Feature
Which brand will win the world cup 2010?
26 June 2010
The event is set to boost the South African ad economy by $220m, but Josh Colley finds out which brands are having a successful tournament and which could be left peering into a gaping hole in their budget.
The closing stages of the FIFA World Cup are sure to see TV screens around the world filled with football fans decked in their national colours weeping as they lament their team’s failures. Some brands are in danger of experiencing the same reaction.
BRAND CONTENDERS
It’s easier to list the brands that aren’t making their presence felt than those who are. Whether it’s local or global, traditional or digital, the lure of a competition that attracts a cumulative global audience of 20 billion is clear.
Since the build-up began two years ago, the official sponsors have seen their names emblazoned right across the competition.
Adidas launched a viral ad that reworked the Cantina bar scene from Star Wars placing celebrities into the action. This coincided with a campaign for its new football boot and production of the competition’s official ball.
Visa used retweets on Twitter to encourage internet users to create the longest ‘goal’ shout on YouTube, while Sony unveiled plans to preview its 3D TV offering at fan sites across Europe.
Coca-Cola trusted its ‘Find Happiness’ initiative by focussing on capturing the most passionate moment – the celebration – and running its biggest integrated campaign to date.
AB-Inbev managed to renegotiate its FIFA contract to include leading brands for markets where traditional sponsor Budweiser is not strong, running its own take on the Big Brother format with the World Cup-centric Budhouse.com.
However, a global event of this magnitude is unlikely to act solely as the playground of official sponsors. Other brands have been keen to ride the wave of exposure. Passive and aggressive ambush marketing has become a powerful tool allowing non-associate brands a way in.
Nike led the charge with an international campaign harnessing its investment in individual sport stars through a global three minute ad, ‘Write the future’. This was followed with local out-of-home activity, including an invitation to spectators in Africa to ‘Write the headlines’ on the continent’s largest digital billboard in Johannesburg.
Sony Ericsson took a different route through several sponsorship deals across topical World Cup TV shows, print promotions and radio. Food brand Pringles went regional, leveraging celebrity endorsements from participants such as Spain’s Cesc Fàbregas and Nicolas Anelka from France for pan-regional TV ads tweaked for different markets.
THE RESEARCH
Unsurprisingly, South Africa is expected to be the biggest benefactor economically, with GroupM forecasting a $220m boost in national ad spend. TV should fuel this drive with a 10% year-on-year rise to $2bn while internet ads continue to grow to $19m (+20%).
The warm economic glow is expected to stretch beyond the host nation. Nielsen predicted a 20% increase in ad spend throughout the Middle East and Africa during the tournament, with more than half the region expected to tune-in.
While the event’s half-time reports are still being compiled, the keyword for brands in the lead-up to the World Cup was ‘awareness’ with principal sponsors failing to align themselves with the event. The Tamar Sports Index tracked key online search terms over three months. It revealed that major sponsors, Sony, Adidas, Coca-Cola, Emirates and Hyundai had all failed to align themselves with them.
The struggle for sponsors was compounded by a Nielsen study into online buzz for all sponsors and competitors. Nike topped the list with 30%, outstripping rival Adidas (14.4%), although, according to TNS, Adidas is the most recognised sponsor among Chinese football fans.
Nike continued to perform strongly in a survey of UK consumers with 30% believing them to be a sponsor, as opposed to Adidas’ 29%. Despite registering 9% lower than fellow beer brand Budweiser, there were also strong scores for non-official brand Carlsberg (23%). However, consumers were suspicious of brand motives with only 7% believing they cared about South Africa and its people.
THE SUCCESS
A Dutch beer brand became the most talked about advertiser thanks to ambush marketing. Bavaria commandeered 40 tickets for the Netherlands’ opening game and used the most traditional ad tool there is: sex appeal.
The sight of 40 women in tight orange dresses caught TV’s eye before it emerged that Bavaria was behind the stunt. Although only subtle branding featured on the outfits, FIFA threatened to take legal action to protect the interests of its official beer sponsor Bud.
The stunt was part of a carefully constructed campaign that also saw the brand sponsor of one Dutch player’s wife, harnessing the growing popularity of ‘WAG’ culture.
Nike’s gate-crashing efforts have seen it pull in more than 17.3 million views on YouTube. Its success has also been built on major players such as Portugal’s Cristiano Ronaldo using its products to create high visibility during matches.
While digital has its advantages, Alexander Burmaster, Nielsen’s vice president for global communications, online, argues Nike’s use of TV was a major factor in its success. “Nike has more visibility,” he says. “We’ve seen that ads tend to be more successful when they’re shown during games, while Adidas has been absent from game-time TV.”
THE FAILURES
The supposed success of ambush marketing could be seen as indicative of a failure by sponsors to grasp World Cup opportunities.
Adidas has also suffered from criticism of its Jubliani ball, and having to shift back onto the defensive has left the company playing catch-up. Crédit Agricole and fast food chain Quick had their own problems when the French team went out in disgrace.
But Interbrand’s Graham Hales suggests the worst failure can be attributed to Italian sportswear brand Legea, which paid €4m for the rights to manufacture North Korea’s kit.
There are obvious difficulties in being affiliated with a dictatorial state but Legea nevertheless failed to recognise the opportunity that presented itself when North Korea earned a credible 2-1 defeat against favourites Brazil.“There’s a story attached to it that a brand could have had fun with, but they’ve done nothing at all,” says Hales. “The North Korean football team was enigmatic and sort of mystical; Legea should have been able to use that.”
MEC:access strategy director Pippa Rubin feels there are three key areas separating those achieving cut-through from those who don’t: objectives, innovative activation and content. Those who get carried away by the hype will inevitably struggle.
QUICK INSIGHT
+5%: The expected increase in global viewers for the final, compared to the event in 2006, according to Initiative
42%: The female share of the global TV audience, according to Initiative
$1.5bn: Expected increase in worldwide ad spend that can be attributed to the World Cup
50%: Potential increase in ad rates for a prime-time TV ad spot during matches
72%: The increase in peanut sales across China during the 2006 event, which is expected to be matched this year, says Nielsen
214: The number of countries that aired live matches in 2006
25: The number of matches FIFA is recording for 3D TV during the event
M&M VIEWPOINT
The success stories of the FIFA World Cup may indicate that the age of the ambush marketer is upon us. However, any brands choosing to piggyback onto an event rather than sponsor it should take heed and examine the foundations that their brand is built upon.
Nike is focussed on the cult of the individual and Bavaria has previous form in ambush marketing. The likes of Adidas and Coca-Cola have built their image around the sport’s team ethics.For them, there’s still value in sponsorship - it’s the execution that may need tweaking. Advertisers without an official association are forced to come up with a clear startegy and innovative ways to deliver content. Brands that rely solely on a natural association with an event are likely to struggle initially.However, sponsorship is about the marathon not the sprint and the true success stories of the World Cup are still yet to be revealed, both on and off the pitch.
Josh Colley. London