The role of technology sponsors in creating the technical infrastructure behind global events such as the Olympics and the FIFA World Cup is largely unrecognised outside of the sponsorship and rights holder communities. There are two reasons for this: consumers and the media are more interested in the show than in the tech; and most tech sponsors are B2B brands.

But the scale of these events - the Olympics ranks among the world’s biggest peacetime projects - together with the rapid evolution of their technological requirements, makes the role of tech sponsors increasingly vital to their success, and the scope of this group of sponsors’ contributions increasingly complex and impressive.

I was reminded of all this last week at an Editorial Intelligence London 2012 seminar, when Stuart Hill, who leads the BT London 2012 Delivery Programme, gave a fascinating insight into the scale of BT’s London 2012 technical operation. Here are a few extracts from what he said:

BT is providing 80,000 connections across all 94 London 2012 venues, as well as 16,500 fixed lines, 14,000 mobile phone SIM cards and 1,000 wireless access points;

The information this network can support – calls, emails, images, texts – will amount to 6 Gigabytes per second: the equivalent of 6,000 novels, or the entire contents of Wikipedia, every 5 seconds;

Whereas 30% of the coverage of Beijing 2008 was digital, 100% of the coverage of London 2012 will be digital, meaning that consumers will be able to watch every sport in High Definition, when they want to watch it.

Stuart also made two other observations which as an Olympic Marketing practitioner I found very interesting. 

The first was about how London 2012 is playing out within BT. Stuart characterised London 2012 as a being like a slow drumbeat inside BT, beating gradually louder, and recalled the excitement of staff when the company lit up the BT Tower to celebrate 1,000 days to go to London 2012.

The second was the highly perceptive comment that BT’s London 2012 delivery role is effectively a silent one - ensuring that when people use BT’s London 2012 services, they enjoy a flawless experience. This of course, emphasises the crucial role for BT’s 2012-related marketing: the need to bring to life for customers and consumers the company’s enabling role in their London 2012 experiences - because unlike B2B tech sponsors, BT needs powerful B2C marketing behind London 2012 to drive its retail business.

I came away from the seminar thinking about these two observations in particular. Is BT’s current B2C London 2012 marketing creating a drumbeat (to use Stuart’s phrase) among customers and consumers as well as staff? I’d be interested in your views – feel free to comment below. And on this point, let me leave you with a personal perspective: as a longstanding BT customer (fixed line and broadband) the only London 2012 related communication I’ve received so far is the London 2012 logo on the outside of the envelope that contains my monthly bill.

By Tim Crow on January 20th, 2010

Tags: London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship

No comments

Channel 4’s successful bid against the BBC to win the UK broadcast rights to the London 2012 Paralympics defied predictions - including, notably, those of former IOC marketing chief Michael Payne - and is the latest in a series of bold and innovative moves by the London 2012 Organising Committee in their quest to create and deliver a Games for a new era and a new generation. It’s a decision that will be good for the Paralympics, for consumers, and for London 2012 sponsors.

Justified or not, there was always a concern that the BBC would prioritise resources to the Olympics over the Paralympics. Channel 4’s bid removes the issue with a raft of unprecedented commitments: re-branding itself as The Paralympics Channel during the Games; 150 hours of Games-time coverage;  two ten-part peak time documentaries in 2011 and 2012; dedicated coverage of the Paralympic Torch Relay; and the biggest marketing campaign in the broadcaster’s history - a particularly crucial feature given the key Paralympic legacy objective of changing attitudes to disability.

But not only is changing to Channel 4 all good for the Paralympics: it’s good for consumers too.

Being free-to-air, access for all to coverage of the Games is assured - a vital consideration. Channel 4 also has a strong and proud track record of innovative coverage (Italian football, horse racing, cricket) that consumers will no doubt now see applied to the Paralympics And isn’t it good for consumers - indeed for society as a whole - that after a decade of Big Brother, Channel 4 is returning to its traditional diversity/minority remit?

I’d also argue that for consumers, having two London 2012 broadcasters is better than one, in that the inherent competition it will engender between the two stations (already visible in their somewhat barbed PR around the announcement of Channel 4’s win) will drive up coverage quality.

And finally, it’s undeniable that Channel 4 winning the rights to cover the Paralympics is brilliant news for the London 2012 Games’ sponsors. Leveraging an Olympic and Paralympic sponsorship is one of toughest challenges in the sponsorship playbook, owing to the nature of the rights: leveraging it in the UK, with - up to now - the non-commercial BBC as the only Olympic broadcaster has made it even tougher. The entry of a commercial station offers London 2012’s sponsors a new, and welcome, marketing option.

By Tim Crow on January 12th, 2010

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics

1 comment

If, like me, you grew up in the seventies, you’ll recall entrepreneur Victor Kiam’s famous Remington ads, which ended with the line ”I liked the shaver so much, I bought the company”. Audi, evidently, feel the same way about their sponsorship of Bayern Munich, having yesterday announced that they had taken a 9% stake in the club as well as continuing as a sponsor. Bayern’s strategy of sponsoring the European footballing elite is self-evident - as well as Bayern, the brand also sponsors AC Milan, Barcelona, Manchester United and Real Madrid - but this clearly takes their involvement to a new level, and raises an interesting question: does Audi’s move herald a new era of brands moving from sponsorship of the elite sporting names to investing in them as well? Only time will tell. But if it did, I wouldn’t find it surprising.

Moving from sponsor to investor is undeniably a leap in terms of the financial commitment involved, but not that big. Clubs like Bayern are massive brands with millions of passionate, committed fans. But let’s remember that as businesses, in financial terms they’re minnows by comparison with the market capitalisation and buying power of major brand owners.

Some might argue - especially with Bayern languishing at seventh in the Bundesliga and facing elimination from the UEFA Champions League - that adding financial risk to marketing risk isn’t a smart move when on-field performance is so critical to the bottom line: the spectre of Leeds haunts. But whilst every deal carries an element of risk, let’s face it, Bayern aren’t Leeds: they’re a long term footballing superpower with stable, membership-based ownership and high-quality earnings. The risk is as minimal as you can get - in football anyway.

There’s a final argument - which I assume applies to Audi and Bayern - that makes moving from sponsor to investor entirely logical to me. If just about everything about the relationship from a brand and business point of view is right, and if you share and can commit to a long-term vision - in short, if there’s perfect synergy - why not go one step further and become an investor as well as a sponsor?

To summarise, I don’t believe we’ll see a stampede into these type of deals: for one thing there’s a recession on, and for another I don’t see too many assets out there that brands would invest in.  But I don’t think the Audi-Bayern deal is the last of its type that we’ll see.

In the meantime, I’ll be adding a new filter question into the model we use to help our clients make a call on whether to sponsor a potential asset: would you buy stock in it?

By Tim Crow on November 27th, 2009

Tags: Default, Football, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultants

No comments

‘Revolutions are not about trifles, but they spring from trifles’
Aristotle

Ukraine v England. A nothing match? Yes - we’d already qualified for the World Cup. A sports broadcasting revolution? No - simply another glimpse of a revolution that’s already here.

This is not to downplay the significance of the match as an online pay-per-view event of course. Even with only a reported 250,000-300,000 online pay-per-view subscribers, it’s the most watched “internet-only” football match in history – the concensus being that the previous record was set by Manchester City’s friendly against Barcelona on August 19, which was available free in the UK only on City’s website, where 95,000 fans clicked in.

But make no mistake: live streaming of major sports events is already with us. During last year’s Beijing Olympics, BBC Sport served 40 million UK requests for online video streams and 11.8 million viewers used the red button during the Games; hundreds of thousands of UK consumers regularly stream live global sports every month through various sites; and niche sports, extreme sports and gaming are routinely streamed online due to the lack of mainstream broadcast distribution opportunities.

As webcasting grows in capacity and audience, it’s inevitable that more events will be streamed online. Computers and portable devices are simply alternative screens, and are converging quickly. Once TV sets are broadband-enabled the role of the internet won’t matter. Viewers won’t care how the match is getting to their screens – it’s all ‘TV’. It’s just that the notion and experience of ‘TV’ is going to change.

But only slowly of course. Saturday’s match proved that internet-only ppv is still in a contentious infancy when it comes to marquee events, and that the traditional broadcasters will not be usurped as the main distributors of big-ticket sport anytime soon.  QED: if England had still needed points against Ukraine, the game would have been bought by one of the big TV names for millions.

But we’ve seen a glimpse of the future. Remember when Sky first came along?

‘The future is already here, it is just not evenly distributed.’
William Gibson

By Tim Crow on October 12th, 2009

Tags: Default, Football, Media

No comments

Visitors to these pages will know that since questioning Andy Burnham’s now-infamous Medal Hopes announcement last year, I’ve written several posts on the issue’s evolution. So, with Team 2012 having risen last week like a phoenix from the ashes of Medal Hopes, it seems only appropriate to mark the issue’s apparent resolution with a few observations.

1. Team 2012 should not have been necessary

Let’s remember that the budget problem Team 2012 is designed to help solve was created by the Treasury in 2006. Let’s also remember that the problem was then exacerbated by two years of DCMS inaction, and finally exploded by the obvious flaws in Fast Track’s Medal Hopes ‘plan’ - memorably described by the BBC’s Matt Slater (author of a number of excellent blogs on the subject) as being ‘up there with Baldrick’s finest’. Quite a contrast with the Vancouver 2010 Own The Podium programme, launched in 2005 with adequate national and regional Government funding and a joined-up long-term plan.

2. The launch of Team 2012 is a triumph for LOCOG and UK Sport

Given the mess they inherited from DCMS and Fast Track, this is indisputable. Consider the list of their achievements: uniting the various stakeholders; creating a new property; resolving (apparently) the incendiary issue of elite Olympic athletes’ image rights; and persuading global Olympic sponsor Visa to come on board as Team 2012’s ‘Presenting Partner’ for £10m to start the fundraising.

3. Visa: sponsorship – or patronage?

I use the term ‘fundraising’ advisedly. Team 2012 is unashamedly a fundraising initiative designed to dent the shortfall in our Olympic sports’ budgets for London 2012, and increase Team GB’s chances of success: the official press release talks of nothing else. In which case, is Visa’s role more about patronage (financial aid with little or no expectation of ROI) rather than sponsorship (a win-win marketing partnership)? Don’t misunderstand me: I wish Team 2012 and Visa the best of British. But getting a meaningful return from this particular £10m investment looks like a big ask.

4. Sponsorship is not the only answer to the budget problem

A month after Andy Burnham’s original Medal Hopes announcement, I began advocating that any replacement programme should also incorporate innovative non-sponsorship fundraising models that had evolved elsewhere, such as Team Business West Midlands and the Vancouver 2010 Patron’s Programme. It’s good to see that this approach has been built into Team 2012, in the shape of the SME Club and the Official Donor programme.

By Tim Crow on October 7th, 2009

Tags: DCMS, Default, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Synergy, Team GB

No comments

The stand-out performer on the track at this week’s World Athletics Championships in Berlin has of course been the astonishing Usain Bolt. Off the track, his sponsors Puma have also demolished the opposition in the marketing contest (albeit that Puma had little to beat, given the complete lack of activation by the various event sponsors) with a funny, savvy, multi-platform campaign which is right up there with anything produced by the category titans, adidas and Nike.

The inspiration for the campaign was gifted to Puma:  the fact that fans and the media incessantly request that Bolt reprise his trademark ’arms pointing skyward’ pose from the Beijing Olympics wherever he goes. Puma’s inspired twist? A ’solution’ to the problem, developed after ‘a year of research and development’, in the shape of strap-on foam ‘Bolt Arms’.

“From now on, they do the pose”, says Bolt, at a fake but cleverly-rendered press conference included in a number of virals released as part of the Puma campaign, which is notable for its integrated use of social media platforms.

Cue from there a blitz of experiential activity in Berlin, including mass distribution of the Arms to fans, leading to an inevitable decision by the IAAF (sports equipment sponsor: adidas) to ban fans from wearing ‘Bolt Arms’ in the stadium - prompting Puma to ask fans via Twitter if anyone managed to sneak them inside, which they clearly did judging by numerous TV crowd shots.

All in all an exemplary case study, and to my mind a contender for campaign of the year.

By Tim Crow on August 21st, 2009

Tags: Ambush campaign, Athletics, Beijing 2008, Default, Digital marketing, Viral Marketing

No comments

I really like the thinking behind Procter & Gamble’s new deal with the NFL, which sees an array of 13 brands in the P&G portfolio become ’Official Locker Room Products’ of America’s dominant sport. P&G’s own comments about the deal also reveal a very interesting insight into the consumer products giant’s new commitment to sports marketing.      

What do I like about the deal? Two things in particular.

First, creating a new, customised category around P&G’s products is seriously smart.  It’s been done before of course - GE’s Olympics deal, Sony’s FIFA deal - but nothing wrong with that. For a house of brands like P&G, the commercial benefits - marketing synergies and retail efficiencies in particular - are immense. Crucially too, P&G’s ‘Locker Room’ play works as a consumer message - not to be underestimated, as so often these type of ‘official’ tags have absolutely no consumer meaning.

Second, playing the NFL to Mom. An odd choice you might say, given that P&G’s products are mainly purchased by women, and that the NFL audience is 66% male. That 33% female audience for the NFL is still huge of course -  estimated at around 94 million by Nielsen. But the key is, Mom doesn’t just buy for herself: she buys for the family. And if a consuming family passion is the NFL - which it absolutely is in the US - then connecting P&G’s products to that family passion is absolutely on the money.

“And let’s not forget” added NFL Marketing SVP Mark Waller today “that more women watch the Super Bowl than watch the Academy Awards”. 

Not convinced? Then consider Gatorade: a brand which went from niche sports drink to mass-market everyday family drink, primarily bought by Mom, by leveraging above all its NFL credentials, in a partnership which endures to this day. And while you’re at it, on the same theme you might also want to consider Gillette - owned by P&G since 2005 of course - which is most famous for its sports marketing.

Which brings me to P&G’s new commitment to sports marketing. In the news around the NFL deal, P&G’s Jason Dial was quoted as follows:

“When we aquired Gillette [in 2005], we found out how much of a role sports marketing could play…Gillette created the winning principles of sports marketing to our broader portfolio.”

I wonder whether other consumer products companies - hitherto oddly under-represented in sports sponsorship - will follow suit?

One thing’s for sure: with big investors like the financial services and auto categories cutting back, and with supply far outstripping demand, there’s never been a better time.  After all, the audience is still there, and still just as passionate - ask Mom.

By Tim Crow on August 5th, 2009

Tags: Default, NFL, New Product Development

2 comments

Great marketing campaigns by rights owners in sport being a rarity (acid test: how many can you remember?) I’ve really enjoyed two very different but equally hard-hitting efforts over the last few days.

First up was Manchester City’s ‘Welcome to Manchester’ poster featuring new City signing Carlos Tevez, aimed squarely and mischievously at the red half of Manchester from which, of course, Tevez came.

Cue national media coverage, a dismissive riposte from Sir Alex Ferguson, and an outpouring of fan banter and reaction, including a paint attack on one of the Tevez billboards and some highly creative visual replies by Manchester United fans - here’s my favourite so far:

Overall a top piece of work by the City marketing team, which has put the City brand, and the City/United rivalry, firmly back on the agenda for the start of the season in three weeks’ time.

Whereas in three years’ time of course, London 2012 will be upon us - as we all know by now following LOCOG’s masterfully-orchestrated celebration of the 3-year landmark on Monday.

Again, acres of coverage resulted – no small achievement - but what interested me most of all was how noticeably positive it was, and how much more upbeat LOCOG’s tone has become

As ever Lord Coe leads from the front – what a natural and assured communicator he is – but it was heartening also to see so many bravura touches during the day, such as the domino trail and the giant human 3.

By Tim Crow on July 28th, 2009

Tags: Brand marketing, Default, Football, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Manchester United, Media, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Public relations

2 comments

Previously, golf’s best-known connection with Tweeting was the (probably apocryphal) story of Tiger Woods’ ’I just wopped Tweety Pie’ SMS to friends, having just beaten an infamously canary-clad Sergio Garcia in the final round at The Open in 2006. But now Ian Poulter is opening up a new front for golf in the Twitterena.

After only a matter of months, Poulter’s microblogs have attracted almost 250,000 followers - a phenomenal number for the platform - and won him widespread media coverage and praise. Which is just how the savvy, outspoken Poulter likes it. “It’s a very clever marketing publicity tool and one that I have complete control over”, he was quoted as saying recently.

Poulter’s success is no accident. It’s down to two factors

First, his dedicated, thoughtful use of the platform. As he puts it: ‘…this is a great way of getting the information out there quickly and giving golf fans some insight they’ve never had before.’ And he’s as good as his word. Take this morning for instance, when Poulter uploaded pictures from each tee at Turnberry as he practised for The Open. Brilliant.

Second, his use of media interviews to market his microblog and create his very own content factory. Enter ‘Ian Poulter Twitter’ into Google, for example, and you currently get 120,000 returns, and plenty of interviews like this, from today’s Times.

Plenty of food for thought for marketers on a variety of fronts. But Peter Alliss won’t approve at all.

By Tim Crow on July 14th, 2009

Tags: Blogging, Branded content, Default, Digital marketing, Golf, Tiger Woods

1 comment

In football especially, we’re used to seeing teams, governing bodies, brands and celebs attempt to make a few quid around major events by releasing a track which attempts to capture the zeitgeist, and there have been some brilliant moments - especially Three Lions, Nessun Dorma,  World In Motion, and the Nike-inspired A Little Less Conversation. Which brings me to The Ashes, the 2009 edition of which starts today, and two very new, and very different attempts to join the pantheon.

First up is Hey Hey Ricky by The Barmy Army (with a lot of help from Naked), which falls firmly into the ‘make a few quid’ category, the Barmy Army being, as The Times demonstrates today, something of a hand-to-mouth operation.

The track has a catchy riff (which many will recognise from the days when the BBC televised cricket) and some clever, light-hearted, Aussie-bashing lyrics. I have to say I hated the film though, with its clunky, gratuitous brand placements, and equally gratuitous Benny Hill meets Eric Prydz moments. But judge for yourself here.

Next up is The Duckworth Lewis Method, a concept album of cricket-inspired songs by Irish musos Neil Hannon (of the Divine Comedy) and Thomas Walsh (of Pugwash).

We shouldn’t be surprised, incidentally, that two Irishmen have turned their attention to cricket - after all, Ireland  bowled out the mighty 1960s West Indies for 25 back in 1969 (albeit with with more than a little help from Arthur Guinness the night before) and Samuel Beckett was a fan and played at first class level, and as such is the only Nobel Prize-winning author to feature in Wisden.

I’m sure that Sam would have approved of TDLM, and I’d be shoulder to shoulder with him. It’s barking mad, but utterly, utterly brilliant, and I unreservedly urge you to buy it.

By Tim Crow on July 8th, 2009

Tags: Branded content, Cricket, Default, Music, Product placement

No comments