I’m saddened but not surprised by the IOC decision to limit Torch Relays to host countries. It was both predictable, following the anti-China protests that dogged the 2008 Torch Relay, and pragmatic, given the volatile political climate. But I believe it’s a backward step for the Olympics which could have been avoided.

The problem with the 2008 Torch Relay was that it was an overtly Chinese Torch Relay, not an Olympic Torch Relay. As such it ran counter to the DNA of the Olympics, which is a celebration of humanity – of the many, not the few, and of all countries, not simply the host.

Call me an idealist if you will, but surely it would be both preferable and possible to preserve the international leg by re-designing the Torch Relay experience so that it both reflects this true Olympic DNA, and in so doing eschews nationalism?

I guess I shouldn’t complain, in that we’ll have the Torch all to ourselves in here in the UK in advance of London 2012. But I can’t help feeling that the Torch could and should be used experientially to share the true spirit of the Olympic Games with the world.

By Tim Crow on March 30th, 2009

Tags: Default, Experiential marketing, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, Olympic Torch Relay, Olympic sponsorship

No comments

One Games ends: the road to another begins. Since the curtain came down on Beijing 2008, VANOC has launched an array of Vancouver 2010 initiatives, including a new Vancouver 2010 brand identity, a new motto (‘With Glowing Hearts’), and the release of the first tranche of Vancouver 2010 tickets.

Another recently-launched initiative is ‘The Vancouver 2010 Club – A Patron’s Programme’, a limited-edition high-rollers’ Olympic experience, which includes premium tickets, a car and driver, a concierge service and a place in the Olympic Torch Relay. VANOC is marketing 100 of these packages at C$285,000 (£140,500) each, and is reporting strong demand.

VANOC has rebuffed inevitable criticism of the concept by pointing out that the tickets involved do not come from the public allocation, and that the scheme is underpinned by philanthropy, as each package automatically donates 100 event tickets to the Vancouver 2010 Charitable Ticketing Fund, which is distributing 50,000 tickets to underprivileged children.

I applaud VANOC’s initiative. It’s a win-win for all concerned, and is simply a logical extension of a major NPD trend of recent times – products and services created specifically for the super-rich.

And what all commentators on the scheme have missed is that without this type of philanthropy, the Olympics would not have been re-born.

Two-thirds of the funding for the Athens 1896 Games, the first of the modern era, came from private donations, and the largest expense of the Games, the refurbishment of the Panathanaiko Stadium, was financed by a single benefactor, George Averoff.

By Tim Crow on October 24th, 2008

Tags: Beijing 2008, Brand marketing, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, New Product Development, Olympic Torch Relay, Olympic sponsorship, Olympics, Vancouver 2010

No comments

Apart from the competitors’ heroics, what will we remember Beijing 2008 for? And how, with London 2012 in mind, will UK consumers feel about the Olympics after Beijing?

Previous Olympics in the modern era have all strongly impacted the Olympic brand – in general negatively – and left a single-issue legacy. Montreal 1976 invented the Olympics as a debt monster. Moscow 1980 was the Cold War, Soviet Games. LA 1984 showcased the American entrepreneurial Dream – and in Atlanta 1996 the Dream became an over-commercialised Nightmare. Seoul 1988 will forever be remembered for Ben Johnson and doping. Barcelona 1992 was a triumphant spectacle for Spain, as Sydney 2000 was for Australia. Athens 2004 was the Games that could never follow Sydney and only just got built.

Beijing 2008 looks like being another single-issue Games – the issue, of course, being Chinese government policy. With the Torch Relay crisis now firmly imprinted on Beijing’s DNA, and the media even more focused on the issue as we move into Games time, I can’t see this changing.

But what I do see changing is the world’s knowledge of and attitude to China. And in this respect the Olympics is part of the solution, not – as many would have it – part of the problem. Beijing 2008 will offer an unprecedented window into China’s uniquely fascinating society and culture. And the greater knowledge, understanding and – let us hope – human empathy this engenders will perhaps be Beijing 2008’s key legacy. As Simon Barnes of The Times wrote in a characteristically brave and intelligent piece back in April, this is a key strand of what this Olympics is about. It will make few, if any headlines, but it will leave the world, and the Olympics, in a much better place.

And what of the legacies that Beijing 2008 will leave London 2012? Here in the UK of course, as the next hosts of the summer Games, we’ll be looking at Beijing very differently to the rest of the world. “It’s our turn next” will undoubtedly be a theme running throughout the Games coverage, rising to a crescendo when Beijing hand the Olympic flag to London during the Closing Ceremony on Sunday 24 August.

The big question, of course, which we’ll be looking at closely with our clients who are Olympic sponsors, will be the effect of Beijing 2008 on UK consumers’ attitudes to and behaviours around the Olympics. There are bound to be some big shifts – especially in favourability if, as we all hope, Team GB wins medals galore – but only time will tell what they’ll be, and how lasting.

By Tim Crow on August 6th, 2008

Tags: Beijing 2008, Brand marketing, China, London 2012, London 2012 sponsorship, London 2012 sponsorship consultants, Media, Olympic Torch Relay, Olympic sponsorship, Olympic sponsorship consultants, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultancy, Sponsorship consultants, Synergy

No comments