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

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

Having won the MCCA ‘Best Campaign Featuring Sponsorship’ last year for its Team GB campaign around the Beijing Olympics, it’s great to be able to say that the Powerade 2009 InnerGear campaign has again been shortlisted in this year’s MCCA BEST Awards. Building on the insights and imagery of the Team GB campaign, Powerade brought the same InnerGear core creative idea to two of its international rugby assets – the English and Welsh rugby teams.

The 2009 edition featured England captain Steve Borthwick, Paul Sackey and IRB World Player of the Year, Shane Williams, in some equally impactful creative, and was supported through the line by Powerade’s cross agency team.

By Jonathan Izzard on January 20th, 2010

Tags: Beijing 2008 , Olympic sponsorship , Olympics , Rugby , Sponsorship , Synergy , Team GB

No comments

When I tell you that I’m a big fan of Chrome, relax, I’m not hinting that anyone get Westwood round to pimp my ride – I am rather referencing Google Chrome, the web browser launched in late 2008 by the ubiquitous internet behemoth.

Having used it as my default browser since downloading the programme over a year ago, I’ve since installed it on my home PC and laptop, as a welcome break from Internet Explorer. I realise that I’m not the first person to break convention here, with any Mac users out there, along with the more technologically savvy, already well aware of life after Microsoft when browsing the web, with Safari – Apple’s own browser – and Mozilla’s Firefox, the main contenders for IE’s crown in the years BC (that’s Before Chrome); however, December 2009 finally saw Google’s new window onto the web overtake Safari’s hard-won market share. No mean feat, a year after launch.

This leaves the stats from December 2009 looking something like:

1. Internet Explorer - 62.69%

2. Mozilla Firefox - 24.61%

3. Google Chrome - 4.63%

4. Safari - 4.46%

5. Opera - 2.93%

6. Netscape Navigator - 0.32%

7. Various others - 0.68%

(Source: Market Share)

This may not look too significant a shift, although given that this % represents around 40 million users, and that Internet Explorer’s global usage dropped by almost 7% last year (from 69.23% in Feb 2009), you might start to appreciate the long-term machinations of Messrs Page and Brin, and how these might impact on one William Henry Gates III in the war of the super-rich supernerds.

In quite a major move for the brand, Google has even been running an offline ad campaign publicising Chrome. Commuters at Oxford Circus may well be familiar with both the posters and digital escalator creatives drawing attention to the ‘fast, new browser, made for everyone’. Indeed, in the lead-up to Christmas, Google engaged in another rare piece of ATL, with a Metro wrap (you may have seen this repeated last week), as well as a call to action for people to make Chrome one of their Xmas gifts to a loved one, via the www.givechrome.com website. Well, it’s better than a pair of socks.

This activity certainly translated into curiosity amongst web users, with searches for Chrome overtaking Internet Explorer for the first time ever, which Google – or its media department – would doubtless argue contributed to its rise in the browser rankings that very month.

So, what’s good about the product? Well, it’s very clean, clear, fast and free; you can have lots of different web pages running at the same time with no drag, and if any particular page crashes, Chrome simply shuts down that tab, rather than the whole browser. I’d definitely recommend it, although the programme is still not a catch-all: certain Microsoft plug-ins are incompatible with Chrome (hmmmm, how unexpected), making it difficult to use some online applications such as the SkyPlayer. For everyday browsing of the internet, however, it’s fantastic.

Other than the slow burn process of accruing new advocates and users, what next for Google Chrome? The answer is actually slightly more ambitious than you might think, with Google now moving further into Microsoft’s back yard through the development of the Google Chrome OS (Operating System). Whilst it’s still a way off, with an official release scheduled for the latter half of 2010, the concept is remarkably different to the traditional Windows offering. As outlined by company chiefs at Google HQ in November last year, the OS is designed with a focus on three user requirements: ‘Speed…Simplicity…Security’, achieving its aims via a radical approach: to all intents and purposes, Google Chrome OS only works when you are online.

What the hell? So I’ve got to be online for my PC to work, you say? Well, sort of.

Although this may sound pretty restricting, Google are not setting themselves the challenge of beating Microsoft at its own game, but rather carving up a piece of the action for themselves, namely through appealing to the burgeoning netbook market. Sales of these small, light, web-friendly PCs were up 103% in 2009, and with decreased price points and increased wi-fi availability, this trend looks to continue. To date, the concept has received a mixed reaction: for the always-online professional netbookers out there, Google are preaching to the converted, with a promise of a system that will be ready to surf the web within seven seconds of power-up; plus they won’t need to store all their docs on their hard disc, with data instead stored remotely and accessed via the web. Google aren’t the first to use a ‘cloud’ system, but probably are the first to take the concept of virtual storage for mobile PC users to such a commercial extreme.

From starting life as the cleanest, fastest and most efficient way to find what you need on the internet, Google has, in an incredibly short space of time become part of our culture, our very vocabulary. And in today’s information age, there appears to be no stopping them: news, video, mail, maps, photos, phones, toolbars, Trends, translation, into China (and out again?) - and we search, and we search, and we search…

By Jonathan Izzard on January 19th, 2010

Tags: Advertising , Brand marketing , China , Digital marketing , Media

1 comment