As the British Comedy Awards once again (dis)graced the small screen with its infamous ceremony last Saturday evening, there was an embarrassing degree of mirth at the sponsor’s expense.

Highland Spring’s association with the Comedy awards stems from a hat-trick deal with ITV in 2006 that saw them take the sponsorship of the British Soap Awards and the National Television Awards as part of the same package.

Ironically, despite being both title sponsor and broadcast sponsor of the event and after show party, the increasingly raucous antics of the guests and nominees displayed little evidence that much, if any, water was being taken at the tables on Saturday night.

No fools ITV, ensuring that the later stages of the ceremony were taken off ITV1 and reserved for the smaller, more open-minded audience of ITV2 - as the behaviour of a resentful bottle-throwing Kevin Bishop proved testament to:

Bottles, undoubtedly, of the Highland Spring water that proudly adorned every table and remained largely unopened for most of the evening.

Admittedly, the creative was strong. The idents that wrapped each section of the broadcast were cute and wonderfully conceived. Simple but effective, positioning a bottle of Highland Spring as an award-winning celebrity itself, under the tag line, ‘If you’re this good, you must be rewarded’.

And that is where the brand presence should have ended. Instead, Sally Stanley (the brand’s courageous but arguably ill-advised Marketing Director) braved the toughest crowd in the business and took to the stage alongside Frank Skinner to present the highly coveted Best Comedy award as the pinnacle of the evening.

Error.

Angus Deayton [introducing Stanley]: ‘And of course a big thanks to Highland Spring - without whom tonight would certainly not have been as…cheap.’

And it only got worse. Granted, with the amount of subsequent mentions that Deayton and Skinner managed to notch up between them, the brand probably regained its rights fee in media value alone. But they also succeeded in presenting the brand as an intrusive, resented necessity, over-playing the contractual exposure that was guaranteed for them, and generally making Ms. Stanley look like a bit of a joke.

With marketeers across the country already cringing with embarrassment on her behalf, she then attempted to squeeze in a suitably ‘on-message’ introduction which was predictably ignored and cut short by her co-presenters and the less than captivated crowd:

Stanley: ‘[the sponsorship] is a perfect partnership as we strive all year round to make people feel better…’

(Err…what?)

Skinner [doubtless echoing the thoughts of the entire room]: ‘Well, it certainly makes me feel better - as a recovering alcoholic. Not quite as good as an actual drink, but you can’t have everything.’

Words alone cannot do the whole episode justice - watch for yourself: 

A prime example of when a sponsor should be seen and not heard - always engage, but never intrude. 

However, whether or not you believe that a television awards sponsor has a rightful active role in their presentation, one must ask how the brand association with this particular ceremonial joke can be seen as beneficial in the long run? The announcement of the 2006 deal suggested that Highland Spring did know what it was getting into, but as the calibre of this most ‘notoriously unpredictable’ awards night continues to decline, how much longer can the brand deem the association a desirable one? Can the value of numerous shameful on-air plugs really outweigh an association with an awards show that is increasingly becoming the laughing stock of the industry? And how does a high-profile water brand sit alongside an event renowned for the drunken, outlandish behaviour of its celebrity guests?

One last thing: take a look at the sponsorship section of Highland Spring’s website. In the brand’s list of ‘high profile Awards and Dinners’ with which they are proudly associated, the British Comedy Awards is not listed.

Go figure.

By Lucie Bartlett on December 11th, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Broadcast sponsorship, Media, Sponsorship, Television

No comments

Traditionally, November is the sponsorship industry’s conference time of year.  Last week’s Future Sponsorship conference in Brussels is now well-established as a gathering of the great and the good in the industry and, as its name suggests, where the future is discussed.  This year was no different.

The first question on most people’s lips was “how will the sponsorship industry be affected by the credit crunch?”  

My answer was, and is, that the sponsorship industry will be affected, just like all other industries and it’s short sighted to pretend otherwise.  Budgets will be trimmed, cuts will be made and everyone will be squeezed in one way or another.

But the industry is far better placed than it was during the last major downturn in the 1990s.  Then, only some marketers were convinced that sponsorship worked.  As a consultancy, we were still busy educating companies on the benefits of sponsorship and showing them that it worked. 

Now, we spend little, if any, time persuading marketing directors that money will be effectively spent on sponsorship – they’re already convinced.  They have numerous examples for reference and it’s pleasing to note that they are considering sponsorship in their current and future strategies as a matter of course.

Increasingly, sponsorship is being asked to provide tangible business benefits.  And, thank goodness, it can, because now is the time when proof is needed that marketing expenditure can indeed put money on the bottom line.

A great deal of time is spent within the industry discussing precisely how that proof should be declared.  Unlike the advertising or PR industries, sponsorship has no universally-agreed evaluation system, arguing as it does that sponsorship’s success depends upon objectives set at the outset.  The difficulty (or, as many argue, the advantage) being that these objectives can be immensely varied and, therefore, results need to be individually tracked.  Thus a universal system is both impractical if not impossible.

I’ve always argued that sponsorship’s marketing advantage is its flexibility; the fact that it can solve a multitude of business challenges.

But I came away from Future Sponsorship thinking that it would be in the industry’s interest if it can make itself bullet-proof against accusations of non-accountability, especially in this economic downturn. 

By Karen Earl on December 2nd, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy

No comments

20 men in a room hugging was the scene last Wednesday night at Harlequins at the Guinness Club Together, ‘Rugby Essentials’, event. Guinness Club Together is a grassroots initiative developed to work with rugby clubs. It is free to join and in exchange for collecting and sending in Guinness keg caps, clubs are able to redeem a host of prizes, merchandise and other sought after items from the online catalogue.

The events are being hosted by Guinness Premiership referees, players and coaches demonstrating training techniques, warm-up drills as well as offering advice on the new and controversial Experimental Law Variations (ELVs) . Wayne Barnes, a Guinness Premiership referee, provided an interactive session on the ELVs. Clubs have now been playing the new laws for a few months and this gave them a chance to discuss how they are being interpreted by both the players and referees. It was the coaching portion of the evening that prompted a group of fully grown men to get up and hug each other as Colin Osborne, the Quins coach, demonstrated the wrestling techniques that the squad use to warm up.  The events have been kept small and intimate to ensure that the attendees get an opportunity to interact and really get what they want out of the session.

I am a rugby fan but last week some of the jargon really took it to the next level and I did wonder at times had it been in a foreign language I might have had more chance of interpreting it! It was really great to see the audience so fully engaged and, at times, mesmerised.

The purpose of the ‘Rugby Essentials’ events is for Guinness to target the core rugby audience and club opinion formers and to engage them in their passion giving them a valuable rugby insight that they can take back to their respective clubs. This is a really great way for Guinness to offer a unique brand experience whilst spreading the wealth of its Premiership sponsorship assets.

The Guinness Club Together Rugby Essential events are travelling around the UK in the next month:

Newcastle Falcons - 29^th October (18.00 – 21.00)
Sale Sharks - 5^th November (18.00 – 21.00)
Northampton Saints - 12^th November (18.00 – 21.00)
Saracens - 19^th November (18.00 – 21.00) 

I would love to be a fly on the flood lights when the guests from last week go back to their clubs and attempt to cajole the players into a bit of a wrestle!

By Lisa Woodward on October 29th, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Experiential marketing, Guinness, Guinness Premiership, Rugby, grass roots sport

No comments

One Games ends: the road to another begins. Since the curtain came down on Beijing 2008, VANOC has launched an array of Vancouver 2010 initiatives, including a new Vancouver 2010 brand identity, a new motto (‘With Glowing Hearts’), and the release of the first tranche of Vancouver 2010 tickets.

Another recently-launched initiative is ‘The Vancouver 2010 Club - A Patron’s Programme’, a limited-edition high-rollers’ Olympic experience, which includes premium tickets, a car and driver, a concierge service and a place in the Olympic Torch Relay. VANOC is marketing 100 of these packages at C$285,000 (£140,500) each, and is reporting strong demand.

VANOC has rebuffed inevitable criticism of the concept by pointing out that the tickets involved do not come from the public allocation, and that the scheme is underpinned by philanthropy, as each package automatically donates 100 event tickets to the Vancouver 2010 Charitable Ticketing Fund, which is distributing 50,000 tickets to underprivileged children.

I applaud VANOC’s initiative. It’s a win-win for all concerned, and is simply a logical extension of a major NPD trend of recent times - products and services created specifically for the super-rich.

And what all commentators on the scheme have missed is that without this type of philanthropy, the Olympics would not have been re-born.

Two-thirds of the funding for the Athens 1896 Games, the first of the modern era, came from private donations, and the largest expense of the Games, the refurbishment of the Panathanaiko Stadium, was financed by a single benefactor, George Averoff.

By Tim Crow on October 24th, 2008

Tags: Beijing 2008, Brand marketing, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, New Product Development, Olympic Torch Relay, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Vancouver 2010

No comments

Brands like Abercrombie and Fitch and Topshop have made a conscious effort to recruit shop staff to reflect and deliver their brand values.  Why then am I so bothered seeing, each night on my journey home, a gathering of Topshop’s young trendy ‘experiential marketing team’ hanging out at Oxford Circus all smoking whilst sporting a t-shirt with the brand proudly emblazoned on it?

One of the things I like about Topshop/man is that the staff working there reflect the style and target customers of the brand (OK, so I maybe pushing the upper age limit of being target market, but still).  This may not register immediately with the average shopper when they’re making their purchase decisions, but I’ve no doubt that subconsciously they feel more comfortable about asking for assistance and shopping in locations where people who look like them work.

Essentially this means that Topshop’s retail assistants could be seen as their experiential marketing staff.  They’re integral to the look and feel of the shop and delivering the brand experience to customers.  Being a brand ambassador doesn’t start and finish within the four walls of London’s biggest shop however, it starts and finishes when the branded t-shirt is put on and taken off.

Smoking has taken on a pariah status amongst many today, me included.  I have friends of both sexes and various ages who won’t date people purely on the basis that they smoke.  If this is an important consideration for them in regards engaging in one type of relationship, it begs the question of how it affects them in building others too e.g. the relationship between the brand and customer.

While I don’t necessarily have the same strength of view as some of my friends on tobacco, seeing Topshop/man staff lounging about smoking and flicking their fag butts into the street does considerably take the gloss off my impression of the brand.  Being involved in representing client brands myself, both individually and through experiential marketing staff I manage on a client’s behalf, I’m always extremely sensitive to the behaviours displayed at all times.  I wonder what Sir Philip Green thinks?

By Malph Minns on October 2nd, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Experiential marketing

1 comment

I’ve posted before about the fact that NPD has been one of the key drivers in modern sponsorship, with virtually every week seeing new platform and property models being unveiled. NPD being what it is however, they don’t always work out, and the most recent example of this is golf’s FedEx Cup.

Launched by the US PGA Tour two years ago as an attempt to reinvigorate the final weeks of the Tour and counter audience migration to the start of the American football season, the FedEx Cup has had a difficult start to life.

For two years in a row, the Cup has been won anticlimactically early, last year by Tiger Woods (remember him?), this year by Vijay Singh, who has only to finish the final tournament of the season this weekend to claim the title. As one columnist from the National Post put it:

‘Under the current FedEx points system, Singh would have to step in a gopher hole or assault a rules official in order to lose the event. He could play all 72 holes with a belly putter and a persimmon three wood and still take the title, even if his card went into three-figures four days in a row.’

And despite changes introduced this year by the PGA, the format and credibility of the FedEx are still being roundly criticised by the media, in pieces with headlines such as ‘Once again, playoffs are a snoozefest’ and ‘FedEx Cup ending with a whimper’.

Tim Finchem, Commissioner of the PGA Tour, admitted that it was a case of back to the drawing board for next year in a recent media conference, although I suspect what he said will have done little to reassure the players, the media and most of all, his sponsor (whose current tagline is ‘Relax, it’s Fedex’).

Using the analogy of golf course designer Donald Ross and his work on the famed No. 2 course at Pinehurst NC, Finchem said that even a second set of format changes to the FedEx might not get it right:

“[Ross] made 213 or 220 changes in the first 12 years of [Pinehurst No. 2's] existence. Sometimes to get perfection, you have to keep working at it, and we intend to do that.”

Let’s hope, for the sake of FedEx in particular, it’s a case of third time lucky in 2009.

By Tim Crow on September 25th, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Default, Golf, New Product Development, PGA Tour, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants, Television audiences, Tiger Woods

No comments

With AIG, shirt sponsors of Manchester United, now having followed Northern Rock, shirt sponsors of Newcastle United, into nationalisation, it occurred to me that the sponsors’ lounge at the next Toon versus Reds match could bring a whole new meaning to the term Premier League. Because, of course, the effective heads of the teams’ two sponsors are now the Premiers of the US and UK.

But who’ll be in those respective hot seats come next March? Over there, will it be John McCain or Barack Obama. Over here, will Gordon Brown still be around? And whoever it is, will they use the occasion for a pow-wow at St James’ on Wednesday March 4? Lovely thought, but somehow I doubt it.

Maybe Gordon could send noted Toon Army member Tony Blair - remember him? - to deputise…

By Tim Crow on September 18th, 2008

Tags: Barclays Premier League, Brand marketing, Default, Football, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Newcastle United, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants

No comments

Attracting the attention of the target audience, getting the message across clearly and having that message seen in a positive light are all important factors in any marketing communication, whatever the discipline.

For me one of the masters of such effective communication was Don LaFontaine.  You probably don’t know his name, but you’ll almost certainly recognise his voice.  Don voiced more than 5,000 movie trailers and I was sad to read today that he’d passed away after an ongoing illness.

Based on contracts signed, he was considered to be the busiest member of the Screen Actors Guild ever. “In a world where” getting your message to cut through the clutter is getting harder, I salute you Mr Don LaFontaine - may you rest in peace.

By Malph Minns on September 3rd, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Film, Television

No comments

As a response to a fan video from Tiger Woods PGA TOUR 08, Tiger Woods and EA SPORTS demonstrate that the “glitch” Levinator25 thought he found in the game, is not a glitch at all.  This is a classic example of taking time to understand your online audience and getting digital marketing right - as the 1.5 million people that have so far viewed the clip can testify.

As I said in my earlier blog ‘Sponsorship’s need for a more creative approach to digital marketing’, “users want ownable and original content with a talkability factor” - and this video from EA SPORTS has that in abundance. 

You’ve only to look at the comments on YouTube to see what a positive effect this video has on even the toughest audience - as YellowOnline says “LOL, I don’t like EA these days (”Quantity not quality”), but this is a brilliant ad.”

I’m sure every brand would like such positive comments from both current and past customers.

By Malph Minns on August 28th, 2008

Tags: Brand marketing, Digital marketing, Golf, Sponsorship, Tiger Woods

No comments

Before Beijing 2008 began I wrote a post speculating about what the legacies of Beijing might be for the Olympics, for London 2012, and for brands. Now that the Olympic flag has been handed to London 2012, what initial conclusions can we draw?

1. From a UK perspective, Beijing was the latest in a long line of single-issue Games - but the issue wasn’t, in the end, China. It was, of course, Team GB’s brilliant performance. This has created numerous legacies, all of which can be filed under ‘Feelgood Factor’. Right now, we feel good about Team GB, London 2012 and The Olympics. Of course it’s too early to say, using one of Boris Johnson’s many wonderful new soundbites, that “Olympo-scepticism” has been totally blown away, but I think we can say with some confidence that thanks to ‘The Great Haul of China’ it will be a minority sentiment from now on.

2. The Olympic brand survived the China crisis. Concerns about regime policy and authoritarian stage-management never went away, but were ultimately overshadowed by a technically superb Games which delivered both breathtaking spectacle and an array of legendary performances. The most important performance of the lot in a global context? My vote goes to Usain Bolt. Not just for what he did, in the event which above all defines the Games, but for what he didn’t do: three of the previous five Olympic 100 metre champions tested positive for drugs. Usain prefers chicken nuggets.

3. The London 2012 brand evolved significantly. Beijing 2008 grafted two new elements into London 2012’s DNA: Team GB and, by very different means and in his own unique way, Boris Johnson (and since you ask, I’m a huge fan of both). Finally, do you know anyone who doesn’t like the new London 2012 logo featuring Union jack colours?

4. And what of the brand marketing contest around Beijing 2008 in the UK? To my mind there were three clear winners: adidas, via their kit sponsorship of Team GB; Powerade, the only Team GB sponsor to commit to a brand campaign throughout the Games, as my colleague Sara vividly described in her post a few weeks ago; and British Airways, who skilfully leveraged Team GB’s homecoming

By Tim Crow on August 27th, 2008

Tags: Beijing 2008, Brand marketing, China, Default, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants, Team GB, Vancouver 2010

1 comment