How to Avoid the $2B Celebrity Brand Graveyard: Scott Van den Berg

For media investors, brand builders and celebrity managers, Van den Berg’s post is a reminder that consumer trust can’t be manufactured by fame alone.

Who We Follow

Scott Van den Berg
Founder of HotSeat VC
LinkedIn Profile

What’s Been Said

Venture investor Scott Van den Berg mapped 47 celebrity brand failures from 2024, attributing $450 million in evaporated value to three recurrent flaws: lazy distribution, white-label mediocrity and founder disengagement.

Van den Berg identified the so-called “Casamigos Curse” as the first pattern (nineteen celebrity tequila brands shut down in 2024) driven by the belief that social media clout alone could replicate George Clooney’s billion-dollar exit. “Clooney spent 5 years building distribution before anyone knew he owned it,” Van den Berg observed. By contrast, most founders led with Instagram announcements and neglected retail fundamentals.

“The celebrity brand gold rush is over. VCs demand real involvement. Customers demand authenticity. Markets demand innovation.”

The second pattern, “The White Label Wasteland,” exposed 14 skincare brands using identical formulations and suppliers, repackaged with celebrity faces and sold at a 10x markup. Van den Berg quotes one founder: “My team handled everything. I just approved packaging.”

Finally, “Ghost Founder Syndrome” described the vanishing act many celebrities pulled after their initial launch hype, posting less than once per week by year-end. Rihanna, by contrast, posted 400+ times and reformulated Fenty 37 times.

Commenters praised the analysis. Matt Higgins called it “an awesome smart post.” Jason Feifer, Editor-in-Chief at Entrepreneur, added, “This was great stuff!” Meanwhile, Jay P Tapper noted the core issue: “Zero innovation… the only ‘differentiation’ is your face on the bottle.”

Why It Matters

The implosion of nearly 50 celebrity-founded brands is more than a cautionary tale; it signals a structural realignment in how capital and credibility are deployed in markets reliant on consumer audiences. For media investors, brand builders and celebrity managers, Van den Berg’s post is a reminder that consumer trust can’t be manufactured by fame alone.

Strategically, the post reinforces a broader shift: audiences are moving passed the façade and demanding substance. Investors now demand engagement, not just endorsement, from celebrities seeking to capitalise on fame. That matters as much to celebrity entrepreneurs as it does to established brands. “In 2025,” Van den Berg writes, “fame gets you a meeting. But only obsession gets you a billion.” His conclusion resonates with an industry leaning increasingly toward vertical integration, sustained engagement and product authenticity.

This insight is especially critical for media executives and private equity professionals exposed to brand extensions and influencer-led ventures. If Rihanna’s 400+ posts and relentless product refinement are the correct standard, then passive licensing models and flash-in-the-pan endorsements are structurally obsolete. That has major implications for marketing expenditure, and how celebrity is leveraged in deal structuring.

With VC appetite and consumer scepticism growing more mature, the celebrity brand playbook must evolve or risk irrelevance. This might be the end of a cultural thesis among marketers, and some investors, that equates reach with relevance. The failures tracked by Van den Berg offer real analytical value. What it emphasises is that the celebrity element offers an unfair advantage that shouldn’t blind capital, or executives, to the true value of hard work.