London Olympics 2012 – Ambush Marketing

As the 2012 Olympics in London are set to begin, the media has been reporting on the London Organising Committee of the Olympic and Paralympic Games’ (LOCOG) huge crack-down on ambush and guerilla marketing.  In some cases, LOCOG have gone to extreme measures.

Ambush marketing, the main problem for LOCOG, is when a brand wishes to associate themselves with a sporting event, without having paid sponsor fees to become an ‘Official Partner/Supplier’.  To do this, guerilla marketing, may – but not always – be used.  Guerilla marketing essentially involves planning a form of promotion, or a PR stunt, that does not look like it is conventional advertising (see below).

How does ambush marketing work and what does it achieve?
Essentially, ambush marketing works the same way as, and achieves the same outcomes as, sponsorship.  The difference being ambush, marketing tricks people into believing a brand is a sponsor when it is not.  Hence, the same benefit of greater brand recall can be achieved through ambush marketing without paying for the rights to do so.

The reason why there is greater brand recall is because of a process called classical conditioning (see below).

Let me put this in the context of ambush marketing.  Brands repeatedly expose themselves to consumers alongside olympic-related symbols/people/colours so that consumers become conditioned to associate the olympics with a particular brand.  Consequently, when advertising from the brand stops, but consumers are still watching the olympics, they are reminded about the brand.  Given the importance of the olympics, you can see why this is something nearly every brand wants.

Example of ambush marketing at London 2012

Despite LOCOG’s best efforts, and the fact that the games have not even started, I have noticed some ambush marketing already:

Virgin Media and Nissan using Usain Bolt

Despite BT sponsoring the olympics, Virgin media have used Bolt and a subtle Union Jack logo to make a tenuous link to the olympics.

Again, Nissan have used a similar strategy regardless that BMW are the official partners of the olympics.  Although Usain Bolt does own a GT-R, the timing of the campaign makes this an obvious ambush marketing tactic.

Haribo Union Jack Sweets
Regardless that Haribo are German sweets, and that Cadbury is an official sponsor, the confectionary now comes in Union Jack packets (see below).  This packaging is to position the sweets at ‘key occasions in 2012’ – which really means the jubilee and olympics.


If you have spotted attempts at ambush marketing, please share in the comments below.

© Josh Blatchford, author of Manifested Marketing, 23/07/2012

 

3 Marketing Lessons from The Apprentice Series 8

The BBC’s, highly popular, ‘The Apprentice‘ series involves 16 candidates – divided into two teams – taking part in a series of business tasks, after which typically one person from the losing is fired.  The eventual winner of the show wins £250,000 to set up a business in partnership with Lord Alan Sugar.

Besides being great fun to watch, the show also has some great lessons for marketers.  Here are three that I think stand-out from the most recent series:

1) The importance of getting a brand/product name right

I have been a long believer that a good name of a brand can never be responsible for the success of the said brand, but a bad name is frequently the major cause of an unsuccessful brand. Unfortunately, Stephen Brady learnt this the hard way.

During episode 3, ‘Condiments’, and episode 9, ‘English Bubbles’, Stephen came up with two very poor brand names.  In the former episode, Stephen named an Italian sauce ‘Belissimo’ (below) – rather than ‘Bellissimo’, which is Italian for very beautiful.

The result of this was a product that looked very unprofessional, and was disliked when the team tried to sell the product to Italian restaurants; this meant that they could only target less-knowledgeable consumers, and not sell in both Business-to-Business markets and Business-to-Consumer markets.

In addition to this, in the latter episode ‘English Bubbles’ Stephen decided to call a new English Sparkling wine ‘Grandeur’, which is French for ‘splendor’.  This was a stupid decision, as it obviously contradicts the whole brand position of the English drink – see my post on Provenance Paradox.  A name does not need to describe the product – such as Google or Apple – but it must not be misleading and should be coherent with the other elements of the marketing mix.

2) The importance of interactive marketing

According to the services marketing triangle (below), successful marketing involves three facets.  External marketing involves marketing communications, such as advertising or public relations; internal marketing concerns motivating and training employees; lastly, interactive marketing is how front line employees interact with customers and the purchase/consumption environment.

The fourth episode ‘Junk Shops’ showed how interactive marketing can increase consumers’ perceptions of quality and allow firms to increase profit margins.  In the episode contestants had to source second-hand products that were considered ‘junk’ and sell them for a profit in London’s ‘hip’ East End.

To make these junk products appear to be trendy – besides making minor improvements to them – both teams created a retail space that had ‘hip’ connotations.  Some of the methods used included adding dead leaves to the store, using minimalistic merchandising and, lastly, all contestants had to truly admire and believe in what they were selling.  Showing true passion for the products is often what made consumers part with their money.

3) The importance of having a clear brand image

In episode 12, ‘Affordable Luxury’, the two competing teams had to create a new good-value luxury brand.  One team went for a new male grooming brand, while the other created luxury confectionary – or was it chocolate? – what about the cocktails? – and jelly was also being sold for good measure.  The brand under which these products were sold was ‘Sweet Thing’.

Although the team’s flagship store – which represents the brand – had great atmosphere and entertainment, there was simply too many products being sold.  This meant that no one product stood out and the overall brand was diluted.  Ultimately, the male grooming brand won .  Hence, despite the male grooming brand image was very dull in comparison, it was far more consistent and clear, which is critical when launching a new brand.

In summary the three points to take home are: 1) brand names need not be amazing, but can undermine other elements of the marketing mix; 2) interactive marketing is often more important than internal and external marketing; 3) clarity in brand images is critical.

 

Ford Focus – Global Marketing Strategy

In the 20th Century multinational corporations (MNCs) have a choice to make: do we apply a standardised marketing strategy or a differentiated approach to each geographic region?  Ford has boldly chosen the former in their marketing direction of the 2012 Ford Focus – their flagship car.  This will mean that the one car will be sold and promoted generically across the globe, rather than adapting the product and promotional material to suit local tastes.  It is very unusual for a global firm to come out and state they are going to take a standardised approach.  Other MNCs, such as Starbucks and McDonald’s, have been criticised for selling a generic product across the globe; this is a highly controversial decision.

The marketing mix decision to use the same promotional material worldwide, has been made – from a functional point of view – as highly rational.   Namely, the company has adopted a global corporate strategy named ‘One Ford’ that has been adopted to make the company more efficient and benefit from cost-reducing economies of scale.  And this is no surprise, given Ford’s last year financial results reported a $14 billion loss.  The marketing department’s strategy, therefore, clearly supports the company’s wider goals.  Hence, the logic is simple enough: by producing just one standard product to satisfy all of their customers needs – as ambitious as it sounds – there are substantial cost savings to be made.  For instance, Ford currently spends $4 billion annual on promotion.

But there are more benefits that merely saving costs.  As Jim Farley, Ford’s group vice president of global marketing, insists, there are is a degree of marketing momentum that can be generated; economies of scale is not just about reducing operating costs.  No – it is more than that.  Marketing economies of scale are the benefits of having a large, simultaneous marketing strategy across the globe.  For instance, it enables a more coherent message to be conveyed to consumers.  And, in the case of the new Ford Focus, the benefit being sold to consumers is technology.

 

Hence, the global division has created 50 short advertisements that each regional division will choose to promote in their geographic area.  This may be seen as Ford trying to pursue a transnational strategy – thinking globally, acting locally.  Thus, there is a world-wide emphasis on innovation and cutting-edge design; there will be no risk of decentralised marketing trying to sell conflicting benefits.

However, as I previously mentioned, this is a highly controversial approach.  Since the development of consumerism, firms have developed poor corporate reputations for trying to sell homogenous products and cite them as the ugly side of globalisation.  Other truly transnational companies, like HSBC, have developed a strong brand image around their differentiated offerings.  Moreover, differentiation is one of Micheal Porter’s three competitive strategies for success (Cost-leadership, differentiation and focus).  Perhaps Ford risks destroying its brand equity by become generic – and thus undistinctive.

Moreover, if we focus at the product itself, it is obvious that different consumers will seek different benefits from the car.  For instance, consumers in the USA may place style and look as important product attributes; consumers in Europe could favour functional design; consumers in Japan seek high-tech innovation.  Can one product really satisfy all of these consumer wants?  Even if it can to an extent, the consumer may be better off seeking a differentiated product that is highly tailored to the market segment they belong to.

It should be clear by now that this strategy will either go down like as a huge success or a failure.  Although 99% of the time I prefer marketing that focuses on a niche – or at least differentiates its products – I actually like Ford’s global approach.  Not only does it make practical sense, every company claims to differentiate their offerings  – regardless of whether or not they actually appeal to a specific market segment.  I like Ford’s optimism.  In a way it says ‘this car is good enough for anyone, anywhere wanting to do anything’.

If this post interests you, check out this video.

© Joshua Blatchford, author of Manifested Marketing, 28/02/2011.

  • Join 202 other subscribers
  • Blog Visits

    • 294,831 views!
  • Twitter Updates

  • Archive