Does nobody want the Olympic broadcast rights?

All three major Australian free-to-air networks have pulled out of the bidding process for the 2016 Rio Olympics.

The Australian is reporting that the Seven Network has pulled out of the bidding process after offering a low bid for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi and the 2016 Rio Olympics, after witnessing the $25 million loss the Nine Network faced after the 2013 London Olympics.

Seven was the only clear bidder out of the three main free to air networks, and withdrew its offer after the IOC asked the network to raise its proposed bid to match what Channel Nine paid for the 2012 London Games.

Due to advertising downturn, the network reportedly cannot justify the financial outlay required to broadcast the games, especially after the losses Nine suffered last year.

The Australian reports administrators at the Olympic movement have been taken aback by the lack of interest in Australia, especially since the broadcasting rights are one of the biggest sources of funding for the Committee. It’s also been reported the IOC has had high expectations for the financial gain it would receive from Australian broadcasting dollars.

Australia is the sixth-most valuable territory for Olympic Games broadcast following US, Europe (excluding Italy), Japan, Canada and Italy.

It is believed Channel Seven will now hold off on making any further offers after declining to raise its bid. It’s focus will now turn to settling the bidding process for the Australian cricket broadcasting rights, which is hoped to be resolved later this month.

Seven is fighting with Nine and Ten for the cricket rights, after making an offer estimated at $320 million.

Australia’s anti-siphoning laws are not making life any easier for the IOC. The laws only allow events like the Olympic games to be broadcast on free-to-air television.

The governing body might have to split the Sochi 2014 and Rio 2016 rights package, and worry about selling Rio at a later date when advertising markets begin to pick up again.

The situation is sure to intensify, as the Sochi 2014 Winter Games are only 10 months away.

 

Olympics topples US election as most tweeted, Obama people’s favourite

While the Olympics garnered more tweets than any other event during 2012, including the US Presidential Election, President Obama’s ‘Four more years’ re-election tweet was the strongest single post of the year.

In fact, Obama’s tweet, which was retweeted more than 816,000 times, is the most-retweeted post ever, according to Twitter’s list of the most-tweeted events in 2012.

“Within hours, that tweet simultaneously became the most retweeted of 2012, and the most retweeted ever. In fact, retweets of that simple message came from people in more than 200 countries around the world,” Twitter spokeswoman Rachael Horwitz says.

Despite the fuel this iconic tweet added to the buzz around the election, the London Olympics had the most overall tweets of any event, with 150 million sent over the 16 days.

The closing ceremonies (specifically, the Spice Girls’ performance) amassed the largest Games-related spike, at more than 116,000 tweets per minute. The largest competition-related conversation came when Jamaica’s Usain Bolt won gold in the 200-metre sprint, generating 80,000 tweets per minute.

By comparion, 327,452 tweets were sent per minute on election night in the US, resulting in 31 million election tweets for the day. However, the election was not able to sustain activity over its entirety to amass as many tweets as the Olympics.

Over 52 million votes were cast via tweets for the ‘most sharable video’ for this year’s MTV Video Music Awards show, with the show itself generating 14.7 million tweets. The biggest peak of the night went to the moment One Direction won ‘best pop video’ with 98,307 tweets per minute. Taylor Swift’s performance was the night’s second biggest moment, generating 86,275 tweets per minute.

The Super Bowl, Euro 2012, Superstorm Sandy and Whitney Houston also ranked in the top events discussed during the year.

Samsung wins Olympic sponsorship gold, Nike upstages Adidas again

Samsung has taken gold for results from its London 2012 Olympics sponsorship, as the sponsor that did best out of the Games in terms of website visits, while Adidas has again been upstaged by non-sponsor rival Nike.

Despite experiencing a strong uplift in site visitation, Adidas failed to convert sponsorship dollars into the same level of social media buzz as non-sponsor Nike. Data from Socialbakers shows Nike, which released an emotive campaign flouting Olympic advertising rules by using towns named London, won the battle for sporting social media engagement on Facebook and Twitter.

During the course of the Games, Nike’s Facebook fan base grew by more than double that of Adidas’, the former netting 166,718 new fans compared to just 80,761 for the official sponsor.

Nike also took gold on Twitter with over 16,020 tweets linked to the brand, 6725 more than Adidas, which was mentioned in just 9295 Olympic-themed tweets.

Jan Rezab, CEO of Socialbakers says the data points to social media having levelled the playing field, marketing blog The Wall reports.

“There was a time when primetime slots around major sporting events were essential for maintaining position as a household name; but social media has levelled the playing field. Through its savvy social strategy, Nike demonstrated that you no longer need prime time to create brand buzz.”

In the site visitation stakes, Samsung experienced a 111% uplift in visitation during the course of the games, trouncing non-sponsor rival Sony which dropped by 7%. The data from Hitwise also showed Adidas and Cadbury coming out on top of rivals in terms of official website traffic.

Olympic sponsors with highest website traffic uplift

1. Samsung – 111%
2. Adidas – 44%
3. Cadbury’s – 41%

Nike received a 10% boost in traffic as a result of its guerrilla campaign and general association with sporting events.

 

‘Socialympics’ chatter rates off the chart, Sally Pearson tops athlete buzz

It was forecast to be the ‘socialympics’ and it didn’t disappoint, with an estimated 80,000 tweets sent per minute over the course of the 2012 London Games, the first Olympics to experience social media in full flight.

Australians weighed in on the conversation in unprecedented numbers, according to social media analysis conducted by Burson-Marsteller (B-M), which tracked more than 500,000 conversations in Australia alone during the event.

Twitter generated the highest volume of Olympic chatter, thanks to its microblogging nature, accounting for four in every five mentions of the Games. Women were more likely to talk about the Olympics than men, according to B-M, supporting other studies which indicate higher activity among female users.

Sally Pearson was Australia’s most talked about athlete, followed by Lauren Jackson and James Magnussen. Pearson’s victory in the 100 metres hurdles was not enough to elevate the standing of her sport, however, which failed to rival swimming, basketball or rowing for buzz levels.

The most widely discussed news story came from the opening ceremony, with Paul McCartney’s reported payment of a single pound to perform at the Opening Ceremony generating significant interest.

B-M developed the infographic below from the findings obtained using social monitoring tool Radian6.The Socialympics - Infographic

Delivering on the promise – sports coverage and TV network marketing

Marketing in 2012 means you have to be perfect all the time, using every avenue at your disposal. Falling down and failing at the key moment when you almost have a long-term customer is no longer acceptable. Though, as I write this, was it ever? Today more than ever it’s essential to utilise the cross-platform space to build consumers’ affinity with your brand.

In a time when personal media, on-demand services and internet TV are attracting viewers away from traditional TV viewing, network marketers need to be better than ever at executing campaigns that both entice viewers and engage with audiences beyond the TV screen.

The most glaring marketing campaign for TV at the moment is for the Olympics. Despite the current social media hype, and with budgets I can safely assume are much bigger than ours at SBS, the marketing campaign that rolled out leading up to Nine’s broadcast, and continues as I write, doesn’t give me a sense of an ongoing journey that is worth my viewing time. And I’m an avid Olympics fan.

Nine’s channel promotion is loud and in your face, marring what could have been a more intimate, emotional experience for the viewer. Perhaps it matters little with an event like the Olympics – a sort of ‘schedule it and they will come’ mentality – but it’s disappointing in its delivery all the same. And, from what I’m witnessing, many viewers are feeling the same and venting it via social media.

Foxtel’s campaign on the other hand invites the viewer into its smorgasbord of Olympics coverage.   Using traditional and direct channels, Foxtel engaged its subscribers in its offer of eight dedicated channels on either TV or via an app, and extended the experience through its digital and social channels. It leaves the viewer never wanting for anything. The excellent ratings are testament to its appeal and delivery on the promise of a better-than-anywhere Olympic experience.

Another good example is SBS’s Tour de France (yes, I know I work for SBS, but I couldn’t resist) campaign which promised the race’s riveting cycling experience anytime, anywhere. Through cross-channel promotion, starting with television and supported by traditional advertising, both hardcore and would-be fans were enticed to experience Cadel Evans’ journey to defend his yellow jersey. Fans could follow the Tour through live coverage, highlights, online streams and a state of the art app, which garnered praise and delight for its delivery of a Tour fix at any time. The social hub engaged the community of cyclists in Australia and kept feeding the frenzy of interest during the first weeks of the Tour.

Those are the kinds of cross platform television campaigns that deliver – and deliver well – on a promise.

Even beyond television marketing, it’s interesting to see how brands perform in the cross-channel space. I’m particularly impressed by Nike’s ‘She Runs the Night’ campaign with its most amazing follow through cross-channel to an incredible and empowering experience for women. The campaign focused on building a community of women around a central idea, then used multiple platforms and hit home the message that women can be empowered to run at night. This was done via straight press and outdoor advertising, online and social media, events and even branded merchandise. Even if you weren’t a female runner, the sheer breadth of that campaign made you notice it, and it was never advertised on television. If you were a runner, you had an experience as a consumer and a woman that was empowering and satisfying all at once and probably left you with more affinity to Nike than ever before.

So, like TV marketers, it’s easy for brands of all kinds (and I’m not perfect!) to miss opportunities – even with big budgets and all the most effective platforms at our disposal – and fail to deliver on promises so boldly made.

 

Google releases mobile search data for Olympics

Google has been busily crunching data over the past week to illustrate just how fans are searching for Olympics-related information – on mobile in huge numbers. In fact, searches on smartphones and tablets grew by 1000% from the previous week, and during certain moments mobile searches eclipsed those from desktop computers.

The search giant suggests the London 2012 Games are well and truly the first multi-screen Olympics, with viewers searching on a second or even third screen about things they see happening on another.

Global searches for Paul McCartney during local broadcasts of the opening ceremony (times are PST).

Paul McCartney

 

Mobile search share around the world during first two days of the Games

This chart is the most indicative of mobile usage patterns, showing the proportion of total searches from the opening two days of the Games that were performed from a smartphone or tablet device. Note Japan, where mobile search dominated desktop search over the period measured.

Global mobile search share

 

Infographic: Connected Aussies turn London 2012 into the social patriot games

The good folks at Effective Measure polled Australian internet users over eight days in mid-June to find out how they’re going to keep up to date with the London 2012 Summer Olympic Games. What did they find? That social media will be used to comment on events even more so than talking about them face to face. See those stats and more in the below infographic.

Considering how quickly breaking news can spread via social media channels such as Twitter and Facebook, it’s no wonder that the Games of the XXX Olympiad have already been dubbed The Social Games.

How Aussies will be using social media during the Games

Going for gold – is Olympic sponsorship on the money or off the podium?

Recent news has drummed into us that Olympic sponsorship may in fact not be worth the investment. Big brands have invested up to 80 million pounds (120 million Aussie dollars) just to be criticised – not to mention confused with non-sponsors. The London Organising Committee of the Olympic Games and Paralympic Games (LOCOG) vehemently defends its strict regulations on the grounds that official sponsors must be protected and allowed a ‘clear run’, especially around the Olympic venues.

On one hand, what LOCOG overlooks is a basic tenet of branding: it’s all about the consumer. While they may believe they are in fact protecting the official sponsors by harshly regulating marketing and advertising, they may in fact be pushing consumers away from the very brands they are striving to help. Visa, for example, is struggling to put a positive spin on the ‘greedy’ label it has received after any other brand was blocked from becoming an online credit or debit card ticket payment option at the Games, as well as the only acceptable card at Olympic events. Thanks to a situation in which brands are essentially shoved down consumers’ throats inside official Olympic venues, Coca-Cola and McDonald’s are feeling similar effects. Only last week, news broke that McDonald’s has told the organisers to ban 800 food retailers at 40 Olympic sites from serving chips with their meals. The sponsorship obligations meant that only fish and chips have been spared the prohibition (not even the Olympics dare ban the national dish).

The evolution of the brand monopoly ethos seems to have rid Olympic sponsorship of the very foundation of the games: competition. What LOCOG really needs to do is realise that if they ran the games like they are running marketing regulation, each event would feature just one star athlete – which doesn’t leave much doubt as to who would win the gold. Adrenaline will be surging, sweat will be dripping, and hearts will be pounding in the arena. The same cannot necessarily be said for the marketplace.

To make matters worse, an ‘ambush ban’ has been declared to run from now through to the middle of August. Just in case anyone is tempted to try it on, an army of 286 purple-clad Brand Police (aka ‘stewards’) will be on the prowl at Olympic venues, armed with masking tape to cover up offending logos which may be deemed direct competition to an official sponsor.

Consumers will resist what is pushed in their faces and resent lack of choice. However, when these same consumers are offered competing brands, they thrive – they are able to make the decision, and provided they engage in a positive experience with the product, they will develop loyalty. Then brands win, too. A brand which has a monopoly during the Olympics will surely profit – it’s common sense that without choice, spectators will indeed buy their product. But what has not been taken into account is the post-game effects of such pushing. Will consumers use Visa during the games? Without a doubt – because there’s no alternative. Will they resent Visa once they return home? They just might.

However, in oversimplifying the concept of ‘audience’, this general argument ignores the population that actually makes up the viewing public: those at home. Arguably, just the relatively small number of around a million who will actually attend the Games in person. How about the remaining billions worldwide? If your brand marque can be seen in some capacity by all of those people watching their TV and cheering on their national team, what’s a £20,000 (AU$30,100) fine in the scheme of things? And, you might just think about the fact that by default, you are possibly aligning your brand with the category leader as main sponsor – not a bad idea for many brands aspiring to reach gold medal status.

At a local level, in-your-face sponsorship may upset the million people who purchase tickets and personally attend events in Olympic venues. However, looking at a more global level, this same sponsorship doesn’t seem quite as negative. In fact, it may pay out in the end. With the title of ‘Official Olympic Sponsor’ comes incredible publicity: your brand mark is seen billions of times over on a range of touch points. An American family watching the women’s gymnastic final won’t feel the annoyance of having been forced to purchase their tickets with a Visa or the lack of ‘chips’ in the arena outside of McDonald’s – they will, however, recognize the Visa logo behind prized US gymnast Gabby Douglas as she nails her floor routine.

This summer should present billions around the world with an opportunity to celebrate sport. At first, we are prone to ask if is all this draconian protectionism really in the spirit of the Olympics. Have we, in fact, lost sight of the foundation of the Olympic games, that which is sportsmanship and competition? However, these questions arise from an oversimplification of the concept of consumer. The majority of Olympics audience members won’t be poolside, courtside, or trackside in London, and thus, perhaps official sponsors have outsmarted us all. We forget that as we name-call and hurl insults, the very brands we target steadily engrain themselves in our lives and our minds alongside billions of viewers worldwide.

At day’s end, Olympic sponsorship may offer the greatest brand advice possible: know your audience.

 

Nike gazumps Adidas in stunning Olympics ambush

On the eve of the 2012 London Olympics, Nike has launched a powerful ambush ad which skirts Olympic restrictions by showing locations around the world also named London and steals the limelight from offical sportswear sponsor Adidas.

The emotive ad shows weekend sportsman, children and amateurs avidly participating in different sports to the subliminal message that greatness isn’t reserved to the chosen few and the bright lights of the Olympics. “The truth is greatness is for all of us,” the voiceover says. “Greatness is not in one special place and it is not in one special person. Greatness is where ever somebody is trying to find it.”

The ad titled ‘Find your greatness’, is currently running as a rich-media billboard ad on YouTube’s home page. It shows signs of places named London from around the world, supported by the message, “Greatness isn’t reserved for the chosen few in one special city, it can also be found London, Ohio, and London, Norway, and East London, South Africa, and Little London, Jamaica, and Small London, Nigeria and the London Hotel and London Road.”

With the Games set to kick off in London on Saturday, local time, Nike’s campaign looks poised to get around rules designed to prevent non-sponsors piggy-backing on Olympic fever with the clever execution, and steal the thunder from offical sportswear sponsor Adidas.

Nike would not reveal how much it was spending on the campaign, which will run in 25 countries, and be backed by a website integrating with Nike+ apps and products and a Twitter marketing push using the hashtag #findgreatness, The Guardian reports.

Attempting to distance the sports giant’s campaign from the Olympics, Nike’s brand chief Greg Hoffman was quoted as saying, “The idea is to simply inspire and energise everyday athletes everywhere and to celebrate their achievements, participate and enjoy the thrill of achieving in sport at their own level.”

If you can’t see the video below, please refresh this page.

 

The Olympic experience and how the brands will make you remember them

By Andrew Hughes, Australian National University

 

Olympic Coca-Cola
FreddieBrown/Flickr

 

 

The Olympics. An experience of a lifetime. The flame. The atheletes. The venues. The events. The winners. Those athletes who leave nothing behind on the track, even if they place last because years of hard work and sacrifice should mean something at the Olympics. The crowds, thousands of happy people from all over the world, gathering together in the one place at the one time to celebrate the better side of humankind. The experience of a lifetime. A positive experience of a lifetime.

And so then it should come as no shock to anyone that every brand that has paid handsomely for the right to have the Olympic logo next to theirs wants to be part of your experience of this event. After all, the IOC itself has some nice wording to potential sponsors about the benefits about being involved with the Games, one of the experience events of world sport.

The one thing the internet can never ever match with offline products is the experience side of things. Experiential marketing is now massive with all brands, especially the retail ones, who have even the smallest offline presence. So how is this being done in London? Where is the tie in to brand/engagement and the Olympic experience most noticeable and is this way over the top?

My good friend, fellow marketer and current London resident, Tim Ivins (@tim_ivins), supplied me with some nice images of how the big brands on the ground are trying to engage the audience and therefore link their brand to that positive Olympic experience. Let’s have a look at some.

Coke, at the exit of the Olympic Mall on the way to the stadium.

Coke as an Olympic partner, the top tier of sponsorship, will be integrating everything in relation to marketing comms to hit their ROI figures. Advertising, sales promotions, sponsorship, event and online will all be integrated with each other, both in London and around the world.

 

The aim will be to engage with the market, to link the positive, happy and healthy images and experiences of the Games with that of the brand to build positive attitudes to the brand and the products.

Coke is trying to create demand for their Olympic Pins by linking the product to the experience.

The above photo of Coke says exactly that. On the way to/from a positive Olympic experience, Coke will be right next to you. Your buddy. Your fizzy buddy.

And of course, when you’ve finished consuming the product, what better way to remember the Games than something you’ll keep forever. Cue the collectable. In this case the Olympic Pins.

The countdown pins always prove popular with those looking for a memento that won’t break the piggy bank or luggage limits.

Now don’t forget to get that soft drink before/after your experience.

Then there is the nice side effect of the brand being so overwhelming at the location that the photos you take will all have the brand somewhere in the background, and therefore exposing friends, families and readers of blogs to the brand. Such as below where Coke is at Hyde Park Corner Tube station.

 

 

Of course, the athletes are the real stars of the Games. Hopefully untarnished, drug-free stars. And as stars they make powerful endorsers, pulling the consumer to the product. And the experience. So brands of course try and link themselves to the athletes, the athlete links to the experience. In London, Visa seem to have done this quite nicely.

 

 

Don’t forget your credit card or you’ll need to Bolt back and get it…

 

 

Usain Bolt, the star of the star event of the track and field, should prove a nice little earner for Visa. Adidas have a whole team of stars they can call on to assist with their experiential marketing at London.

 

Take the stage… but only with the right brand of clothes on!

 

 

 

Of course, not all brands are heavily cashed up sponsors of the Games. Some are trying the guerrilla path of being part of the experience by being right near the experience. Bosco are one smart brand who are team sponsors, but not Games sponsors. Their store in the Olympic Mall has lots of glass to engage with consumers and invite them in for that nice bit of clothing.

 

Who says Eastern Europe has no style?! Great placement at the Olympic Mall by Bosco.
 

 

 

McDonald’s of course have the stores close to the Olympic venues, but to differentiate themselves from the other brands based on the experience they are encouraging consumers to engage with them by using their own language when ordering food or being at the outlet. Not a bad effort, and of course well integrated around the world with a very smooth IMC campaign.

 

 

 

I’m hungry now :–(
 

 

 

Finally, if you can’t beat them, join them or at least rip off part of the British experience to link to your brands, and at the same time encourage the consumer to engage with the brand. And don’t forget that this will lead to the brand appearing in photo albums for eons thanks to the digital generation and social media. Ah, marketing, where would the Games and our experiences of them be without it…

Salute consumer and buy!
Salute consumer and buy! 

 

 

 

 

The Conversation

This article was originally published at The Conversation.
The ConversationRead the original article.