A question...

I've kept pretty quiet about the Bavaria ambush at this month's World Cup - between the hundreds of the stories already out there on the subject, the misinformation and misdirection put out there but those in the know, and claiming to be in the know, and wanting to see how everything played out prior to commenting, I thought it best to bite my lip and see what more the Finals may have in store for us.

However, one thing about the Bavaria case which has interested me since it first made news, but hasn't yet received any major coverage, is the impact the media circus surrounding Bavaria's ambush, and FIFA and the South African government's subsequent legal action, has had on Budweiser's sponsorship?

As nearly every media report on the Bavaria ambush made mention, Budweiser is the official beer sponsor of the World Cup, and they've paid a massive amount of money for those rights. But what impact has the added exposure in the media, and constant affirmation of Budweiser's official status, had on their ROI? Moreover, would such a study reveal an unintentional impact of ambush marketing not previously suggested in the academic world? Past thought and opinion - particularly the opinion held by those within the major sports federations and commercial rights holders - has been that ambush marketing has a parasitic effect on sponsors, that it devalues their association and their investment by confusing consumers and distracting from the official sponsors who fund these mega-events.

If as I suspect, however, Budweiser's sponsorship has ultimately benefitted from the added media coverage, exposure, and identification in the media, could this Bavaria promotion not ultimately have benefitted the Anheuser-Busch brand in some way? How many who witnessed or have followed the Bavaria story confused the Dutch company as official sponsors? While the campaign certainly distracted from Budweiser's sponsorship, the media has ensured that their association has remained in the spotlight.

It would be interesting to know the impact of such campaigns when dealt with in this way. The media coverage benefitted both Bavaria and Budweiser ultimately, providing exposure above and beyond what either company had bargained for. Due to the heavy-handed way in which South African government handle ambush marketing, Bavaria equally emerged as a sympathetic figure in the press, and the women arrested as victims of the law. Certainly there's more than meets the eye to this story...

In The News...

As the rules of the game change, companies must do more to recognize the various forms of ambushing. With a clearer understanding, organizers and sponsors stand a much better chance of protecting their investment. With this in mind, we propose the following updated breakdown of ambushing, including its strategies and the threats to sponsors, rights-holders and event organizers.

Check out Business Insight's new piece on ambush marketing by Professor Simon Chadwick and I, our most recent work on ambush marketing here at CIBS...

Ambushed! Sponsors pay a lot to link their brands to sporting events. Then there are those who get those links for nothing.

The article highlights a new typology of ambush marketing, and a new way of looking at and understanding the methods and strategies employed by ambush marketers. With the Vancouver Games fast approaching, and the 2010 FIFA World Cup just around the corner, it should be interesting to see what new strategies may emerge, and which tactics take the most prominent roles in 2010...

Examining Athlete Brands... Part 4: The Who and Why

Sitting in Anfield last night, bemoaning Liverpool's lack of form, finishing, and fitness, the value of Steven Gerrard and Fernando Torres to Liverpool's fortunes this season could not have been more apparent. Uninventive, unimaginative, and incohesive, Rafa Benitez's side looked confused, disjointed, and unlikely to break their current slump any time soon.

However, as well as the doom and gloom surrounding Liverpool's title chances and hopes of a sixth European cup, the club's reliance on Gerrard and Torres from a marketing perspective struck me equally - dominating Liverpool's marketing and merchandising, and badly overshadowing any of Liverpool's other stars.

As two of the game's biggest stars and brightest talents, their prevalence in Liverpool's marketing strategy comes as no surprise. Moreover, a quick glance through their TOPSTAR traits makes it all the more obvious why the two are highly marketable assets. What we've yet to stress, however, in looking at such athlete brands, is why and how players like Gerrard and Torres become such valuable commercial properties, while other players with similar perceived or potential value, are more often overlooked.

Arguably the greatest difference, and certainly one of the most crucial elements of TOPSTAR not already discussed here, is the effective and strategic management of an athlete's commercial image, and the nurturing and positioning of the athlete within the context of their most valuable TOPSTAR traits and characteristics.

For example, take Liverpool's Dirk Kuyt: a tireless worker and fantastic team player, Kuyt is also one of the club's highest scoring players of all time in European competition, despite of being played out of position. He's become a key leader on the pitch, and has shown over the years to be a caring family man and respected member of the community. Despite his at times unorthodox style of play, and generally un-Dutch skills, he's a much loved member of the Holland national side, and was once the top scorer in the Eredivisie. Few players in today's game represent what Liverpool as a football club stand for, despite his often frustrating first-touch, and occasionally wayward passing.

However, Kuyt's brand and commercial value trails Gerrard and Torres significantly, with little sign of catching up. Even if Kuyt were to score the winning goal in next summer's World Cup, handing Holland it's first major trophy in over 20 years and finally helping the Dutch realize their undoubted potential in world football, it is debatable if his commercial potential would approach that of his more marketable teammates. But why?

While there is no one simple answer, I would argue that underlying any successful or failed athlete brand is the management and positioning of that brand. While the elements of TOPSTAR we've examined here provide the basis for a football player's brand, and are the source of any actual or latent value, it is only through the leveraging and maximization of such characteristic, or combination of characteristics, when a brand achieves any value. Be it of the player's own initiative, that of his representatives, his club, or his sponsors, strategic brand management has been behind every successful athlete brand.

I suppose the next question is, then, who will be next?

Contentious? Controversial? Inspired?

Check out this article in the National Post yesterday, on a new book being released by former NHLer Bob Sirois on the systematic and institutionalized racism against French-Canadian hockey players in the National Hockey League. While I haven't yet had the chance to read the book, it certainly sounds like an interesting, if not controversial, read.

First, the important quotes:

... a book published Monday by former National Hockey League player Bob Sirois, examining four decades of professional drafts, comes to the explosive conclusion that francophone Quebecers are systematically thwarted by an "anti-francophone virus" plaguing the NHL.

Francophone Quebecers are wrongly disparaged as too small, too lax on defence and not suited to the robust "Canadian" style of play, Mr. Sirois writes in the book, published in French and titled Le Québec mis en échec (Quebec Bodychecked). "Myths, prejudices, stereotypes and favoritism make up an integral part of every draft session in the National Hockey League."

He concludes that francophones who are not first-line forwards, starting goalies or top defencemen are rarely drafted, and if they are picked, they do not last long. Looking at francophone Quebecers who played three or more seasons in the NHL, he found they were extraordinarily successful. Of the 176 players in this category, 42% won an NHL trophy or were named to the all-star team during their careers. "Only francophones of the highest level were able to have lasting careers; the other Québécois hockey players were quickly eliminated from the NHL," he writes.

The overall remedy he prescribes is twofold. He believes a return of professional hockey to Quebec City, as the city's mayor Régis Labeaume has been promoting, would increase the pressure on the Canadiens to be more representative of their province. He also proposes that Quebec field its own team at the World Junior Hockey Championship, saying the Canadian team regularly overlooks Quebec talent. A Quebec team would allow "our young elite hockey players to measure themselves against their peers from the other nations of the world," he concludes.

From a researcher's perspective, and even more from an academic perspective, Sirois' findings both intrigue and concern. While the research he's done provides evidence of what many have previously postulated - that Québecois hockey players are being overlooked, both at junior and senior level - the suggestion of causality is flawed. Without reading the book in full it is impossible to say, however based on the findings cited in the National Post, and the quotes attributed to the author and its reviewers, the implication behind the story appears to be that racism is the root cause of the declining numbers and involvement of French-Canadian hockey players in the NHL.

However, the study's results merely indicate that numbers are declining, and that top-level Québecois hockey players are being overlooked in the NHL draft, not WHY. Any number of reasons could be proposed, and indeed should be investigated, before accusing an entire league of institutionalized racism. The import of European and international players has directly coincided with the decline of Québec-born players, as has a shift in minor hockey in the province, towards a more recreational, less-competitive structure - a move in the exact opposite direct of Canada's other major hockey producing provinces such as Ontario and British Columbia. Moreover, legitimate concerns exist within hockey over the type of hockey being taught and developed in Québec's major junior system, where free-flowing, fast-paced, offensive hockey is the norm, and defensive systems and trap-based hockey is limited.

Moreover, as the game has changed over the past 20-30 years, so too have the roles played by certain provinces and countries in supplying talent to the highest levels of hockey. Following Patrick Roy's emergence and dominance between the mid-1980s and the 1990s, the butterfly style of goaltending he popularized, led to a widespread move towards Québecois goaltenders throughout the 1990s and into the 2000s. In other areas of Canada, where the stand-up style was more popular, the adaptation to the butterfly and the new dominant regime was slower. Today, however, the dominant goaltending style in the NHL is a hybrid of butterfly and stand-up, more reminiscent of Martin Brodeur's technique than Patrick Roy's, and is representative of the evolution of goaltending in other areas from stand-up to butterfly; from covering angles and stressing lateral movement, to being compact and square to the puck, covering the lower portion of the net. Without having the exact numbers in front of me, a quick look through current NHL rosters would indicate a relaxed reliance on Québecois goaltenders, as compared to 10 years ago. Sirois would be hard pressed to argue that racism has caused this shift.

Ultimately, Sirois' book presents both an interesting and likely contentious read. Of concern to Québeckers, the NHL, and the governing bodies involved, is that Québecois hockey players are incontrovertibly declining in the NHL. While racism has been, and will continue to be, cited as a key reason for this move away from French-Canadian players, it seems obvious that more research is needed into the actual and exact reasons behind this shift, dating back to the start of the NHL draft and the Montréal Canadiens' choice to take part in the draft with all other clubs, and not have first choice on the top Québec player each year...

Sport in the Globalized World...

An interesting piece from BBC Sport came out this week, looking at the impact of globalization on English football, and the influx of foreign players into the Premier League (as compared to the former First Division, circa 1989-90).

Where the Premier League's players come from
By Ollie Williams

In the past two decades, the composition of England's top-flight teams has changed dramatically.

At the start of the 1989-90 season, leading clubs like Arsenal and Manchester United boasted just one or two regular first-team players who were born outside the United Kingdom.

Now, Premier League teams have, on average, 13 foreign-born stars within their ranks.

Use the interactive world map above to explore the birthplaces of players in all the current Premier League squads, and compare them with the same teams' players from the start of the 1989-90 season - then find out more about each team below.

Twenty years ago, defending champions Arsenal had just two players born outside the UK on their books: Icelandic midfielder Sigurdur Jonsson and Irish forward Niall Quinn.

Jonsson made barely a handful of appearances before leaving Highbury in 1992, while Quinn was soon to sign for Manchester City.

Liverpool, eventual title-winners that season, had an unusually large number of foreign-born players in their 1989-90 squad.

Kenny Dalglish's side featured five players born outside the UK: John Barnes (Jamaica), Bruce Grobbelaar (South Africa), Glenn Hysen (Sweden), Jan Molby (Denmark) and Steve Staunton (Republic of Ireland).

But they were the exception. Teams were far more likely to boast just one or two players born outside the UK and, in many cases (such as Manchester City's David Oldfield and Chelsea's Tony Dorigo), those players were British nationals who happened to have been born abroad.

Two decades ago, the teams making up this year's Premier League could only boast 12 players born outside the Commonwealth between them.

Twenty years later, more than half of the Premier League's clubs could field an entire starting line-up of foreign-born players.

Liverpool now have just three UK-born first-team stars in Jamie Carragher, Steven Gerrard and Glen Johnson, with other British talents like Jay Spearing making only occasional European appearances to date.

Anfield is home to 20 foreign-born players with a strong first-team claim, while Arsenal can boast 23, as opposed to four Brits, all aged under 21.

Teams recently promoted to the top flight have the fewest foreign-born players in their first-team squads - Burnley have seven, Wolves have eight, as do Stoke, who gained promotion a year earlier, while Birmingham have nine.

West Ham are also at the lower end of the spectrum, with nine foreign-born players, but at the time of writing this still comprised almost half of the 21 first-team players at Gianfranco Zola's disposal.

Follow the link to see analyses of each of the Premier League's twenty teams, and the changes in squad formation and player origin over the last two decades. Interesting reading for anyone curious about the impact, both positive and negative, of the globalization of sport.

Where the Premier League's players come from

Examining Athlete Brands… Part 2

Following on my contention that comparisons between Christiano Ronaldo and David Beckham as athlete brands are premature, here we look at the key characteristics of successful athlete brands in team sports, backing up my stance and looking at the areas Ronaldo’s management will be looking to evolve…


In a study by Burton & Chadwick (2008) assessing the nature of football player brands, seven key characteristics of athlete brands were identified (TOPSTAR), explaining the success of David Beckham’s commercial activities, and suggesting Ronaldo as his most logical successor. Here we’ll take those findings a step further, and assess Ronaldo’s brand a bit more deeply.

The seven variables identified with the Burton/Chadwick study can be shortened to the mnemonic TOPSTAR; from Professor Chadwick’s Daily Sport Thought blog, the variables in short:

Team – the team(s) that a player plays for or has played for; the associations a player has with a particular team; the profile, reputation and success of the team; the player’s role within the team;
Off-field – where the player lives; who the player socialises with and where; who the player is married to or is dating; the type of house the player lives in, the car they drive, the clothes they wear;
Physical characteristics, mentality and values – the facial appearance and physique of the player; other distinguishing features such as hairstyle, tattoos etc.; the way a players thinks and the views they hold;
Success – the player’s on-field record; the number of trophies, medals and prizes the player has won; the winning teams and games in which the player has been involved;
Transferability – the extent to which the player appeals to males and females, young and old, followers and non-followers of football; the extent to which the player and their image are culturally and geographically transferable; language(s) spoken;
Age – the stage at which a player is in their career; viewed in product life-cycle terms, this will have an impact on the profile, characteristics and longevity of the brand as well as influencing how the brand is managed;
Reputation - the player’s reputation as footballer; style of play; disciplinary record; the player’s reputation outside of football; way the player deals with public and media attention.

From Ronaldo’s perspective, the seven variables in question are rather telling in outlining the success of his brand thus far, and the areas he still trails Becks in leveraging his commercial worth.

Team: Ronaldo, in joining Real Madrid this year, moves from one of the world’s most famous and successful clubs, to another of the top draws in international football, following in the footsteps of Beckham and a select few others. Though a polarizing figure on the pitch, either loved or despised, Ronaldo has largely been an idol at Old Trafford, is Portugal’s leading light, and begins life at the Bernabeu as a legend in the making.

Off-field: Outside of football, Ronaldo’s brand pales in comparison to Beckham’s more mature, manicured image. Whilst Beckham is seen and portrayed as a loving family man, a cultural and fashion icon, and an international ambassador or football, the Portuguese star’s image is much less refined. Writing off a crashed Ferrari, being romantically-linked to Paris Hilton, and generally enjoying the life of a footballer, Ronaldo has yet to foster the same marketable image as Beckham. Given his age, and the potential value of his brand, however, there should be little cause for concern long-term.

Physical characteristics, mentality and values: Both a major strength and significant shortcoming of the Ronaldo brand. Like Beckham, Ronaldo is known for his physical appearance, and rivals the Englishman in good looks and style; however, his mentality and values contrast Beckham’s, with his arrogance, self-confidence, and at times selfish play overshadowing more favourable traits. Beckham, meanwhile, is respected for his work ethic and team-play, as well as his highly prominent family life and ambitions of working with children.

Success: In his time with United, Ronaldo established himself as one of the top players in the world, winning trophies with Manchester, player of the year awards, and generally drawing accolades throughout football for his play and influence in United’s on-field success. Without a doubt, one of the strengths of the Ronaldo brand.

Transferability: Is there where Beckham, as much if not more than any other athlete brand, differentiates himself? Few, if any, athletes can compare to Beckham's ability to transcend demographics, psychographics, geographics... really any-graphics. Beckham's appeal in Asia, and marketing value to both Manchester United and Real Madrid was undeniable; his foray into America, although not a resounding success, has in many ways opened the door for football and brought considerable attention to the sport, without crippling the finances of the league in the same way the North American Soccer League's influx of stars did in the 1970s and 80s.

Ronaldo, by contrast, is something of an unknown in this respect. Real Madrid's marketing surrounding the mercurial star, and projected shirt sales figures point to a successful partnership to date. However, as I mentioned earlier, Ronaldo is a polarizing figure, more often hated than loved. While Beckham's family values, work ethic, and media friendliness have proven highly lucrative for the brand, Ronaldo's public personality and on-field behaviour has been considerably less endearing. Consider him more Cantona than Beckham...

Age: For all of the issues Ronaldo may encounter in challenging Brand Beckham, and the areas in need of improvement, his age and relevance as both an athlete and a public figure are firmly in his favour. Still only entering his prime and already one of the best players of his generation, and indeed a generation-defining player in Portugal, Ronaldo has time on his side.

Reputation: Much like Beckham in his early years, Ronaldo's reputation is somewhat suspect and presents one of his biggest hurdles. Becks faced serious criticism and skepticism throughout his time with United, and again of late with the LA Galaxy; disciplinary issues with England, conflicts with United manager Sir Alex Ferguson, and questions over his focus on football were at one time serious concerns for the England international.

By comparison, Ronaldo's on-field petulance, perceived arrogance and at time unsporting play have too undermined the player's abilities and marketing value. Sir Alex was largely able to control the young star, and smoothed over relations within the dressing room following the now-famous 2006 World Cup incident with teammate Wayne Rooney, but nevertheless, Ronaldo's reputation is in need of repair in order to maximize his potential.



Ultimately, based on these seven key traits of football player brands, Christiano Ronaldo trails David Beckham by some distance, though there is certainly cause for optimism. Brand Beckham, in its early days, encountered many of the same issues that now face Ronaldo, though by the time Becks had arrived in Spain, his brand was largely solidified. It remains to be seen how well managed Ronaldo will be in the coming years, and to what extent his and Madrid's marketing teams succeed in leveraging the talent, physique, looks, and marketability in the coming years.

Ambush Marketing Legislation: Why?

A press release put out not long ago by the UK's Chartered Institute of Marketing stated that in a recent survey of business, 43% of respondents stated they had "no understanding" of the legislation put in place for the 2012 Olympics. A further 43% stated that their understanding was "very poor" or "poor".

The 2006 London Olympic Games and Paralympic Games Act details the legal and governmental framework surrounding the upcoming London Games. More specifically, concerning the CIM, the act outlines the measures in place to protect against and prevent ambush marketing (the International Olympic Committee have sought protective legislation against ambushing from hosts since the 2000 Sydney Games, the first to formally introduce such measures).

Ambush marketing, defined as "a form of associative marketing, utilized by an organization to capitalize upon the awareness, attention, goodwill, and other benefits generated by having an association with an event or property, without that organization having an official or direct connection to that event or property", has become one of the biggest stories surrounding major sporting events over the past twenty-five years (Check out the CIBS working paper series here for more information on ambush marketing, and the work we've been doing at CIBS).

What's frustrating about the legislation being enacted, and the controversy surrounding anti-ambush legislation, is not necessarily the confusion surrounding the rights of non-sponsors, or the powers given to LOCOG and the government in 'protecting' sponsors. What frustrates most is the lack of accountability on the part of most Olympic sponsors that has driven this need for legal protection. In most countries where anti-ambush marketing legislation has been enacted, it has served as a reinforcement of existing intellectual property rights laws, and in cases, with specific reference to protecting the Olympic marks. However, a look at past incidents of ambushing reveals that the vast majority of cases of high-profile ambush marketing in sport avoid the use of protected marks and symbols, and thus should by and large be safe from anti-ambush legislation. Instead, most ambushers use innovative imagery and association, suggesting a connection to the event, without expressly linking their brand to the event.

For the London Games, the legislation put in place is aimed to protect against the use of trademarked and copyrighted words and symbols, such as the words 'gold', 'silver', and 'bronze', as well as the more obvious 'London 2012', 'London Games', 'London Olympics', the Olympic Rings logo, and so on. Given the amount of money committed by sponsors, and the importance of sponsorship money to fund events such as the Olympics, protecting sponsorship investment is obviously important. It is my contention, though, that sponsors must first protect themselves, before concerning themselves with the legal measures in place to protect them.

Take, for example, these two ads from the past year - the first, a television ad from official London Olympic sponsor Lloyds TSB bank; the second, from non-sponsor (and famed ambush marketer) Nike.

Lloyds, in order to become an Olympic sponsor, pledged a reported £80 million in 2007, and yet throughout their subsequent marketing activities, have struggled to leverage their association adequately, and seldom make reference to the Games or their connection to the event beyond including the London Games logo at the end. Nike, by contrast, despite having no official link to the Games and having made no financial investment to date, make indirect yet implicit reference to Olympics in London throughout their 'I'll Be Ready' campaign, leaving little doubt of their interest in the upcoming Olympics.

Ambush marketing legislation has been enacted to combat ambushers and protect sponsors, and yet in these two cases, such legislative action does little to benefit either the organizers or the sponsors. Tanning salons in London, advertising for customers to "Get bronzed in 2012", can expect cease and desist notices, but major players such as Nike, brands who may legitimately and logically be confused for sponsors, are unlikely to fall foul of such regulations. Rather, such legislation has in fact tarnished the image of organizations in the past, and threatens to undermine the values of events such as the Olympic Games. Early in ambush marketing's history, questions were raised over the ethics of ambush marketing, and the morality of embarking on an ambushing campaign. However, in recent years, and in light of counter-ambush strategies being employed (including legislation, marketing clean zones around stadia, and on-site policing of fans), this ethical focus has shifted. The question today is - how far will the restrictions on non-sponsors, local businesses, ambitious marketers, and spectators, go? Expect and interesting public relations battle over ambushing before the Games are all said and done...

Examining Athlete Brands... Part 1

This is the first in what I anticipate will be a series of posts examining further the nature and characteristics of athlete brands. Given the growing interest in the marketing of athletes and a few recent events of note, consider this the start of an on-going discussion...



There have been a number of stories the past few weeks surrounding the value and nature of athlete brands, particularly in the wake of the massive transfers of footballers Christiano Ronaldo and Kaka to Real Madrid. Despite both players' undoubted talents and status as two of the best players in the world and of their generation, the money spent by the Spanish side (£80 million and £56 million respectively, according to most reports), was without doubt inflated by the international marketing values of both.

Ronaldo in particular, it has been suggested, is in many ways the new David Beckham, and is poised to assume his role as the leading football player brand in the world. However, despite similar career paths, and good looks as well as on-field talent to rely on, the comparison between Beckham and Ronaldo is, in many ways, premature. While it is not unfair to suggest the Portuguese star to achieve the same status as Beckham one day, I would argue that day is not yet here.

This reticence is largely due to the actual nature of brands and of athlete brands more specifically, and our occasional confusion between athlete brands, and athlete endorsers. While Ronaldo's marketing value is among the highest in the world among athletes, to date he has yet to explore the full value of his own potential brand in the same way as Beckham. By contrast, Becks has extended his commercial interests beyond football and driven his own commercial value, outside of endorsements and club-led marketing initiatives. In doing so, he (and his management team - let's not be naïve) has built Brand Beckham into a nearly unrivaled athlete brand among his contemporaries.

It's premature to cite Ronaldo as an athlete brand on par with the Beckhams and Woods' and Jordans of the world. But, the potential is there, latent and waiting to exploited further. It will be interesting to see what influence Real Madrid may have in pushing it further...