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.

By Sara Wilson on August 18th, 2010

Tags: Athletics, BBC, BOA, Default, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Sponsorship, Team GB

2 comments

As the excitement of Britain’s medal haul at the European Championship fades, the media and public turn the spotlight on our chances at the much anticipated London 2012 Olympic Games.  Many sports journalist have discussed the hopes of Idowu, Farah and Ennis but what the sports media are missing is more coverage on the potential of the talented Men’s GB hockey team.

It may have been over twenty years since Great Britain’s men’s hockey team won gold at the Seoul 1988 Olympic Games, in the days of Kerly, Batchelor and Sherwani (who? you are most probably asking yourself), but now Great Britain has a new breed of stars that could become heroes.  After recently reaching the final of the Champions Trophy they are in real contention for a medal, although Great Britain will have to overcome an extremely dominant Aussie team…which could make an incredible final at London 2012.

Hockey is a mass participation sport; registering over 100,000 people playing in the UK every week (and not just by girls, before my colleagues launch in to their predictable banter).  Whilst this sport won’t be at the top of every potential sponsors wish list, hockey could provide the right brand with a really unique opportunity to engage with the passionate and dedicated audience of this great game.

By Simon Roche on August 11th, 2010

Tags: Blogging, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sport

1 comment

I wasn’t surprised by Wednesday’s announcement of Procter & Gamble’s TOP sponsorship agreement with the IOC. If you read my August 2009 blog on P&G’s sponsorship deal with the NFL, and subsequently followed P&G’s wonderful ‘Proud Sponsor of Moms’ activation of its USOC partnership across Vancouver 2010, you probably weren’t surprised either. It was an inevitable next step in the colonisation of a new(ish) piece of Olympic white space by P&G – using sport to market to women.

P&G’s strategy is as simple as it is brilliant.

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.

And finally, I wonder how former IOC TOP partner Johnson & Johnson is feeling about P&G colonising the Olympic white space they pioneered with their ‘Thanks Mom’ campaign around Beijing 2008?

By Tim Crow on July 30th, 2010

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

4 comments

Anyone who knows me will be aware that I like things that pop up in city locations seemingly out of nowhere. The more random and unexpected, the better – elephants, pianos, lions, designer deckchairs… So the recent landing of 100 ping pong tables scattered across the capital is especially pleasing to the old Branston eye.

In an attempt to trend-ify (is that a real word? Am not sure) table tennis, ping pong is set to become the urban craze of London for the next month with the kick-off last Thursday of the Ping! London festival. Pop up sport for impromptu games all over the city has a neat appeal. And interestingly, Yahoo branding aside, this particular initiative doesn’t feel to be over-endorsed by brands. Almost refreshing; ironic I know given the industry in which we operate.

Great timing too; getting in there ahead of this week’s somewhat brand-cluttered London 2012 two years to go landmark. The Ping! London initiative, supported by the English Table Tennis Association (ETTA) hopes to raise the profile of the sport and get more British people to play ahead of the 2012 Olympic Games. An Olympic sport since 1988, apparently table tennis is the world’s second most popular sport after football, with over 300 million registered players.

Are you serious?

Last week’s Ping! launch party witnessed the GB Team showing off their moves and despite having lived and breathed sport all my life, I wouldn’t be able to name any of our national team. Sad but true. Not one. A different matter in Asia and for the Chinese in particular where it is considered the country’s national sport. Hence why they excel at spending lots of time on the old ping pong Olympic podium. And we don’t. Two years to go mind, all that could change.

Having given the re-positioning of ping pong some thought, it strikes me that table tennis has rather a lot going for it. The sport has universal appeal, is accessible, cheap, not too time consuming, easy to learn, can be played by all ages/genders (all 2 of them) and appeals to the child in us all. And if we needed any further convincing, and here’s the PR talk, it is played by celebrities too – Blur’s Damon Albarn & Hollywood legend Susan Sarandon (co-owner of New York’s successful ping pong club SpiN) – the names freely touted around as ping pong lovers.

It seems especially apt that the table tennis tables are currently residing in London given the sport was invented in Victorian-era England. Ping! follows closely behind Luke Jarram’s highly successful ‘Play Me, I’m Yours’ artwork, a project that has been touring globally since 2008. Last month in London, over 20 pianos were placed throughout the city for anyone to play. A creative blank canvas and one that left behind a rather touching legacy with the pianos being donated to local schools and community groups. Loved it. Hopefully the tables will follow in the pianos footsteps and be given to local youth clubs and charities to enjoy once Ping! waves farewell to the city on 22nd August.

If you’ve not already bumped into a table (bats & balls all provided too. Over 4,000 bats, fear not), keep your eyes peeled in Soho Square, Tate Britain, the British Library, Heathrow Airport…all over the shop.  A geek-chic Olympic sport that we will not only see played in our own backyard come July 2012 but one that is enjoying an uplifting revival as ideal for hip city dwellers – count me in.

Game, set and match.

By Stephanie Branston on July 29th, 2010

Tags: London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, PR, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sport, grass roots sport

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

Those little red mittens came to symbolise the 2010 Olympic Winter Games in Vancouver. At $10 a pair, with half going towards Canadian athletes (though I’m not sure by which specific route), they were the must-have item for those attending the Games.

As I left the Air Canada lounge for the flight back from Vancouver last week, I fell into step behind a group of passengers who were debating the success of the mittens and what London 2012 should produce that might perform a similarly symbolic role. One of them thought it a good idea to produce a specially commissioned football shirt. I thought at the time that this was a silly idea; on reflection I think it would be borderline catastrophic. Here’s why.

The mittens performed a number of roles, some obvious and others less so, but all of which were entirely relevant to the occasion: they kept your hands wrapped in fleecy warmth; they branded the Games as they featured in their deep red multitudes in TV coverage of every Olympic event; and they allowed viewers to show their appreciation and applause for competitors as they clapped their mitten-clad hands together or held them to the sky.

I’m led to believe that the mitten is also a traditional Eskimo garment, which has positive cultural overtones relating to the native population; and they also supported a worthy cause, looked great and were priced accessibly.

Contrast these benefits with the message that a football shirt would send. It would reinforce (mostly) ill-founded foreign views of British sports fans as an ill-mannered rabble; its symbolic function is to divide us into tribes rather than unite us in support; it is unlikely to be cheap to buy; and it sure as hell won’t protect us from our weather.

I think the right souvenir garment – London’s version of Vancouver’s red mittens – is a stellar idea, but what should it be? Suggestions on a postcard please (or in the comment box below) as to what we might produce for London 2012.

By Scott Garrett on March 2nd, 2010

Tags: Advertising, Football, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Sales promotion, Vancouver 2010, Winter Olympics

1 comment

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Tim Crow on January 20th, 2010

Tags: London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship

No comments

Channel 4’s successful bid against the BBC to win the UK broadcast rights to the London 2012 Paralympics defied predictions and surprised leading observers. The latest in a series of bold and innovative moves by the London 2012 Organising Committee in their quest to create and deliver a Games for a new era and a new generation, it’s a decision that will be good for the Paralympics, for consumers, and for London 2012 sponsors.

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

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

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

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

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

By Tim Crow on January 12th, 2010

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

1 comment

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