One Foot Forward or One Foot Back?

USA Track and Field Relaxes Sponsorship Rules

Brilliantly outlined in Jere Longman’s attached article, USA Track and Field has relaxed their rules of allowing another sponsors besides footwear to be on Athlete Track and Field Uniforms.  For the struggling USAT, this is at least one move that potentially will drive more sponsorship dollars to athletes in this Olympic year.

But there are a number of sides to this news.  Let’s start with how did we get here?  That answer is not as interesting as to the “why?”  Initially, Running Clubs had to be entered into a race and the footwear and apparel companies served as those teams. Team Nike, Reebok, etc.   As Nike grew to dominate the sport, they looked at sponsored athletes (rightfully so) as extensions of their brand. Therefore, they wanted the athletes branded “Nike” and Nike only; thus, working with USA Track and Field, Nike made it difficult to have co-sponsors on the uniform similar to other Olympic Sports such as cycling, triathlon, etc.  Leading Marketing for PowerBar in this segment, I ran into this hurdle on a daily basis.

Ironically, the practice was referred to athletes “being clean”. Post Marion Jones, we now use that term differently.

So what does that mean for sponsorship in the sport?

First, after a short and tumultuous reign of Doug Logan as CEO, this is an innovative step in right direction for this organization and their customers—the athlete

But the irony here is that shoe companies have even more power to decide where sponsorship marketing is headed.  This decision could force the footwear companies to recognize that sponsorship is a combination of innovation, engagement, marketing and science; and, no longer the “Brandalism” that they are still practicing a decade ago.  The industry may grow up and realize that sponsorship can go beyond just a logo on the uniform.  This opens the possibilities for the Google -Nike Team and having videos of the athletes across the internet bringing running onto everyone’s phones and I-pads.  A dream for a sport that gains attention once every four years and on a Sunday and Monday. (New York Marathon and Boston Marathon)

So what is ironic?

Well, if Nike, Puma, Adidas and others say to athletes that they will only pay cash sponsorships for athletes that are “clean” or exclusive to their brand,  you may very well see the athlete (or consumer) hurt in the process.  If Nike is offering $20,000 and the athlete figures they can get $15,000 from Subaru and $15,000 from Nike, you can do the math, it is better for the athlete to have two sponsors.   But if Nike insists their brand is exclusive, the athlete (or consumer) is hurt in the process. Similarly, Nike could pull cash sponsorship and only offer shoes and apparel for anyone who has an additional sponsor.

It is a bit unfair to keep using Nike as the example.  But it will be fascinating to see if Nike, Under Armour, Asics or New Balance actually embrace this opportunity to find winning partnerships that allow for a win (the brand) win (the partner) win (the sport) and win (the athlete)

The Nike+ Apple Team could allow for athlete content on all the I-pods in the world.  I would even put songs on the uniforms instead of the Apple Logo.

How about “Born to Run”? 

Baby we were born…

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/01/01/sports/track-officials-loosen-sponsorship-rules-for-athletes.html?ref=jerelongman

# people I want to have dinner with

# people I want to have dinner with

As I set goals for 2012, I always like to put together a list of people I would want to have dinner with; some are carry-overs.. still working on them..some are new… others off the list! Here is early look at 2012 (subject to revision) ..in no particular order

Danny Meyer: the founder and chairman of Union Square Hospitality Group and founder of Union Square Café; his book “Setting the Table” is a must read on customer service. He and I have met, but my experience at his restaurant –the one at the Modern Museum in New York—I have now told to over 8,000 people when I speak; absolutely incredible way to empower employees to do the right thing, but also hold employees accountable with “constant gentle pressure”. I just had dinner at Blue Smoke—6^th time I have been there, always the same table. Coincidence?

Al Gore:  Perhaps a polarizing figure, but his concession speech in the 2000 election was brilliant; his comeback even more impressive.

Gary Erickson:  Founder, CEO of Clif Bar. He and I have met as well, but not for enough time.  As a former PowerBar passionate employee, Clif accession has been remarkable—and they do it with purpose, conviction and walk the walk.  Day care in the office, cafeteria, smart people, one can succeed and not compromise values. I am a fan.

Eminem:  Let’s face it, brilliant marketer.  What other cursing, tattoo laden, controversial rapper could have street cred and sell thousands of cd’s at Wal-Mart.  8 Mile is brilliant.  Lose yourself is an anthem to all generations. 

Occupy People:  I guess this one is easy, grab a sandwich and go sit in the park. I respect their dedication and passion—but I want to better understand “What does success look like?”

Brian Cashman:  General Manager of the Yankees. Yes, a long time fan and weaved into our family tradition.  But talk about “managing up”; he has had the toughest boss in the world, consumer demands to deliver the best product each and every year, scrutinized by the media and deal with tough employees (players)

Meredith Vieira:  Much respect. She eases into one of America’s biggest franchises, the Today Show, effortlessly, has a wonderful self deprecating way, but is incredibly smart. She leaves on her own terms for the right reasons –her family. Plus, she is a Tufts grad as well.

Paul Giamatti: The anti-George Clooney just keeps hitting it out of the Park. Sideways was brilliant, “Win Win” may surprise everyone with a Best Picture nod.  I would talk film, but also baseball. Check out who is Dad was.

Steven Wright:  If you don’t know the old school comedian, pull him up on YouTube, podcast etc. Dinner with him would be dry, sharp and hysterical.

Gisele Bundchen:  Of course..you say. But worldwide model, incredible businesswoman and Mom. Who else could make Tom Brady into Mr. Mom?  Plus she lives near me J

Michael Dell:  An entrepreneur who is a success story..but also a fascinating one as Apple’s explosion has impacted his  business and how he is dealing with change. Plus I love Austin, so I will come to him.

Jimmy Fallon:  No one on TV has ever gone from ridicule to brilliant in such a short period of time. If you don’t watch him, DVR it. There is no one doing such creative, innovative and relevant to the 18-34 demo as Fallon. The fun he is having is contagious; his Justin Timberlake (#1 not #2) rap was one of the most amazing things on TV in a decade.

Me:  All business people, especially this one, should slow down and have a long end of the year dinner to reflect on the year and plan for the next year.  My dinner may last a week.

Occupy Brand Street

Occupy Brand Street

As committed people camp on Wall Street to Main Street-and someone think they should be committed - they are showing the power of resolve, technology, and community and, most impressively, their voice. Unlike a political movement, let's understand this is a consumer movement.  The idea of the Consumer Voice maybe Times Man of the Year.

We are now seeing the power of that voice impact consumer brands

-First Netflix, and then this week, Bank of America.  In speaking to a business school class last week, I was challenged by my assertion that Netflix will be the "new Coke" of this decade. Many of you maybe too young to remember the debacle that was new Coke in 1985.  But after 100 Years the iconic can and formula were changed.

Coke a cola decided to change its formula to great fanfare. That included the new beverage arriving at the Lincoln Center and I believe the Statue of Liberty. The backlash was like anything we had seen before.  Netflix may be worse. Netflix changed its pricing plans by separating streaming from DVDs and suddenly consumers’ bills doubled over night. Moreover, DVDs were known as Quickster-destroying a brand that had "hero" attributes and turning it into a villain. From a branding standpoint, “Qwikster” spin off would have been partly understandable if they were planning to spin it off.

Netflix CEO Reed Hastings quickly apologized but did not change the pricing.

Consumer’s voice was heard through Twitter and emails and with their wallets- 100,000 people left and the stock is down 30%--- and Occupation Netflix was complete. Plans were being restored

Occupation Bank of America took hold this week as consumers pushed back on a $60 a year fee for use of a debit card. The policy was revoked.

So how far can this Occupy Brand Street take us? Perhaps to the White House where this group now can influence an election easier than Bank of America.  But my bet is Airlines and cable systems -especially Comcast. 

I do wait for the day sports fans don't show up at Fenway Park to protest ticket price increases-- that would truly make a great visual statement

We are the voice of change...occupy away

Social Media Impact on Sponsorship

A few weeks ago @JimAndrews_IEG  IEG’s Jim Andrews wrote in his blog—a must read of insights into the sponsorship and branding business—about the impact of Social Media on sponsorship.  Jim, who I consider a good marketer and a better friend, and I exchanged some emails on the subject. I have thought more about the impact and thought I would share.

The fascinating part of Social Media on sponsorship is that ironically it may actually drive shorter deals, lower rights fees and even lessen the reason for sponsorship.   Why?  If, for examples AMICA Insurance as a sponsor the Boston Celtics gains access to season ticket lists or names via on site promotions.   If AMICA does a good job of engaging consumers, starts a two way conversation via blogs, Facebook, managed content newsletters and a continued dialogue ensues.. AMICA has a few choices when their deal concludes  1) Our social platform worked well and we want to lasso further Basketball fan/ consumers  2) we already have the access we need, we can email or tweet Basketball fans without the need for sponsorship. The conversation is unfolding… and we are really a sponsor of that

I believe it will be closer to #2)    what is the impact?  Due to Social Media, I believe sponsorship deals will continue, but will shorten to two or three year deals.  Shorter deals are an issue for properties (category too closely affiliated with first mover brand, energy and resources to sell a new partner etc.)  The bigger issue is that the value of X Category may drop as the initial sponsor in the category has already developed social media access and owned a conversation with the consumer/fan.

My recommendation for Brands?  I would recommend thinking not for your brand..But think like your competitors.. What would they do?

Dan

Sponsorship You Thought was Safe at Home

Paging through Sports Illustrated a few weeks ago, I saw the Bigelow Tea @bigelowtea ad featuring Terry Francona and Joe Torre.  It is funny, with professional athletes being indicted, shooting themselves in the foot (literally) or driving while intoxicated, you would think Managers are safe? Mature, leaders, buyers and retailers can identify with them. 

 Bigelow is a great brand, owned by a great parent company and a strong culture that adds to the earth the community , growers and people around them.  So a brand manager that says "what can happen? Managers are a great fit for a brand endorsement"

But in the case of Bigelow, their brand's mission statement is "satisfied employees", "strong relationships" , "satisfied consumers" and "good corporate citizen".  Their imagery is one of "serenity".

I am sure you laughed as you read those words above. Poor Bigelow. This is a teaching moment for all on the challenges of signing celebrities.  Terry Francona, who I have met a number of times, is a great guy and was the right person at the right time in Boston.  But "satisfied employees" is not the word we would use this week. And neither is "strong relationships"  And as far as being a good corporate citizen, John Henry may disagree.  For Torre, I am not sure if he and A-Rod have a "strong relationship" after his book came out a two years ago.

There have not been many soothing tea moments this week. Torre and Francona may plan a cup of tea together over the winter, but they will share stories of "betrayal", "tough bosses" and "frustration". 

You know what?  this week's Sports Illustrated Bigelow Ad?  Features Wayne Gretzky :)

I hope Bigelow doesn't become the EA Sports or Sports Illustrated Cover Curse.

DS

Marketing "Win Win" Putting Yourself in Someone's Shoes; Why are people so Myopic?

So I am on a bit of a rant tonight.  I teach a film class at a Senior Home once a month-- I learn more from them than they learn from me-- and I saw the movie "win win" tonight.  I am doing the film as a center piece to a discussion about Paul Giamatti. 

But the film got me on a late night rant. 

So why am I on a rant?  

Here is my bedtime story for you...

We are building a partnership between two companies-- a property (event) and a brand. 

We presented the proposal to the property to review.  This is a property with limited sponsors. The reaction?  The property executive tore back the pages, interrupted me and said they "were being screwed" by the other party.  "We are giving away too much value"  "They are screwing us"

Yes. You got them. That was an element of this billion dollar brand's strategic plan.  Among objectives to expand globally into Russian and China, evaluate production facilities and start a new packaging division, their goal was to "screw Bill from the XYZ Marathon".

This is coming up daily at S2F-- why have people become so myopic?  Is it that they are trying to do more with less? it is because of the economy?  technology?  lay offs occurring? Narcissism?  Does it matter?  The issue is that people/companies are not putting themselves in other people's shoes to set up "win win" relationships.  Some may say "win win" is a cliche-- but how can something that is a champion formula be a cliche? Saying to people in a meeting that you want to talk "off-line" is a cliche.

If this property had put "themselves in the other brand's shoes" they would have learned the brand was  doing a regional test for a national deal.  The other party needed test data before scaling the relationship nationally and this was very high quality/ low quantity marketing than they were use to.  They are also a big brand and they had to pull different functional groups into the meeting at each stage.  During that process, the partnership proposal had some things taken out and some added.  But all in all, the brand was offering a very strong package compared to what the property was getting from other sponsors.

So what happened?  The Property eventually took the deal.  They included a lot of "best efforts" contract language--eliminating accountability-- and entered the relationship with a "we are getting less than we should" attitude.  Meetings were tense. Execution was slow.  And most frustrating, the people at the property spent more time reading the contract and citing what they were not required to do. They said they had a lot on their plate --which they did--but they came out and said that the brand was offering less than originally promised-- and they would make best efforts to deliver.  This was even though the final offer/proposal was more than anyone at the time in the category was paying for these rights.

The brand? The brand came in with  "we want to meet all our commitments, under promise and over deliver" attitude.

What happened next?  The property started getting into jams --vendors not showing up, additional event dates-- and they needed help from sponsors.  Without asking, the brand swooped in to help.  The brand understood the nature of relationships in the field.   

Well.... the property ice melted.  The property calls with last minute opportunities/ fire drills (depending on whose shoes you are in)  -- but to their credit the tone has changed.  Even though it was not everything the property wanted from the start, the partnership blossomed and they found "win wins" that were never in the contract.  There are more smiles, more phone calls greeted with  "it's us again" with laughs.  And the property provided more ROI measures--if even only a picture or video from an event.  Guess who else won? The consumer/participant.  The consumer loves the brand and the product..and they loved coming to these events. 

So I will give you a KISS good night.  Keep It Simple Stupid.   Isn't this all so simple?  If the property had put themselves in the other parties shoes (the brand), they would have seen that the brand was launching a number of new products this year.  This particular brand/ product was not a focus in 2011 at the company-- and their budgets were seriously cut--but in 2012 the budgets for the brand are tripled.

For the brand, they are learning the benefit of quality engagement vs mass advertising.

I recently heard someone say that a successful negotiation is when "both sides leave the table unhappy"-- that is ridiculous.  His point is understood.. no one party should leave unhappy and if both parties leave happy, then one is bound to say "he/she is too happy..what did I miss?". 

But I don't agree.  Both parties should come into the discussion with the same understanding; more often than not, we have to work together.  Putting yourself in someone else's shoes allows for you to understand key elements such as- How is this person evaluated? When this person sits down with a family member of friend..what do they tell the person about their job?  What business issues is he/she having and how can you help solve for them?   What is this person fearful of?

If the property had taken time to put themselves in the other persons shoes they would have asked questions and learned that the executive at the other party did not commit to additional elements of the partnership because he knew there were lay-offs coming and it was going to be very difficult to commit to things that he knew would be more difficult to fulfil.  He was "setting things up to succeed" from the start.

So what to learn from this late night good night story..
1.  Pick up the phone. Email makes things so much more difficult.  A phone, or better, a Skype conversation makes things more human
2.  Don't take things so personally--trust me
3.  Ask questions
4. Share how both of you are being measured and why this deal/partnership is so important to you. If it isn't  --leave

O.K. this bedtime story is not "Good Night Moon".. but if more properties and brands thought this way... we would all sleep better

DS





  

SGMA Numbers.. what is driving the growth?

PART II

The most fascinating sport continues to be running.

·        Fueled by “bookend demographics”—running is growing at 50%

·        This number will sky rocket this coming year ironically due to equipment; the hottest trend in running in 20 years is “barefoot” running from Vibram. The “five finger shoes”, featured in the best seller “Born to Run” has formed a category the running shoe companies are calling “minimalist”.  It is flying off the shelf and should be called “maximus” as 1.) you have to be a gladiator to run in these shoes and not get injured  2) built with two napkins and a rubber band, these shoes are maximum profit potential

·        Don’t get me wrong, East Coast City Sports Chain cant keep the New Balance product in store

·        “Bookend” is younger—high school kids whose running programs are being expanded because other more “equipment intensive” sports are too expensive for school districts, encouragement in this less active/ obesity age and the concept of “everyone gets a medal” narcissistic age.  With numerous track and field events, you have a chance for the “look at me”’ generation to participate and win a medal.  Let’s understand that there is only one center in basketball, but there are 4 entries in each heat of the 400 meters and 10 events overall.

·        More fun running events like the surging “Mud Category” of mud runs like the Tough Mudder, Muddy Buddy and Merrell Down and Dirty Mud Run Tour are all sold out.  These “mud” runs are 5k up to 10 miles that are run through mud, water and over obstacles.  Kids as young as 5 are doing them! Think it is military crawling along on their stomach in mud? Nope. Average demo is 26 year old women. It is like a Book Club out there

·        The other end of the bookend is the Boomer Set.  The boomers are making things like marathon Runs and Triathlons grow. The once unattainable Ironman—the grueling 2.4 mile swim, 112 mile bike and 26.2 mile marathon run—is selling out in 12 minutes in some locations.  The World Triathlon Corporation sold to Providence Equity three years ago, they are building and gobbling up races, consumers can’t get enough and when Venture Capital gets involved with a sport that has 250,000 participants-there must be growth. It is like they have bought Apple at 26 and are running, biking and swimming to the bank. 

So here in the spirit of good or bad sequences, is the big headline; Apple.

The piece of “sporting equipment” that is fueling “low equipment” sports is one item; the I-pod.

Yup.

I was only half kidding when I said that we should stop checking Dick’s Sporting Goods and start checking Best Buy.

If you really look at the SGMA List, the sports where you can use I-pods, I-phones or “I” anything—is growing.   Running, Gym, bicycling etc.

The sports, with regional lacrosse an exception, where you can’t drift off into music outer space. Football, roller hockey, golf, scuba diving etc. that have lots of equipment are all down.  In this “140 Character” age, it is my opinion that people want to put on their I-pod and go …that’s it. No bags of bats, balls, skates or helmets.  Just Lady Gaga.

So where do we see all this going?  Well, you have to call us to find that out.  But in short, we see a lot of outdoor active sports continuing but a hot growing trend is emerging. And yes, you have to have us in to share with you.

But what I can share here is that one of the Top 10 Activities for the older set in the SGMA Survey was “bird watching”.  See… no equipment either.  And you can do it listening to your I-Pod Too. Maybe they download The Counting Crows.

Dan