Leveraging the Big Sponsorships with Big Ideas
Mark Harrison

Originally printed in PR Canada, February 13, 2006

The BIG Sponsorship events are upon us this February.

  • Super Bowl
  • The Grammy Awards
  • Torino 2006 Olympics

After plenty of planning (we hope!) and even more financial investment (we know!) it is crunch time for many brave-hearted marketers. Getting involved with any of these large-scale properties can provide the opportunity of becoming a marketing legend or legendary flameout.

Let’s look at the Super Bowl for example. On Super Bowl Sunday I was interviewed on CTV Newsnet regarding the value of advertising during the big game. We all know it has become a cultural phenomenon when people complain that they can’t get the American feed in Canada so they can watch the COMMERCIALS.

Okay marketers, let’s repeat that last sentence again slowly. Consumers are complaining because they CAN’T watch the commercials.

Back to the interview. One of the things that I was asked about was the value of Super Bowl advertising to an advertiser. In answering that question it made me realize that there are some interesting contrasts between the Super Bowl and the Olympics …especially for the sponsorship marketer. Where does the value of each property lie and how does an organization take advantage of a BIG Sponsorship?

Well first off, let’s define things for our viewers at home. To become involved as an Olympic partner on any level you have to become a sponsor. Quite simply, the Olympic governing bodies work incredibly hard to prevent ambushing. That is not to suggest that the NFL doesn’t, but they have a different (yet very profitable approach). Cadillac might sponsor the MVP award (which they do), but Toyota, Honda and Dodge are all free to advertise during the game. This illustrates the fundamental difference in my mind with the two properties. The Olympics are all about sponsorship and the Super Bowl is all about advertising.

Marketers who align themselves with the Olympics are eager for the image transfer that comes from being part of the mission of the Games. Marketers who participate in the Super Bowl see the event as a stage. Olympic sponsors are keen to bask in the glow of the Games’ promotion of peace, education, healthy lifestyles and sustainable development. Super Bowl advertisers see the game as a coming out party for all things cool. (And it’s not just the marketers, so do the entertainers. Not one performer at the Super Bowl receives a single dime for appearing! Think about it, The Rolling Stones playing for free).

Needless to say, the Super Bowl and Olympics are vastly different strategies. Regardless, they both require a significant amount of planning, skill, and a little bit of luck to hit a home run.

Let’s examine how as a marketer you can make your investment in these properties pay off. There are three critical considerations to assess in your plan:

  1. Time horizon
  2. Equity alignment
  3. Implementation

Time Horizon

As you can imagine, the time horizon for the Olympics is much longer than it is for the Super Bowl. The most successful Games sponsors (think Coca-Cola and RBC) have had long standing relationships with the Olympics. But even a new sponsor can succeed if they recognize the need to build a multi-year plan and leverage the two year opportunity the alternating Summer and Winter games brings. Importantly you need to focus your efforts on the critical success factors of your first Games. This is what Rona, Hbc, and General Motors face this year in Torino (Although GM does have a previous heritage with the Games.)

For the Super Bowl it is a much shorter time horizon mainly because it is all about making a splash. Yes, Apple has reaped 22 years of PR for their “1984” ad, as have Master Lock and Budweiser for some of their spots, but at the end of the day it is all about that 30 or 60 second window where a marketer has laid down their bets for a shot at the fences. Therefore the Time Horizon is all about the process of generating one great creative spot.

Equity Alignment

The second issue is equity alignment. Ever notice how little connection there is to football in Super Bowl advertising? Oh there are a few spots (think Bud again) and some vague references, but football is not integral to creating a successful Super Bowl spot. The best spots tend to ride a pop culture wave. Again this is all about using the hype machine of the NFL as a big drive-in movie screen for your ad.

On the other hand, the Olympics are all about equity and this is where the challenge is. Question for you? What was the best rink board ad you saw during the Salt lake Gold Medal game? The answer: There are no rink boards at the Olympics. There is no signage at the Games period. Check out the IOC web site. Same thing!

You can’t put a logo on a jersey unless you’re a federation equipment sponsor. So it is down to creating equity programs and frankly there are too many brands “aligning with athletes.” You have to do more than hire a few athletes to work as spokespeople. You need to tell a story.

Implementation

Lastly, comes implementation. This is where there are a ton of similarities. If you are going to succeed with any monster property you need a tight Implementation plan. To me this is NOT about classical Integrated Communications where every discipline gets their share of the pie. This is about creating that one idea; that key consumer story that is carried through all touch points. This, in my opinion requires one author, one driver and one owner. It requires that some disciplines are going to have to rest their creative skills but work overtime on their media channel skills. Twelve points of view on how the story should be told won’t cut it.

Get your marketing team shredded down to a few key stakeholders. Get ready to meet every four days to discuss milestones. Put up the “DO NOT DISTURB” sign to all competing disciplines …but let them in the room when you need them. Get out and drive your ONE IDEA through the entire company all the way to your bank account.

Here is a simple example. Budweiser wowed fans across North America with their “Magic Fridge” advertisement. Twenty-four hours after the game I visited the Bud web site and while I could view the ad on the U.S. site (but not the Canadian site.)

I couldn’t buy a Magic Fridge … enter a sweeps to win a Magic Fridge … customize the ad to create my own “Magic Fridge” spot …or even order a “Magic Fridge” fridge decal for my own fridge (to the relief of “Mrs. Mark”). When I visited my local beer and liquor stores I didn’t see a “Magic Fridge” display pivoting around beckoning me to buy or see a “Magic Fridge” cooler or mini fridge or any signage to that effect.

Now maybe the folks at Budweiser/Labatt would tell me to mind my own business. All I am suggesting is that a single-minded and truly integrated implementation might have resulted in a desire to merchandise the success of this ad. On the other hand that may be the answer right there.

It was Advertising, not Sponsorship.