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

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

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

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

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

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

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

By Jonathan Izzard on February 2nd, 2010

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

No comments

In an article in The Times last week (IPL auction likes Morgan a lot), Nick Hoult detailed the fact that only one English player attracted any bids in the annual scramble for overseas players to add star quality to the Indian Premier League. Swann, Bresnan and Trott languished penniless while Eoin Morgan went to Bangalore for $220,000.

Mr Hoult writes that “…as far as England’s players are concerned the future now looks to be a decision between Test cricket and the IPL.” The point he is making here is that because of the timing of England’s various tours relative to the world’s richest cricket competition, players cannot do both.

An inevitable consequence is that players will choose to specialise: to become expert one-day or Twenty20 players (presumably chastised for taking Indian coin) or to focus on “proper cricket” and the multi-day game. I believe this to be true, based on evidence much closer to home, where my 13-year old son recently announced his intention to reduce his limited over cricket for fear it will turn him into a batsman less effective at the three day game (which is as long as it gets for a 13-year old). Sage words, and I wish that more illustrious talents would abide by them.

Where my views diverge from Mr Hoult’s and, I suspect, from those of a great number of “purist” fans of cricket, is that I think it is a brilliant idea for players to specialise, to choose one format of the sport over another. In this way they will get better at what they do and provide greater enjoyment for us all. If this happens then it will hasten recognition from the game’s administering authorities that Twenty20, one-day and test cricket are essentially different “codes” of the sport requiring different skills, different players and different commercial models to support them. This means a greater range of opportunities for players, viewers and sponsors, and I think this is A Good Thing.

I point to rugby as evidence of this positive effect. Rugby union, rugby league and rugby sevens are different codes of the same game. Some fans enjoy all codes, others prefer one. Players occasionally swap from one to the other, or develop from one to the other, but most players choose to specialise. All shapes and sizes of player are accommodated across the three codes and sponsors enjoy a wider range of commercial opportunities. Rugby in its broadest sense is richer as a result; it’s even made it into the Olympics.

Twenty20 in 2020 has a nice ring to it. My only regret is that Garrett jnr, having made his choice, will not be opening the batting.

By Scott Garrett on January 29th, 2010

Tags: Cricket, ICC World Twenty20, Indian Premier League, Olympics, Sponsorship, Sponsorship consultants, Sport

1 comment

When you’re looking to get a foothold in a very competitive industry like ours, opportunities for work experience are invaluable. This week at Synergy we have (as we often do) had an intern join us to see what really happens in a sponsorship consultancy. Edmund’s week has been filled with learning; he’s experienced all ends of the sponsorship spectrum; packed mailouts, scored the papers, set up a scaletrix track for one of our F1 clients and helped out with an NFL presscall to name but a few.

I’m sure he’s not the only one who’ll go back to school with some amazing learning experiences. However, I doubt many can top Edmund’s show and tell from the NFL photoshoot…

Edmund with the Tampa Bay Buccaneers Cheerleaders in advance of this Sunday’s NFL fixture when the Tampa Bay Buccaneers take on the New England Patriots at Wembley.

Does work experience get any better?

By Ben Wilkinson on October 23rd, 2009

Tags: NFL, Sponsorship, Sport, Synergy

1 comment

I’ve just rushed to get the tube and I’ve amazed myself with how much access to information I need for my 20 minute trip home. I left the office frantically grabbing marketing press, to make sure I’m up to date with the ever changing marketing environment in which we live. On the way to the tube I picked up the (sadly only remaining) evening free sheet to stay in touch with London, sport and news. Not forgetting hastily refreshing my Twitter feed before I head to the depths of the underground to ensure I’ll be up to speed with all the goings on with my many new online buddies. They’ll be fixing the signal down here soon right?

All this for just 20 minutes? And in that time I’ll guess I’ve had 200 plus brands trying to talk to me.  The problem being (particular at this time of day) I don’t feel that up for a chat. I just want my facts and stats to keep me up to date. I don’t need info overload.

My short journey home provides a small example of the millions of channels available to me - but hopefully you see my point - engaging with your target can be more and more challenging each and every day. I recently heard someone with supreme intellect profess “It’s not the message, it’s the medium”. Wise words I thought. But, then two days later, I was at a fabulous talk when the online guru said “The channel is secondary, it’s all about the content”. Two quite different views and further weight to the challenge we face in the future of marketing.

All of this got me thinking. How would I engage with me if I was a brand? A quite simple task you’d think. I know the target audience reasonably well. I’ve got a good grip of what makes me tick and can tap in to the inner brain that is so important to both influencing behaviour and planning the most opportune moment for interaction.

I’m quite a simple being. I love sport, cooking, a bit of music, the odd drink and going on holiday is right up there. I want short and relevant bits of information and, if you can give me something with added humour or something of genuine interest I’m hooked. Simple.

Now, the challenging element is finding how to give me this gift of humorous/interesting content along with the brand’s message. How do we know what media I’ll be consuming, how much time I’ll have and what distractions I’ll have along my way? The truth is we don’t, but we do know I’m loyal to certain media platforms, albeit ones that change and fairly regularly too. At the moment I’m hooked on Twitter and I scan the free sheets on my way to and from work, so get your message to me there and I should get it (as long as it intrigues me). Through Twitter I might even respond and you’ve suddenly gone beyond just a message and I’m in dialogue with the brand.

Now if that message was to invite me to an experience or event that floats my boat, the brand’s on to something. By engaging me further with one of my passion points, I’m happy to interact but I won’t hit the dance floor on my own. I need to be invited.  As soon as I’m hooked, I’m loyal and I’m long-term - the perfect consumer. And for me, here lies the true power for the future of marketing; an integrated approach to communication leading to an immersed brand experience to drive powerful long-term consumer relationships. 

Partnerships between brands and content/experience platforms strengthen the opportunity and that is why sponsorship is increasingly becoming the core of many major marketing strategies.  I certainly see it as the future, but am keen to get some opinions; if you’ve read this far please feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments.

Now, all this thinking has made me miss my 20 minutes with the London Lite, Marketing Mag and Twitter. I’m also questioning the content I’ve just produced. I guess if no one reads it I could always blame the medium?

By Ben Wilkinson on September 29th, 2009

Tags: Advertising, Communications, Digital marketing, Experiential marketing, Sponsorship, Sport

2 comments

Read any of today’s national newspaper reports on Leeds United v Liverpool in last night’s Carling Cup and you’ll notice something - a total lack of any pictures of the match. Instead there is a box out in all papers saying the same thing, below is how The Guardian framed it.

Although, Leeds decided to allow just Action Images and a local agency in, they did allow national papers to send a photographer each which sounds fair enough until you listen to sports editors stating that they need a variety of photos from a game in order to chose the best shot.

Leeds may have sensible reasons for precluding leading agencies such as PA and Getty from the ground based on space, congestion, spectator viewing impairment etc but it does re-kindle an age old ‘debate’ between sports rights-holders and the media.

Here’s the problem - rights-holders have successfully packaged their product for television and make a vast amount of money from it, for example the latest Premier League / Sky deal is worth around the billion pound mark. At the same time, monetising the rest of the media has proved elusive.

You only need to look at the increased pagination of newspaper sports sections to know that sport is an important circulation and advertising driver, however, unlike TV and radio, newspapers don’t have to pay a penny for the right to air. This becomes even more acute with photographic and written agencies who directly make money by selling photos and copy from the matches without having to pay any sort of license to the rights-holder.

Agencies and media say they are providing the global publicity and coverage that is the oxygen of any sport and allows the rights holders to make more from sponsorship and in turn drives people to the television completing a virtuous circle. Are they right? Absolutely but it is almost impossible to actually equate that return. Is it frustrating for rights-holders trying to monetise all elements of their product? You bet.

While this argument rumbles on there will only be one loser, the team / event sponsors, missing out on the very exposure they paid for in the first place.

By Dominic Curran on September 23rd, 2009

Tags: Communications, Media, Public relations, Sponsorship, Sport

No comments

Reading through my daily Google News Alert I came across a press release from Endsleigh Car Insurance issued Sunday last where, according to the headline, Endsleigh ‘looks ahead to the rest of Formula 1 Grand Prix 2009 season’.

What followed was a short summary of Michael Schumacher’s failed return to Grand Prix racing, Luca Badoer taking the place of the injured Felipe Massa, and questioning how many more teams will leave the sport following BMW’s decision to call it a day.

Not exactly ‘what Formula 1 Grand Prix fans can expect from the rest of the season’ as promised in the release, but more a lazy regurgitation of old news.

Luca Badoer has been and gone, having raced in both the European and Belgian Grands Prix, before being replaced last week by fellow Italian Giancarlo Fisichella; BMW are well into the process of trying to find a buyer; and ‘Crashgate’ has been dominating the F1 media agenda.

Despite the stories mentioned in the release being more than two weeks out of date, a quick Google search revealed pick-up on more than twenty websites.

It’s tough for brands not directly associated with Formula One or one of the current teams to benefit from the sport’s perceived glamour and large fan base. Endsleigh Car Insurance have shown themselves to be a little off the pace, which for a sport that lives and dies by fractions of a second will not endear the brand to motorsport’s hardcore.

By Nick Mott on September 17th, 2009

Tags: Default, Formula 1, Sport

No comments

Triathlon may be the fastest growing sport in England, but sports fans like it a little rougher Stateside. Time magazine has called it “the fastest growing sports brand in the United States” and it recently graced the front cover of Sports Illustrated. UFC - the Ultimate Fighting Championship - is taking the sports world by storm…with mixed reactions.

Many purists see this as a step back in time, as fighters regress into a more barbaric style of combat, not seen since the days of bare knuckle boxing. Although they have now banned head-butting and hair pulling, many boxing fans and officials still consider this as a highly dangerous sport. This view from the boxing world may be influenced by the massive market share of sports fans that UFC is drawing in, as boxing slowly but surely decreases in followers.

Boxing may have pulled in 850,000 pay-per-view sales for the recent fight between Pacquiao and Hatton, but in the US, UFC regularly hits the million mark. In the style of the infamous “Fight Club” film, most of UFC’s followers are typically white-collar males aged 18-34 years. Whether you like it or not, brands looking to sponsor a rapidly growing sport would be wise to look seriously at this proposition; although, controlling the UFC ambassadors you employ would be a different story. Another appealing factor to this high-adrenaline sport is that there are rarely unbalanced fights, unlike in boxing where a promoter cannily chooses matches in his fighter’s favour. This may be due to the greater balance of pay amongst the fighters; according to one source there are around 380 UFC fighters earning over $100,000 a year.

As much as I enjoy spending a quiet day watching a village cricket match, for sheer entertainment and a real ‘edge of your seat’ factor, few sports compare to UFC’s aggression, skill and will to win. I hasten to add, in this case these views most definitely come from an armchair sportsman!

By Simon Roche on August 28th, 2009

Tags: Sport

1 comment

I’ve debated in this forum previously, the merits of various activities calling themselves “sport”. In a nutshell, sport is competitive activity that can be won outright and which raises a sweat through the competitor working physically for his or her victory. Thus running, jumping and swimming are sports. Darts, golf and anything synchronised are not.

Whither motorsport? Clearly a machine bears the brunt of the load, but having lived in Formula One for a while, I can testify that F1 drivers definitely sweat in pursuit of victory and need to be fine physical specimens in order to pilot their machines at all. Motor racing, and Formula One in particular, is definitely a sport.

But not according to the Indian government.

India’s aspirations to join the developed world as a sporting venue are well documented. The Commonwealth Games beckons and F1 is supposed to visit an as-yet un-built circuit somewhere in Uttar Pradesh in 2011.

F1 has a record of attendant commercial prosperity: witness the annual $500m delivered in attributable commercial benefit to Bahrain and the (admittedly unlikely) $570m claimed by Valencia in relation to its 2008 race. F1, commercially speaking, will be A Good Thing for the good people of Uttar Pradesh.

Which makes it surprising that the Indian authorities this week refused to allow a special tax allowance to the company seeking to build the circuit and promote the Grand Prix, on the grounds that Formula One is not a sport. The tax allowance relates to foreign currency transfers and applies to sport, but not to entertainment.

F1 has been deemed an “entertainment” rather than a sport (please, Indian government, what is the difference?) and, more pertinently, a “commercial exercise” (again, what is the difference?) and therefore not eligible for the allowance.

This decision will cost the promoter about $36.5m. Not enough to slow development, but enough to leave a sour taste in the mouths of those seeking to develop one of the world’s emerging economies through the unifying medium of sport.

Shame on you India. This is a very poor advertisement for your country as a sporting venue and one which will, for a while, drive potential investors elsewhere.

By Scott Garrett on August 26th, 2009

Tags: Commonwealth Games, Formula 1, Politics, Sport

No comments

In 2004, the Government outlined in a paper that they would like to get serious about bidding for international sporting events in this country. Five years on and this is one promise they’ve more than delivered on. With the recent announcements across both codes of rugby, the score is now 5-0 to Britain.

Not counting this year’s ICC World Twenty20, over the next six years we’re within driving distance of the following:

2010 - Ryder Cup; 2012 - The Olympics; 2013 - Rugby League World Cup; 2014 - Commonwealth Games; 2015 - Rugby Union World Cup

And if that wasn’t enough, we’re also bidding for the second biggest sporting event on the planet - the FIFA Football World Cup in 2018.

As a sporting destination, Britain ticks a lot of the right boxes - stadiums, infrastructure, a history of hosting huge events from Wimbledon to The Open, timezone (critical for the TV money) and a vibrant sponsorship sector. The economic and profile boost these events can give a country, if done right, is well documented so at a time when congratulatory headlines are scarce, Team Government has earned a place at the top of the podium.

By Dominic Curran on August 4th, 2009

Tags: Default, Glasgow 2014, London 2012, Olympics, Public relations, Rugby, Rugby League Marketing, Sponsorship, Sport

No comments

A year ago Engine took part in the annual NABS netball tournament.  I wrote a blog about it and signed off with ‘I make a pledge here and now that by the time London is hosting the greatest games on earth you’ll see Engine’s name engraved on the NABS netball trophy.’ 

Well, in true Synergy and Engine style we have delivered and three years early as well!

Engine's NABS netball team

The Engine girls took to the court and despite taking awhile to warm up, we sailed through to the plate section of the tournament. Success in the quarter and semi-finals took us through to the Plate Grand Final against RKCR/Y&R. It was a close run game but a storming performance by Natalie Parish of WCRS - later voted player of the tournament -secured Engine their first NABS netball title. Congratulations ladies and here’s to another win next year!

For those who read my blog last year, you may be interested to know that the number of supporters campaigning for netball to become an Olympic sport on Facebook has more than quadrupled with over 40,000 members.

By Caroline Ayling on August 3rd, 2009

Tags: Commonwealth Games, Default, Employee engagement, Facebook, London 2012, Olympics, Sport, Synergy

No comments