Tag: partnerships

When Doping Delivers – US Postal Service & Lance Armstrong 12th August, 2015

Following the fallout from the recent athletics doping scandal brought to the fore by The Times & German broadcaster ARD last week, this is an opportune time to look at one of the biggest and divisive scandals in sport. The continuing battle between Lance Armstrong and one of his prime sponsors, the US Postal Service.

The US Postal Service was a long term sponsor of Lance Armstrong’s cycling team, partnering from 1998 to the 2004 season. The US Postal Service paid $40 million in rights fees across the 6 year term with around $18 million received by Armstrong himself.

In the wake of Lance Armstrong’s sensational doping confession in 2013 the US Government are seeking damages of over $100 million under the False Claims Act as it was sold on the notion Armstrong competed as a ‘clean’ rider. In the blog Enter at Your Own Peril, Slingshot Sponsorship previously explored the facets that affect a sponsor when the rights holder is involved in controversy, however the current case has highlighted another valuable point of discussion.

The interesting development within the Armstrong vs. U.S.P.S. case is the comment from Armstrong’s legal team that the US Postal Service “got exactly what it bargained for, including tens of millions of dollars’ worth of publicity, exposure to more than 30 million spectators at international cycling events, and hundreds of hours of television coverage”.

Herein lies an interesting argument. The US Postal Service did indeed ‘get what it paid for’ with studies stating it received at least $139 million in worldwide brand exposure in four years. Bolstering this, in a document for a 2003 Postal Service news conference the Postal Service described the sponsorship as “may be one of the most effective public relations ventures the Postal Service, and for that matter, any other global service agency, has ever undertaken”.

The argument posed by the defending council is during the sponsorship of the team the US Postal Service reached its objective of overhauling the stereotypes of the postal workers, increasing brand exposure and driving sales and that the current revelations had no hand in the effectiveness of that partnership.

If the US Postal Service reached its outlined goals it would seem contrived to seek fiscal compensation over a decade after the sponsorship ended. With the battle still rumbling on in the courts only time will tell what the Federal Judge will decide.

Sky & British Cycling – When It Pays To Put All Of Your Eggs In One Basket 29th July, 2015

Fresh from the saddle of my first Sky Ride and currently in awe of the (super) human feat by Chris Froome in the Tour de France, I thought this the perfect moment to celebrate the partnership between Sky & British Cycling and question what’s next for both properties.

Since its inception in 2008, Sky’s partnership with British Cycling has been embodied across multiple areas of the business from staff engagement cycling events to wider reaching Sky Rides and the global media machine which is Team Sky. Sky’s involvement was initially seen as a revelation in the industry, only to be further magnified by the venture into Team Sky, with mass plaudits following shortly behind.

Hitting the targets of the partnership over a year ahead of schedule, Sky delivered over a million more regular cyclists across the UK and a British winner of the Tour de France. Now Sky is seen as an industry leader in cycling across all levels from the elite to mass participation with cycling becoming the epicentre of Sky’s engagement both internally and externally.

The announcement earlier this year that Sky will end the partnership with British Cycling in 2016 created a shock throughout the media. With such success and over delivery on the partnership, many have expressed an uncertainty about what will follow. Despite the decision to part been reached “amicably” as British Cycling’s chief executive Ian Drake advised, the challenge for British Cycling will be to find a partner that offers the same level of support as Sky for the long term.

The question which forms much speculation is what the focus of Sky’s next partnership will be. After all, people generally advise not to put all of your eggs in one basket – following Sky’s success with British Cycling, only time will tell if they choose to do so again.

London Twenty What? Brands opt for sponsorship flings as opposed to the ball and chain 28th July, 2014

Whatever happened to legacy? During the 2012 London Olympics we could scarcely move for the word, and in regards to sponsorship there is very little evidence of it. Since 2012 there have been four major global sporting events and yet still very few campaigns follow on after the life of an event. And why not?

As Lucien Boyer explains, the buzz of an event doesn’t last forever and as such brands should look to the long term if they want their partnership to provide an effective return, rather than being accused of ‘cashing in’. Sponsorship should be seen as a marriage between the event, marketing, and its values and vision. A long-term partnership sets a clear direction for a company’s future marketing, allowing the brand to develop a strong message and engage with the target audience consistently over time.

The London Olympics and subsequent 5 years offered a plethora of global athletic events all located within the UK; first London 2012, now the Glasgow 2014 Games, and soon to follow the London 2017 World Athletic Championships (not to mention GB competing at Rio 2016). If a brand had wanted to align themselves with the values of athletics and use global sport as a means to engage the audience (UK or abroad) there might rarely have been a better opportunity.

Sainsbury’s serves as a prime example in delivering sponsorship this way. Having sponsored the 2012 Paralympic games to great effect (as the only ‘big four’ supermarket to make gains in market share during this period posting a 5.6% increase YOY), Sainsbury’s didn’t stop there. They finalised an agreement to partner with the British Paralympic Association for the next four years and also to sponsor the British Athletics Major Event series, including the Anniversary Games and British Grand Prix in August. In addition to this they launched a one million pound scheme to provide coaching and facilities to help disabled children lead more active lives providing an ROI that “will not just be measured in pure marketing terms”.

So having returned this week from a jaunt north of the boarder to indulge in the Commonwealth Games, I couldn’t help but hear that word again on everyone’s lips. One of Glasgow’s major sponsors SSE is looking to change this. As an Official Partner to the games, SSE used an onsite Twitter leader board to engage on Twitter and experientially at the Green Zone. Furthermore, they had a number of brand ambassadors from the home counties, provided long term naming rights for the SSE Hydro (hosting the netball and gymnastics), and are looking to continue the long term effects by increasing the funding for the SSE Next Generation programme giving support to aspiring athletes in the UK. Only time will tell with how much vigour brands will continue to engage now the curtain has closed on Glasgow. Who knows, come Rio 2016 perhaps the word ‘legado’ will never even be uttered.

Is this not old news? The Evening Standard’s article: Goalposts shift as sponsorship game turns more complex? 2nd February, 2014

It was refreshing to read a sponsorship article in a national paper that did not have to do with how much a brand paid for their recent premier league football kit deal. However what surprised me was not the content of the article in question, but the amount of tweets that included the words “fascinating” and “amazing” from those working in the sponsorship industry that followed.

For those of you who haven’t read it, the article outlines how the advancement of marketing technology has shifted how brands communicate to their audiences. With Barclays pulling out of Boris Bikes and Vodaphone’s recent announcement of dropping F1 to launch their Firsts programme, this is clearly becoming big news. However, this should not be a surprise to those in the industry as it has been going on (albeit in smaller incubator-type projects) for awhile.

This shift is the reason I launched Slingshot and despite these large budgets being pulled out of single properties, I echo chief executive of M&C Saatchi Sport and Entertainment Steve Martin’s comment as we too, “have never been busier”. This is because sponsorship still remains the best way to engage with audiences by creating emotional engagement beyond traditional advertising.

In the past four years, Slingshot has worked with a number of brands who have slowly been siphoning budget out of their larger media–based sponsorships into tester projects that have deeper engagement, allowing their internal teams the opportunity to become more creative with the rights they purchase. Our results have enabled our clients to prove the value of this type of sponsorship (away from badging into engagement) against what they have previously been doing, driving larger budgets into more innovative projects year on year.

The drive for brands to innovate is leading this shift and in reference to the article’s ‘earned’ vs ‘paid’ media argument, there remains a great opportunity for the sponsorship industry. As noted in the article, it is now becoming easier for brands to create their own platforms; however, the cost and typically the lack of direct knowledge in these areas significantly increases the risk. Sponsorship can support this drive and really is what sponsorship should be about – working collaboratively to create something unique through the synergy of two of more organisations. With these types of sponsorships, the lines between rights holder and sponsor become blurred as the benefits derived from both are not just equal, but significant.

This is only the beginning of what will inevitably become a major shift in the traditional sponsorship model.

I went to Glastonbury and all I got was this crappy T-shirt 1st July, 2013

As another Glastonbury passes, it makes me think of all of the sponsorship activity that will be taking place over the next couple of months. While much of it still remains the same (or the same but packaged up in a different box), I have noticed a shift into better commercialisation by the rights owner and more tailored sponsorship activation by brands compared to last year.

One area that is undeniably a huge commercial opportunity for festivals is merchandise and licensing. This is a completely untapped market and one that is bountiful. Although no ‘Hard Rock Cafe’, the festival ‘brand’ is growing through social engagement and digital interaction. The offshoot benefit of a larger audience is the commercial potential through new revenue streams.

For such a global, well-respected and creatively-driven festival, I was surprised this wasn’t reflected in their merchandise choices (found here). Although, their approach is not dissimilar to many of the other UK festivals, highlighting that their resource allocations are based predominantly on core revenues of ticketing, pouring rights, and sponsorship. It still is surprising that the pinnacle of the UK festival experience, Glastonbury, hasn’t taken the time to create truly memorable merchandise to combine with the memorable experiences of the festival.

Which leads me on to how smaller musical festivals can be a much better sponsorship platform to create brand experiences and conversations due to their drive of innovation and flexibility. One of our clients Outlook Festival recently launched their Outlook X Majestic Athletic Varsity Jackets this year in collaboration with festival sponsor Majestic (check them out here). Used for Outlook Festival competition giveaways, special VIPs, and of course for purchase – this limited edition jacket something you’d actually purchase – and something I’d much rather walk away with compared to the Glastonbury coffee mug.

Some of Slingshot Sponsorship’s key tips for creating merchandise partnerships with music festivals:

Think of your audience and what they want to buy
Create something completely unique
Allow for creative input from all parties and, when appropriate, your festival go-ers
Think big

Digital Unite Appoint Slingshot Sponsorship as Exclusive Sponsorship Agency 20th August, 2012

Following the use of Slingshot’s insightful one day Sponsorship Boot Camp, Digital Unite and Spring Online, the UK’s leading digital inclusion platform, have appointed Slingshot Sponsorship as their exclusive sponsorship agency.

Slingshot Sponsorship will be working with Digital Unite in order extend and exploit the commercial opportunities presented by the Spring Online campaign which features over 2,500 events nationwide between April 22^nd – 26^th 2013 as well as additional commercial opportunities within Digital Unite as a whole.

With over 8 million people still digitally excluded in the UK, many of which being over 55, Spring Online provides a free, safe, and enjoyable environment for those people who consider themselves digitally excluded to receive free IT tutorials – these including lessons in how to use such key communication tools as Skype and Facebook to keep in touch with friends and family as well as how to use the internet for a range of everyday tasks that many of us take for granted including shopping, banking and watching television.

Slingshot Sponsorship will be extending the commercial assets offered by the campaign, adding value to brand partnerships with key benefits including nationwide exposure, unique CSR opportunities and the chance to establish an early relationship with a growing age demographic.

Jackie Fast, Managing Director of Slingshot Sponsorship, commented:

Following the success of our recent work with Digital Unite at our introductory Slingshot Sponsorship Boot Camp, we are thrilled to be working on next year’s Spring Online campaign and to have the opportunity to contribute towards narrowing the digital divide.

Spring Online is a highly unique campaign, proving testament to the ever increasing number of ways in which sponsorship can be utilised and leveraged in order to improve businesses as a whole. Given the value and scope for involvement offered by the platform, we are excited to explore the prospect of some truly ground-breaking partnerships in 2013.

Emma Solomon OBE, Managing Director of Digital Unite, commented:

We are delighted to be working with Slingshot Sponsorship on our award-winning Spring Online campaign.

Over the last eleven years, Spring Online has been instrumental in helping tens of thousands of people understand and engage with computers and the internet. Local events held right across the UK reach people from a wide cross-section of society, from the over 55s who have never been online to existing users of all ages who want to brush up on their existing skills and learn more, from rural to inner-city areas. Our fantastic Spring Online event holders provide that essential support and help show learners how digital technology can be relevant for them.

“We continue to develop Spring Online to make it bigger and better each year. Our vision is that ever increasing numbers of local events support more and more communities across the UK to make the most of the digital world – and to really enjoy it too. We are thrilled to be working with Slingshot and to be developing the creativity, dynamism and reach of Spring Online with them.

Olympic Sponsorship: Remember the Positives 30th July, 2012

Whilst awareness of Olympic-association is of course growing for official sponsors of the Games, the recent controversy surrounding LOCOG’s increasingly stringent sponsorship policies and the subsequent public outrage is resulting in certain sponsorships becoming dangerously close to having an adverse effect on certain brands – quite a significant problem after investing hundreds of millions with the aim of using the platform to enhance brand perceptions.

Although some sponsors may have demanded a little too much exclusivity i.e. Visa and McDonalds, the latest issues have taken complaints to a new level. The first concerns Coca-Cola and Lord Coe’s comment stating that attendees ‘probably wouldn’t be walking in (to the Olympic Village) with a Pepsi T-shirt’ which is, of course, ridiculous. Despite the off-chance of hundreds of fans herding into the Village wearing Pepsi-branded clothing, this would have miniscule, if any, effect on either brands’ perception or the Olympic campaigns, activations and initiatives executed by Coca-Cola. The second issue is the numerous events proving to be half empty due to ticket allocations not being utilised – this resulting in understandable public outrage however the blame spreads across multiple parties including National Olympic Committees, the IOC and the media in addition to sponsors.

With a negative cloud beginning to descend over the concept of sponsorship in general, I wanted to add to the refreshing comments of Evening Standard Editor, Sarah Sands’ recent article shedding some light on why ‘sponsors are the good guys not the villains’.

On the whole, sponsors are providing vital products and services to the Olympics whilst simultaneously raising awareness of the event in all corners of the world. Acer, the official computing equipment partner of the Games, has been responsible for the installation of an enormous technology infrastructure – no small feat and a significant cost saved for LOCOG. Likewise for GE who have contributed heavily towards key infrastructures across transportation, energy, lighting and medical equipment. Coca-Cola, despite the controversy over branding and health, have invested millions in grass roots sports and vow that 75% of their products consumed at the Games will be sugar-free. With significant value being added by all Olympic partners, the positives of sponsorship significantly outweigh the negatives. (Of course, there is also the added benefit that they provide hundreds of millions of pounds in revenue and in turn lower the cost of the Games to the tax-payer.)

It is important to remember that the art of successful sponsorship is creating a relationship that simultaneously benefits the sponsor, the audience and the rights holder with it ultimately being the responsibility of the latter i.e. LOCOG to get as close to this harmonious balance as possible.

The Olympic Committee is evidently yet to find this balance with certain partners but when weighing up the pros and cons, sponsors cannot be viewed as the bad guys. After all, despite recently sympathising with protesters, Jacques Rogge hits the nail on the head when stating that “Quite simply, staging the Olympic Games would not be possible without our partners.”

NEWER POSTS