I was in Auckland with the British and Irish Lions when London was awarded the 2012 Olympic Games. Very excited, my first thought was ‘how can I get involved’?

Roll on two years and my excitement grew when I filled in my volunteer form. After working at Synergy for nearly 30 years and with an employment history of running media offices in a number of different sports, I assumed – wrongly as it turned out – that I would be an ideal volunteer to work in one of the many media centres.

Over the next nine months I continued to receive emails from the LOCOG Games Maker programme saying I hadn’t been forgotten but on the other hand I hadn’t been chosen…

Suddenly, three weeks ago, I received an email saying my application had been reconsidered and could I come in for an interview – not for the media centre but instead the Spectator Entry Team!  Still keen to be involved, I rang up and booked my interview time.

So it was that last Friday I found myself heading towards LOCOG’s offices in Canary Wharf to attend my interview.  A group of us sat waiting – about 12 in total – representing a cross-section of London society.

Escorted to the office, the group was full of questions and we were given an outline of the role for which we were being interviewed – in short, we would be ambassadors outside the venues helping spectators with information and also ‘providing entertainment’ if the security queues got too long.  Not quite sure what he meant by that, but it certainly was a worry when we were told that it might take an hour and half to get through security into the venue…it might need a little bit more than us entertaining them with that wait!

We moved on to have our ID checked and our photo taken – in case we are chosen – and were then taken into a holding area full of information about 2012.

Next stop a cinema to watch a short film on the programme – with sweets provided by a nice man from Cadbury and clear mention of our training was being provided by McDonald’s – which constituted a very funny to camera piece from Eddie Izzard. Then the interview…

The interviewer assured us that this would be very informal, asking us the following questions: what is your favourite Olympic memory (I chose Steve Redgrave winning his fifth Gold medal); why do you think you can do the role (given that we had only been told what it was 10 minutes earlier, there was a need to think quickly); how many days can you commit to, etc.

My favourite Olympic memory

With the interview over, we headed down towards the Tube, and I discovered that I was not the only person that hadn’t been selected when their experience might be best-suited…there was a doctor (who had ticked the ‘Medical’ box) and two other media officers (who had ticked the ‘Media’ box).  Most interestingly there was the guy who had researched Boris Johnson’s background for ‘Who do you think you are?’ – I am not sure which box he’d ticked though!

So I am now waiting to see whether I have been chosen and if so to which venue…perhaps it will be Lord’s which is only five minutes from my house and I know like the back of my hand having worked there for various sponsors over the past 20 years – just please don’t  give me Wembley!

Stay tuned for the next update…

By Fiona Foster on November 18th, 2011

Tags: Default, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sport, Synergy, Team GB

2 comments

We all know the Olympic Games is coming to town. It’s getting closer and the clock is ticking, will we cope? Will the London Tube system handle all the extra people? How many medals will Team GB win? Anyone fancy a legacy? Will it make kids thin again? All those words are echoing around the UK media. I don’t have the answers.

But what I can explore is a new view, certainly to me anyway, as I’ve only had it about 5 minutes. London 2012 represents many things and has many hot topics, not least the L-word: Legacy. Defined as anything you want it to be, depending upon who you’re talking to, so I may as well chuck my own legacy-hat in the Olympic Ring…

Welcome to the world of collaboration

In marketing, we often discuss new platforms, will it be Facebook, Twitter, an app or something more traditional? But whilst all these platforms (and many more) have a huge role to play in the future for sponsorship, it’s finding better and more interesting ways to work together that will define the next generation of our industry. How will we combine the creativity and know-how across the marketing industry and beyond, to create truer forms of engagement and understanding?

What does this all mean for the Games?

For me, this is indeed the opportunity that smacks us in the face. I’m privileged to work for Engine, a place designed to create, embrace and accelerate the fast-changing collaboration process, which we leverage across all kinds of brands and all kinds of projects and campaigns. But London 2012 will, and is, enabling all types of cross-functional working, taking down barriers to make the best of British talent. Look at the architectural brilliance of the venues, the undeniably efficient construction projects, or how government and other public bodies are finding ways to work together towards a single goal.

We have the world’s biggest sporting event, in one of the most creative, digitally-savvy and energetic cities on the planet; I’m pretty sure an opportunity like this is rare. True, lots of us realise it’s coming and are grinding away to try and deliver something of marketing genius. Some of us certainly will.

But the opportunity to create truly integrated working — when we merge brains, disciplines or even industries — will have by far and away the biggest impact and lasting legacy on our industry. At least it certainly should do.

I believe we do ‘forced change’ particularly well in the UK. Take the recent and awful riots across London and other UK cities. It was something that no one anticipated or wanted to see, and yet, we’re already seeing huge change programmes implemented, from the top of government to tiny communities projects. Knee-jerk probably, but very much needed too. Change is vital to ensure these challenges are addressed, to give young people the opportunities they deserve to take a grip of their own futures.

In a very different way, the Games provides a similar vehicle to force change, the immovable deadline of London 2012 creates the pressure and dynamic environment to really make things happen. Decisions, teamwork, integration — none of these are optional and they have to happen, and quickly, to make certain the Games can be deserving of its title — the greatest show on earth. I say, embrace change, collaboration, integration — all of it.

Collaboration is a wonderful thing but, much like the old legacy word, it’s a very easy thing to say, much more difficult to put in practice. Our ongoing challenge is to continually challenge ourselves, to work together to make the cleverest, most creative and most integrated campaigns ever. Then afterwards? Keep on doing it, of course.

Not reading anything new? I completely agree, this thinking has been around for a long time. But — and it’s a big but — there’s a massive difference between thinking and doing. In the words of the most famous Olympic ambusher…

By Ben Wilkinson on August 26th, 2011

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Synergy

No comments

May 10th 2011. As the rest of the nation settled down to the new series of The Apprentice, switched on SKY Sports to watch Manchester City destroy Tottenham’s season, or celebrated the anniversary of Nelson Mandela’s inauguration as President of South Africa, over fourty of INSEAD’s finest alumni gathered at Engine to discuss another momentous moment in our lifetime – the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games. Hosted by our very own INSEAD graduate and Direct of Consulting – Carsten Thode – the Synergy ‘Get Ready for 2012’ seminar garnered insight from a selection London 2012 partners.

The premise of the event was simple – the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games in London are going to be transformative for many UK businesses, with unprecedented impact on their industries, sectors, customers and staff. With just over a year to go before the Games, what can we learn from the people who have been planning and preparing for that moment for as long as Boris?

Representing the sponsors – Richard Hudson, Marketing Director, BMW UK, a Tier 1 sponsor of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games, and Jat Sahota, Head of Sponsorship at Sainsburys, which negotiated a ground-breaking deal to become the first ever Paralympics-only sponsor. For the broadcasting community – Edouard Benroubi Business Manager at the BBC and the man responsible for the technical implementation of BBC’s London 2012 Olympic Games coverage, and tasked with delivering this aspiration – to broadcast every minute of every sport live via every platform. No pressure there then.

So what did we learn? Well, Chatham House rules applied but in case anyone was wondering about the enormity of the opportunity, and challenge, that hosting the Olympics presents, consider the following:

So, feeling ready for 2012?

By Tom Gladstone on May 18th, 2011

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants, Synergy, Synopsis

No comments

The London 2012 velodrome was officially unveiled on Tuesday to universal media acclaim. Quite right too: it is a stunning creation. The media coverage also confirmed that the velodrome has already acquired a widespread media nickname because of its distinctive roof: the Pringle.

To those of us who work in Olympic marketing, this is more than somewhat ironic. Without paying a penny, courtesy of the media,  Pringles has annexed a priceless piece of Olympic real estate.

Famously, the IOC keeps the Olympics as a spectacle free of brand names and presence: this is key to the Games’ DNA. Not that the spectacle actually is brand-free of course. There are the equipment manufacturers’ logos on every athlete’s clothing and footwear, and the branding and clocks of the official timekeeper Omega are very visible. But it’s pretty close.

This ban on branding extends to all buildings used for Olympic events. Thus, for the period of the Games, the O2 will be de-branded and given a neutral name. Whatever it’s called, we’ll all still call it ‘The O2’ of course: you can’t turn the clock back. But BT, and none of the other London 2012 sponsors, wouldn’t have signed up without this type of protection – and let’s not forget the global and domestic sponsors are together providing close to £2billion – 18% – of London 2012’s funding.

Which brings me to the second irony: the Pringles brand is actually owned by one of the global sponsors of the Olympics, Procter & Gamble. What a nice bonus this is for them: it will be interesting to see if they take extra advantage of their good fortune.

So, will ‘The Pringle’ stick? Will it spread from a media nickname (coined by PA reporter Helen William, according to this blog by BBC London’s Olympics Correspondent Adrian Warner) into the consumer mainstream? Only time will tell.

One thing’s for sure: if the powers that be decide, as expected, to sell the naming rights to the velodrome after the Games, I have a feeling I know who they’ll call first.

By Tim Crow on February 23rd, 2011

Tags: Brand marketing, Cycling, Default, Design, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Naming Rights, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship, Team GB

No comments

With an estimated 2m extra overseas tourists in London next summer, not to mention those travelling to the capital from across the UK, brands are already planning how to make the most of their assets in order to gain exposure and cut-through during what will be one of the busiest marketing periods the country has ever seen.

Olympic sponsors are in a slightly stronger position than most to try and gain this cut-through, in that they will have first option on outdoor advertising sites across the city, and are the ‘special ones’ who, because of their multi-million pound partnership deals, can officially run Olympic related activity without incurring the wrath of the Olympic police.

Some 2012 sponsors are, however, still topping up their portfolio with additional assets to ensure they have as much presence as possible – take EDF Energy, who last month signed an £8m three-year deal for the naming rights of the London Eye, one of the capital’s biggest tourist attractions.

EDF Energy London Eye

Brands who are not official sponsors of London 2012 are having to work a little bit harder to make sure their brands are visible to the 10.8 million ticket holders and the rest of the population who will be joining in the party.

We’re already seeing the Barclays brand around the city on a daily basis thanks to the Mayor’s flagship cycle scheme – promising to be even bigger in 2012, this is a clever way of navigating complex Olympic marketing laws.  And then we have O2, with naming rights to The O2.  Do we really think anybody will actually call it the North Greenwich Arena during Games time?

Barclays Cycle Hire

The O2 - or North Greenwich Arena?

Now there is another asset up for grabs. Sanyo yesterday announced that they will not be renewing their site on the Piccadilly Sign – one of the world’s most iconic advertising sites – after 33 years. With the lease running until the end of this year, it will be interesting to see who takes advantage of this opportunity for what will no doubt be one of the most visited areas by tourists in 2012.  The screen is already passed by an estimated 56 million people per year – 34 million pedestrians; 17 million people in coaches; 2.6 million taxis and 2.4 million cars.

Piccadilly sign

With three global Olympic sponsors already in situe, Coca-Cola, McDonald’s and Samsung, the sign will surely be a core part of their Olympic marketing plan. For whoever replaces Sanyo, Olympic sponsor or non-sponsor, the Piccadilly sign offers a truly premium outdoor advertising site, and because it is privately owned, by Land Securities, falls outside of the outdoor advertising restrictions put in place by LOCOG.  Watch this space….

By Sara Wilson on February 15th, 2011

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants

No comments

Mihir Bose needs little introduction as an award-winning journalist, author and broadcaster. From 2006- 2009 he was the BBC’s first Sports Editor; prior to that he was Chief Sports News Correspondent for the Daily Telegraph. He has written 22 books, including an award winning history of Indian cricket and the first history of Bollywood, and presented numerous programmes for radio and TV. Currently, he contributes a weekly ‘Big Sports Interview’ to the London Evening Standard and is working on a book on the power of modern sport.  

So, we were delighted when Mihir agreed to give us his take on our on going ‘What’s the Greatest Sports Marketing Innovation?’ debate. Who or what did he think were the big game changers? Had we missed anything crucial off our list?

Synergy: So, Mihir, having looked at our initial list, what do you think is the greatest sports marketing innovation of the modern era?

Mihir Bose: Well, it’s a very impressive list, starting with 1960 when Arnold Palmer and Mark McCormack shook hands. Is that the greatest? That’s a bit hard to say. It’s an innovator, but the first is not necessarily the best.

Certainly, the Horst Dassler and Patrick Nally one, of creating a sponsor (for a shoe really, in effect) and a world event. As a result of that, and the effect it’s had on football, is very impressive. Also, I would say very, very impressive is the Nike creation of the shoe for Michael Jordan. And that is impressive on two counts: firstly creating a shoe for a sportsman, but also for the first time in America, making a black player an iconic television star, which hadn’t been done. It sort of broke through – if you like, it’s the Barack Obama moment of sport – it broke through that barrier there.

Synergy: Do you think we’ve missed any that deserve a place on the final shortlist?

MB: The only one that’s missed out on this list, I would say, is the Indian Premier League, which started in 2008. I think that took cricket – domestic cricket – to a different height. Domestic cricket nowhere in the world pays money, it’s international cricket that brings in the money, and I think the Indian Premier League, combining Bollywood with money, large dollops of cash, is an innovator.

Synergy: Conversely, and possibly controversially, do you think we have included any which don’t deserve to be there?

MB: I would say that the ECB one, of introducing Twenty20. The ECB did introduce Twenty20 but it actually didn’t make the most of the marketing; it allowed the Indians to make the most of it. Maybe partly it reflected the English market and so on… but that’s the one I would say I wouldn’t bring in.

And also perhaps 1981, the boxing match, where sports viewing of that kind was born. I’m not sure that pay-per-view works – it works in America, but it doesn’t work [in the same way] around the world. It’s an important concept, but if you’re talking of the ten best events, or right at the top, I would say that has had a limited appeal.

Synergy: So, returning to our main question, what game-changer has had the biggest effect on the industry to date?

MB: The biggest? That is always very difficult to say. But probably television. I think this list shows that there has been, since the 70s certainly (round about ’78 or ’79 – Ecclestone came in ’79) an incremental awareness, and a steady increase of the awareness of what television can do.

Sports and sponsorship is not a new entity – ever since sport started there has been some sort of sponsorship – but television has added a completely new dimension, and the use of television to increase revenues and highlight sportsmen and women; I think that has been the big factor.

And I suppose if one looks at it, perhaps in some ways the biggest moment, was not merely the creation of the The Olympic Partner (TOP) sponsorship program – but the marriage of television and money that enabled the production of the 1984 Los Angeles Games, following the boycott of the 1980 Moscow Olympics when the Olympic Games looked like it was going to collapse. The Olympics, the ultimate amateur thing (where you play not for money, you can’t advertise on kit, winners don’t receive money, just medals) was transformed: perhaps that marks the single moment when world sport realised the importance of marketing and the importance of sport.

Synergy: So can we conclude that TOP program would be your choice for the greatest modern sports marketing innovation?

MB: I’d say yes. That is the ultimate one, where you retain the outer crust of the amateur ethos (the athletes stay in an Olympic village, they don’t earn any money, there’s no advertising in the stadium) and yet it brings in a lot of money.

And the IOC, the way it’s run, the sort of ambush marketing it has, and that sort of thing, it’s run like a corporation – in fact, it’s run like a McDonald’s franchise. It comes to London and it has told London what exactly the London bid committee can or cannot do. It showcases the ultimate marriage of man and sport; the idea that sport is for everyone, anyone can pick up a running shoe and just run and win the 100m. That’s not quite the case, but that simplicity of sport that makes it so appealing, combined with the fact that if you win the 100m, you could become a very, very rich man – or a rich woman if you win the women’s race! - that concept I think makes it the single most important sports marketing moment.

With thanks to Mihir Bose. www.mihirbose.com. http://twitter.com/mihirbose.

By Lucie Bartlett on December 2nd, 2010

Tags: Ambush campaign, BBC, Cricket, ECB, India, Indian Premier League, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, New Product Development, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultants, Synergy, Television, What's the Greatest Sports Marketing Innovation?, World Cup

No comments

This has been the question for many athletes and officials across the Commonwealth over the last few days. As is often the case with any major sporting championship, media scepticism tends to reach a peak just before the event begins, with huge attention focused on security, drugs scandals, infrastructure and much else.

For most, the turning point for this pre-event trepidation is the first moment of the Opening Ceremony with feelings of cynicism and concern being immediately replaced with excitement and enthusiasm. However, with under a week to go until the Delhi 2010 Commonwealth Games, I’m not so sure this is going to be the case.

Concerns surrounding the efficient delivery of the Games have been widely voiced since Delhi was awarded the event in 2003, however, they reached new heights last week when a footbridge outside the Jawaharlal Nehru Stadium collapsed. Whilst the Chief Minister of Delhi, Sheila Dikshit, couldn’t understand the alarm (Quote: “The footbridge was not meant for athletes and delegates. It was for the use of the common man”. Well, that’s OK then), the incident has triggered outrage with many more serious problems now being exposed.

As with any major event, potential terrorist attacks and security are always a concern. Attention on Delhi, though, has now focused on the images of the athletes’ accommodation released last week. Not only are many areas still unfinished (it was announced today that everything will be completed by Wednesday – four days before the Opening Ceremony), but they showed horrendous levels of hygiene.

(c) BBC Sport - Images of the athletes' accommodation

As I write this, the England team are due to enter the athletes’ village, but they will be without high profile athletes such as Phillips Idowu, Christine Ohuruogu and Lisa Dobriskey. Whilst the two latter athletes pulled out because of ‘injury’, Phillips pulled out because of concerns over his safety . “Sorry people, but I have children to think about,” he said via Twitter. “My safety is more important to them than a medal.”

Whilst he is said to be disappointed not to be competing, his absence and that of many other high-profile British athletes raises other questions about the stature of the event. Putting aside all the concerns over security, safety and uncompleted venues, even if these were all in hand and the Games were fully supported and expected to take place without any further hitches, it needs to be asked as to whether the event still holds its place as a major placeholder in the sporting calendar?

English hurdler Natasha Danvers appeared on BBC Breakfast last week and voiced her thoughts on whether the event has had its day and is still as appealing as before. She quite rightly summed up that for a GB Track and Field athlete, there are many other competitions that are simply more important. 2010 has already witnessed the European Championships, and with the Commonwealth Games being pushed back to October many athletes had already decided not to compete as they are now entering into their winter training schedule in order to be on track for the IAAF World Championships next year, and even more importantly the Olympic Games in London in 2012.

So, when the news of the collapsed bridge and appalling athletes’ accommodation came to the fore, it perhaps wasn’t that hard a decision for some more athletes to withdraw. On the other hand, however, for other competitors the decision hasn’t been as easy, as this event is still of the utmost importance to them.

With GB athletes competing in the vest of their home countries, the Commonwealth Games often offer the opportunity for other athletes to represent their country who might not otherwise get the chance to wear a national vest. It certainly isn’t an easy decision for them to forsake years of preparation and training for what may be for some their only chance of national pride.

The media attention is continuing with further controversy and outrage unfolding on a daily basis, and the jury is out on whether Delhi can recover from its current problems and somehow deliver a successful event. But, albeit that Glasgow is already committed to stage the Games in 2014, are we witnessing the beginning of the end for the Commonwealths?

Personally, having experienced a Commonwealth Games first-hand when I spent two amazing weeks working with one of the top-tier sponsors in Manchester in 2002, Guardian Media Group, I hope not. However, as always, only time will tell.

By Sara Wilson on September 27th, 2010

Tags: Athletics, Commonwealth Games, Glasgow 2014, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sport, Team GB

2 comments

It’s a very exciting time when the mascots are announced for any Games.  Admittedly, this excitement is normally reserved for those aged under ten, and rightly so.  However, I feel very fortunate that I’m blessed with an inner child and can appreciate similar feelings of anticipation that I did back when I was six or seven years old. The more exciting thing this time though, is the fact I might actually get to meet the London 2012 editions.  If you’ve yet to see them, take a look at the Telegraph’s comprehensive explanation of their design.

As you’ve probably guessed I like them.  I think they offer something that will inspire and engage young people across the UK.  They have a thrilling adventure ahead of them and they’ll be able to interact with their audience like never before in the history of Olympic Mascots.  The speed in which both technology and young people have developed in recent years is astonishing.  The digital children right across all corners of the UK will have the opportunity to follow, like and play with Wenlock and Mandeville however they choose, whenever they choose and wherever they choose.  Surely this is amazing? They will take them on holiday, take them to school and probably in the bath too, and more often than not this will be through the digital channel.

I think for brands involved as Official Partners of the London 2012 Olympic and Paralympic Games this offers a unique opportunity.  The mascots will play an important role in connecting with the young people, not only in terms of promoting the Games, but also as an educational inspiration.  I remember how engaged I was when taught about the Olympic movement, having something so real and tangible on the door step will have an enormous impact, particularly for young boys who commonly have learning challenges in certain subjects of the curriculum in this age group.  Tapping into to this market to help develop and extend the Olympic experience and involve our young nation in the Games is a fantastic opportunity and we’ll be looking to develop programmes for our clients to maximise this exciting development.

So, I hope you to get some excitement from seeing the new mascots unveiled.  If they’re not for you don’t worry, but I urge you to just ask a small person their opinion in two years time, as this will be the true judge of the success of Wenlock and Mandeville.  Get involved yourselves and follow them on Twitter @iamwenlock and @iammandeville and see how the story unfolds in the build up to the ever nearing London 2012. And keep your eye on this blog, as if I do get the chance to meet them the pictures will be here first!

By Ben Wilkinson on May 20th, 2010

Tags: BOA, Brand marketing, Branded content, Digital marketing, Experiential marketing, Facebook, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Online communities, Social Media, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants, Synergy, Team GB

5 comments

I’ve been with Synergy clients and colleagues here in Vancouver for over a week now taking in the 2010 Olympic Winter Games. This is the seventh Games I’ve attended, and as always it’s been a fascinating experience, but this time with a heightened sense of importance and uniqueness, because we’ll be applying the insights we develop here for our clients to their London 2012 sponsorship strategies.

With this in mind, here are a just a few examples of how the Olympics has played out here in Vancouver and Canada, with some thoughts on the associated implications for London 2012.

1. The Weather

This has of course been a major theme in the Vancouver 2010 story, both around the world and here in Canada, with the effects of one of the warmest winters ever in BC impacting heavily on the events in Whistler and Cypress Mountain. But it’s been less of an issue here than you might expect, because so many major events – in particular ice hockey, of which more later – are being staged in indoor venues in the Vancouver metropolitan area.

Whilst the weather is of course a much less critical factor in the summer Games than in the winter edition, there’s no doubt that a wet summer in two years’ time – and let’s face it, a wet summer is hardly a rare event in the UK – would have a major effect on the overall image and experience of London 2012.

2. Olympic Scepticism

Vancouverite scepticism is not getting in the way of the party, but it’s always there in the background. Games-time has brought with it a huge surge of excitement and celebration, but there is a palpable undercurrent of scepticism about the effects and benefits of the Olympics here. It’s characterised by what Vancouverites would be the first to admit is their opinionated mindset, and framed by Canada’s proud tradition of free speech. I’ve experienced it every day, face-to-face, in the news and in social media, across a wide spectrum of topics, such as Government policy, the economy, tax, house prices, and travel disruption.

Recognise any similarities with the UK?

3. The Opening Ceremony

Fuelled by a tidal wave of rumours and a surprising lack of leaks from inside the dress rehearsals, last week everybody here was talking about the opening ceremony, in particular who would perform (apart from Rush, most of the rumours I heard turned out to be true) and who would light the Olympic flame (who else could it have been but Wayne Gretzky). The post-ceremony debate was equally fascinating. Whilst the consensus was “brilliant show” (and it was – the minor technical problems did not detract at all) there was also a significant debate about to what extent the ceremony truly represented Canada.

We’ll see exactly the same things happen in the UK around the London 2012 opening ceremony: indeed if anything, the pre-show rumours and the post-show debate will be even more intense.

4. Bad Luck, or Bad Games?

Although every Games has its problems, Vancouver 2010 has of course already had more than its fair share. They have ranged from the unfortunate to the tragic and – depending on your point of view – resulted from either misadventure or mismanagement. Inevitably this has become a major media theme worldwide, with the most strident criticism of IOC and VANOC coming from the UK, as well as some early – some would say too early – comments by UK journalists that this is ‘the worst Games ever.’

The Canadian media and Canadian consumers aren’t denying that there are problems – quite the reverse. But it’s hardly surprising that many have reacted furiously to some of the more extreme criticism from the UK. If London 2012 comes in for similar criticism from another country’s media, we’ll see exactly the same reaction in the UK.

5. In Canada, It’s All About Ice Hockey

Ice Hockey – just ‘Hockey’ here – is king in Canada. Think football in the UK, cricket in India or gridiron in the USA in terms of its dominant popularity. And so it follows that for Canada, this games is going to be defined by whether or not Canada wins the hockey gold medal. Of course, every Canadian success is going to be a cause for national celebration, as it was when Alex Bilodeau won Canada’s first-ever gold medal on home soil – an occasion I was lucky enough to witness at first hand – in the freestyle skiing moguls. But hockey is what really matters. So it was that on Tuesday night, after Canada beat Norway, the energy and noise in the streets and the bars of Vancouver went way up, to the levels we see in the UK when England play a big FIFA World Cup or UEFA Euro match.

Will London 2012 be different in the UK? Yes and no. We’ll see, I’m sure, huge support for all of Britain’s athletes, and national celebrations when a gold medal is won, particularly in the blue riband events. But although medal success will definitely be a key measure of how UK consumers judge the success of the Games, the focus will be spread across most of the Olympic sports rather than just one.

By Tim Crow on February 18th, 2010

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Vancouver 2010

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