Explore Posterous

TBS.com: You've driven me to pirating

Partnerships between content providers and companies are great, except when those partnerships limit your possible consumers.  As in the case of TBS.  TBS, all I want to do is watch an episode of Seinfeld.  I'll even watch ads, that's fine.  Even full commercial breaks, as long as I can watch the episode on-demand.  You're able to stream shows to my cell phone, but you can't let me watch shows on my Macintosh!

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Seeking Soleil...

Stacey Soleil wears many hats (both literally & figuratively speaking). She's a performer, a spokesperson, a social media junkie and a self proclaimed "TrekkieTechGirl" (due to her addiction to NextGen reruns). Yet behind the whimsical demeanor you will find a solid entrepreneurial backbone. For the past several years, Stacey has been the proud owner of Soleil Marketing & Promotions whereby she strategizes and implements all of the sponsorship deals, digital placements, online promotions & grass roots marketing campaigns for her broad range of clientele. Stacey garners more than 15 years of sales & marketing experience within the general entertainment, music, and non-profit organization forefront. In early 2005, Stacey shifted her focus to the web upon recognizing the necessity for new media marketing campaigns that would reach the latest generation of web and mobile savvy users. Stacey currently serves as the Director of Social Media Strategy with Karma Media Labs and has served as the Director of New Media Marketing & Promotions for both Toucan Cove Entertainment & Arthropoda Records. She also participated in a tour wrap sponsorship program for artists such as Killswitch Engage, Mudvayne and Static-X. Furthermore, Stacey launched grassroots marketing endeavors for various websites such as iLike.com, garageband.com, & handheldcomedy.com. Stacey’s creative approach to marketing & branding has created partnerships between musicians and major athletic figures as well as co-promotions with big brands such as DirtBag Clothing for tour sponsorship. During her stay as Director of New Media Marketing, Stacey helped Toucan Cove Records secure top billing as the #1 independent label during 2008. Ms. Soleil's most recent endeavors include NextWeb64, Girls In Tech OC, as well as community outreach for The Angela Shelton Foundation. Soleil Marketing & Promotions is conveniently based just outside of Los Angeles, allowing Stacey to meet directly with a majority of web, mobile & entertainment headquarters throughout southern California.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Losing the human story of sport

After attending a rash of sport sports-related seminars, I’ve heard and learnt a lot about making sponsorships sweat, running big-ticket events, sticky eyeballs, hot-shot activation and the Holy Grail - ROI. All the energy is spent discussing event execution and broadcast.

Conspicuously absent at all these intensely debated forums is what are we doing to directly support the sports persons themselves – the individuals who wrap their lives around training or building a sports legacy that encourages young people to pursue excellence in sport. This so-called 'soft legacy' is missing.

Sports business seminars on infrastructure mull around ‘acquiring land-building-selling’ – the so-called ‘hard legacy’ is defined in buildings & stadia that in many cases barely comply with competition requirements, athlete comfort be damned!

Facility upkeep or even availability to young sportspersons after the big event is over is not on any priority list.

The discussions among sports marketing folks are confined what they can do to get more advertising around broadcast time. Sports sponsors think ROI equals plastering their branding, first-class box for the bosses, advertising – while non-sponsors think-up new ambush marketing techniques.

Sports federations and organisers’ of the Olympic/ Commonwealth Games devote more energy to legally protecting their brand name, orchestrating events and official delegation visits!

Sports persons who have the most direct and personal stake in delivering the core sport element are incidental and usually ignored while more ‘important’ issues are discussed. There is very little discussion about investing in athlete training and promotion, well before the Games arrive.

Specific to India, the current and escalating demands on athletes include: training, marketing, getting into media; being available for sundry photo-ops with pot-bellied officials and above all, WINNING even if they don’t have the same training facilities that all competitors have!

The human story of sweat, pain, tears, and hours of practise that excludes evenings-out or cuts into family time, to improve the score by a minute or an inch is ignored by most. Athletes go through training on their own steam, sometimes with their coach and family for company.

While I recognise that world-class performers have to enforce a degree of isolation and put in countless hours to reach peak performance, this does not imply:

[A] No-say in decision-making that affects performance especially sponsorship for training [that is if you get a small percentage of what the federation corners]

[B] Not being respected by federation officials, who threaten your place in Team India for the flimsiest of reasons

 [C] Officials excused when they ‘forget’ registering athletes for important competitions that influence world ranking and berth

[D] Not being paid dues on-time even though officials are jet-setting on educational tours

[E] Being made to chase sundry officials every time you travel international, for permissions/ tickets etc

[How difficult is it to ensure dues are paid on time, training-related issues are sorted quickly or travel/ logistics are driven through a speedy clearance for ‘Team India sports persons only’ channel.]

[F] Undue pressure to perform or perish [latter happens more frequently in India, with no support for athletes who need a ‘recovery’ program from bad-form or medical issues]

If our top sportsperson spend a large percentage of their energy just running around to ensure basics are not overlooked and they don’t anger some official on the tree, how will they develop an ‘edge’ that makes vital difference to a podium finish? Wait, we still haven’t even got around to sharing that wonderful human story of overcoming limitations, that’s waiting to be told.

In hoopla around organising bigger events, roads, stadia, greening the city, TV rights, and sponsorship, the real and human story of sport is lost.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (2) »

Cambridge University 'Tesco' Library - Underestimating The Value Of Sponsorship

Dons at Cambridge University have clashed with their campus bosses by expressing concern over potential plans to sell naming rights to the University Library in a process the Telegraph describes as, "selling to the highest bidder."

Professor Gill Evans, a member of the university's Regent House governing body, said: “At this rate, one might set off for the University Library one morning to find it turned into a branch of Tesco with an internet café." 

Such a superficial assessment of sponsorship's benefits can be attributed what Evans herself describes as "a lack of consultation". Although we have recently seen with sports stadia that changing the name of established properties can be perceived as insensitive to the establishment in question, there is also much to praise in successful partnerships between brands and rights owners beyond the financials alone.
 
The University said the move was the “ultimate commemorative naming opportunity" and said the benefaction would mark the 800th anniversary of its founding." But this isn't the only thing a potential sponsor should bear in mind. The extra funding could help the University to recruit more underprivileged students or assist current students in achieving their potential beyond University life. It could improve campus facilities and ultimately help the staff maintain the quality of the University's emphatic research and teaching reputations. The right name, with the right plans, can make positive waves for the University.
 
It's a little frustrating to see so much negative press for naming rights deals in the UK. With Newcastle United and Chelsea upsetting their fans with talks of renaming their historic grounds, Cambridge had a real opportunity to rubbish the 'Tesco' mindset that is tarnishing naming rights deals and set out a non-financial agenda.
 
Naming rights is not just about raising funds, but about enhansing reputation, building relationships and fostering opportunities that benefit all stakeholders. I hope that the Cambridge campus can include all faculty and students alike in their plans and start discussions not by asking, 'how much funding do we want to achieve?' but, 'what sort of partnership do we want to create?'
 
If it's a partnership that stretches on for another 800 years, it is well worth planning carefully.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Outsourcing Sponsorship Deals

The Age, Australian edition, reports that Qantas Airlines has axed its internal sponsorship division in favor of outsourcing sponsorship deals.

The article paints a negative picture from the standpoint of Qantas sponsorship recipients as "throwing into doubt the future of tens of millions of dollars of sponsorships."

I see it as quite the opposite. Qantas will now be able to divert its resources to other areas and instead concentrate on the main focus of the airline's core business. Besides, all sponsorship deals will (and should) still be reviewed internally.

The sponsorship agencies, especially the interactive ones specializing in engagement, are better equipped to lower cash outlays via embedded advertising/marketing creativity and campaigns, while maximizing ROI for their clients.

Obviously, simply turning the business over to any ad agency, no matter how a big a name it has made for itself, may not be the right answer. Digital strategy decisions should not be at the hands of traditional marketing outfits.

Now, the challenge is for the sponsorship agencies to hold up their end of the bargain, and deliver promising results, if they would like this trend to continue. I believe it can be done. It's a win-win for all parties. And I welcome it!

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Naming Rights - This Time It's Stamford Bridge

It seems the naming rights saga has caught fire among the English FA Premier League . On the back of Newcastle United's announcement that St. James' Park is to be known as the "sportsdirect.com @ St. James' Park", Chelsea's Chief Executive Ron Gourlay has now revealed that Chelsea are preparing to follow the lead by selling the naming rights for Stamford Bridge. Like Ashley and Co. at Newcastle, Gourlay is insisting that the associated brand will only be able to add to the name, rather than actually change the name of the stadium altogether. 'Stamford Bridge' would therefore be retained in the name along with the assocation with "a suitable blue-chip company."

"Retaining the heritage of the stadium is paramount to considering such a move but we think that is achievable and on that basis we would enter into discussions over naming rights with the right partner for Chelsea", Gourlay told Chelsea TV.

"We understand that this is a sensitive issue for our fans and that is why we would keep the name Stamford Bridge in any deal".

Could it be that scenes like the below are soon to be a thing of the past within the giants of the game? Surely Abramovich doesn't need the money as much as Chelsea need the identity of their stadium?

A sensitive issue indeed, but Gouray feels that the financial advantage of selling the rights is essential.

"What we are not prepared to happen, and I am sure our fans will appreciate this, is allow our rival clubs in England and Europe to gain a competitive advantage over us in terms of the revenue they can generate through either expanding the capacity of their existing stadia or moving to a new stadium and then invest that upside in their team or the club. Those possibilities are not open to Chelsea for the foreseeable future because of the restrictions in expanding our stadium and the issues around finding a new site, so that means we have to be creative and look at our sponsorship architecture and see if we can create new value and new opportunities that keeps us competitive".

In 2004, Emirates paid Arsenal £50million to acquire naming rights on their new Ashburton Grove stadium for 15 years, and Allianz is charged £4m every twelve months for Bayern Munich's ground to bear its name. In the USA, Citigroup pay £10m so for the new New York Mets baseball arena, now called Citi Field.

Check out http://chelseafc.com for more information.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

'Benefiting The Whole Football World' - East Against West, Frank Lowy and The FIFA World Cup

"We are able to show that bringing the game to Australia and having the Asian continent with us at the same time-zone will benefit not only Australia, not only Asia, but the whole football world"
Frank Lowy, Chief of Australia's FIFA World Cup Bid and Australia's Richest Man

Asia comprises the world's fastest growing economies, the fastest growing television and media audiences and the fastest growing consumer markets. Intuitively, Lowy's claim seems to be sensible. But how valid is this regional bias? The three points below try to open this up a bit.

1. The combined audiences for West and East are broadly similar

By looking at FIFA's published TV and Out Of Home (which includes pubs and other public viewing areas) cumulative viewing figures by region we can compare the 2002 World Cup held in Asia with the 2006 World Cup held in Europe.

In terms of the number of viewers, comparing Europe with Asia is hard to swing in Europe's favour. In 2002 there were 2.7 Asian viewers to every European viewer. In 2006 this figure was cut to 1.6 but still, this is a huge difference. However, this only takes into account numbers for Asia and Europe. 'East' and 'West' is much broader.

By grouping together figures for Europe with North America, South America and Central America (EurAm) we get a better idea of what Western audiences actually add up to. We can then compare this with an Eastern group comprised of the Asia and Oceana (APAC). When we look at East vs. West in this hollistic way we get a slightly more even result. In the 2002 World Cup, held in Asia, there were only 1.3 Eastern (APAC) viewers to Western (EurAm) viewers but in the 2006 World Cup there were 1.2 Western viewers to Eastern viewers - despite the fact that the Germany World Cup was broadcast in 11 fewer EurAm territories than the 2002 World Cup.

So there wasn't that big a difference after all.

The audiences are pretty much similar from East to West. The drop off in audience attributable to changes in time-zones is nearly identical with both regions losing roughly 7% of their audience when the games were shown at more unsociable hours. Let's not forget, though, that with China's population alone being double that of the whole of Europe, Asia's 7% certainly represents more people. This brings us on to our next point - although the audiences are roughly the same, and the drop off is the same, advertisers will look for efficiency over reach and this may present the West with another argument against the Lowry.

2.  Rights fees are based on efficiency, not just reach 

Lowry also spoke about the revenue that an Australasian World Cup would bring in. He didn't go into specifics in the article I read but someone told me he'd quoted a difference of +$1bn. That's a lot of money and I'm not sure where he gets it from. Despite offering huge reach, there's going to be an awful lot of wastage in a market where the audiences are almost inconceivably large. In EurAm, penetration is much higher with a greater proportion of the total populations watching or experiencing the tournament. I don't want to waste any money speaking to people who aren't in the mood to listen, especially if there's millions of them.

Also, because there aren't many national broadcasters in the regions, the scope for competition among those looking to secure broadcast rights is smaller. Coupled with the lack of efficiency, this makes for risky - and tricky - business for those formulating broadcast revenue prediction models. Although, broadcast revenue isn't the only source of income from the tournament.

3.  A successful event needs the stadia to be full

Although we hate to admit it, everyone secretly loves the English. English football fans, like many of our counterparts, bring with them a fantastic enthusiasm for the game that heralds from decades of disappointment and ecstasy from following the nation's team. World Cup tournaments need these fans. They need them to fill up the stadiums and prevent what happened at some of Beijing's Olympic events where organisers had to give tickets away to locals for free (retail price was very high - around £90 per ticket) in order to fill the seats. In Sydney's Olympic games, kids were actually transported to the venues by buses to fill the venues with the right kind of audience.

What's the lesson here? Big TV audiences don't necessarily equate to a success on a national level.

We have a little time to go before the decisions for 2018 and 2022 will be made (December 2010) but at the moment, it seems as though the argument isn't as black and white as we may have originally thought. Let's see what FIFA say.

You can read more about Lowry's argument here
Picture found here

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »

Measuring ROI

All I hear about nowadays is how difficult measuring ROI in Social Media can be. As Ken Kaufman in CFOwise Blog writes, "Social Media is about branding, not advertising," and so it seems, at first look, very difficult to quantify the everlasting results of brand development, at least immediately.

But how easy is it to measure the return on traditional advertising anyway? While it is true that Social Media adds value to the brand, and therefore is a significant influencer, its ROI can also be measured in terms of its alignment with the greater strategy and the results the overall campaign achieves.

Here's Mashable's look into HOW TO: Measure Social Media ROI.

It is quite possible to add quantitative elements to an Interactive Campaign utilizing Social Media. We've been able to do it for Sponsors via Live Events. The pre-event buzz generated on social networks (including offering discounts off admission prices to people who followed on Twitter or signed on as Facebook fans), together with follow-up post-event activities featuring highlights of the event, promotions on related and future events, continued audience interaction and feedback, and product offerings, are all measurable/trackable avenues. And at the event itself, onsite interaction and the instant action options all culminate the entire process into a very measurable model.

All attendees at a recent event were able to type in the unique code found on their e-tickets, register through a URL the sponsor created and used specifically for the promotion to win one of the prizes -products of the sponsor. But all attendees, even if they were not among the winners, were given a free download. Based on those registrations, and the tracking of the downloads, the sponsor was able to determine how many actual paid downloads were achieved throughout the rest of the season as a result. Not only were they able to see who the new engagements are, they also knew from what event, venue, and when.

The best part of this whole experience for the sponsor was our PPP (pay-per-purchase) approach. Rather than asking the sponsor to 'spend' money on gold, silver, or bronze 'sponsorships,' we were able to convince them to try our 'Interactive' methods, once they realized they'd only pay if the program was successful. It wouldn't cost them anything to try. It was definitely a win-win for all; including the audience who benefited from a hands-on approach, as well as voluntary but willing engagement rather than resigned submission.

The emergence of digital technology utilized both onsite and online, increases brand awareness and consumer loyalty by generating a high involvement with your target group. The new digital feedback mechanisms offer advertisers a wide variety of possibilities, limited only by imagination. And measurable ROI.

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (2) »

Social Media Strategy: The Real One

'Get on Twitter' is not a social media strategy, declares Brand Channel (pdf), and I agree wholeheartedly.

"... you probably have some people from within or outside consultants saying, 'We need social media!' or 'We need to be on Twitter!' or 'We need to be on Facebook!' or several other methods. But they aren't explaining why you need to be on those things. Why, because everyone else is doing it? That's kind of a lousy strategy. And what will you do once you are on some of these sites? Just talk about yourself? That's not a particularly good way to establish a relationship."

How do you plan on connecting with your audience? Better yet, why should your audience connect with your brand? Do you understand 'Interactivity'?

Your strategy should be specific to your brand and to your audience. One-to-many and one-to-one. Once you've customized your plan, only then you should use Twitter and Facebook to establish your relationship. Then get ready for the interaction. Just as important, if not more, what happens next should have already been prepared, not reacted to. Obviously, there will be instances where the plan is tweaked, but social media is not a learn-as-you-go process. At least not anymore!

You should concentrate on developing your business, marketing your product, handling the aftermarket. But when it comes to social media and interactivity, you should bring in the professionals who do just that for a living. However, insist on seeing their road map! Test how ready they are for what happens next! And make sure they provide you with a measurable ROI so you can gauge how successful the 'real' strategy is!

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (3) »

Interactive Sponsorship Explained

Wikipedia refers to Interactive Marketing as the evolving trend whereby marketing has moved from a transaction-based effort to a conversation.

The definition of interactive marketing comes from John Deighton at Harvard, who says interactive marketing is the ability to address the customer, remember what the customer says and address the customer again in a way that illustrates that we remember what the customer has told us. Interactive marketing is not synonymous with online marketing, although interactive marketing processes are facilitated by internet technology.

Interactive Sponsorship takes Interactive Marketing one step further. Interactive Sponsorship embraces the dominant marketing discipline and rebuilds relationships with all the parties involved, especially the 'until-now silenced' customers of the sponsor.

Through creative activation campaigns, Interactive Sponsorship is an effective mechanism for sponsors to engage the 'instant-action starving' target demographic via mutually beneficial offerings, while experiencing success and measurable ROI.

Interactive Sponsorship should not be confused with consisting purely of advertising methods. After all, advertising is a monologue, but sponsorship is a conversation!

Just as Interactive Marketing is not based on online efforts solely, Interactive Sponsorship also takes advantage of both the online involvement of social media and generating the buzz leading up to the event, as well as the follow-up post event, coupled with the onsite engagement based on live events at public venues via demographic targeting and the use of digital technologies.

However, some Sponsorship 'agents' still have it wrong. But it's up to the sponsors to be informed as much as it is the agents' responsibility to inform them.

We welcome sponsors who wish to take advantage of what we have to offer. If you are the one seeking a sponsor, then you should read this before contacting us.

By the way, Social Media is bigger than you think! (YouTube)

Loading mentions Retweet

Comment (0) »