Two weeks into the World Cup and where is the ambush marketing? According to Nielsen's, Nike and Carlsberg are the biggest beneficiaries of the World Cup - both of whom are not sponsors of the event. The battle is not in South Africa, it is elsewhere where the FIFA abnormal legal privileges are absent. Let it be a lesson to both FIFA and the sponsors.
Nike and Carlsberg have launched their so-called "ambush marketing"Â� on the internet.
Nike released its marketing video, called "write the future"Â�, on YouTube which dominated the online space for them. Adidas, who pays a whopping $200 million to be a main sponsor for FIFA, must have choked on their cognac on receiving this news.
This must be a lesson to FIFA and the Sponsors. You cannot hijack an international sport like soccer under one brand, namely FIFA. Sport belongs to the people and it cannot be controlled by one body - for that body's benefit alone.
Ja well, no fine, but if there were no FIFA World Cup, how would Nike have been able to piggy-back on the event? This brings me to the second lesson for sponsors. If FIFA were not that greedy and had not demanded such an outrageous amount of sponsorship money, but remained in line with other World events, Nike would actually have become a sponsor and if Adidas then used ambush tactics it could be combated with careful strategy. But a main sponsor to a FIFA event is bled dry and does not have budget left to combat opponents" tactics in such instances.
So, the lesson is: do not pay as much as FIFA demands. It only makes FIFA rich and does nothing for your brand, nor does it do anything for the soccer loving public. The fact that a voluntary association such as FIFA runs an event for commercial profit, borders on criminal behaviour, and the idiots who join in the circus are equally guilty.
[ Back ]