Tag: marketing

Slingshot Sponsorship Announced as Exclusive Sponsorship Agency for Children's Charity Rays of Sunshine 22nd February, 2013

Slingshot Sponsorship has been announced as the exclusive sponsorship agency for Rays of Sunshine Children’s Charity’s 10th Anniversary Concert, which will be held at London’s prestigious Royal Albert Hall 6 July 2013.

Set in one of London’s most beautiful and exclusive venues, the Rays of Sunshine Concert promises to be a night of unprecedented music and entertainment.  With past line-ups featuring a host of Britain’s most treasured pop stars ranging from JLS to Pixie Lott, Rays of Sunshine’s Concert is shaping up to be as unique as the children themselves.

Granting its first wish in 2003, Rays of Sunshine Children’s Charity was formed with the aim of granting wishes to children with serious and terminal illnesses.  The charity’s promise is to grant wishes however impossible it may seem.  Ranging from hospital ward wishes, to organising events and outings for large groups, Rays of Sunshine has granted trips to Disney World and even meetings with superstars like Beyonce and One Direction.  What is more, Rays of Sunshine will be celebrating its 3,000 wish in line with its 10th Anniversary.

Jackie Fast, Managing Director of Slingshot Sponsorship stated:

Slingshot is delighted to be working alongside Rays of Sunshine for their annual Concert.  As a charity, Rays of Sunshine changes lives, and it is a privilege for our agency to be working with this highly unique organisation.  We are excited to explore the prospect of delivering partnerships that will enhance this special night for the children.

Rays of Sunshine’s Concert is one of many wonderful events the charity organises throughout the year, to raise money for children at their time of need.  One mother stated after attending the event, “I have never seen Ria like this before, she has so much energy and charisma, I cannot thank Rays of Sunshine enough for granting her the opportunity to attend a once in a lifetime event.”

Jane Sharpe, CEO, Rays of Sunshine commented:

We are proud to be working with Slingshot Sponsorship.  The expertise that Slingshot has crafted around events similar to Rays of Sunshine’s Concert will help us to deliver an event that will stay with these children forever.  The concert has become an integral part of our calendar and we have every confidence that alongside Slingshot, we will deliver the best concert in its history.

Sponsorship opportunities for the Rays of Sunshine Concert are currently available.

Are naming rights getting out of hand? 31st January, 2013

Naming rights aren’t a modern introduction to the world of sport, brought in as an additional revenue stream over the past twenty years to help pay the inflated wages of our beloved superstars.  In fact, stadiums named after an associated corporation or sponsor far precede the internationally broadcast versions of basketball, football, rugby and baseball that we know and watch today.

Fenway Park, home of the Boston Red Sox, was named after its owner’s realty company all the way back in 1912. Perhaps more commonly known, William Wrigley, founder of the chewing gum company and owner of the Chicago Cubs, aptly named his club’s stadium Wrigley Field in 1926. Since then hundreds of stadiums have followed the naming rights model, from the Veritas Arena in Finland to the De Beers Diamond Oval in South Africa to UK properties as the Etihad and the Reebok Stadium.

Yet despite this illustrious history, a couple of recent stories surrounding potential name changes to Wembley Stadium and Ibrox, two of the most revered institutions in British football, have made me question – have naming rights gone too far?

Naming rights deals are a fantastic marketing medium, but they have to be implemented in the right way, on a suitable property, for them to be perceived as a success.  In my eyes, there are five essential factors for any brand considering a naming rights deal:

1. Longevity: Sponsorship is all about developing and changing perceptions and simply renaming a stadium for four years is not going to make anyone think differently about a brand.

Football grounds are considered ‘home’ for millions of fans worldwide, a feeling developed over years of shared memories with fellow supporters  – as an Arsenal fan it took me a long time to call The Emirates home, but as the stadium has been so-called for so many years the name now rolls of the tongue as naturally as Highbury ever did.

2.  Sponsor integration: For all the criticism they receive, media impressions are obviously still a huge factor in any naming rights deal. However, it is now essential for a brand to develop a relationship with fans both at the ground and online on an emotional level more than before to achieve true value on a naming rights deal. Whether that be through priority on concert tickets (O2), discounted flights for members (Emirates) or even free orange juice (Minute Maid Park), the sponsor is engaging with the potential customers it spent so much money to reach.

3. Emotional attachment to the stadium: One of the reasons Arsenal fans were more inclined to give ‘The Emirates’ a chance was the fact that they were moving to a brand new stadium.  I would have been far more sceptical, and potentially opposed, to any corporate sponsor coming in and renaming Highbury.  As Wonga were well aware, any plans they had of naming Newcastle F.C’s stadium to something suitably daft (Wonga Arena) would have been met with derision from the club’s supporters and they (cleverly) reinstated St James’ Park as the stadium’s official name.

4. The Name: Too long and the fans will simply shorten it (Friend’s Provident St Mary’s to St Mary’s) or too corporate and the fans will revert to a more familiar name (Capital One Field to Byrd Stadium)

5. The Investment: Sports fans (myself included) are by and large fickle creatures.  If they believe that the money invested by sponsors is helping the club pay wages and higher transfer fees, then they are far more likely to accept the brand as part of the club.

Given the five factors listed above, I think any naming rights deal of Rangers’ Ibrox Stadium would be greeted with a resigned acceptance from its fans.  Ibrox obviously has a long and cherished history, but if a well-aligned naming-rights sponsor comes in and invests money that could potentially save the club from further financial strain, then I don’t think there will be too many dissenters.

In contrast, I can’t see a proposed partner (Everything Everywhere) and Wembley fulfilling any more than 3 and 5 of the above and as such can’t see it working particularly well. It is only suggested that it will be Wembley ‘in association with EE’ anyway, which media and fans alike will inevitably shun. Lastly and  in this instance most importantly, Wembley, more than any stadium in the world, evokes memories and emotions of a by-gone era that many people still cherish. As such any potential naming rights partner will face far more opposition to get past than on a regular stadium.

I’m not sure it’s worth it.

The Increasing Importance of Sponsorship in Winning the Right to Host International Sporting Events 28th January, 2013

Last week Olympic bidding city Istanbul announced the signing of 7 leading Turkish companies as sponsors of their bid for the 2020 Olympic games, a $20m deal that organizers feel could swing momentum away from the favourite Tokyo. While to some extent this announcement was simply a show of financial strength and a dig at Japan’s stagnant economy, it raises a question that has been increasingly important in the bidding for the Olympic Games and World Cup in recent years;

How important has the ability to attract, and successfully handle sponsorship become in winning the right to hold these two major international sporting events?

Speaking at the recent announcement, Istanbul bid chairman Hasan Arut used the successful acquisition of sponsorship to push home their ability to host the Games;

‘The Olympic Movement should take great confidence that Turkey will be able to deliver a significant amount of high quality sponsors should we win the rights to host the games.’

This claim has been widely backed by public opinion, UK bookmakers signalling the change in momentum by the cutting odds on the Turkish capitals bid in half, making them a close second behind Tokyo.

Istanbul is by no means the first city to use sponsorship as an early show of strength in an Olympic bid. Our own London 2012 team publicly announced the support of 25 national sponsors to the tune of £6m back in May 2004, 8 years before the event and over a year before the final vote.

It is not only a bid’s ability to bring in national sponsorship that has become increasingly important in securing an event, but also the ability to provide the optimum platform for international sponsors within a host city/country.

The agreement of both Olympic and World Cup bids to provide the events sponsors tax waivers is needed for an organization to even enter the process. While in London this was actually declined by all sponsors within the Olympic Park due to the economic decline, it highlights the necessity for a bid to be willing to yield significant power to sponsors.

The importance of event holders working for official sponsors has most dramatically been shown in Brazil, where legislation banning alcohol consumption in football stadia was overturned last summer. The ban, put in place in 2003 to tackle domestic fan violence, was overturned in Brazilian Congress under FIFA’s request due to Budweiser’s positions as the exclusive alcohol brand of the World Cup. Commenting on the ‘Budweiser Bill’ FIFA General Secretary Jerome Valcke could not have been clearer on the importance of this sponsorship to the event and the need for the hosting country to acquiesce; ‘Alcoholic drinks are part of the FIFA World Cup, so we’re going to have them. Excuse me if I sound arrogant, but that’s something we won’t negotiate’.

As each event passes the importance of sponsorship to both bidding cities/countries and governing bodies will only grow as the revenue provided by sponsorship becomes even more central in funding the creation of the vast infrastructure needed. As this happens, the ability to both attract national sponsorship and work well with the events official partners, will increasingly be at the heart of all successful bids for these major sporting events.

Red Bull Challenges F1's Sponsorship Stallion 5th December, 2012

In the last couple of weeks, the Red Bull Racing and Sebastian Vettel vs. Ferrari and Fernando Alonso rivalry has dominated sporting headlines. In the end it was yet again the former who took both the Constructers’ and the Drivers’ World Championship titles in the thrilling Formula 1 season finale in Brazil. This nail-biting end to the season has prompted a closer look at the team’s and driver’s success off the track and their contention for the commercial crown.

The Constructers’ (Sponsorship) Championship:

Despite prize money being in the millions, sponsorship is by far the key source of revenue for both teams and their drivers which begs the question: who is leading the commercial championship?

According to Forbes’ latest list of the ‘Formula One’s Most Valuable Teams’ Ferrari’s total revenue is estimated to be around £240m with £190m being generated from sponsorship alone. Nearly £155m is generated via three major deals with Shell, Santander and title sponsorship partner Marlboro. These three deals are worth more than any other team’s total sponsorship revenue.

But what about Red Bull Racing? Out of all teams on the grid, they are surprisingly down in fourth in the overall revenue standings at £100m in 2011. 60% of this revenue comes from Red Bull’s success on the track earning them more prize money than any other team in the championship however the contribution from sponsors falls significantly shorter than Ferrari, coming to £38m positioning the team in the middle of the sponsorship field. The main reason for this is that the brand does not seek sponsors for most of their advertising space as this is generally used for self-promotion. As opposed to Ferrari (whose title sponsor is Marlboro at £100m) and other leading teams like McLaren Mercedes (Vodafone, £47m) and Mercedes AMG F1 (Petronas, £35m), Red Bull is sacrificing a significant amount of commercial opportunity in this area. However, this may all be about to change with the constructors’ champions securing their first title sponsorship deal with Nissan’s luxury arm, Infiniti.

When reviewing the revenue potential of both teams, Ferrari should still be out of reach in the short-term with regards to team value however with Red Bull being the fastest growing team in the paddock, the commercial gap is certainly narrowing.

The Drivers’ (Sponsorship) Championship:

Are Vettel and Alonso also competing for a sponsorship title? In his latest blog post, Mark Mylam asked whether sports men and women as brand ambassadors were really worth the money from a sponsor’s perspective as there is always a risk associated with their image deteriorating and affecting the image of the endorsed brand. An almost risk-free sportsman for instance could be Sebastian Vettel. The driver is unarguably one of the most charismatic Formula 1 drivers, as demonstrated at last year’s Autosport Awards and although his interview at the podium ceremony of Abu Dhabi included some strong words, nothing seems to be able to tarnish his image. This is why Sebastian Vettel, who manages his endorsement deals himself, enjoys lucrative sponsorship deals with Casio and Procter & Gamble’s Head & Shoulders worth around £2m in total, according to a study carried out by Sport + Markt.

Fernando Alonso, on the other hand, seems to have a completely different persona. One could perceive him as being rather introverted although he is not one to shy away from commercial opportunities with earnings upwards of £6m through his deals with Santander, Tag-Heuer and Puma in 2011. This positions Alonso at the top of the sponsorship leaderboard with Michael Schumacher way behind at £3.5m and Lewis Hamilton (£2.5m) ahead of both Sebastian Vettel and Jenson Button, both at £2m. Marcel Cordes, Executive Director at Sport + Markt, points out that it is unlikely that Vettel will be able to close this gap as “he (Vettel) is already very strongly associated with the Red Bull brand”. Also, Sebastian Vettel is not interested in signing sponsorship deals just for the sake of securing a higher income. He’s already stated in the media: “It is not a goal for me to earn more money. For me, it is important that the brand is ideally suited to me”.

Compared to other sports stars like Roger Federer or Kobe Bryant, sponsorship earnings of Formula 1 drivers are minimal because in most cases, the teams control almost all of their driver’s sponsorship rights.

It is interesting to see that championship wins have by no means been reflective of either team’s or drivers’ respective commercial successes but will this continue into 2013? With the pressure mounting on Sebastian Vettel, could we see Ferrari’s sponsorship stallion overtake the Red Bull both on the track as well as off or will the power of the ‘Vettrick’ prove too much to contend with? Let us know your thoughts!

Promoted Posts – a decline of Facebook or a reflection of a shift in marketing? 21st November, 2012

In recent weeks Facebook has come under increased scrutiny over its introduction of charges on fan pages to promote posts. Charges on these pages – used by businesses to interact with potential customers – have caused widespread anger against the social media giant. From tech billionaire and Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban threatening to leave the NBA teams fan page neglected to George Takai’s claims he will dedicate a whole chapter of his new book to the matter, Facebook has come under fire for their commercial shift. Is this profiteering?

Behaviour targeting

Effective in January, promoted posts work in conjunction with wider changes made by Facebook regarding what users see on their newsfeed. Facebook has created an algorithm to filter the content that reaches people. This behaviour targeting reacts to how people engage with posts and other people and will feed marketing and behaviour information accordingly.

Promoted posts

Promoted posts provide the new option of paying to promote specific posts. This change bypasses the behavioural targeting mentioned above to guarantee a certain amount of a targeted audience (and at a price, their friends) are guaranteed to see a specific post. Payment for this service is scaled.

The advantages – Business

While many are outraged at this new model, there are a number of commercial advantages for brands:

  1. Analytics – when a post has been promoted you are now able to receive a breakdown of post views and viral capabilities.
  2. Fan Appz – provides instant measurement of any advertising campaigns in real time and works to help you convert fans into advocates.
  3. Affordable – the scaled system of payment means promoting posts is a viable option for all sizes of business.

The advantages – Consumer

  1. Better creative – payment to promote posts forces brands to consider the quality of their advertising far more. While before pages could churn out posts with little thought for content quality, the introduction of charges should encourage companies to be more thoughtful in their approach.
  2. Targeted information – as internet users currently fight a war on noise receiving millions of marketing messages online, targeting ads ensure that you are served ads that are relevant to your purchase behaviour.

A wider shift

While Facebook’s promoted posts for many will always appear part of its wider decline since capitalisation, it in fact marks a larger shift among social media companies into being viable businesses. From Twitter’s ‘Promoted Tweets’ to Tumblr signing agencies to bring in advertising revenue, Facebook’s model both fits a growing trend while offering clear advantages for both business and consumer.

EPL, Bendtner & Nalbandian: How Branding IS Still Relevant, No Matter What The Cost 2nd August, 2012

I wrote a blog a few months ago called ‘Sponsorship – More Than Just Branding’.  Whilst it’s palpable that sponsorship has evolved into far more than straightforward logo placement, it’s important not to forget that branding – be it via naming rights, advertising hoardings or shirt sponsorships – is still relevant within our industry and most importantly, still deemed hugely valuable in the eyes of sponsors.

On Monday, General Motors signed a colossal £175 million deal with Manchester United that will see the Chevrolet logo replace Aon on the front of the club’s shirt for the next seven years.  Chevrolet will be provided with numerous additional benefits from their shirt sponsorship (via advertising, hospitality etc.) but primarily their logo position on United’s shirts will promote brand perception of ‘success, speed and superiority’.  Further it will automatically garner favour with United’s 659 million followers worldwide, as General Motor’s VP for N. America states: ‘this is about connecting the brand with Manchester United and its passionate supporters around the world.’

And it’s not just the Premier League’s most famous teams that are seeing such significant returns on shirt sponsorships, with the likes of Sunderland attracting substantial investment from their lucrative partnership with Invest in Africa. Recent figures reveal a 25% increase in English Premier League shirt sponsorship to £147 million, dampening fears that the EPL as a brand would suffer as the British economy entered its second dip in four years.

Now, while these shirt sponsorships represent the more expensive side of branding within sponsorship, a couple of incidents a month or so ago, illustrate that (clever/accidental) logo placement can still generate positive brand perception and awareness on a budget.

Firstly, David Nalb(r)andian  took out a knee-height Nike hoarding, along with an umpires shin, after failing to return a base-line shot from Marin Cilic.  This was followed shortly by the boxer-gate affair surrounding Nicklas Bendtner’s Paddy Power lined briefs, which he revealed after scoring his second goal in Denmark’s 3-2 defeat to Portugal.

Both men were disciplined accordingly – Nalbandian receiving disqualification from Queens and Bendtner receiving a hefty fine – and received their fair share of press attention.  Granted the Nike hoarding board was not the focal point of such attention over Nalbandian’s kick-out, but it was in Bendtner’s case, and Paddy Power got a huge amount of publicity and engagement out of it.

Their Facebook page was awash with comments from users acclaiming their ‘genius’ marketing strategy and the story was covered byevery major broadsheet.  While I don’t conform to the consensus that a distinctly average footballer wearing a green pair of briefsconstitutes exceptional intellectual aptitude, it was rather clever.

For just £80,000 (the price of Bendtner’s fine, which Paddy Power agreed to pay) the Irish bookmakers got nationwide exposure and saw thousands of additional online users flock to see what other mischief Paddy Power have been up to.

Obviously Bendtner’s boxers can’t be compared with Chevrolet’s United sponsorship in terms of worldwide reach, but you’d be hard pushed to say that it’s not better value!

Leverage vs. Rights: The Evolution of Sponsorship Spend 19th July, 2012

A weekend showcasing two of this year’s biggest boxing showdowns has prompted a blog looking further into sponsorship’s very own rights holder rivalry: the niche underdog versus the undisputed mass appeal property.

As sponsorship history goes, the large-scale established property has always been the primary choice for bigger brands to use as a marketing platform with such rights holders offering more exposure, better hospitality and a more expansive opportunity for activation than the smaller properties out there. However, brands are beginning to adopt a new approach by increasingly taking the power in their own hands via focusing investment towards leverage. No brand has received more success in this area of marketing than Red Bull. By taking ownership of smaller, less mainstream, properties from breakdancing to cliff-diving, the energy drink has been able to take control of brand messaging; completely tailoring their sponsorship, and the property, towards the values of their target demographic. With such success in publicising their presence within the actions sports arena, the brand has even gone one step further with the creation of Red Bull Media House, a platform allowing for extended communication of exclusive Red Bull content across TV, mobile, digital and print.

Where once it was a typical Haye vs. Chisora situation, where all bets and confidence were placed within the bigger name, brands are opening up to the concept of taking the side of the underdog, using their own financial and marketing resources to aggressively infiltrate the market, creating a more Garcia vs. Khan type scenario.

Despite 22% of global sponsors only investing in pure sponsorship rights with no leverage, the ratio of activation investment compared to rights currently stands at an all-time high of 1.7:1. So what is the reasoning behind brands shifting investment towards leveraging their sponsorships? Quite simply, when executed properly, activation spend is inextricably linked to return on investment. The more relevant a brand can make itself to an audience’s personal interests, the more likely the audience is going to buy into the concept. By working its way into the lifestyle fabric of a key demographic, a brand will naturally become the preferred choice among the numerous options available to the consumer.

As an energy drink, Red Bull has created a brand image that personifies stimulation and rebellion, pushing the boundaries in everything they do and showcasing the product’s core function on a truly emotional level. This innovative approach has in turn ensured that the original energy drink has continued to dominate the market, with competitors from Monster to Relentless all playing catch-up to Red Bull’s 42% market share – a true testament to the benefits of sponsorship leverage.

Checking-In to Sponsorship with Maps & Social Media 4th July, 2012

With branding and exposure only being part of the modern day sponsorship picture, the focus for brands now lies on new and innovative ways to interact and engage with consumers. Via the use of social media and mapping applications, brands are increasing audience engagement by tapping into their key interests whilst providing the opportunity to play a role and effect change within a campaign.

How are maps and social media being utilised?

Competitions and promotions offer a return for the audience with consumers being tasked with finding clues and unlocking codes in order to be in with a chance to win a reward. The key reason for engagement here, along with the resulting success of the campaign is that this is much more than being entered into a prize draw and getting lucky. Here, consumers are given a platform to compete and earn prizes, rather than simply win them.

Alternatively, games and applications are being used to task the key demographic with using a campaign in order to gain access to exclusive content. Different forms of digital entertainment are generally the ‘bait’ with consumers having the chance to unlock content including videos, music and games.

Example: Competitions

Consumers are now constantly being encouraged to compete with one another in order to win prizes; a great example of this being Evian’s recent campaign surrounding their 2012 Wimbledon Championships sponsorship. The public were given the opportunity to win tickets to this year’s tournament via hunting down a Wimbledon ball boy at large and checking-in via their social media accounts once finding him and receiving a numbered tennis ball.

Clues were posted on Evian’s Facebook and Twitter pages as to the ball boy’s whereabouts with a number being announced as the winner of VIP tickets at the end of each day.

Example: Social Gaming

Thanks to social media, marketers are simply able to launch a campaign and communicate the idea to those closest to the brand, with consumers then doing the leg-work to increase both exposure and engagement.

A perfect example of this would be a campaign mentioned before on the Slingshot blog but a perfect case study all the same: “Decode Jay-Z (Powered by Bing)”.

With Microsoft’s Bing search engine looking to increase their relevance with a younger audience, this campaign consisted of taking pages and scenarios from Jay-Z’s soon-to-be-released autobiography and bringing them to life at the range of locations documented in the book. This included a page printed on the bottom of a Miami swimming pool, plates from Jay-Z’s favourite restaurants and even custom-made Gucci jackets.

With clues being released daily via Facebook, Twitter and Radio, users were then encouraged to find real-life images of each page in each location using Bing’s Search and Maps tools and piece together the story on a dedicated micro-site for the campaign.

By using a relevant subject relating to the target demographic (Jay-Z), Bing were able to truly engage the audience with play time averaging eleven minutes. With Jay-Z’s Facebook ‘Likes’ increasing by over one million and his Decoded autobiography featuring on the Best Sellers List for nineteen straight weeks, Bing witnessed a visit increase of 11.7% in one month.

Why are such campaigns so successful?

Social media and maps are allowing for a whole new category of marketing in which communication of brand messaging is delegated to key brand fans. The most loyal consumers are now working on behalf of the brand in order to spread the word and pull others into the campaign, whilst encouraging these new ‘recruits’ to go out and do the same.

Unbeknown to the consumer, both brand awareness and credibility are being increased and improved via the use of location tagging, posts and tweets, reviews, image and video uploads and more. This in turn creates a buzz among the target demographic, initiating a mass shift in both brand perception and buying behaviour.

By using a relevant point of interest and in turn heavily engaging the audience, a consumer feels that a brand understands their preferences and will therefore cater to these needs and wants upon using their product or service. Trust, and in turn loyalty, are therefore instilled as the brand builds a reputation for giving the people what they want.

Given the effectiveness of digital marketing campaigns and their increasing role within today’s sponsorship model, consumers can be sure to look forward to more engaging competitions, rewards and exclusive content from their favourite brands in campaigns to come.

The Origins of Sponsorship: Financing Scott's Expedition 27th June, 2012

For those of you who don’t know the history of Captain Robert Falcon Scott’s ‘Terra Nova’ expedition of 1910 to the South Pole, it is a fascinating story of exploration and the endurance of the human spirit. The expedition was so groundbreaking for its day the only recent comparison to be drawn of what his team overcame would be that of the space race to the moon. The objectives of this expedition were to charter new territory and to pioneer scientific research in polar wildlife and in doing so hoping to answer polemical questions surrounding evolution. Captain Scott, a former naval officer gathered together a team of leading scientists and explorers to accompany him. However, the major obstacle to this expedition was finance. To make this expedition possible, the ever resourceful Scott understood that the power of sponsorship was the key.

In order to reach the South Pole, Scott needed a ship, men and resources for the round trip past Australia and New Zealand which took them a total of eight months each way. This privately funded expedition cost an estimated amount of £40,000 or the equivalent of over £3 million of today’s value. Scott didn’t have the luxury of time either to raise the money, with competition from Norwegian explorer Roald Amundsen striving to reach the South Pole first. Scott recognised that the booming newspaper industry of 1910 could be his opportunity and a powerful tool to raise the capital required for the expedition. Scott needed supplies from a range of different brands and suppliers from Heinz to Burberry. He knew that photography on the expedition would not only serve to catalogue the team’s journey and discoveries, however allow for brands to finance and endorse the trip and feature in the burgeoning newspaper industry in support of the mission.

Scott understood the theory of sponsorship, and the opportunities for brand association. Brands such as Bovril, Oxo and Shell petrol not only gained large amounts of exposure in newspaper advertising; however they are credited for making this unprecedented expedition possible.  Sponsorship of the expedition supported key messages for the brands, such as patriotism, advances in scientific research, the importance of home comforts, adventure and survival. Furthermore, what better brand ambassadors than the brave team of explorers of Scott and his team.

Lessons from the past

Although these photos now appear at such odds to present day expeditions of its kind and current marketing messages, the theory and the ingenuity of Scott’s use of sponsorship is still very pertinent in the 21st century. Using an innovative platform to capture the attention of the public with the most engaging medium at your disposal is exactly what Scott achieved. The emergence of the press in Scott’s day has many parallels to the emergence of the digital age in which we live in, and those able to utilise this resource to the best of its ability have been able to reap the rewards.

In this sense the theory of sponsorship at its essence remains very much frozen in time, much like Scott’s hut which has been near perfectly preserved due to the extreme temperatures of the South Pole and which serves as a reminder of the incredible feat Scott and his team achieved.

OLDER POSTS
NEWER POSTS