The last week in sport has been jam-packed with enough controversy to keep talkSPORT listeners quarrelling until 2018; be it the News of the World’s revelations about the Pakistan Cricket team, Monty’s baffling decision to omit Paul Casey from the European Ryder Cup team (with revelations about his & Tiger’s private lives still hanging uncomfortably in the air), Bloodgate Doctor Wendy Chapman being cleared of deception, the continuing debate over the sex of Caster Semenya, or the world first of Michael Schumacher actually admitting fault following his attempt to make Reubens Barrichello a permanent feature of the Hungaroring.

Despite this, the one thing that really appealed to me (for all the right reasons) was the start of Channel 4’s programming dedicated to the London 2012 Paralympic Games, brought to life with two new shows: Inside Incredible Athletes, and That Paralympic Show. The launch naturally coincided with the landmark of two years to go to the opening of the Paralympic Games, and while I can’t remember a thing that happened for the equivalent mark for the London 2012 Olympic Games, I’m now going to be regularly tuning in to Channel 4’s coverage.

There was surprise when the Beeb didn’t win the rights to the Paralympics but I was personally delighted by LOCOG’s foresight. I think it’s often overlooked that Channel 4 is a public-service broadcaster, and I was confident they would bring a more piercing lens on the Paralympics and Paralympians, in light of their heritage of innovative programming. I still look back with fond memories of their coverage of NFL, Football Italia, Sumo and Kabbadi (OK, not so much Kabbadi), and TransWorldSport was a regular staple for me on Saturday mornings.

The programmes themselves were a great mix of scientific insight, personality and humour. ‘Inside Incredible Athletes’ got under their skin of Paralympians using scientific tests and state-of-the-art scanning technology to create ‘biomechanical portraits’, in other words, the Science behind their disability. ‘That Paralympic Show’, with its magazine format, focused much more on the personalities of the athletes, their stories, their sports, and included humorous features such as ‘Pimp my Chair’ – An idea that wouldn’t have made the Beeb’s cutting room floor.

Employing T4 stalwart Rick Edwards to front programming alongside renowned Paralympian Ade Adepitan was a good choice, and a great way to widen the appeal of the Paralympics to a younger audience, an important job in light of viewing figures for the Games themselves which historically tend to be watched, in the majority, by the over 50’s. It doesn’t end there though, and Channel 4 has commendably launched a £500,000 initiative to identify and train new on-screen talent with disabilities to play a leading role in the coverage of the London 2012 Olympics. The broadcaster is aiming for 50% of its presenting team covering the Games to be disabled.

As for the sponsors of Channel 4’s Paralympics coverage, BT & Sainsbury’s both have an unrivalled opportunity to change the way consumers perceive their organisations. While there is the obvious benefit of a two year broadcast sponsorship to drive awareness of their association (something the BBC could never offer), both brands have the chance to truly integrate the Paralympics into their brand marketing over the next two years and beyond, and steal considerable thunder from the Olympic sponsor family. Taking inspiration from Channel 4’s initiatives would be a good start.

It’s also good to see two brands with strong British heritage sponsoring an event born on these shores as the Stoke Mandeville Games in 1948. BT & Sainsbury’s can speak to the majority of the UK population and if they fulfil commitments to ‘make a lasting difference to attitudes towards disability in the UK and create opportunities for change in disabled people’s lives’, then they will have contributed to a ‘real’ legacy. In my opinion, that’s much more powerful than the legacy claims of LOCOG’s swollen band of Sustainability partners – a prize to anyone who can name them all without Googling.

How they deliver on these promises remains to be seen, but I hope they aren’t afraid to use Paralympians to front their wider brand and product marketing campaigns. Both brands need to be bold and I’d urge them to consider an OFCOM stat I’m firmly attached to: ‘69% of able bodied people said they would not be put off buying a product advertised by a ‘severely’ (visibly) disabled person’. I hope through their combined efforts by 2012 this will increase to at least 80% of the UK population.

BT, whose credentials within Paralympic sport are well established after years of support for the Paralympic World Cup, already have a suite of ambassadors from which to front their efforts. Sainsbury’s made their first step this week, with the signing of Ellie Simmonds to front their Active Kids programme, on the back of a record breaking IPC Swimming Championships for Paralympics GB.

If both brands work in tandem with Channel 4, there’s a real chance that by 2012 the UK public will recognise just as many Paralympic athletes as Olympic ones. When considering Paralympics GB is by far the most successful Team we have in UK sport (102 medals in Beijing), and that this will be the first time they’ve performed on home soil since 1948, I only hope that thousands of us are cheering them on by name and showing our appreciation of their achievements as world-class athletes, as we will with Team GB.

So if you, like me, are tired of getting lost in the barrage of sleaze, politics, and ego that shows no sign of abating in the wider sporting world, definitely make the effort to follow Channel 4’s Paralympic coverage from now until 2012.

By Paul Whitehead on September 1st, 2010

Tags: BBC, Brand marketing, Broadcast sponsorship, London 2012, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Team GB

2 comments

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

By Tim Crow on June 11th, 2010

Tags: Default, Digital marketing, Downloads, Facebook, Football, Football Sponsorship, New Product Development, Olympic sponsorship, Social Media, Vancouver 2010, Winter Olympics, World Cup

No 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

Yesterday, FIFA announced the stellar line-up – an array of international and African artists – for a ‘Kick-Off Celebration Concert‘ in Soweto on June 10 to mark the opening of the 2010 FIFA World Cup in South Africa. Predictably, the story generated worldwide coverage. But I couldn’t help feeling that FIFA has got its PR strategy on this wrong, and could learn something from the Olympic Games.

Shakira and Alicia Keys will help kick-off the 2010 FIFA World Cup

Back in February, I blogged from Vancouver on what a huge story the Vancouver 2010 Opening Ceremony became in the week leading up to the ceremony itself. This was because the VANOC took the opposite approach to FIFA, by deliberately not revealing details of who would be performing in the Opening Ceremony, or indeed anything about what the show would be like – which naturally generated a tidal wave of media and consumer speculation and discussion, and made the Opening Ceremony one of the most eagerly-anticipated events I’ve ever encountered.

Bryan Adams and Nelly Furtado performed “Bang the Drum” at the 2010 Winter Olympic Games opening ceremony

My mind went back to this when FIFA made their announcement yesterday, and I couldn’t help but feel that FIFA has missed a trick by announcing their line-up. Had they adopted the approach taken by VANOC, I’m sure it would have created the same level of buzz and anticipation that we saw in Vancouver – maybe even more. Sure, there will be buzz around the FIFA gig, but nowhere near as much as there would have been if we didn’t know who was going to perform.

By Tim Crow on March 18th, 2010

Tags: Football, Football Sponsorship, Music, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Public relations, Vancouver 2010, Winter Olympics, World Cup

No 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