, the value of the

celebrity will develop and grow over time, sometimes incrementally, while other times

exponentially. The celebrity, at this point, through the celebrity’s name, becomes a brand, not

unlike any other brand such as Nike, Tiffany & Co., or Louis Vuitton. The brand requires

controlled strategic management and specific image cultivation. The brand also requires to be

constantly thrust positively in the public forum so that its value continues to be enhanced and

increased, while balancing the ebbs and flows of public interest (Turner, 2004). Names such as

Nike and Tiffany & Co. convey positive connotations to their customers; therefore certain

celebrities should also convey positive, congruent connotations which are representative of the

endorsing brand (Dalton, 2007).

However, what if the celebrity dies? Can a celebrity be more valuable in death than in

life? Dead celebrities have the advantage of having a fixed, sometimes iconic public image.

Upon death, their public image is frozen in its last, positively cultivated state. The dead celebrity

is not subject to ongoing risk like public embarrassment involving wardrobe-malfunctions,

unflattering club-exiting photographs or insensitive commentary at an inappropriate time (Petty


& D’Rozario, 2009). Further, Petty and D’Rozario (2009) provided that the dead celebrity brand

can often be a safer, cheaper alternative to employ, in some manner, than live celebrities, thus

avoiding those potentially unforeseen and potentially damaging publicity issues, thereby both

furthering brand enhancement and positive associations with the brand. The value of the dead

celebrity collectibles, for instance, is usually at peak value within the first couple of years after

the celebrity’s death (Piazza, 2011). Celebrities, especially eclectic, artistic types, are often the

most desired and pursued endorsement types in death (Piazza, 2011). When an artist like Kurt

Cobain can sell over a quarter-million copies of Rolling Stone magazine after his death, simply

by having his photograph appear on the cover of the magazine, death becomes simply the next

stage in a celebrity’s career, moving from life into legacy (Houze, 1994; Bunn, 2000).

Continuing into the 21st century, the notion of death and celebrity as a business is a

growing industry. No longer does death spell the cessation of the celebrity’s career, as the

celebrity can realize a lucrative career after death, administered by the celebrity’s estate or

management through use of the law and the creative employment of copyrights and trademarks

(Petty & D’Rozario, 2009). Recently, two of the largest online music retailers reported triple-

digit growth in sales compared to the previous week, with double-digit growth reported in the

average unit sale price per item just after Michael Jackson’s untimely death (Yan & Kitchen,

cited in Sanderson & Cheong, 2010). In a 2009 report, the Hollywood Reporter stated that

Jackson had earned “more in the past year than any living celebrity except Oprah Winfrey”

(Bond, 2010, para. 1). Death not only can present immediate financial gain for the celebrity’s

estate and management, but it can also be fortuitous for the long-term interests of the celebrity’s

estate and management. For instance, “Elvis was worth $7 million when he died. Now he’s a

$100 million a year industry” (Jensen, 1995, para. 3). There are numerous cases where notable


dead celebrities have earned far more money than they had earned while alive. In 2011 alone,

dead celebrities have generated billions of dollars in revenues, with no sign of declining (Klara,

2011). Other notable dead celebrities generating high revenue deals include J.R.R. Tolkein,

Charles Schultz, and Stieg Larsson – all garnering eight-figure paydays (Bond, 2010; Greenburg

& Paine, 2010). Given the strength of a celebrity’s worth in terms of pure future financial

viability, brand endorsement worth, and consumer attraction, it would seem that the potential

value of the celebrity should not be lost upon death, but enhanced by the automatic scarcity of

supply of the celebrity due to death. What characteristics exist in certain celebrities that capture

and enamor society? Why do certain celebrities possess a charming timelessness, compared to

other celebrities, and compared to the average person in society, which allows them to profit

financially over others. In death, what is the value of the celebrity? Furthermore, what makes a

celebrity valuable that their economic and emotional value may increase after death?

Celebrities, Values and Brands

Branding & Longevity

Brands are generally regarded as popular products or companies; however celebrities are

also brands (Silverstein, 2007). Celebrities, Silverstein (2007) concluded, are a different kind of

brand which can achieve the longevity to which most brands aspire. Living celebrities can

benefit from association with brands, in the same way that brands can benefit from these

associations. Nevertheless, living celebrities are hampered by their humanity. Their propensity

to get into trouble or engage in other potentially damaging discourse can conceivably

compromise a brand and its equity in connection with the brand’s consumer base (Behr &

Beeler-Norrholm, 2006). Dead celebrities, especially those celebrities who maintained a clean,

trouble-free image throughout their careers, manage to continue their career, after death, as


legally protected trademarks and copyrights (Behr & Beeler-Norrholm, 2006). These celebrities,

Behr and Beeler-Norrholm (2006) argued, are elevated from their existence as a dead celebrity,

into a brand where consumers forget that the brand was ever the name of a person. Lacoste

clothing is generally regarded as one of the most familiar and long-standing trademarks in

modern sportswear, generating billions of euros in sales every year. Yet, many either do not

know, or are not familiar with Rene Lacoste, the world championship-winning tennis player who

innovated many improvements to the game of tennis, including a certain tennis shirt (Behr &

Beeler-Norrholm, 2006). Societies all over the world have extolled certain people as celebrities.

These celebrities are people who garner, through their looks, their mannerisms, their talents, or

other intrinsic factors, an increased amount of attention. This attention produces distinct

preoccupations, near euphoric excitement, and anticipation in what these certain people will or

may do next (Summers & Johnson Morgan, 2008). Such overemphasis on the individual

generates a type of “hero worship” which, in turn, can be leveraged by strategically harnessing

the fame and adoration for monetary gain (Bouzeos, 1989). In order for a dead celebrity to have

any kind of value, the celebrity must be created and crafted while living, harnessing such

characteristics like “hero worship” in order to have long-term success, even after death.

Beyond this notion of hero-worship is longevity and legacy. Celebrities want to be

remembered. Multi-decade pop-star Madonna once declared, “I want longevity as a human

being. I want it to last forever…” (Taraborelli, 2001, p. 90). Many celebrities strive to achieve

this goal. Hotel heiress Paris Hilton is considered by some to be a “post-modern celebrity” as she

is famous for nothing else but being a famous person who is famous (Behr & Beeler-Norrholm,

2006). At the same time, Hilton, besides being a living brand in her own right, as the namesake

of the Hilton Hotel brand, cultivated an impregnable personal brand, built upon a well-known


and understood level of expectation for her consumers. Through the use of Paris Hilton’s well-

publicized misbehaviors in public and on video, coupled with meticulous image crafting in the

media (whether positively or negatively) to harness the publicity, consumers of Hilton’s products

are keenly aware of what the Hilton brand represents (however low the expectational benchmark

may be relatively set) (Behr & Beeler-Norrholm, 2006). This allowed Hilton to have certain

freedoms: consumers absolutely know what to expect when her Hilton brand is involved, and

consumers know what to expect from a product when she endorses another brand. These factors

have contributed to the enduring nature of her brand, as evidenced by continued retail successes,

including a clothing line, shoes, perfume, hair extensions, retail stores, party guesting and real

estate ventures (VanSickle, 2011). Through these brand associations and ventures, Hilton is able

to cultivate and maintain a long lasting legacy – the longevity she craved.

Brands, like celebrities, are things which vie for positive attention from consumers. By

creating business relationships with celebrities, brands can benefit from the synergies between

the celebrity’s positive influence with the consumer. In turn, the celebrity can benefit from the

brand’s existing positive credit and influence with consumers (Petty & Cacioppo, cited in Byrne,

Whitehead, & Breen, 2003). By maintaining relationships with other brands, dead celebrities

can cultivate longevity beyond that which made them famous during their lifetimes.

Celebrity as a Brand

The entertainment industry relies upon hero worship every time a new feature film,

television series, webisode or other media product is released to the public. Celebrity may be

nothing more than a type of brand which relies upon a societal spark, or hero worship, which

makes someone become a celebrity. Once someone is a celebrity, they can merchandise or

otherwise harness their celebrity into financial gain (Turner, 2004). Creating and maintaining


celebrity relies upon a positive public image. Crafting a positive public image that resonates in

society generating powerful economic results has become big business in the entertainment

industry, and is usually handled by a small army of outside parties: managers, publicists, and

agents (Turner, 2004). The influence of living celebrities on a brand (and sometimes the brand

on the celebrity) allows for the living celebrity to reinvigorate a brand or legitimize a brand,

reassuring/reminding the consumer of the quality of the endorsed brand (Abbot et al., cited in

Bryne et al., 2003).

Celebrities exist because they also serve a purpose beyond hero worship. Consumers are

compelled to seek some escape or respite from the tediousness of their bland existence (Wann,

cited in Chia & Poo, 2008). Celebrities can also provide an opportunity for brands, through

celebrity partnerships, to engage in enhancements in the quality of life for consumers. By

creating brand alliances with celebrities, the celebrity cultivates his/her value through the value

of the partnership. Brands then can leverage the notion of “the celebrities’ entertainment value”

(Stever, cited in Chia & Poo, 2008, p. 5) and create new value for both their brand and for the

celebrity brand. In a survey in 1986, “90% of the top 10 people whom teenagers wanted to be

like were entertainers” (Cowen, cited in Chia & Poo, 2008 p. 2). Given that there is such a

compulsion for people in society to idolize, adore and connect in some way with celebrities,

there is intrinsic and monetary value in that relationship upon which brands can capitalize.

Unfortunately, there is a dearth of information, analysis, and academic understanding

surrounding the economic impact of celebrity (Seno & Lucas, 2007), and in the retail effect of

celebrity endorsement (Byrne et al., 2003). However, certain levels of economic performance

and intrinsic value can be extrapolated by looking at other key factors found in dead celebrities

which can suggest a value proposition once a celebrity has passed on.


The Value of Dead Celebrities

Since living celebrities tend to be marred by misbehaviors which result in salacious

headlines, dead celebrities have the advantage of a solidified and reliable image, untarnishable

by media aspersion or other such commentary, and an overall cost which may be thousands less

than the current hot celebrity (Petty & D’Rozario, 2009). Dead celebrities are often defined by

their achievements or notoriety prior to death, which cements their brand. It is this combination

of notoriety and brand worth in life, which suggests the value of the celebrity posthumously.

Consumers remember the celebrity’s greatest achievements or emotionally powerful

performances rather than the celebrity’s eccentricities, especially when the celebrity’s estate or

management strategically crafts and maintains the celebrity image. Such case can be illustrated

with the loss of pop-star Michael Jackson and other celebrities. These recollections spark

nostalgia. Such nostalgia is fuelled by the emotion of loss and disconnection with the celebrity

creating intangible demand for the dead celebrity brand.

Economic Value in Death

The business surrounding dead celebrities is often very lucrative. The strength in the

dead celebrity lies not just in the brand equity created by the celebrity while alive, but in the

scarcity created in death. Dead celebrities can invoke a strong sense of incurable nostalgia in the

consumer. Whether by the notion of remembering the positive times in a consumer’s experience,

or by vicariously reliving and re-experiencing the glamour or danger that a dead celebrity once

embodied, dead celebrity brands are able to connect with consumers of every generation with at

least one celebrity iconic to that generation. A dead celebrity who is iconic to a generation

becomes a financial asset. Just after the announcement of the death of Michael Jackson,

thousands began to mourn his loss – by shopping. Amazon.com, for instance, reported CD and


digital sales hundreds of times over the normal volume, with Jackson’s albums dominating the

top sales categories on the website (Timpane, cited in Sanderson & Cheong, 2010, p. 329).

People remembered him for his artistic creations, not storied antics. While living, Jackson was

understood to have been in severe debt, but after death, the premiere of his last film alone was

projected to generate almost half a billion dollars worldwide – and that’s before the memorabilia

and album sales are factored in (Buss, 2009). Although the pop star was gone, his brand showed

renewed vitality and strength which vaulted Jackson to the Forbes’ Top Earning Dead

Celebrities list after Jackson’s first year of death (Greenburg & Paine, 2010).

Nevertheless, such successes are not common. Few celebrities have vast estates

generating millions of dollars long after death, fueled by mass fan nostalgia. Many celebrities

have simple estates with no massive infrastructure attached with the sole purpose of making

money, which are then bequeathed to relatives. For instance, surprisingly simple estate

structures can be found with actress Brittany Murphy and with Australian actor Heath Ledger;

these highly-successful actors do not have massive licensing engines generating revenues

(Mayoras & Mayoras, 2010; Ebeling, 2009). These actors’ estates are successful, but not on a

mass scale – there are no brands attached to them, nor were they firmly attached to a brand.

Ledger is now relegated to passing comparisons with another dead star, James Dean (“One Year

Later, Ledger’s Legacy Still Growing”, 2009). Alternatively, some equally beloved celebrities

simply made business mistakes: Jimi Hendrix never wrote a will; Marlon Brando made oral

promises without documenting any such promises; Princess Diana relied upon a “letter of

wishes” instead of a legally binding will (Ebeling, 2009). Nevertheless, all of these celebrities

remain beloved in society.


Some celebrities are not the economic powerhouses that one may expect. One

explanation is brand associations and brand equity. In this analysis, it has been established that

celebrity worth is more effectively built by combining brand recognition and celebrity through

brand relationships (e.g., endorsements). This synergy with endorsements can garner strong

profits to the brands being endorsed, while also enhancing the worth and recognition of the

celebrity through the use of the brand. Further the dead celebrity’s economic worth can be

initially determined by the value of the endorsement deals (whether active or inactive).

Additionally, celebrity/brand endorsements can also validate a celebrity to consumers.

Consumers may believe a brand has more worth because a certain celebrity uses or endorses

such brand. Conversely, a celebrity can gain more worth because a high-quality, high-equity

brand is being endorsed or used by a celebrity. This transaction creates mutual advantages for

both the celebrity and the brand in terms of an exchange of high consumer equity and high value

which benefits both parties (Halonon-Knight & Hurmerinta, 2010). Preparation and meticulous

image building with a living celebrity is essential in translating high consumer equity value to

the dead celebrity. Then the valuable image of the living celebrity can be harvested and

translated into creating strong posthumous brand equity, from the strong brand associations in

life. There is, however, a dearth of academic research in connection with translation of

consumer equity value to the dead celebrity, and should be a subject for further research (Seno &

Lucas, 2007; Byrne et al., 2003; Halonen-Knight & Hurmerinta, 2010).

Management companies, usually as a partnership with the estate, are charged with,

among other duties, maintaining and maximizing the brand equity of the dead celebrity. This can

come, for instance, by continuing previous brand associations, or by starting new ones. Strong

management ensures the reliability and bankability of the dead celebrity, especially in light of a


living celebrity who might “pull a Tiger Woods” and damage existing brand associations (Klara,

2011, para. 2). A recently deceased celebrity, Elizabeth Taylor, did not neglect the business side

of her celebrity, and, upon her death, Taylor had a multifarious number of licensing and

endorsement deals still active, which were meticulously constructed by the cadre of

representatives whom she had employed (Piazza, 2011). It is not enough that a celebrity had a

degree of fame, fortune and adoration while living. Once dead, fans focus on the talents, skills,

successes and happiness in the celebrity’s life and internalize these experiences, which can aid

greatly in the valuation of the dead celebrity. Each dead celebrity brand adds value to the

industry overall, currently valued at over two billion dollars per year in revenues, which includes

notable dead celebrity brands such as Marilyn Monroe, Bob Marley, Elvis Presley and Albert

Einstein (Klara, 2011).

Maintaining Value after Death

Dead celebrities continue to generate revenues and create value in death because of the

association in the consumer’s mind. This association should be cultivated and maintained by the

estate and its managers for the dead celebrity brand to flourish. As Petty and D’Rozario (2009)

argued, estates often fail to properly maintain the intrinsic elements which made the celebrity

beloved, for the sake of cashing in on some of that potentially enormous endorsement money.

The effect of this can result in anything from trademark dilution to offending the dead celebrity’s

fan base. In the case of Fred Astaire dancing with a Dirt Devil vacuum cleaner in the famous

1997 commercial, the Astaire fan base voiced its displeasure, finding the commercialization of

his image reprehensible (Laurens, cited in Petty & D’Rozario, 2009). Theoretically, Petty and

D’Rozario (2009) argued that failure to properly maintain the image of the dead celebrity can

also occur because an estate may simply lose interest or may become apathetic to the rigors of


maintaining the brand image and product image of the celebrity, especially after many

generations (Petty & D’Rozario, 2009).

There are examples where this maintenance has enhanced the celebrity as a brand. Aside

from the aforementioned Lacoste brand, similar success can be found in luxury fashion design

brand Yves Saint Laurent, the namesake of which was a famous French clothing designer; luxury

fashion retailer Dior, the namesake, Christian Dior, was a cutting edge haute couture designer;

composers Richard Rodgers and Oscar Hammerstein, whose composing talents were reflected in

works such as Oklahoma and The Sound of Music are a brand which denotes the classic

American musical; and finally Michael Crichton, whose name is synonymous with gripping,

high-drama stories (Hare, 2009). All of these dead celebrities had established valuable brands in

life. After death, the lucrative value in the celebrity name, as a brand, can be found in marketing

any related product (such as a new Broadway opening of Rodger’s and Hammerstein’s The

Sound of Music), or in the enduring sales of Yves Saint Larent and Dior retail products, including

the maintenance of both brands as a high-end, luxury experience. Consumers still associate

positive experiences with each brand, thus perpetuating the value and strength of these brands

long after the celebrity has died. The name continues to endure decades later, as in the time-

honored dead celebrity brand of Walt Disney, synonymous with positive family entertainment

and experiences.

Future Economic Value

Consumers maintain positive associations with a celebrity after the celebrity has died, as

consumers did when the celebrity was alive. Whether the reasons are nostalgia or the desire to

associate themselves with the brand image that the celebrity name conveys, consumers continue

to return and consistently patronize the celebrity brands. However, the consumer marketplace is


fickle, and dead celebrities do fall out of favor, or out of touch with modern realities. It is the

responsibility of the estate or brand manager to continually supervise consumer sentiment and

adjust to changing market pressures in order to maintain the highest possible value for the dead

celebrity brand in the current and future markets (Behr & Beeler-Norrholm, 2006). The value of

death varies with the maintenance of the celebrity’s brand, with continued diligent efforts to

grow and improve the brand with long-term brand strategies in play (Dalton, 2007).

Nostalgia. One key strength of the dead celebrity brand is consumer nostalgia.

Celebrities have traditionally been used to enhance brands through endorsements because of the

higher positive consumer acknowledgements versus brands without any celebrity endorsements

(Byrne et al., 2003). To understand the intangible strength of nostalgia, one must understand how

nostalgia interacts with and shapes the consumer. Nostalgia is directly connected to the

consumer’s identity and esteem; it gives the consumer a sense of being and a social attachment to

other consumers through relatable experiences (Sedikides, Wildschut, & Baden, 2004).

Nostalgia also counters consumer’s sense of a bland existence, as it can provide an escape to a

once better place in the past (Sedikides, et al., 2004). In other words, celebrities can provide a

direct connection to one’s past experiences, whether they be fond childhood memories or of

better times where people felt life was easier, better or worth more (Kershaw, 2009). These

intangible connections are made by every consumer, and every consumer’s experience attaches a

value proposition to the celebrity. Because nostalgia is tied to identity, the consumer celebrates

the highs and lows of the celebrity’s life, as if it were their own. When a celebrity dies, there is a

disruption in this continuity: the vicarious experiences are terminated and the notion of identity

and self-esteem are realized to be mortal to the consumer (Gibson, 2007). Therefore, when a

celebrity dies, the death becomes a time of collective reflection, identity re-affirmation and a


collective realization that the celebrity is human, mortal and not infallible or invulnerable

(Gibson, 2007). Nostalgia is triggered when a consumer remembers their positive experiences

and relates or attaches their personal positive experiences to the celebrity. Nostalgia can be a

positive, negative or neutral emotion, depending on how the consumer attached their experiences

to the celebrity (Sedikides, et al., 2004). Management of the dead celebrity must comprehend

how the consumer’s experiences relate and connect to the dead celebrity brand. With such an

understanding, management can connect with consumers and give them valuable experience

opportunities through endorsements or other exploitations. Consumers then ideally affirm their

nostalgia of the dead celebrity brand by purchasing the experience (i.e., a consumer good like a

book or re-release movie) or purchasing the endorsed product (i.e., Audrey Hepburn’s GAP

advertisement for black jeans) (“Test Pattern: Hepburn falls into The Gap”, 2006).

A tightly controlled image of the living celebrity can make the celebrity seem bigger than

life. The celebrity would be elevated to becoming the consumer’s hero, champion or symbol of

some better existence (Gibson, 2007), all based on what was specifically constructed for the

consumer to internalize. Marilyn Monroe had a tumultuous personal life; however most of those

circumstances were suppressed, even after death, while her managers continued to maintain her

glamorous image by limiting Monroe’s access to the general public while alive (except for

important award events, etc.), and continued such practices with her image immediately after

death, in an effort to preserve her stardom (Currid-Halkett, 2010). Consumers from all around

the world felt attachment, remorse and nostalgia when Princess Diana died and when Kurt

Cobain died – two different people, two different times, both with similar reactions to the loss of

the living celebrity (Gibson, 2007). Celebrity, Currid-Halkett (2010) argued, is an enlarged

version of the day-to-day existence of people in society and people can connect in various and


differing ways to positive and negative experiences of the living celebrity. In death, the

nostalgia of the celebrity’s positive and negative experiences is what attaches the consumer to

some of their own, unique experiences. This attachment by the consumer to the dead celebrity

bolsters the viability of the dead celebrity as a brand. Consumers can relate and internalize the

experience of the dead celebrity brand and re-imagine the glamor of the past. By creating certain

strategic alliances with other brands which are congruent to the values of the dead celebrity

brand, economic capitalization can be achieved at what has proven to be a large scale. The

nostalgia of the loss and of the experiences creates value propositions in the dead celebrity brand

with the consumer.

Technology. Technology today has the power of resurrecting dead celebrities in ways

never before contemplated. Cashing in on the nostalgia of the golden days of Hollywood or on

the riveting talents of now-bygone talents, visual effects companies, aided by new advances in

3D and 2D visual compositing, are finding new ways of bringing these dead celebrity icons to

life (Carlson, 2004). With the use of this new technology, dead celebrity brands can, not only be

breathed back to life, but be resurrected in a nearly-tangible fashion, restoring the beauty,

nuances and charm once wielded by the celebrity in his/her heyday. The notion of a new film

starring Marilyn Monroe, James Dean, and Elvis Presley is not unfounded given the

advancements in technology. Already there have been appearances by Lawrence Oliver, and that

Monroe/Dean pairing is in negotiation and is actively being developed (Carlson, 2004; Dalton,

2007). Other companies, such as 3DMaxMedia and PentaMedia Graphics, have been working

on resurrecting two of the most famous Indian dead celebrities, M G R and Raj Kapor since the

year 2000 (Bunn, 2000). Visual effects may grow the market for dead celebrity brands in the

years ahead, especially by partnering with key brand alliances in providing safe, valuable, and


enduring icons, perhaps digitally, to champion new and classic brands. Banking on part

nostalgia and part “movie magic,” bringing iconic dead celebrity brands to life is unventured

territory with lucrative possibilities. Additionally, such endeavors are crucial in keeping the dead

celebrity brand refreshed, current and relevant (Gellene, cited in Petty & D’Rozario, 2009; Petty

& D’Rozario, 2009) enabling the value of the brand to flourish for years to come. Given this

new reality (or near reality), death ceases to be the end of a celebrity’s career, but rather the

opening of a new phase. The new technological solutions on the horizon, should give pause to

living celebrities in terms of how they want to be marketed and re-imagined after death (Dalton,

2007). Japanese pop-star Hatsune Miku – a 3D hologram – played to sold out stadium concerts

all over Japan (Saenz, 2010). Hence, the notion of creating new concert events by Kurt Cobain

and Michael Jackson has lucrative revenue potentials, especially if their celebrity brands remain

undiluted over time. These events are rooted in the value of the dead celebrity brand and the

nostalgia of the popularity of the iconic artists of the time. Other possibilities which can enable

dead celebrity brands to grow is illustrated by Japanese all-girl pop band AKB 48, who recently

debuted a new band member via a candy commercial – a band member who does not physically

exist, but was composited using digitized features of the other band members to form a new band

member, complete with a full personality, likes, dislikes and a background bio (Murray, 2011).

The potential of real digital re-animation of dead celebrities is truly on the horizon.

The literature review has shown that brand management, both in life and thereafter, is

critical to the continued positive growth and association of the dead celebrity brand. The value

of death in celebrity varies directly with not only the accomplishments of the celebrity in life, but

also with the value in associating with key strategic brands which enhance the brand equity of

the living celebrity brand. Moreover, once in death, the celebrity brand can capitalize through


the scarcity caused by the loss (death), by the intangible of consumer nostalgia, and by strategic,

directed brand management. Without the estate or managers meticulously maintaining the brand

luster of the dead celebrity by creating new licensing and brand association structures, the

economic value of the dead celebrity may never materialize. Years of preparation in celebrity

image management contributes to the overall growth and development of the celebrity when

alive. It is no different after death. Celebrity cultivation still requires strong management; image

guidance and the necessity for brand alliances with other brands to maintain grow and develop

continued value in death.

Methods

The analysis consisted of one case study of the management of an iconic celebrity who is

currently deceased: Marilyn Monroe. This celebrity broke into the mainstream between the

1950s and 1960s. Monroe attained a relatively high level of industry success; however she

garnered a disproportionately high level of fame during these years and beyond. The Marilyn

Monroe estate has controlled the Monroe brand since her death, having licensed certain

management rights to a few companies over the years. The aim of the case study is to determine

the fundamental reasoning why this celebrity gained a higher economic value in death than in

life.

Units of Analysis

The study analyzed Marilyn Monroe in the context of her economic value in life, and her

economic value in death. In connection therewith, the analysis shall observe the following units

of analysis:

 Comparative background of Marilyn Monroe and a summary analysis of her

achievements while alive, including economic performance of the projects she starred in,


her business policies and strategies (as an analysis of the establishment of value).

 Circumstances surrounding the termination of Monroe’s career (as a final establishment

of value while alive), including her death and the achievements/accolades she garnered

before death.

 Management by the Estate after Monroe’s death in terms of economic performance,

including licensing and sales endeavors, intellectual property rights management, policies

and strategies.

Each unit of analysis was analyzed in terms of how much an effect each unit has had on

the value of Monroe after her death. The study used these units of analysis to determine the

effectiveness of Monroe’s management in creating strong posthumous value in the Marilyn

Monroe brand. From the results of the study, the data was analyzed to synthesize the results of

the decisions made by the Estate of Marilyn Monroe in creating value in death for Monroe.

Drivers of Analysis

In connection with the aforementioned units of analysis, there are certain drivers, or

catalysts, of these units which should be factored in, as they influence the units of analysis. This

analysis shall include these key drivers, such as:

 The value of key talent and experience of both the Monroe management company and the

execution of the Estate of Marilyn Monroe, including experience in brand management,

managing celebrity assets, and licensing management. The experience factor found

behind the Monroe management is a driver of differing levels of success, through the

differing strategy methods and execution.

 The value of the “icon” as a brand enhancement. Monroe’s popularity stemmed from her

unique connection with her audience. Her sex appeal was generally known, publicized


and marketed; and even after death, has buttressed her value, since she died relatively

young while still in her prime.

 The value of the “troubled story” as a driver of attraction to each star. Monroe’s

background and formative years were tumultuous and emotionally damaging, yet she rose

to be one of the biggest stars of the time, while embodying the glamour and treachery of

Hollywood. Stories of Monroe’s antics on set and off, also are a contributing factor to

the lure of the Monroe brand, as such anecdotes fuel mystery surrounding Monroe’s

death.

Each driver shall be analyzed in connection with their related unit(s) of analysis to

provide a clear, distinct picture of the structure of Monroe’s posthumous success and longevity

and providing insight as to effectiveness of the management styles of the Estate and its licensed

representatives. By then analyzing the strategies of the Estate and its licensed representatives, the

study can then provide insight as to the reasons for levels of success for the Monroe celebrity

brand.

Criteria and Data

The criteria for this analysis included referencing key historical and strategic information

from the relative, applicable time periods, including using intellectual property rights

information from current representatives, analyzed against previously established business

conventions by Monroe herself. The analysis is based upon one the most iconic and established

celebrity brands from the late twentieth century:

Marilyn Monroe. One of the most replicated and glorified images of the twentieth

century, Marilyn Monroe was one of the most iconic actresses of the modern era. Her films

grossed more than $200 million domestically (Biography, 2011). Monroe has consistently been


ranked by Forbes among the top ten dead celebrity earners since 2001 (Fong & Lau, 2001;

Schiffman, 2002; DiCarlo, 2003; DiCarlo & Patsuris, 2004; Kafka, 2005; Rose, Hau, & Shupak,

2006; Goldman & Ewalt, 2007; Noer, Ewalt & Hoy, 2008; Pomerantz, Rose, Streib, & Thibault,

2009; Greenberg & Paine, 2010). A striking icon, Monroe rose to fame as a sexy, dingy blonde

whose movies captivated audiences around the world (Biography, 2011). She garnered Golden

Globe Awards in 1954, 1960 and 1962, and a BAFTA award in 1956, and two BAFTA

nominations for performances from several of her 30 films made between 1950 and 1961 (CMG

Worldwide, n.d.d). Monroe was listed by the AFI as the sixth greatest female American Screen

Legend of all time (American Film Institute, n.d.) and as the 14th greatest screen performance in

the feature film Some Like It Hot (1959) (American Film Institute, 2004). Monroe died in 1962

of suspicion of a drug overdose (Biography, 2011).

Monroe’s estate was bequeathed to Lee Strasberg, her former acting teacher. After his

death, Strasberg willed Monroe’s estate to his widow, Anna Strasberg (Marilyn Monroe, n.d.).

Strasberg vigorously enforced Monroe’s posthumous rights of publicity and certain copyrights

through the courts and sold certain representation rights to CMG Worldwide, administered by

CEO Mark Roesler. Such rights were recently sold for between $20-30 million to Toronto-based

Jamie Salter of Authentic Brands Group, which included National Entertainment Collectibles,

Inc., with Anna Strasberg as a minority partner in the overall venture (Whitman, 2011). For the

purpose of this case study, analysis was made of the business decisions in creating revenue

streams of the Marilyn Monroe brand to determine the economic strength of the brand. This

included analysis of licensing and merchandising rights and policies of Monroe’s name and

image, movie sales and domestic gross over time, and analysis of the endurance of the brand vis-

a-vis the emotional connection the consumer has made with the Monroe name and likeness. Key


interviews were required of CMG Worldwide head Mark Roesler, including his head of licensing

who manages the Marilyn Monroe account, fans of Marilyn Monroe, Anna Strasberg and the

rights holder of several vintage Marilyn Monroe photographs, Charles Murphy. Due to ongoing

litigation, Mr. Roesler and Ms. Strasberg were not available; however other interviews were

conducted with Mr. Murphy and with Scott Fortner, head of one of the largest Marilyn Monroe

private memorabilia collections in the world.

The Case of Marilyn Monroe

“She was our angel, the sweet angel of sex, and the sugar

of sex came up from her like a resonance of sound in the

clearest grain of a violin. Across five continents the men

who knew the most about love would covet her, and the

classical pimples of the adolescent working his first gas

pump would also pump for her, since Marilyn was

deliverance, a very Stradivarius of sex, so gorgeous, so

forgiving, humorous, compliant and tender that even the

most mediocre musician would relax his lack of art in the

dissolving magic of her violin.”

(Mailer, 1973, p. 15)

Celebrity has a unique effect upon society. Few celebrities have had a more far reaching

and long-enduring effect upon people and society than that of the legendary movie star Marilyn

Monroe. During her short film career which spanned the late 1940s to the early 1960s, Monroe’s

films grossed hundreds of millions of dollars worldwide (Biography, 2011), while captivating

audiences around the world as a 1950s “sex goddess” with a relatable vulnerability and a


“childlike innocence” (CMG Worldwide, n.d.a, para.1; Yahoo, n.d., para. 1). Words, such as

those expressed by Norman Mailer above from his visual biography of Monroe, are echoed even

today by fans of all ages. Monroe is still regarded as one of the world’s “biggest and most

enduring sex symbols” (Biography, 2011, para. 1). At the time, Monroe was one of the most

sought after actresses in Hollywood, but not the most successful, compared to others. Her story

of a tumultuous upbringing and subsequent transformation from a local girl to Hollywood

superstar is the kind of dramatic story which makes a blockbuster Hollywood movie. What made

Monroe’s story even more captivating was that her tragic story was true, from her difficult

beginnings to her controversial and untimely ending. Monroe’s timeless legacy still charms men

and women of all ages and generations today. With the rise of the commercial Internet and the

digitization of her image to near ubiquity, fans worldwide now have new, unprecedented ways to

connect (or re-connect) with her legacy. “She will forever be known as the standard for beauty

and sexuality,” said the owner of marilynmonroecollection.com, one of the largest independent

Monroe collectibles sites in the world, when asked why he still collects and follows Monroe

news and events (Fortner, personal communication, September 29, 2011). There is a dearth of

academic analysis as to why Monroe has such deep and enduring success. Through this case

study, Marilyn Monroe’s rise to timeless fame after death will be analyzed, establishing that

intelligent and talented estate management is the key to growing and maintaining the lucrative

value of Marilyn Monroe celebrity posthumously. This was accomplished by Monroe making

key strategic business decisions during her life with an eye for the future. Through these

decisions, the Estate of Marilyn Monroe may then utilize the economic and emotional value

Monroe had established in her life with the public, paired with her business precedents, as

powerful foundations for strong future deals. The Estate can become empowered through


leveraging the Monroe brand, scarcity of Monroe product, and the captivating power of nostalgia

over Marilyn Monroe.

Monroe’s Background

Monroe had a childhood fraught with challenges and unhappiness. Born in 1926 as

Norma Jeane Mortenson in Los Angeles, California, her birth certificate was devoid of a father’s

name. This formed the first mystery of Marilyn Monroe, which began the long tradition of

speculation over Monroe’s history (CMG Worldwide, n.d.a; Yahoo, n.d.), which continues even

today. Her mother, Gladys Pearl Baker, was employed as a film cutter at RKO Studios and

suffered from psychological illnesses and “mental breakdowns,” which were observed directly

by Monroe (then Norma Jeane), resulting in Baker’s institutionalization (Yahoo, n.d., para. 2).

As a result, Norma Jeane (later baptized as Norma Jeane Baker) spent her formative years in and

out of the Los Angeles foster care system and orphanages until her mid-teens. There is further

speculation as to whether Monroe endured further “emotional and sexual abuse” while in the

foster care system, without any concrete proof ever emerging (CMG Worldwide, n.d.a; Yahoo,

n.d., para. 2). In 1942, shortly after Norma Jeane’s sixteenth birthday, she married James

“Jimmy” Dougherty, the 21-year-old son of a neighbor, in an arranged marriage organized to

prevent Norma Jeane’s forced return to the foster care system (Yahoo, n.d.). This circumstance

arose when her then-current guardian, friend of Monroe’s mother Gladys Goddard, told Monroe

that she was moving away and could not bring Monroe along (Yahoo, n.d.). In 1944, Norma

Jeane was employed at the Radio Plane Munitions factory in Burbank, California, inspecting

parachutes and fireproofing aircraft, living with her in-laws while her husband was on active

duty overseas with the Merchant Marines (Yahoo, n.d., para. 3).


During her employment at the munitions factory, an Army photographer, David Conover,

discovered her while on assignment covering women who were contributing to the war effort for

Yank magazine (a U.S. Army publication) (CMG Worldwide, n.d.a; Yahoo, n.d.). From these

photos, and encouragement from Conover to Norma Jeane to sign with The Blue Book modeling

agency, other modeling opportunities poured in for Norma Jeane. She became a highly desired

model for various magazine covers, swimsuit and pin-up layouts. Norma Jeane continued to

evolve, changing her look and hair color “to emulate such established stars as Lana Turner and

her long deceased idol, Jean Harlow” (Yahoo, n.d., para. 3). Two years later, upon the return of

Jimmy Dougherty from overseas duty, Dougherty had discovered that his wife had become one

of the hottest, in-demand models of the time. Unfortunately, this discovery ultimately resulted in

their divorce, releasing Norma Jeane to chase her career aspirations (Biography, 2011). That

same year, Norma Jeane had signed her first contract with 20th Century Fox, making “$125 per

week” (Biography, 2011, 0:01:30). She changed her name to “Marilyn Monroe” borrowing her

grandmother’s last name of Monroe (CMG Worldwide, n.d.a; Yahoo, n.d.). In 1946, Monroe set

out to be a star.

Stardom

“Norma Jeane decided to create a character. She invented a character. She died her hair

blonde, she wore low cut dresses. She invented a character and people accepted her for that”

(Biography, 2011, 0:01:44). Norma Jeane physically and emotionally transformed herself from

“Norma” to “Marilyn” – a transformation which, to this day, has irreversibly changed the human

experience worldwide. As Monroe began her career, her early performances were not explosive

successes. In fact, after Monroe’s initial contract renewal from Fox, she was dropped by the

studio, citing poor box office performance (Yahoo, n.d.). However, starting with the films


Niagra (1953), Gentlemen Prefer Blondes (1953), How to Marry a Millionaire (1954) and The

Seven Year Itch (1955), Monroe had successfully left an indelible impression on Hollywood,

while enchanting audiences by playing desirable, yet unique roles in her films, charming and

smoldering on screen leaving audiences yearning for more Marilyn (Biography, 2011, para. 5;

Yahoo, n.d.). By 1955, Monroe began to desire smarter roles and to be taken seriously as an

actress, despite rising to fame based upon her meticulously crafted sultry, yet ditzy image

(Yahoo, n.d.). She was widely considered at the time to be “America’s #1 Sex Goddess” (Burns

& Specht, 2001, 1:09:31) and was voted by Photoplay magazine in 1953 as Best New Actress

(CMG Worldwide, n.d.a).

Despite this, Monroe broke her contract, left Hollywood, and moved to New York to

study under the famous acting coach Lee Strasberg (Yahoo, n.d.). Many in the acting

community perceived such a move to be ambitious and gutsy, especially since it was Marilyn

Monroe, of all actors, who attempted such a transformation (Burns & Specht, 2011). For

Monroe, however, she wanted to be truly respected as an actor with legitimate credibility, while

gaining more control over her career to play more sophisticated roles than the usual “sex bomb”

(Burns & Specht, 2001; Yahoo, n.d., para. 12). Immediately, Monroe’s efforts generated results:

in 1955 she formed her own production company, Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc., to establish

better creative control in selected projects and approval over which directors she would work

with in the productions in which she chose to work (Burns & Specht, 2001, 0:04:21). Her

company also allowed her the option to provide non-exclusive acting services for other studios,

not just one (Burns & Specht, 2001; Yahoo, n.d.). The subsequent pictures consistently garnered

her critical acclaim, including a Golden Globe Award for Best Actress in a Comedy for her


performance as “Sugar Kane Kowalczyk” in the motion picture comedy Some Like It Hot (1959)

(Biography, 2011).

During this meteoric rise to stardom, Monroe was secretly managing her personal issues

and deteriorating mental health. A miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy caused by endometriosis

in the late 1950s triggered an emotional landslide to such a degree that Monroe would never fully

recover (Yahoo, n.d.). Monroe married twice more in her life, both of which ended in painful

divorce. The accumulation of difficult personal situations such as divorce from both baseball

great Joe DiMaggio and especially author/playwright Arthur Miller, with whom Monroe became

pregnant, depression and prescription drug addiction (mixed with regular alcohol consumption)

took major tolls on Monroe’s stability and performance (Yahoo, n.d.).

In spite of these issues, by 1962, Monroe was 20th Century Fox’s most successful and

economically reliable actor, yet had become an unsafe risk behind the scenes, which damaged

her economic reliability going forward (Burns & Specht, 2001). Her final two completed films,

Let’s Make Love (1960) and The Misfits (1962) underperformed (Burns & Specht, 2001). Her

final unfinished film, Something’s Got to Give (1962) proved to be too tumultuous for Monroe to

handle as she called in sick 20 times, working only one-third of the full shooting schedule,

setting the production behind for weeks (Burns & Specht, 2001). Fox fired her for failing to

render services. Dean Martin, her co-star, refused to continue with shooting the picture if

Monroe was not a part of the picture – therefore production ceased and the picture was never

finished (Biography, 2011). By the end of Monroe’s career, she had garnered British Academy

of Film and Television Arts (BAFTA) award nominations in 1956 (for Best Foreign Actress in

The Seven Year Itch) and 1958 (for Best Foreign Actress in The Prince and the Showgirl); four

Golden Globe Award nominations in 1954, 1956, 1960, and 1961, winning in 1954 (for Female


World Film Favorite), 1960 (for Best Actress in a Comedy in Some Like It Hot) and in 1961 (for

Female World Film Favorite); and she was awarded a star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame,

among many other accolades (Biography, 2011; Yahoo, n.d.; CMG Worldwide, n.d.a; CMG

Worldwide, n.d.d; Marilyn Monroe, n.d.). She was never nominated for an Oscar, and therefore,

never won an Oscar Award.

“Sad Child, Unhappy Star”

In Life

The intrigue and curiosity around the legend of Marilyn Monroe is not without salacious

scandal. The stories of her personal life, personal struggles and fights with 20th Century Fox

made Marilyn Monroe relatable: she was amazingly glamorous, beautiful and sexual, yet she

constantly fought with her boss and could not find happiness in love. Fox considered her a

“somewhat out of control but still very bankable movie star” while co-stars such as Cyd Charisse

from the unfinished motion picture Something’s Got to Give thought Marilyn had psychological

problems (Burns & Specht, 2001, 0:15:08). Her professional conduct was the stuff of legend, as

she was consistently late to the set on every single production in which she worked. Even when

she appeared to sing the now legendary performance of “Happy Birthday Mr. President” to then

President John F. Kennedy, she was late to the stage and a joke was made of her tardiness (Burns

& Specht, 2001). Her consistent throat and cold problems resulted in costly production delays

on every one of her films. Her doctor believed that her immune system became weak and

dropped due to depression, which caused her to have further illnesses (Burns & Specht, 2001).

Recalling Monroe’s two other marriages, these experiences contributed to her crumbling

emotional and mental state. With DiMaggio, marital bliss only lasted nine months as DiMaggio

struggled with Monroe’s massive popularity, especially with men (Biography, 2011). This was


evident when, during their honeymoon in Japan, Monroe stopped to perform for U.S. servicemen

stationed in Korea: a performance which resulted in a near-riot among the troops as they went

crazy at the sight of Monroe – a situation which made DiMaggio exceedingly uncomfortable

(CMG Worldwide, n.d.a). His discomfort was profoundly displayed during the filming of the

famous sewer grate scene from the motion picture The Seven Year Itch (1955) when a crowd

watched Monroe’s skirt blow up over the sewer grate, then watched DiMaggio overreact to the

crowd’s enthusiasm over Monroe’s visual spectacle (Yahoo, n.d.). Their struggles were quite

public, as was their divorce, citing “conflict of careers,” yet DiMaggio remained ever faithful

and loyal to Monroe for the rest of his life (CMG Worldwide, n.d.b, para. 3; Yahoo, n.d.). With

Miller, Monroe was attempting to improve herself - to be more intellectual and broad (Burns &

Specht, 2001). Introduced through Lee Strasberg, they remained married for five years, with

Miller even penning the part of Roslyn Taber in The Misfits (1961) for Monroe. She remained a

steadfast wife to Miller, despite more unpleasant circumstances such as Miller’s testimony and

subsequent discipline during the U.S. anti-communism hearings and during their trying times

with the failed pregnancies (Yahoo, n.d.) It seemed evident Monroe would continue to have bad

luck with keeping a marriage, as her second marriage ended in nearly the same manner as her

first (Biography, 2011; Welkos, 2005).

Aside from her marriage troubles, Monroe was also connected to more curious and

scandalous circumstances, tied to both then U.S. Attorney Robert Kennedy and then President

John F. Kennedy in rumor and speculation which Monroe has never shaken to this day. The

exact circumstances of the relationship between both Kennedys and Monroe has never been

exactly proven (or disproven), despite the numerous novels of theory and whimsy, cogitating

upon whether she was engaged in some extra-marital affairs with either Kennedy, or both


(Yahoo, n.d.). However, she considered the Kennedys to be a very important and meaningful

part of her life (Burns & Specht, 2001). The suspiciousness of her relationship with the

Kennedys served to further fuel conjecture and conspiracy theories over Monroe’s untimely

passing.

In Death

Marilyn Monroe died at the age of 36 in Brentwood, California. She died alone, lying

unclothed and face down on her bed, on August 5, 1962 – discovered by her live-in housekeeper,

Eunice Murray (Welkos, 2005; Burns & Specht, 2001). Of the many facts surrounding her

death, these seem to be the only facts which most believe to be true. Her death, even today, is

the fodder of murder conspiracies, government cover-ups and other intriguing mystery parables

(Welkos, 2005). The Los Angeles Times, in 1962, reported her as a “troubled beauty who failed

to find happiness as Hollywood’s brightest star” (“Marilyn Monroe dies of overdose”, 2006,

para. 2) and reported her as dying of an overdose drugs, under the headline of “Sad Child,

Unhappy Star” (“Marilyn Monroe dies of overdose”, 2006, para. 6). However, on the official

Marilyn Monroe biography page by CMG Worldwide, the management company which still

represents certain images of Monroe, they report Monroe simply “died in her sleep” (CMG

Worldwide, n.d.c, para.3). Wild speculation has continued for decades that she was murdered

(Biography, 2011). Numerous books have been authored over the last 50 years which discuss

various conspiracy theories and murder mystery cover-ups related to Monroe’s untimely death.

Nevertheless, Monroe’s death was officially ruled as a drug overdose. Dr. Thomas Noguchi, then

Deputy Medical Examiner, had reported that Monroe’s death was due to “acute barbiturate

poisoning” and considered the death, not a homicide, but a “probable suicide” (Welkos, 2005,

para. 11). Monroe was known to be a manic depressive. Producer Henry Weinstein, just before


commencing principal photography on Something’s Got to Give, had once found Monroe passed

out on her bed from some bout with drugs (Burns & Specht, 2001). Monroe had grown

dependent on sleeping pills during her career, as she used drugs to cope with long periods of

insomnia (Burns & Specht, 2001). Her doctors were aware of her behaviors and they coped with

this reality by maintaining 24-hour access to her residence and remained ready to respond when

necessary (Burns & Specht, 2001) Peers in Hollywood had also known Monroe for mixing

champagne with drugs, a combination known years later to be very dangerous and potentially

fatal (Burns & Specht, 2001). Her death stunned the world.

Marilyn Monroe Incorporated

The narrative of Marilyn Monroe paints a seductive, compelling portrait of a woman with

a dark, painful start who rose above her adversities to become successful beyond her dreams,

constantly challenging herself to improve. Such a narrative also paints a portrait of a woman

clawing for happiness and acceptance. She needed to be loved, accepted, adored and respected –

but never ultimately enjoying any such splendors, with the narrative ending far too early, and far

too tragically. Nevertheless, it is the tragic nature of her tale which, with memories of her

smoldering beauty and irresistible sexuality, which drives people young and old to remember and

enjoy the life and creative endeavors that was Marilyn Monroe.

During her career and thereafter, Marilyn Monroe’s films have grossed over $200 million

worldwide (Welkos, 2005; Biography, 2011). Currently, over 430 books by or about Marilyn

Monroe can be purchased through Amazon.com alone. A cursory search for “Marilyn Monroe”

items on ebay.com will return over 43,000 different items for sale. Monroe’s voice and likeness

have been used to sell items such as Chanel fashions, Mercedes-Benz, Chrysler, General Motors

and Volkswagen advertising campaigns worldwide; Gateway Computers, Levi’s Jeans, a


“Marilyn” perfume line in Europe, Dom Perignon ad campaign, Marilyn Monroe-branded leather

furniture and wine, the face of 2,000 slot machines; Visa advertising campaigns, Aliz

International Luggage, HMY Airways, Calvin Klein Europe, Unilever ad campaigns (Fong &

Lau, 2001, para.1; DiCarlo, 2003, para. 1; Kafka & Hoffmann, 2005, para. 1).

FIGURE 1: YEARLY INCOME GENERATED BY
MARILYN MONROE ESTATE
(including all revenues from authorized licensees and auctions)
[as analyzed by Forbes magazine]
2001 $4,000,000 USD
2002 $7,000,000 USD
2003 $8,000,000 USD
2004 $8,000,000 USD
2005 $8,000,000 USD
2006 $8,000,000 USD
2007 $7,000,000 USD
2008 $6,500,000 USD
2009 $4-$5,000,000 USD (estimated)

2010 $27,000,000 USD

Figure 1: Summary of the yearly revenue generated by the Marilyn
Monroe Estate, from revenues generated by its licensing partnerships, as
compiled by Forbes Magazine over the last ten years. Adapted from
(Fong & Lau, 2001; Schiffman, 2002; DiCarlo, 2003; DiCarlo &
Patsuris, 2004; Kafka, 2005; Rose, Hau, & Shupak, 2006; Goldman &
Ewalt, 2007; Noer, Ewalt, & Hoy, 2008; Pomerantz, Rose, Streib, &
Thibault, 2009; Greenberg & Paine, 2010; Pomerantz, 2011a)

Monroe has consistently been ranked by Forbes among the top dead celebrity earners

since 2001 earning $4 million to $8 million per year (See Figure 1, above) (Fong & Lau, 2001;

Schiffman, 2002; DiCarlo, 2003; DiCarlo & Patsuris, 2004; Kafka, 2005; Rose, Hau, & Shupak,

2006; Goldman & Ewalt, 2007; Noer, Ewalt, & Hoy, 2008; Pomerantz, Rose, Streib, & Thibault,


2009; Greenberg & Paine, 2010). Although over the year 2000 decade, Monroe’s income

plateaued then dipped, her estate’s annual income is still significant (Forbes Magazine only

tracks income above $6 million per year). In 2010, Monroe’s income rebounded to over $25

million in revenues, putting her in third place of top dead celebrity earners (Pomerantz, 2011a).

Auction revenue of Monroe memorabilia, for example, has been strong with Christie’s Fine Art

Auctions raising over $13 million in 1999 (Fong & Lau, 2001), “$460,000” was raised in 2001

(Schiffman, 2002, para. 1), while just recently the iconic white dress Monroe wore in the film

The Seven Year Itch (1955) was sold at auction for “$4.6 million” (Morgan, 2011, para. 1).

Numerous feature motion pictures have been made chronicling Monroe’s life over the

years (or a portion thereof), including a TV movie entitled Marilyn: The Untold Story (1980)

which aired on ABC; Norma Jean and Marilyn (1996) which aired on HBO and garnered

multiple Emmy and Golden Globe nominations, and a TV mini-series entitled Blonde (2001)

which aired on CBS (Yahoo, n.d.). At least three more projects are slated to be released in the

near future: a feature from The Weinstein Company entitled My Week with Marilyn (2011), an

independent production entitled Blonde (2013); and a documentary entitled Marilyn Monroe:

Murder on Fifth Helena Drive (2012) about the possible conspiracy cover-up concerning

Monroe’s death (Adler, 2010, para. 1, 2; “Marilyn Monroe: Murder on Fifth Helena Drive”,

n.d.). Coupled with the numerous and lucrative auctions which the Estate continues to hold each

year, selling more memorabilia, personal property or other artifacts of Monroe’s, which can

generate millions of dollars in sales for a single item, the marketplace has proven to still have an

insatiable desire for everything related to the person, the actor and the woman called Marilyn

Monroe.


Management and Strategy

Initial Strategy (Living)

Comparatively, Monroe was not as successful an actress as some of her contemporaries,

such as Audrey Hepburn. As previously stated, she did not win an Oscar, and won only one

Golden Globe Award for acting. Yet, the allure and attraction of Monroe, even today, is robust,

generating millions in revenues every year (as outlined in Figure 1, page 33). A distinct and

crafted strategy was in play, which began with the strategic collusion and business decisions

made between Monroe and Strasberg in the 1950s. This strategy included using media

photographers’ images of her to leverage public support and build a fan base for Monroe, and

using Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc. to secure ideal roles, strong rights acquisitions

(participation and rights splits) and to individually select key directors to work with in key

pictures. The strategic mentality established by Monroe is maintained by the Estate today and

spearheads Monroe’s consistent earning power and projected long-term viability well into the

next fifty years.

Monroe is regarded by many as the world’s “most famous, most glamorous and most

tragic superstar” (Burns & Specht, 2001). Her intelligent strategy can be gleamed from her

career decisions and management of 20th Century Fox. As referenced by Burns and Specht

(2001), when she was being fired from the production Something’s Got to Give, despite her

continued health problems, Monroe waged a public relations campaign, as advised by Paula

Strasberg and her then publicist Pat Newcomb. This campaign involved several of her favorite

(and now famous) still photographers for key strategic outlets, including an interview with

Richard Merryman from Life magazine and hundreds of photographs from her friend George

Barris (Burns & Specht, 2001). The goal, per Burns and Specht (2001) was to put the public


attention squarely on Monroe in a positive light. Her words to Merryman were “Don’t make me

a joke!” because she felt she was being treated like a joke by Fox and industry insiders and did

not want to be reflected in the same light to her fans (Burns & Specht, 2001, 1:07:13).

Posthumous Strategy

It is with this mentality that the Marilyn Monroe Estate, initially bequeathed to Lee

Strasberg, her former acting coach, mentor and friend, then bequeathed (and current

Administratrix) to Anna Strasberg, Lee’s wife, after his death (Whitman, 2011), has engaged in

business with the purpose of licensing the image, name and likeness of Marilyn Monroe. The

Estate engaged in licensing products and in other business opportunities which would enhance

and grow the brand that Monroe established for herself: a talented, glamorous and smoldering

superstar with class, vulnerability and a genuine sweetness (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC

et al., 2011). Monroe “was shrewd about her own image. She saw it” (Burns & Specht, 2001,

0:18:44). Additionally, by opening Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc., after having had many

counseling sessions with Lee Strasberg, the new production company gave Monroe an

unprecedented level of control, allowing for the ability to control rights, directors to work with,

and the flow of revenues through her corporation (including engaging in co-production

opportunities). Monroe felt that having this control, especially over directors “was very

important” (Burns & Specht, 2001, 0:04:37).

Richman. After Monroe’s death, the Estate made efforts to consolidate rights and gain

representation to continue management of the Marilyn Monroe legacy. As early as 1989, 27

years after Monroe’s death, the Estate signed an agreement with the Roger Richman Agency to

represent the iconic “Marilyn Monroe” legacy and to promote “the most photographed person in

the world” (Murphy, personal communication, August 27, 2011). The Roger Richman Agency


held the rights to be the licensing agent for the Estate of Marilyn Monroe until June 30, 1995,

with a one-year commission run-off period (of any then-existing licenses), of which 100% of all

of these revenues are the sole property of the Estate (e.g., any successor to these rights has no

claim to any of this revenue) (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para.

6[d][ii][b]). It would be over the next decade that Marilyn Monroe would begin to realize a true

renaissance.

Roesler. In 1994, the Estate chose to pursue a different direction which proved to be the

most lucrative decision in maintaining and growing the Marilyn Monroe icon and legacy. Mark

Roesler is the chairman, founder and CEO of CMG Worldwide, a (currently) 40-year-old

company located in Indiana. His belief is that the “most valuable asset to celebrities is the

goodwill associated with their name and with them. That goodwill is an intangible asset, and it’s

important to protect and manage it – not only right now but also in the future” (“CMG

Worldwide: Intangible Assets”, 2010). Roesler’s philosophies and strategies are based on a

belief that litigation is vitally important to the protection of the brand and that brands need

protection (“CMG Worldwide: Intangible Assets”, 2010). As newer media technologies emerge,

(e.g., the Internet, digital regeneration of personality voice and likeness, etc.), protection of the

celebrity brand in these new media technologies is extremely important, as these new media

technologies become a tool for both promotion of the brand and for public interaction with the

brand (“CMG Worldwide: Intangible Assets”, 2010). Additionally, Roesler’s philosophies

included the notion that a brand like Marilyn Monroe should maintain a long-term branding

strategy in place. Such a strategy was established by Roesler in 1994, after acquiring the rights

to render services as the licensing agent for the Estate of Marilyn Monroe, in connection with the


licensing of Monroe’s name, signature, likeness, voice and other elements (CMG Worldwide v.

MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011).

Terms and business strategy. To achieve these objectives, a specific strategy was put in

play by the Estate of Marilyn Monroe through the use of the services of CMG Worldwide, Inc.

as a means to grow, promote, and capitalize upon the brand strength and equity of Marilyn

Monroe worldwide. Using the expertise of Mark Roesler and his zeal to further grow the

Marilyn Monroe brand and augment the image of Monroe, the Estate engaged CMG Worldwide

for almost 16 years, establishing Marilyn Monroe as one of the world’s pre-eminent brands.

The engagement started in July of 1995 to take over as the “worldwide licensing agent

for the Estate of Marilyn Monroe” (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B,

para. 2[a]). The Estate employed a specific strategy in terms of how the scope of licensing was

to be implemented. Pursuant to the Engagement Agreement signed in 1995, CMG Worldwide

became the exclusive worldwide licensing agent of the Estate with respect solely to

merchandising and advertising rights of Marilyn Monroe held by the Estate (e.g., the right to

exclusively license in merchandising and advertising endeavors only “among other rights and

things, certain rights in and to the image, signature, voice, photographs, likeness, name,

biographical information, right of publicity, performance, trade name, common law and statutory

trademarks, copyrights, merchandising, publishing and commercial rights…of Marilyn Monroe

(a/k/a Norma Jean Dougherty, Norma Jeane Mortenson or Norma Jeane Baker”) (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[a], Schedule A, Recitals para. 3).

In connection with those rights, CMG Worldwide was also granted non-exclusive rights

with respect to “CD-ROM and other CD based formats and/or applications and Swimwear;” with

the Estate retaining the full, unencumbered right to license concurrently such rights to third-


parties, without any monies being paid to CMG Worldwide for such concurrent licensing (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[b]). CMG Worldwide was also

licensed to use the granted rights to create and maintain an Internet web presence (on the

Internet, in any communities such as AOL, or via any media now known or hereafter devised),

with all content, artwork etc., owned by the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al.,

2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[d]).

Finally, the Estate granted to CMG Worldwide the right to authorize, “subject to the

limitations of Schedule B” and with the Estate’s prior written approval, the right for “third

parties to perform acts, shows or commercials, simulating the characters or performances of

Marilyn Monroe” (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[e]).

These established terms laid the specific groundwork for what CMG Worldwide could do with

the Marilyn Monroe intellectual property. It is through these specific guidelines and regulations

that Roesler was able to create the legacy of Monroe through the various books, movies,

merchandise products and advertising campaigns which either featured Marilyn Monroe or

created a simulation and/or likeness of Monroe. Through the use of future technologies clauses

in the grant of rights (e.g., “all media now known or hereafter devised”), the Estate granted CMG

Worldwide a truly forward-looking tool which allowed the Estate, through CMG Worldwide’s

licensing efforts, to economically capitalize on new advances in technologies (in areas such as

distribution, creation and media consumption) (CMG Worldwide v. MM-AGB LLC, et al., 2011,

Exhibit B, para. 8[i]).

However, the Estate did not grant everything to CMG Worldwide. Although outwardly,

the Estate appeared to engage in a progressive business strategy through CMG Worldwide, it

also withheld and protected key revenue streams based upon, in part, Monroe’s hands-on


services rendered in her motion pictures, and more progressive rights which are now proving to

be lucrative business opportunities. Schedule B in the Engagement Agreement outlines the

exclusions to the rights granted to CMG Worldwide in Schedule A. Such Schedule B exclusions

are in addition to the limitations of rights to CMG Worldwide outlined in the Engagement

Agreement (e.g., the limitation that CMG Worldwide can only exploit merchandising and

advertising rights in connection with the Marilyn Monroe intellectual property) (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, Schedule A). Schedule B exclusions, as

outlined in CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al. (2011), include such rights based from

Marilyn Monroe’s existing, personal rights and those of her Estate which included the any rights

controlled by Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc. and any such rights of the successors, heirs, and

assigns of Marilyn Monroe, Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc., as they would control to the

following rights: SAG entitlements; residuals from any recording, feature or television

performance in any media now known or hereafter invented; “rights and entitlements whether or

not related to or arising out of any contract heretofore executed by Marilyn Monroe, Marilyn

Monroe Productions, Inc. or by her Estate” which may have related to any television

performance, motion picture or other performance in which Monroe was an actress; “video

cassette rights” (e.g., home video rights) whether or not related to or based from any contract

which Monroe, her Estate or Marilyn Monroe Productions, Inc. may have signed; “interactive or

other uses of Marilyn Monroe film clips in any media, now known or hereafter invented other

than in merchandising or advertising” (e.g., use of such clips as licensed to hulu.com, etc.); the

“artificial or electronic creation, reanimation or depiction of the image, likeness and/or voice of

Marilyn Monroe through the use of technology in any media, now known or hereafter devised”

other than in merchandising or advertising (e.g., the creation of a digital Marilyn Monroe for film


roles as opposed to a digital Marilyn Monroe promoting MasterCard); the incorporation of any

other existing licenses at current as a Schedule C matter (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et

al., 2011, Exhibit B, Schedule B).

Finally, as a blanket holdback, any and all rights not specifically granted to CMG

Worldwide are held by the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B,

Schedule B). Any trademarks, patents and/or copyrights which were either approved, secured

and/or created by CMG Worldwide’s efforts are to be registered and owned by the Estate,

including any derivative works created pursuant to any licenses or otherwise pursuant to the

Engagement Agreement (including promotional materials, advertisements, etc.) in any media

now known or hereafter devised (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B,

para. 8[d], [i]).

Given these rules of engagement as to what rights CMG Worldwide was granted (or not)

in connection with future licensing, the Estate established strategic holdbacks for future

exhibition, separate from what was granted to CMG Worldwide. These holdbacks would prove

vitally important and more lucrative in the near future for the Estate. The Estate further

compartmentalized where it wanted certain licensing endeavors to be realized, and where the

Estate did not want certain licensing endeavors to be realized. For instance, the Estate restricted

third-party licensors (including CMG Worldwide) from “[simulating] the voice of Marilyn

Monroe” without prior written consent from the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et

al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[f]). Further, CMG Worldwide, with its array of other celebrities it

represented, was restricted in depicting or associating any other person or character with

Monroe, without prior written consent from the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et

al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[g]). CMG Worldwide was restricted in using Monroe’s name,


likeness or other Monroe intellectual property on any billboard, radio or television advertising

and/or promotions without the prior written approval from the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-

ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[h]). Therefore, despite being granted certain

advertising rights, CMG Worldwide still had to secure written approval for certain advertising

ventures (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 2[h]).

Finally, no license of any kind executed by CMG Worldwide could contain an automatic

renewal provision longer than one year from the expiration of the Engagement Agreement

without prior written consent from the Estate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011,

Exhibit B, para. 2[i]). This limitation gave the Estate security to terminate undesirable licenses.

CMG Worldwide was permitted the use of “foreign sub-agents” (a.k.a., sub-licensors in foreign

territories) with the Estate’s prior written approval; however the term of any “foreign sub-agent”

agreement was limited to two years and must expire no later than June 30, 2000 (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 6[b]). It is unclear whether such

“foreign sub-agents” were permitted during contract term extensions. The Estate was free to

engage any and all action, licensing, etc., with respect to the Schedule B rights, without notice to

or approval from CMG Worldwide, and it was at the Estate’s sole discretion whether or not to

allow CMG Worldwide to engage in any licensing of any Schedule B rights (CMG Worldwide v.

MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 3[a]).

Exploitations of works of art, personal properties, personal letters, etc., as outlined in

CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al. (2011), which may have been created by Marilyn

Monroe or owned at some time by Monroe and are now in possession of the Strasberg Estate

(which may have been bequeathed to Lee Strasberg upon Marilyn Monroe’s death or prior to)

are freely exploitable by “the Strasberg Estate, Anna Strasberg, or its respective heirs, successors


and assigns” (e.g., not the Marilyn Monroe Estate) (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al.,

2011, Exhibit B, para. 3[b]). CMG Worldwide (and the Anna Freud Center as the passive

participant 25% owner of the Marilyn Monroe Estate) has no claim to any revenues generated by

any exploitation of these goods (e.g., by auction or other such means) and only require prior

notification of any such exploitation of these goods. Any other area of property or interest which

was not explicitly granted to CMG Worldwide is the sole and exclusive right to the Estate and

can be freely exploited with no claim by or revenues to be paid to CMG Worldwide (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 3[b]).

The Estate and CMG Worldwide agreed upon an initial term of five years (i.e., the

granted rights to CMG Worldwide would expire on September 30, 2000), with a customary run-

off period to extend thereafter to manage any remaining Monroe licenses which may have

existed (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 4[a-b]). CMG

Worldwide had an option to extend the term of the Engagement Agreement, by written

instrument, if such extension communication was sent at any time (CMG Worldwide v. MM-

ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 4[c]). Pursuant to a letter sent by David Lee Strasberg

to Mark Roesler, dated September 9, 2010, CMG Worldwide’s exclusive licensing rights expired

on September 30, 2005 and CMG Worldwide was engaged in licensing Marilyn Monroe

intellectual property, pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Engagement Agreement, on a

non-exclusive, “at-will” basis until September 9, 2010, when the Estate effectively terminated

CMG Worldwide’s licensing rights (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit D,

para. 2). Essentially, CMG Worldwide, after 2005 continued to operate on an expired contract,

acting in good faith of the previous terms and conditions, while the Estate looked for a better

deal and kept the revenues flowing.


Payments and commissions. The Estate was guaranteed a term payment of

“$4,500,000.00” (e.g., the Estate was paid “$1,125,000.00” for each year of the term) as a

guaranteed payment of revenues and the fee to purchase the aforementioned licensing rights

(CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 5[a-b]). It is presumed that

CMG Worldwide continued these guaranteed payments for each term up to the final license

term, but it is unclear as to if any payments were made to the Estate by CMG Worldwide after

the term expired, but prior to the termination of CMG Worldwide by the Estate. All such

payments were included with a quarterly report outlining the licenses-out and revenues

generated. Per CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al. (2011), CMG Worldwide was

permitted to commission all of its licenses made with the Estate’s prior written approval

(including Schedule C licenses, which were only made at the specific direct of the Estate)

pursuant to Figure 2 (page 45) (and subject to certain provisional limitations outlined in the

agreement) (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 5[d], 6[a], 6[d]).

It is unclear whether this commission structure maintained in the extension term, or if any of

such terms were modified.

All revenues generated by such licenses by CMG Worldwide were subject to a certain

payment distribution schedule outlined in the Engagement Agreement, which included

deductions such as Authorized Expenses, as defined in the Engagement Agreement. With respect

to licensing revenues, each kind of license revenue was not to be co-mingled (CMG Worldwide

v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 8[a-b]). For example, the Engagement

Agreement stipulated that for each license CMG Worldwide administrated and collected

revenues from, the checks are payable to “CMG Worldwide, Inc. (Marilyn Monroe Trust

Account) and are to be segregated from other CMG Worldwide revenues, into a “separate and


distinct” bank account named “Estate of Marilyn Monroe, Deceased Trust Account Number

One” (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 8[b][i]). Revenues from

Schedule C licenses which are administered by CMG Worldwide (excluding certain licenses

such as Franklin Mint or Fox merchandising agreement, etc.) shall also be segregated in a similar

manner, with revenues deposited in an account designated as “Estate of Marilyn Monroe,

Deceased, Trust Account Number Two” (CMG Worldwide v MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011,

Exhibit B, para. 8[b][ii]). The Estate wanted to ensure that all monies due to it were easily

tracked and not lost in accounting issues.

FIGURE 2: CMG WORLDWIDE
COMMISSION PERCENTAGES
(% commission on licenses defined as “Full Agent’s Commission”)
Gross Revenues Domestic Foreign

1st Million $ 35% 40%

2nd Million $ 30% 35%
Over $2 Million 25% 30%
CMG Worldwide “Schedule C” Commissions
0% from 7/1/1995 through 6/30/1996

15% from 7/1/1996 through 6/30/1997

20% from 7/1/1997 through 6/30/1998

Full Agent’s Commission from 7/1/1998

Figure 2: CMG Worldwide commission percentages paid per license
agreement as outlined in the engagement agreement, including
commission percentages paid to CMG for administrating “Schedule C”
commissions. Adapted from CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al.,
2011, Exhibit B, 6(a), 6(d)(i).


Finally, the Estate established certain operational controls in connection with its

relationship with CMG Worldwide. First, CMG Worldwide agreed that “all items to which said

Estate’s Property shall be connected shall be of first-class commercial quality. CMG Worldwide

agreed that the products and/or services as to which it makes licenses will be of good taste and to

the enhancement of the image and name of Marilyn Monroe” (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG

LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 8[c]). The Estate made the issue of product quality control and

the desire to grow and augment the brand strength of Marilyn Monroe a contractual requirement.

CMG Worldwide was also required to not contest the ownership of the rights by the Estate in

any manner and will not “tortuously interfere” with contracts made by the Estate with third

parties, while CMG Worldwide will not engage in any licensing of Marilyn Monroe intellectual

property in any manner not consistent with the Engagement Agreement (CMG Worldwide v.

MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 8[e], 8[g]). The Estate retained a sole and

exclusive right to prior written approval over all “revenue-producing” activities and over all

marketing, advertising and/or promotional materials in connection with said “revenue-

producing” activities, including whether to litigate against or arbitrate on infringing parties

(CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit B, para. 11[b-d]). The Estate, in

realization of Mark Roesler’s superior expertise in the arena of managing deceased celebrity

properties, provided that if Mr. Roesler were to cease rendering his services as Chairman and

CEO of CMG Worldwide, or “cease to work full time on an exclusive basis to supervise this

Agreement” the Estate may elect to terminate the Engagement Agreement with 30 days written

notice, and all obligations due to the Estate would terminate (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG

LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit 14[b]).


Future plans. In December 2010, the Estate sold the licensing and intellectual property

rights of Marilyn Monroe to a Canadian brand management firm Authentic Brands Group in a

joint venture deal valued in the range $20 million to $30 million, with the aim of upgrading

certain licensing endeavors into upscale areas such as “apparel, personal care, cosmetics, home,

sunglasses, handbags, footwear and jewelry” (Whitman, 2011, para. 5). Anna Strasberg would

join the new company as a “minority partner” (Whitman, 2011, para. 10). This transaction,

pursuant to a Letter Agreement dated February 3, 2011, would also pay CMG Worldwide

$1,352,000 for transfer of ownership to all Marilyn Monroe online properties (e.g., domains,

Facebook pages, etc.) and to close any further licenses in which CMG Worldwide may still have

outstanding (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC, et al., 2011, Exhibit A, para. 1, 2[c]).

Additionally, the Letter Agreement would release any and all claims against CMG

Worldwide by the Estate, including assumption of liability in connection with the judgments

against CMG Worldwide and the Estate for the Shaw and Greene lawsuits (wherein CMG

Worldwide and the Estate were found liable for over $670,000 in judgments and costs in

connection with the rights to certain archives of Marilyn Monroe photographs) (CMG

Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit A, para. 2, 2[a-b]). Other terms were later

discussed via email and further clarified in a Termination of Agreement letter, dated November,

2010, which would expand the scope of CMG Worldwide’s rights in and to existing and near-

term licensing of Marilyn Monroe merchandise through the creation of a revenue “tail” which

would terminate just after the date where CMG Worldwide would no longer represent Marilyn

Monroe (CMG Worldwide v. MM-ABG LLC et al., 2011, Exhibit C, para. 2, 4).

As outlined in Figure 1 (page 33), since revenues for the Estate have been essentially flat

by 2009, this shift in management marks the next phase in the expansion of the Marilyn Monroe

USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane)

USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane)

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane)

Similar a USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane) (20)

Último

Último (20)

USC Master's Thesis - Celebrity and the Value of Death (by Aaron Settipane)