Let’s start by revisiting a joke that is not simply old but something of a national treasure.
Q: Do you enjoy Yngling?
A: Dunno, I’ve never Yngled.
This time 10 days ago nobody outside the sailing community could tell you whether Yngling was an extinct flightless bird or the capital of a lesser known former Soviet Republic.
By this week, everyone – at least everyone in the UK - knows what Yngling is and everyone has yngled, thanks to the victory of three photogenic yachtswomen in the Olympic sailing class of that name.
Such is the power of the Olympic Games.
To borrow a phrase from the advertising copybook: Only The Olympics Can Do This. It’s given us not only a new sport to enjoy but a new verb to boot.
That we have discovered the Joy of Yngling is evidence of the real charm and fascination of the Games. For beyond the millionaires’ row of the track, football field and basketball and tennis courts, lie a host of no less demanding sports for which the Olympic Games represent what is often their only moment in the warm glow of public appreciation.
There’s often a good reason for this. Football and basketball make great TV so we know who plays and we care. Tennis can make great TV but nobody knows when its going to finish so we’re only engaged when we already care about who wins.
Sailing, like shooting, really doesn’t work at all on live TV so we rely on national success at the Olympic Games to propel these sports to prominence .
At the Nagano Winter Games the GB women’s team attracted a massive early hours TV audience. Not bad for a sport damned by one observer as ‘housework on ice’. It got the attention because the team was winning but, despite the fact that curling actually makes rather good TV ( overhead cameras are a boon here), there’s been no surge of media interest and we have not all become curling ‘ultras’.
It’s generally accepted that many sports which burn brightly with the Olympic flame will fade from the collective consciousness once normal service has been restored to television schedules. Time after time we hear aficionados of these sports blame the fickle broadcast media, for its failure to recognise their ratings potential, for the lack of continued recognition and consequent commercial success.
There are, of course, those who believe that’s about to change thanks to the introduction of ever more sophisticated broadband TV services, seen in some quarters as a low-cost route out of the sports ghetto.
Broadband television isn’t the universal panacea for the visibility problems of minority sports but at least it provides the potential for niche sports to grow participant and fan bases and to strengthen the brand image of their major competitions and athletes. It allows niche sports a new platform but, realistically, it won’t suddenly move them into the mainstream. They will remain niche sports and may well lack the mass to ever make them commercially attractive to sponsors.
However, it may be that clever marketers can see the value of aggregating these niche sports communities by looking at what they have in common rather than what separates them. For example, rowing and field hockey may be entirely different sports but are the general demographics of their participant and adherents broadly similar?
Broadband delivers an attractive medium through which to reach these groups. The audiences may be small but they are identifiable as a result of registration processes and the cost of accessing these audiences is relatively low. Sure, it’s not as easy as sticking a perimeter board in front of 30 squillion viewers at an international soccer match, but in terms of impact on a specific group and measurability of results, there may be something there.
So long may the Olympic Games continue to raise the profile of individual sports which, if they are carried through the use of new media, may attract sponsors and help them achieve unexpected results.
After all, results of studies published recently show a major discrepancy in the way that consumers in different parts of the world react to Olympic sponsors’ offerings. Those in the US appear to have a stronger relationship and are more likely to be favourably influenced by a brand with an Olympic link.
Now this may well have something to do with the fact that that the US takes the Olympics more seriously than the rest of the world because it excels at most Olympic sports, most of which hardly get a look-in on TV the rest of the time. Outside the Games, track and field in the US is, we are told, a more or less media-free zone. Of course, the US love affair with the Olympics may also be fired-up by the fact that there is no world championship for the NFL, NBA or NHL that has anything approaching the cachet or international status of the FIFA World Cup or UEFA's European Championships.
The point is this. If, as these findings suggests, the broad-brush approach begins to produce a patchy finish, perhaps the sponsorship community will begin to take other options more seriously.
* * * * * * *
It’s wonderful to see that the trend towards irony in all things has not by-passed sports marketing.
Following the sponsorship of Scottish soccer referees by a firm of opticians comes the news that Gillette – one of the longest serving of all global sports sponsors – has become the official grooming product of English Rugby.
Gillette makes things for a smooth shave and to make you smell nice. So far as we are aware it doesn’t cover bruises or disguise cauliflower ears.
But the brand that helped change the way sponsorship is thought of with The Gillette Cup and Gillette World of Sport, appears to have got it right again. Changing the face of rugby is a great line, and the sponsorship should fit like a well-worn glove.
