Category: Sports Marketing

English: The Official Language of the LPGA

If the LPGA needed to create more exposure for its brand, it certainly accomplished that task by announcing this week that it will require its members to pass an English proficiency test. The new policy is being positioned as an effort to have the LPGA’s players equipped to deal with the media and sponsors. In particular, the policy appears to target the large Korean delegation on the LPGA tour. The policy is effective immediately, and the proficiency tests will be first administered near the end of 2009. The LPGA pledges to give non-English speaking players support in the form of instruction and tutoring to help develop their English.

The new policy has met with a great deal of criticism. The PGA has several players who do not speak English, but it has no such policy nor has given any indication it would consider it. While it is certainly beneficial for the LPGA to have its players be able to converse with reporters and VIPs from sponsors in English, the new policy may be too heavy handed. The LPGA currently has more than 100 international members, which could potentially be leveraged as part of a global brand building effort. The international flavor of its players could be given greater emphasis than the edict of “speak English or you will be suspended.” If nothing else, the new policy may create a new sponsorship category for the LPGA: I can envision Rosetta Stone or Berlitz as the official English language resource of the LPGA!

Link: ESPN.com – “LPGA Will Suspend Memberships if Players Don’t Learn English”

NFL Extends Behavior Expectations to Fans

Under the leadership of Commissioner Roger Goodell, the NFL has been proactive in establishing guidelines for players’ conduct off the field. Now, the league is setting standards of behavior for fans attending their games. The “Fan Code of Conduct” sets expectations of fan behavior in parking lots before games as well as during games. Among the behaviors deemed unacceptable are visibile intoxication, abusive language, offensive gestures, and interfering with the game by throwing objects on the field. Fans violating the Code of Conduct are subject to ejection from the stadium and revocation of ticket privelges for future games.

It is unfortunate that the NFL had to go to the lengths of drafting a Code of Common Sense… I mean Conduct. Unruly fans in tailgating areas outside stadiums and in the stands detracts from the enjoyment and experience of other fans. Personally, I have little interest in attending an NFL game because I have been to enough games and encountered idiots who thought buying a ticket gave them license to go out of control. The cost of attending games is too high to allow a small minority of patrons to create negative experiences for others.

The NFL has taken many steps to protect its brand reputation by ratcheting up the personal conduct expectations of players. But, those efforts would be negated somewhat if the fan stakeholder group was ignored. People attending NFL games this season should take comfort in the fact that if inappropriate conduct or behavior takes place, there is recourse to involve security and address the problems. Thanks, NFL!

Link – USA Today: “NFL Unveils New Code of Conduct for its Fans”

Supreme Court Decision Can Be a Home Run for MLB

Major League Baseball, like any good brand steward, vigorously protects its brand marks and how they are used. However, MLB lost its most recent battle of brand protection when the U.S. Supreme Court refused to rule on an Appeals Court decision that upheld fantasy baseball service providers’ rights to use the names and statistics of MLB players in their fantasy games. MLB had sought to license the information to the independent fantasy game providers, contending players’ names and statistics were intellectual property. The lower courts’ opinions maintained that the information is already in the public domain, and free speech rights of independent fantasy baseball companies trumps MLB’s rights to control names and stats of its players.

MLB has fought the good fight, now it is time to embrace the fantasy game industry and figure out how it can benefit from independent fantasy game operators. Two huge benefits are evident. One, the independent fantasy game providers are helping to maintain and build interest in MLB. The more people who play fantasy baseball, the more potential visitors there will be to MLB.com as well as purchasers of premium MLB content such a MLB.TV. Committed fantasy baseball players want more information and stats that they can find in the newspaper and even on the Web, and they will often pay to get info that may propel them to the top of their league! Second, competition encourages innovation, both from MLB and other firms. The potential exists for smaller firms to develop new features or games that broaden the market for fantasy baseball.

Today’s fantasy baseball market is made up of an estimated 3 million players, which is a fraction of the market for fantasy football (15-16 million). There is room to grow the business, which only makes it more valuable because it would attract more advertising and sponsorship dollars to fantasy baseball… and to MLB. So, rather than feeling as dejected as a batter who strikes out with the bases loaded, MLB should see the potential that exists for fantasy baseball when open competition is allowed.
Link: USA Today “Supreme Court Refuses to Consider Fantasy Baseball Case”

When Divide and Conquer is a Dangerous Strategy

The collective yawn heard among auto racing observers last week was in response to the announcement that the Indy Racing League and Champ Car World Series would merge. This move had been long anticipated; Champ Car had been struggling going back to its days as Championship Auto Racing Teams (CART). Prior to the formation of the competing racing leagues in 1996, open wheel racing enjoyed greater fan interest than stock car racing and its premier league, NASCAR. However, in the years following the split into IRL and CART the market for open wheel racing was too fragmented, and NASCAR benefited as it gained casual fans as well as fans unhappy with the split in open wheel racing.

Segmenting markets is often good. We seek market niches that we can best serve and do it with as little competitive interference as possible. The split of open wheel racing serves as an example of when not to segment markets. The IRL-CART open wheel racing war only divided the market that liked this form of auto racing. Little differentiation occurred, other than the IRL’s ownership of the crown jewel of auto racing, the Indianapolis 500. CART/Champ Car attempted to position itself as more of a global brand as well as a greater emphasis on road course racing. Hindsight is always 20/20, but in this case the feuding factions in American open wheel racing would have been better off to resolve their differences. Instead, the bitter fight dragged the sport through 12 years of strife and let NASCAR leave open wheel racing in the rear view mirror.

A similiar battle for a limited market has taken place in recent years in the satellite radio industry . XM Radio and Sirius racked up hundreds of millions of dollars in losses by paying dearly to secure content and market heavily to attract customers. At least these two companies realized a divide-and-conquer strategy had no hope of succeeding in the satellite radio industry. Hopefully their proposed merger will not be another case of too little, too late.

The Marketing Threat Posed by Sports Scandals

What a memorable week it has been in the sports world. Too bad none of the memories have occurred on the field of play. The showdown on Capitol Hill between Roger Clemens and Brian McNamee cast baseball in an unfavorable light yet again. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell met with U.S. senator Arlen Specter about the New England Patriots “spygate” situation. Indiana University men’s basketball coach Kelvin Sampson faces more allegations of improper recruiting activities. Some people wonder what the big deal is in all of these cases. After all, cheating has probably been going on as long as the concept of competition has existed!

The common thread in this week’s sports headlines is that unethical behavior poses a threat to the integrity of the brands involved. Companies in virtually all industries profess to place a premium on ethical conduct in their dealings with customers, suppliers, and other stakeholders. If businesses breach the trust of a stakeholder group, they suffer financial consequences (e.g., lost sales, employee turnover) or even legal consequences such as fines or other sanctions. The sports industry must realize that it can suffer the same consequences if unethical behavior is not brought under control.

Let’s face it- the NFL, MLB, NCAA, and their member franchises or institutions are all brands. If the reputation of a brand is eroded and its credibility is called into question, it loses its power in the marketplace. Sports brands hold a special place in our society because of the passionate relationships so many people have with their favorite sports and teams. But, those relationships could be negatively impacted if steps are not taken to curb unacceptable behavior. Sports consumption is not a necessity, and if sport properties want to remain relevant they must make it a priority to operate with the utmost integrity.

Super Bowl Advertising Part 3 – See It Now, Buy It Later

This final pre-Super Bowl post deals with a rising trend in Super Bowl advertising. The big game has become a platform for launching products new to market or in some cases not even yet on the market. The large audience delivered by a Super Bowl and the high involvement the audience has with commercials makes it the ideal situation to roll out new products or a new advertising campaign. Movie studios have taken the idea a step further by advertising movies that might not be released for several months.

Why advertise a “product” that cannot be purchased by people once they are exposed to it? For most products, a strategy whereby you essentially say “Here is my product, but you can’t have it… at least not now” would be foolish. Why does it work for movies (if indeed it works)? This teaser strategy creates awareness for upcoming releases. Also, it can begin a buzz about a movie among people. Such word-of-mouth communication is very helpful to stimulate interest in a movie. So, be on the lookout for movie trailers during Sunday’s Super Bowl. But, don’t expect to be able to watch those movies any time soon!

Super Bowl Advertising Part 2: When $100K per Second is Good Value

The cost to buy advertising time during the Super Bowl is expensive… too expensive for many companies to even consider or it simply does not make sense in terms of ROI. But, if a company has sufficient marketing dollars to spend on a Super Bowl ad spot, the investment may not be money well spent.

Granted, the cost of commercial time is high- $2.7 million for 30 seconds this year. Add to that figure the cost to create a commercial and an advertiser has easily topped $3 million for its investment in the big game. The total cost incurred means that an advertiser is paying $100,000 per second to reach the Super Bowl audience. The size of that audience makes the Super Bowl an attractive marketing vehicle; this year’s audience is expected to be as high as 94 million people. So, if an advertiser spends $3,000,000 for air time and production, its CPM (cost per thousand people reached) would be about $32. The cost efficiency as measured by CPM makes Super Bowl advertising appealing, even if the outlay is quite high.

The question a potential Super Bowl advertiser must ask given these considerations is “How many of the 94 million viewers are part of my target market?” If it is believed the audience has substantial overlap with a brand’s target market, then Super Bowl advertising may be the best $100K per second a marketer ever spends!

Super Bowl Advertising Part 1: Don’t Overlook Non-Traditional Audiences

This week’s postings will be devoted to Super Bowl advertising. Today, the question is who should be the target audience of Super Bowl commercials? The obvious answers are men and sports fans. Such a generalization of the target audience for a televised sporting event works most of the time, but this is the Super Bowl. We are talking about a cultural event as much as we are talking about a sporting event! The audience will be very diverse demographically.

One example of a non-traditional audience marketers would benefit from reaching throught the Super Bowl is moms. According to a survey done for the Marketing to Mom’s Coalition, 80% of moms surveyed said they would watch the Super Bowl. Perhaps more importantly, 60% of moms said they watch the Super Bowl to see the commercials! So, the idea of targeting women with a 30-second Super Bowl spot is not so far fetched if the survey’s findings mirror the behaviors of moms across the general population.

Yes, it could be argued that marketers of products targeting moms would incur a certain amount of wasted spending reaching people not in their target audience. However, ads that target moms make more sense than a B2B marketer like Sales Genie, a business database and list company, running a spot targeting businesses to inquire about its list services. Reaching audiences is an expensive proposition during the Super Bowl ($2.7 million for 30 seconds), but for some brands it could be an opportunity to reach their audience through a different, yet engaging media vehicle. Link

Hyundai Calls Audible on Super Bowl Advertising

In my last post I commented on Hyundai’s consideration of withdrawing its commitment to advertise during the Super Bowl. Hyundai has since announced its intention to remain on the roster of Super Bowl advertisers. While I give them credit for the careful consideration of whether the Super Bowl ad buy was the best use of marketing dollars, the company’s uncertainty about whether it belongs in the Super Bowl is troubling. If it was a good idea in October when the spots were bought it should still be a good idea today!

On another Super Bowl advertising note, Victoria’s Secret has purchased a 30-second spot slated to run during the second half. It is that company’s first Super Bowl appearance since 1999, according to Advertising Age magazine. I like this move for two reasons. First, the Super Bowl will be played a mere 11 days before Valentine’s Day, a key selling period for Victoria’s Secret. Potential exists for the commercial to be a driver of traffic to stores and the VS web site. From a timing standpoint, the VS spot makes much more sense than Hollywood studios running commercials for movies that will not open until summer! Second, airing the commercial during the second half means that the number of younger viewers who would be exposed (no pun intended) to the message could be lower compared to airing in the first half.

MLB After the Mitchell Report

The long anticipated Mitchell report on steroid use in Major League Baseball was released today. Did the report unveil the names of big-time major leaguers associated with steroid use? Yes, most notably Roger Clemens and Andy Pettitte of the New York Yankees. In addition to the few high profile players, the report named dozens of other current and former players as having acquired or used steroids.

The impact of the findings of the Mitchell report on MLB is not the list of names revealed. The impact on MLB will depend on how its leadership, especially commissioner Bud Selig, acts on the findings and recommendations. MLB is riding high, having just enjoyed its fourth consecutive season for record attendance in 2007. More than 79 million people attended MLB games this past season. The league is a money making machine at the moment, but perceptions that little or nothing is being done to remove the steroid culture from MLB could hurt the brand. As important as maintaining trust with fans who buy tickets for games, MLB must proactively manage the steroid issue to retain the value of MLB for its sponsors and broadcast partners. Their stakes in MLB are much higher than the everyday fan who shells out money for tickets and concessions.

The irony of the current situation is that many fans and sponsors driven away from MLB by the 1994 lockout were drawn back to the game by the single season home run chase by Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa in 1998. McGwire and Sosa were two players already implicated in the steroid scandal, and their feats as well as many other players in recent years appear to be influenced in part by the use of performance enhancing substances. So, the steroid-enhanced thrills that brought some fans back to MLB may create distrust that pushes them away once again.