The King of the World is dead, long live the King of the World.

You have to hand it to James Cameron: at $1.88billion in takings to date, his 3D epic Avatar is officially the biggest box office ticket of all time. And having taken only six weeks to eclipse the record set by Titanic, JC’s last feature film, this is likely to be just the tip of the iceberg.

Yes, the world and his wife (and their three children, plus extended circle of friends) have queued up at cinemas to see Avatar: whilst it’s not perhaps a film for everybody, it has nonetheless garnered some strong reviews, and, 3D effects aside, features some of the best CGI ever used in medium. The spectacle in 3D, however, elevates Avatar beyond movie to experience, drawing the audience into Cameron’s alien world of Pandora without simply resorting to the customary “oh, that was the 3D bit” camera pans. Not all 3D films can claim to do the same.

Avatar is a 3D success because the extra something this technology brings makes us believe it more, enriching the immersion and further suspending disbelief. The question is, how to monetise this on a more regular basis, as opposed to only once every 15 years, when Mr Cameron decides to take us one step beyond?

Naturally, the answer came in the form of the ever-inventive Sky, with Sky Sports’ first foray into 3D programming the live coverage of Arsenal vs Manchester United last weekend. For those lucky enough to be in one of the nine bars across the UK to feature 3D screens - well, if you’d call ‘lucky’ being reciprocally filmed by Sky Sports looking like the rejects from a Buddy Holly casting session - the experience was mixed. The customary Sky Sports graphics, player line-ups (where a sense of depth and perspective is inherent to the camera view) and wide angle shots from behind goal were suitably impressive; however, the third dimension was not the totally eye-popping revolution many were imagining.

To be fair, Sky does spoil the viewer: with up to 20 cameras tracking the game in regular Ds and lovely High Definition crispness for those willing to pay an extra tenner a month - it’s hard to say whether the final spectacle of 3D could ever match up to our expectations. It’s no massive surprise that this was basically a glorified experiment by the broadcaster - football may not be the ultimate sport to benefit from an extra dimension, versus, say boxing, rugby, or even golf - but the fanfare of such a world’s first certainly captured the public’s imagination, leaving viewers hungry, or at least peckish, for more.

Whatever the future holds for in-home 3D, it’s clear that from a sporting perspective, as James Cameron understands, the extra dimension needs to add something to our experience, to give something back, with Sunday’s experiment representing a small step in furthering Sky’s opinion on exactly how it plans to achieve this.

By Jonathan Izzard on February 2nd, 2010

Tags: Barclays Premier League, Branded content, Broadcast sponsorship, Experiential marketing, Football, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Media, Sport, Television, Television audiences

No comments

So, the draw for the 2010 FIFA World Cup™ finals is almost upon us. At 5pm GMT today in Cape Town, Sepp Blatter, Charlize Theron (yes, really) and co will select the teams from the four designated pots that will make up Groups A – H next summer in South Africa.

But what does it all really mean to the brands, the fans and to FIFA’s flagship?

From a brand perspective there are no surprises in terms of the major head-to-heads we’ll be seeing: Nike managed to comprehensively crash adidas’s party in Germany at the last World Cup, with Joga Bonito stealing adi’s ball from its own back yard. What about 2010, though? As the first World Cup to take place on the African continent, will the joy, enthusiasm and raw power that characterise African football play into Nike’s hands, or, as kit supplier to 11 of the 32 teams, including hosts South Africa (versus Nike’s 10), do adidas have something else in their locker? Although if anyone understands African football, it’s Puma. Together with reigining champions Italy, Puma supplies four of the continent’s six nations: the brand’s use of its African assets in Africa’s World Cup will be interesting to track.

So what about the draw itself? Whilst Portugal and France’s poor qualifying records have upped the ante on any prospective Group of Death, all we can do at this stage is wait and speculate. For sponsors, a killer draw may represent a challenge, for others an opportunity: big Group Stage fixtures in the diary drive scale and anticipation and allow for advanced planning…but also affect permutations in the Knockout Stage. From a fan perspective, no one wants a Group of Death – but who imagined they’d see France getting ‘Senegalled’ back in 2002? Whether it’s the relief of a dream Group, the agony of the worst draw imaginable, or the buzz of a being drawn against a historic or local rival, this will be THE big global sports story of the next few days no matter what happens today.

What about FIFA? After a 2006 tournament remembered for Zidane’s madness, rather than his magic, a sticky tie here or there is likely go down pretty well with the organisers, adding to the colour and vibrancy already imbued by hosts South Africa. And, as a prelude to Samba Football going home at the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ in Brazil, the 2010 draw is a critical moment in FIFA’s perennial brand and business rivalry with UEFA and its titans, the Champions League and the European Football Championships.

By Jonathan Izzard on December 4th, 2009

Tags: Default, Football, Football Sponsorship, Synergy, World Cup

No comments

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

Who would have thought a simple name change could cause such a rumpus? St James’ Park, more a cathedral to the Geordie Nation then a stadium, has been given the catchy title by its beleaguered owner of ’sportsdirect.com@St James’ Park’. Cue much uproar across the media and more importantly among the fans.

However, rather then add to the derision already rightly poured on this bizarre move, we think there could be an opportunity for a canny brand here. Any brand in sponsorship is fundamentally looking to engage, not alienate, fans and this naming rights debacle actually offers up a unique opportunity.

The answer is simple - try and strike a short term deal with the Newcastle United commercial team, buy the naming rights for the rest of the season and call it - this is the simple bit - ‘St James’ Park’.

In other words, give it back to fans: they’ll love you forever and no doubt you’ll get more than a few column inches to boot - for the first naming rights deal to get rid of the brand name.

By Dominic Curran on November 17th, 2009

Tags: Communications, Football, Football Sponsorship, Naming Rights, Newcastle United, Public relations

No comments

So I open a copy of Metro on the tube this morning and read about Samsung’s new five year deal with Chelsea. Great news for the club in difficult economic times.

However, for a deal that is reputedly worth well over £50 million for the term, I thought someone could have pushed the budget a little further for the photoshoot and at least made the backdrop high enough!?

By Dominic Curran on July 16th, 2009

Tags: Default, Event management consultants, Football, Football Sponsorship, Public relations, Sponsorship consultancy

No comments

Launching a sponsorship is a vitally important moment for a brand: first impressions count - they only happen once. AON has shown that they get this.    

The company’s openness and candour about the background and rationale behind the Manchester United sponsorship, in particular the various briefings given by their senior people to a raft of media, including fan blogs, has been a masterclass of its type, proactively seeding key messages, addressing multiple stakeholder groups, and demonstrating a business transparency that, although regularly cited as a modern pre-requisite, is a custom more honoured in the breach than the observance.

On which point I was interested to see that, unlike the other five Champions League sponsors, Ford opted to say absolutely nothing about having recently extended its long-running sponsorship, choosing instead to let UEFA slip it into last Monday’s announcement about the Champions League’s six sponsors for the 2009-2012 cycle.

Whilst Ford undoubtedly had its reasons for adopting this approach, to me it was the wrong call for two reasons.

1. It runs totally counter to Ford’s current positioning around the deal. The Ford UK website, for example, currently states (my italics):

‘For 17 years, Ford has been the UEFA Champions League’s biggest fan and a proud sponsor of Europe’s premier football competition.’ 

2. At a time when Ford is more embattled and scrutinised than at any time in its history, surely it would have made far more sense to have taken a leaf out of AON’s book and been absolutely transparent about the Champions League deal and its brand and business rationale? Put it this way: why not take this approach?

First outcome: a call by the GMB, on behalf of Ford’s workforce, for Ford to reveal the rationale and terms of the Champions League deal.

QED.

By Tim Crow on June 24th, 2009

Tags: Default, Employee engagement, Football Sponsorship, Public relations

No comments

It is good to see AON CMO Philip B Clement quoted in Marketing Week as saying that that the company’s sponsorship of Manchester United will “inform everything we do”.  AON, as we all know by now, are taking over from AIG at the end of the 2010/2011 season as Manchester United’s shirt sponsor. 

What is irritating is to read Marketing Week’s Russell Parsons, in the same piece, write that AON’s decision comes “at a time when many brands are questioning the wisdom of long-term sponsorship deals as the global economic downturn puts the spotlight on what return on investment sponsorship can bring”.

It’s irritating because it just isn’t true.  Which brands?  Which long-term sponsorship deals?  If anything over the past few months there have been more announcements of brands recognising the value of sponsorship by announcing further or new investments.

However, I was pleased that Mr Parsons shoots himself in the foot in the next paragraph when he quotes Mr Clement as saying that the sponsorship is an efficient and effective way of building the AON brand globally, and that the company would have to spend significantly more on media to match the exposure the deal will bring the brand over the four years of the deal - quite apart from its other benefits.

“It is a pretty good bet for a US firm looking for a global presence”, Mr Clement says.  You bet it is.  It’s done a great job for AIG.  It’s just a pity that the brand was unable to capitalise on the benefits delivered through the sponsorship because the company fell foul of the global economic conditions - a situation which, if we were to believe media reports, can be laid squarely at the feet of the MU sponsorship. 

I would love to have been a fly on the wall within AIG when the marketers were undoubtedly arguing that the MU sponsorship deal was one thing that was worth saving from the ashes.  Shame for the AIG brand they didn’t win the argument.  AIG’s loss will be AON’s gain. And Manchester United haven’t done too badly either - the deal is reportedly worth an extra £6 million to them annually.

By Karen Earl on June 10th, 2009

Tags: Default, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Sponsorship

No comments

They may now be the richest club in the world, but Manchester City will be desperately hoping that Etihad, their new shirt sponsors, don’t go the way of their predecessors - because the source of City’s new wealth, Abu Dhabi, owns both the club and the airline.

Before Etihad, City’s shirt sponsor was Thomas Cook, whose parent company Arcandor has just filed for bankruptcy protection. Prior to that, exactly the same thing happened to First Advice, whose parent company The Accident Group went into administration in 2003 - and infamously fired its staff by text - leaving City without a sponsor in 2003-04. First Advice replaced Eidos, who are still going but whose share price collapsed almost immediately after they signed up with City - owing to a dramatic drop in year-on-year profits rather than the sponsorship announcement, I hasten to add.

Somehow, though, I suspect City are now as safe as you can be. Off the pitch at least.

By Tim Crow on June 10th, 2009

Tags: Default, Football, Football Sponsorship

No comments

Certainly not a new topic in this forum, but yet again David Beckham is at the top of his marketing game. Tomorrow (11 June) he makes a rare public appearance in London, at Selfridges on behalf of Emporio Armani.  As Dom mentioned in his post on Becks, he’s a marketing certainty, and I have no doubt that tomorrow’s event will be mobbed.

For me DB is a fantastic sponsorship opportunity.  He’s always been a gifted footballer, and it’s fair to say he’s a bit of a looker too, but he’s certainly not short of company in that bracket.  He has that little something that no-one can quite put their finger on, an aura that surrounds him that makes him appeal to so many different people all over the world.  This is what makes Beckham so unique and has seen him take footballers beyond being just footballers.  He has become his very own brand, but his brand is one that can be so powerful when used in partnership with others, just ask his current sponsors at adidas, Cabo Sao Roque, Coty, Emporio Armani, Motorola and Sharpie.

Armani’s use of Beckham should be admired, as the brand consistently leverages a very strong relationship between the brand and the icon.  Armani’s integrated approach drives consumers affinity with the brand, and importantly offers an emotional experience beyond the ATL campaign. For fans all over the globe the opportunity to meet Beckham is a once in a life time experience and this week some of those fans will get their chance in London.  The experience will also provide a great PR platform to extend the campaign into the all important column inches.

So tomorrow sees the man at Selfridges, and whilst it will be a small duty in the life of David, I’m sure it will provide incredible excitement for those that meet him.  May even help sell a few pairs of pants too.

By Ben Wilkinson on June 10th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Brand marketing, David Beckham, Experiential marketing, Fashion, Football, Football Sponsorship, Product placement, Public relations, Sales promotion, Sponsorship

No comments

While football fans brace themselves for yet another drawn-out summer of incredulous transfer speculation, credit has to go to Portuguese bank Banco Espirito Santo for capitalising on the ongoing Cristiano Ronaldo ‘will he? won’t he?’ saga.

In an advertising campaign destined to further anger Sir Alex Ferguson, the ever on-the-ball Football365’s Mediawatch, has spotted the Manchester United star grinning away above the slogan ‘Where will I be in three years? I don’t know, but my money will be here.’

While you have to admire the sheer audacity of Ronaldo (he really doesn’t care who he upsets does he?), it made me think; why don’t more brands use transfers and the transfer window in particular as an opportunity to speak to a captive football audience?

Whereas most footballers will be sunning themselves on the beaches of Europe or the Caribbean this summer, the majority of football fans will still be glued to Sky Sports News round-the-clock coverage or scanning The Sun on a daily basis for stories of their best player stating his undying allegiance to their club, before moving for an undisclosed record fee the next day. If you want loyalty, buy a dog as they say!

So while the football season is now officially over, our desire for unabated news of even the most trivial detail related to our club’s dealings in the transfer market knows no bounds.

The relevance and potential of this territory is something that US brands capitalised upon years ago. The furore that surrounds the build up to the drafts of the NFL, NBA, MLB and even the NHL is all supported by an array of brands looking to tap into the fevered interest in off-season activity.

Seasoned rumour mongers Real Madrid were also more than aware of the benefits they could deliver to their own commercial partners when they signed David Beckham in the 2003 transfer window. On arrival in Madrid, Beckham was driven from the airport to his medical check-up, to sign his contract, to his official presentation all in a brand new Audi.

The impact was so great that Jesus Gasanz, the president of Audi in Spain said: “The international exposure our company received in that brief period was so immense that our three-year investment in the club was repaid — and several times over — right there.”

Yet despite this supporting evidence the majority of football sponsors still appear to go into hibernation over the summer months, once the seasons over and the window is open. It all seems like a missed opportunity to me.

But don’t take my word for it, just ask Jesus himself!

By Paul Whitehead on June 8th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, David Beckham, Football, Football Sponsorship, Manchester United, Media, NFL, Sponsorship

No comments