Mud-slinging is not an event at the Delhi Commonwealth Games in September, but it just as well might be.
It appears all is not well in Delhi.
On August 16 organisers said the venues would be ready by August 25th. That was yesterday. Has there been confirmation? I’m still looking.
Members of the Organising Committee have been suspended for alleged corruption or, in other words, fingers in the till. Indian Railways, the event’s largest sponsor, is withholding a payment of $30million because they say the money is going to “outside parties”, not to the Games themselves.
Even the Queen has been dragged in, reportedly being in a “cold fury” about the allegations which reflect upon the Queen’s Baton Relay which she launched in London last October.
Undeniably, it’s all a bit of a mess, but as you read the many attempts to gloss over the difficulties and paint a brighter picture, you can’t help hoping that once the Games start, all these grimey stories will fade into the background.
Because, even though the Commonwealth Games may not carry the same kudos as major global events such as the Olympic Games or the FIFA World Cup, they do bring out the inevitable national fervour in those Commonwealth countries that participate. And, in the case of many of those countries (our own home nations to name but four), medals are a possibility precisely because other, stronger countries cannot take part.
We may not be stuck to the TV, computers and other digital devices in quite the same numbers as we will be when the Olympic Games come to London, but a large proportion of the nation will enjoy the events, the competition, the personal endeavour stories and, above all else, the success stories.
Because this is what the Olympics, the World Cup and, yes, the Commonwealth Games all have in common – the sense of excitement and achievement; the admiration of those many athletes who spend hours training for their one moment of glory. And it’s our sense of patriotism – we love it when our country wins.
So, even if some in Glasgow have been watching with some horror at the goings-on in Delhi and secretly wondering why they spent so much money and effort in securing the Commonwealth Games for 2014, I suggest they can relax in the knowledge that it will all come out right on the Opening Ceremony night and they will bring the flag back to Glasgow after the Closing Ceremony with eager anticipation for the next four years.
All the Glasgow Organising Committee has to do is ensure that the Games are well-organised, that there’s not a whiff of scandal and – oh did we mention this before? – that there are no security breaches. If there’s one of those in Delhi, that would be a much more serious issue to get over. Fingers crossed there won’t be.
Don’t worry, Boris Johnson hasn’t called a snap Olympics! The Games in question are the inaugural Youth Olympic Games which are currently taking place in Singapore, and which represent a long-awaited dream of Jaques Rogge, President of the International Olympic Committee, who has always wanted to create a global sporting event for young people.
The Games kicked off on 14 August with an elaborate Opening Ceremony, after which around 3,600 athletes between 14-18 years of age will be participating in 12 days of competition across the 26 summer Olympic sports.
Team GB has sent a team of 40 athletes to Singapore, including some individuals who are already hugely experienced at global sporting events, such as Tom Daley, the World and European Champion diver, who is a strong GB medal hope for London 2012. For other team members, the experience of Singapore will be crucial to their development, especially for those with longer term goals such as Rio 2016.
With no precedent for this event, the organisation and build-up was always going to attract varying levels of interest and, as is often the case with the Olympic Games, the cost of hosting the event is one of the major elements that has been scrutinised. The original budget submitted to the IOC of $90m has already been exceeded three-fold, with the current figure standing at around $270m.
Sponsorship is another area where difficulties have been experienced. Again, because this is a new event there is no precedent for sponsors to work from – no history of viewers or interest (although it is anticipated that there will be around 370,000 spectators) – therefore, the Games were seen as a risk for all involved and the Organising Committee has had to work hard to secure the required investment. As it stands today, the Games have attracted 68 Marketing Partners – 11 Worldwide Olympic Partners (including Coca-Cola, Visa and P&G), 9 Official Partners (including Deloitte and Singapore Airlines), 16 Official Sponsors (including Volvo and SingPost) and 32 Official Supporters.
Total revenue generated from the sponsors has been estimated at 60m Singapore Dollars, however, many of the brands became involved on a 100% value in kind basis, seeing them offer their goods and services to the Organising Committee to help deliver of the Games, in return for marketing rights.
The final verdict on whether these Games have been a success won’t be known until all the marketing intelligence and data is collated. Regardless of this, China has already recognised the potential of the newest addition to the IOC events calendar, with Nanjing winning the bid to host the event in 2014 – a decision that was made by the IOC in February this year.
If you want to catch some of the action you can view live it live on the IOC website or highlights on BBC iPlayer.
Following a recent brainstorm here at Synergy, I asked myself a quick, but thought-provoking question:
Are the football fans of England suffering from ‘burnout’?
Burnout, for those who don’t know is: ‘a psychological term for the experience of long-term exhaustion and diminished interest.’ More common in younger sportsmen and women, burnout will occur if excessively high expectations are placed on an athlete by teammates or coaches and if the athlete in question is pushed too hard too quickly.
It was obvious, in my humble opinion, that this could well have been the case with the England Football team in South Africa. People can say what they like about their ridiculous salaries and the fact these young men are paid to train and play, but, ‘at the end of the day’ (sorry) these guys are only human and they need a break from work, just like the rest of us.
But is it now the football fans themselves who are starting to suffer from this physical, mental and emotional exhaustion?
So my question is; ‘Is the football-loving UK now suffering from ‘burnout’ following the sheer amount of football we’ve had to endure every day of the summer – and ultimately the depression that followed our hyped up World Cup campaign?’
Well, I guess we’ll find out soon, when the new season starts on August 14th…
One year on and another NABS netball tournament saw a new Engine netball team take to the courts in Battersea Park to try and live up to the high standards set last year. With a squad consisting of nine ladies from six of the different agencies within Engine, we took on the challenge of proving we really are best in class under one roof (well nearly, with Penrose just around the corner). Having never played together before, a 5-5 draw in our opening match against a well-rehearsed Ogilvy side was satisfactory.
After a slight reshuffling of positions Engine cruised through the remaining group stage matches with comfortable victories over DDB London, Publicis, Hachette Filipacchi and John Aylings. Finishing top in our group meant we bettered last year’s performance: we were in the Cup! After dispatching Media Com and with Penrose’s Laura Batty not missing a shot, Engine found themselves in the semi final against a strong News International side. At full time Engine had managed to hold the score to a 7-7 draw, which meant extra time (I can hear you all waiting with bated breath). Unfortunately, the News International side proved too strong and extra time saw Engine go down by just two goals and thus miss out on a place in the Grand Final.
Despite leaving with no silverware this year, the Engine girls can hold their heads high after reaching new levels of the tournament and walking away 3rd out of 25 teams. Have no fear: we’ll be heading back next year and keener than ever to get Engine’s name on that winning trophy. Congratulations ladies another fantastic Engine performance!
Now that you’ve heard all about Engine’s netball success I bet you’re all dying to get onto a court and have a game, but, before you do here are five facts to expand your netball knowledge:
1. Large numbers of women watch sports, but because sports marketing is so male-oriented, no one is talking to them: P&G decided to own that white space.
2. There are certain sports, and certain events, which very large numbers of women watch and enjoy. In the US, the NFL is the most popular; globally, it’s the Olympics. P&G decided to own those events for its brands.
If you’re not familiar with how P&G activated its USOC deal around the Vancouver Olympics, celebrating the unsung role played by Mom, it’s worth your time. Here are a couple of sports from the campaign, created by W+K in Portland.
Evidently, the campaign paid off big time for P&G, apparently generating $100m in incremental sales. As the company’s North American VP Kirk Perry said on Wednesday at the launch of the IOC partnership.
“We had a terrific run in Vancouver, and realized the potential on a global basis. It became obvious the next step wasd to expand to other markets around the world.’
It will be fascinating to see how P&G’s move into this white space impacts on the Olympics, and maybe on sports marketing as a whole.
How will other Olympic sponsors react now that they know what P&G’s thematic territory will be around London 2012?
How will P&G’s competitors react – will we, for example, see them move into ambush sponsorships with Olympic sports?
Will other traditionally male-oriented rights owners attempt to get in on the action and create new female-oriented sponsorship platforms?
Will male-oriented sports sponsors re-engineer their marketing to appeal more to women? On which subject, take a look at this fascinating piece by Janie Curtis from Forbes.
Since FIFA announced its 2007-2014 sponsorship programme, many industry commentators have made much of FIFA’s new, so-called ‘less is more’ approach. It is a Very Good Thing, they say, that whereas the 2006 World Cup had 15 global partners and thus too much clutter, the 2010 edition has only 6 global partners and thus much less clutter. I’ve never been persuaded by this argument, because I don’t think this is how it plays with consumers during the World Cup itself.
Consider, for example, what consumers see on the TV interview backdrops behind players and officials during the World Cup right now – illustrated in the still below (from the halcyon days before England played Germany on June 27). Call me old-fashioned, but I count 20 different brand logos.
Yes, I know that the logos of the 6 global ‘FIFA Partners’ are bigger than those of the 8 second-tier ‘World Cup Sponsors’, whose logos are in turn bigger than those of the 6 ‘National Supporters’. I know that the rights packages vary widely between tiers too. But I still count 20 logos. And that’s what the consumer sees. Not too different, then, from the 2006 World Cup, where there were 15 global partners and 6 ‘National Partners’. A difference, to be precise, of one less sponsor.
Consider too, Frank Lampard’s disallowed goal in the England v Germany match, surely destined to be one of the most replayed football moments of all time around the world. Brilliant news for the 6 FIFA global partners then. Except it wasn’t. Because the brands whose logos were on display at that moment on the perimeter ads behind the goal, and who’ll be in shot forever, were MTN and Seara – as you see below.
Contrast this with the UEFA Champions League, which in the modern era remains the examplar of ‘less is more’. Only six brands are official Champions League partners, and that’s what you see when it comes to the TV interview backdrops – again, as illustrated in the screen grab below of Sir Alex Ferguson in post-match interview mode last season – and on the main televised perimeter ad positions.
One of the many things I love about social media is the way it enables us to re-imagine how we use old media. This year I’ve seen Nike do this brilliantly twice – first in Vancouver during the Olympics, and now in Johannesburg for the World Cup – using the same technique of integrating social media with giant outdoor spectacular ads to create ’socialised spectaculars’.
In Vancouver, as part of its ‘Force Fate’ campaign, Nike leveraged Canadian hockey fervour and its sponsorship of the Canadian hockey team, by inviting fans through Facebook to create their own inspirational ads featuring their favourite player , and then running giant projections of them onto the Sears Building on Robson Street in downtown Vancouver throughout the Olympics. Here are a couple of pictures I took of the executions.
They became a must-show for Canadian TV and a must-see, must-photograph and a must-share for fans – Nike took pictures of the projections and sent them to the people who created them so that they could share with their friends. Does it get any more social than that?
Four months later and 10,000 miles away in Johannesburg, Nike has repeated the trick at the World Cup as part of their ‘Write The Future’ campaign, but made it bigger in every way.
‘Write The Headline’ has global appeal by featuring Nike’s stable of football icons from around the world. The social media element is much broader too – fans can get involved through Twitter (#writethefuture), QQ (a Chinese chat programme) and Mxit (a South African IM app) as well as Facebook. And the ad is state-of-the-art – a dynamic LED installation that dominates the Southern Life building which towers over Johannesburg and can be seen for miles. Up to 100 headlines are selected each night and transformed into player animations, and when a fan’s message is used Nike sends them the animation.
You’ve got to love a good viral. Many of you will have seen Brand Republic’s article this week on the efficacy of this type of marketing, which includes a liberal dose of Goviral’s favourite videos to be leveraged as part of a wider viral campaign. Many of these are fantastic, with the 15million views of Nike’s ‘Write the Future’ video testament to their pulling power and creativity.
Assuming this list managed to whet your appetite, how about spending a few minutes with Ignite’s view of the viral game-changers of the last 10 years. Lots of things you’ll have seen, but also, I’d wager some stuff that may have passed you by. It’s a liberal mix of videos, pictures and applications, but all check a single box, namely, would you send this on to a mate?
As you may have noticed by the none-too-subtle references in my last couple of Synergy blogs, I’m a bit of a film fan, so to see ‘The Blair Witch Project’ so high up on Ignite’s list reminded me just how much of an upsurge of viral marketing campaigns related to film releases there has been over the past few years.
Ask most people and they’ll probably agree that 1999’s ‘The Blair Witch Project’ was certainly one of the first films to really embrace viral marketing, and use the internet to create a genuine phenomenon. They’d be right, and the figures speak for themselves: though the production costs are often enthusiastically undercooked by the media (in fact coming in at a total of around $600,000), the movie nonetheless went on to gross almost $250million worldwide, at the time making this one of the most profitable independent films ever made. Incredibly, this was recently eclipsed by the similarly spooksome ‘Paranormal Activity‘, which has to date taken over $190million from a mere $15,000 production. Now that is frightening.
Since then viral has formed a part of a great many movie releases, but perhaps the most important question is how did Blair Witch’s original campaign come together? Using the internet as a subversive source of pseudo-information to create and perpetuate the myth of the Blair Witch. Coupled with the movie’s amateur documentary feel, blurring the lines between actors and characters, it sucked you in and creeped you out.
Without doubt the Blair Witch team exploited first-mover advantage – to be fair, in a year that saw the release of ‘Star Wars: Episode I’, ‘Toy Story 2′ and ‘The Matrix’, they needed it. In fact, ‘Blair Witch’ ended up as the 14th biggest movie at the box office in 1999, out-grossing ‘American Pie’ (okay, bad use of the phrase ‘out-grossing’), ‘Sleepy Hollow’ and ‘Fight Club’, to name but a few memorable titles.
So what about the pretenders to the throne – the viral campaigns that followed in the Blair Witch’s shadowy wake?
‘Cloverfield‘ is one you might mention. With a budget of $22million, it could hardly be termed a small movie, but the air of mystery that was cultivated around its release was pure viral: the teaser trailer featuring directly before producer JJ Abrams’ preceding major release, Mission: Impossible III; the drip-feed of subversive shots of a decapitated Statue of Liberty; and what the hell was a ‘Cloverfield’ anyway…? As with ‘Blair Witch’, ‘Cloverfield’ was based on the premise of found footage – but this time on a Hollywood scale – with a viral campaign that built intrigue ahead of the big reveal, mirroring the natural plot crescendo of many a monster movie before it. Disappointing or not (anyone see the finale of ‘Lost’ – also by JJ Abrams?) – it was definitely a success.
Conversely, you’ve got the Samuel L Jackson vehicle, ‘Snakes on a Plane’. Infamously inheriting its title from the classic Hollywood elevator pitch (Ridley Scott originally described Alien as ‘Jaws in Space’), the online community went wild over it. A slew of parodies and spoofs, such as ‘Cats on a Plane’, ‘Snakes who missed the Plane’ and even ‘Steaks on a Train’ were released on video sharing sites in the lead-up to the movie’s opening. Unfortunately, a turkey is still a turkey (even if it’s on a plane), and, in spite of a spirited effort by its marketing team, no one went to see it.
Various others have followed, including ‘Spiderman 2′, ‘Iron Man 2′, and, most notably ‘The Dark Knight’ (yes, you guessed it, ‘Batman 2′).
This last example represented viral marketing with a difference: there was no doubt from the off that the sequel to Christopher Nolan’s successful franchise reboot was going to be big – it didn’t need a clever campaign behind it to break any records. However, where it differed was in its very specific approach, with its careful exploration of The Joker, Batman’s enigmatic nemesis, allowing interested fans the opportunity to glimpse this character’s dark, unsettling roots. Importantly, though, ‘Why So Serious?’, the resulting ARG (Alternate Reality Game) encouraged not only online discussion, but offline, real-time participation in live events across an estimated 177 countries worldwide. Millions of people wanting to talk about your product, coupled with a career-defining performance from Heath Ledger saw ‘The Dark Knight’ have the biggest opening weekend in history (taking $158million).
And it’s the same team behind ‘Why So Serious?’ that are trying to repeat the trick for the upcoming Disney movie ‘Tron: Legacy’.
Not heard of it? That’s because it’s a sequel to ‘Tron’, cult sci-fi flick from way back in 1982. It was one of the earliest films to bring video games to the silver screen together, with a plot revolving around a games programmer, Kevin Flynn – a young Jeff Bridges – being sucked into a computer network (okay, it was no ‘Gandhi’), and notable for being omitted from the Best Visual Effects category at the 1982 Oscars on the grounds that many of the film’s special effects were computer-generated.
So why bother with viral marketing? I mean, if you’re Disney then surely you can just buy an audience via traditional media? Maybe the answer lies in who they’re targeting with the ‘Flynn Lives’ campaign – key influencers in the geekosphere: tech bloggers, sci-fi critics and comic fanboys. As the kind of people who, like me, are naturally protective of cult movie IP, and therefore highly cynical about a money-spinning 3D sequel, this is a key demographic for Disney to engage with and convert. As such, the ‘Flynn Lives’ campaign started with an exchange of branded memorabilia, details of esoteric code to be cracked and secret web addresses with clues to real-world experiences, such as trailer screenings.
Disney are not technically buying love (although it’s definitely a transaction of sorts), but rather engaging with the sceptics and bartering for belief, in a bid to reclaim interest amongst the 1982 original’s fanbase.
The Vancouver Olympics and the 2010 World Cup have been watershed events in the evolution of sports and entertainment marketing strategy in the digital era, as new technologies enable increasingly compelling ways for brands to engage fans following these events, and living their lives, simultaneously online and off line. A fascinating feature of this has been the rise of the iPhone app that, out of nowhere, becomes a cult phenomenon around mega events.
But I’m betting that the World Cup’s left-field equivalent of the Vancouver cowbell app phenomenon will be the vuvuzela. Unknown to the wider world unfamiliar with South African football, the sound of the vuvuzela will be a defining feature of this World Cup, and one I’m sure fans around the world will want to download and share. There are already six vuvuzuela apps out there, each backed by some smart marketing, in particular by Aculocity, developers of the Virtual Vuvuzela app. Try Tweeting ‘vuvuzela’ and you’ll see what I mean.
Numbers: the 2010 FIFA World Cup will be a feast of them, with anything and everything that happens on the field analysed down to the minutest statistical detail. But that’s not my agenda here. Instead, I’ve listed below some of my favourite stats about the business of this World Cup off the field. Enjoy, and feel free to comment and add your own!
0
Number of times the World Cup has previously been staged in Africa.
0.5
Percentage the World Cup is forecast to add to South African GDP this year.
1
Number of teams sponsored by Umbro, which only sponsors England.
2
Percentage the World Cup is expected to add to total global advertising revenues this year.
Predicted ratio of UK viewers for World Cup matches on BBC compared to ITV, based on recent World Cups and UEFA Euro Championships. Bad news for Adrian Chiles.
Percentage of South Africans (approximately 5 million) with internet access.
12
Teams sponsored by Adidas competing in the World Cup. Nike sponsors 9, in case you were wondering.
16
Official FIFA fan parks (known as Fan Fests) around the world for the tournament: nine in South Africa and seven others, in Berlin, London, Mexico City, Paris, Rio, Rome and Sydney
19
Official sponsors of the World Cup, comprising six FIFA ‘Partners’ (Adidas, Coca-Cola, Emirates, Hyundai-Kia, Sony and Visa), eight ‘World Cup Sponsors’ (Budweiser, Castrol, Continental Tyres, McDonalds, MTN, Satyam, Seara and Yingli) and five ‘National Supporters’ (BP, First National Bank, Neo, Prasa and Telkom).
32
Fans, one from each competing country, who will feature in ‘Bud House’, World Cup sponsor Budweiser’s ‘Big Brother meets the World Cup’ reality show which run on YouTube throughout the tournament.
33
Days between the end of the World Cup on July 11 and the start of the 2010/2011 Premier League season
Hours of World Cup coverage to be broadcast by BBC.
200
Countries who took part in the World Cup qualification campaign, a new record on the previous best of 194. A total of 19.3 million fans attended the matches.
1954
Year when a World Cup match was televised for the first time.
1978
First World Cup tournament to feature official FIFA World Cup sponsorships.
3,300
World Cup trademark violations, according to FIFA, in 84 countries, from the 2006 World Cup. In 1994, when FIFA began taking action against violations, there were 258 reported in 39 countries.
5,556
Altitude above sea level, in feet, of Johannesburg, where the 2010 Final will be staged.
11,300
Reported number of tickets bought by non-South African Africans.
150,000
Media representatives working in South Africa during the tournament.
3,300,000
Tickets to be sold in total for the 64 World Cup matches.
13,765,154
YouTube views to date of Nike’s ‘Write the Future’ World Cup-themed ad featuring Wayne Rooney, Christiano Ronaldo, Homer Simpson and others.
23,000,000
Dollar difference in FIFA prize money between winning the World Cup and being knocked out at the group stage.
186,000,000
Returns, at the time of writing, when you type ‘World Cup 2010′ into Google.
2.5 billion
Amount in sterling that Betfair is forecasting fans will bet on Betfair during the World Cup.
Find us on Google maps