Preaching to the converted is a good thing

As someone who has worked in marketing for nearly 20 years now (gulp!!!), as justification for changing strategy or plan, I have heard the expression ‘well we’re just preaching to the converted’ many times – and each time I hear it I get more and more angry.

I heard it recently as a justification to reduce, and I guess to ultimately withdraw from, an entire long term sponsorship programme. What a load of nonsense.

The view I take is this. Marketing is basically about relationship building. A brand wants to build a relationship with a consumer, in order to convince that consumer to buy the brand’s products now and in the future. Marketing is the way the brand develops and builds that relationship. And within that, sponsorship can be one of the very best ways of developing that relationship because often relationships are built on shared passions. If you no longer share interests or passions, then the relationship is going to suffer.

It’s just like relationships between people. If we maintain a constant dialogue, and share interests and passions, then we’re going to get along. But if, all of a sudden, your friends stops phoning you, and decides they’re not into football any more, but actually they’re into sailing, then the chances are you’re going to see less of them and you’re not going to phone them. Well it’s just the same with brands, consumers and sponsorship. If you pull out of a sponsorship, then the fans of that event, team or sport are unlikely to have the same relationship with you any more – and guess what, they’re not going to buy your product in the same quantity as they used to.

It’s fair enough to think that you’ve reached the maximum potential with a group of consumers, but if you end the relationship with them, then they will go elsewhere. Why not start to think how you can grow that number of consumers? How can you help the event or the team you sponsor grow the number of fans or spectators? Or, can you convert some of your other customers into fans or spectators? Either of these will ultimately bring additional business benefits to you.

I don’t know who it was who said it, but if you’re ever thinking of pulling out of a sponsorship because you feel the job is done then just think of this:

It can be 10 times more expensive to attract new customers, than it is to retain existing ones.

5 tips for successful sponsorship proposals

I get a multitude of approaches from teams, events, shows, charities, individuals and businesses seeking sponsorship - probably around one per day on average. Over the years that is a large number of documents, decks, emails etc that I have had to read.

I would have said that over the last three years, whilst I've been working with Skoda, I could probably count on one hand, the number that I have actually considered to be appropriate to Skoda's business. That means there are hundreds that I would consider to be a waste of both my time, and also the sponsorship seeker's time. That is possibly thousands of wasted man hours.

So what is it about the proposals that I get that make them 'appropriate'? Here's a list of 5 do's:

1. At Skoda we have a 2 page document that we can send to sponsorship seekers that lists our marketing and sponsorship objectives, processes etc - it basically tells them what we're looking for. So get on the phone, or send an email and try to find out what the sponsor is looking for. They will probably be able to tell you in about 5 minutes. One benefit of doing this is that you'll be able to quickly figure out if it's worth pursing this sponsor, or if, in fact, you are not well suited to their needs, and therefore don't need to waste your (and their) time pulling together a proposal.

2. Take the information you've found out, and pull together a bespoke proposal for the sponsor. Don't send a generic deck on it's own - ensure that if you do have a generic 'deck' that you also pull together a specific bespoke proposal for the potential sponsor.

3. Ensure the proposal includes several activation ideas that the sponsor could tap straight into. The current trend is for social media and content activation - so probably a good idea to include some ideas around those themes. This shows that you are keen to help the brand make the sponsorship work. That you'll work with them, and not just take their money and then leave them to activate alone.

4. Talk about your fans, your members, your spectators and how you can help the sponsor engage with them - after all, that's the point of sponsorship - to tap into a fan's passion and to improve the experience.

5. Do include, where you can, estimated media coverage, numbers of fans, spectators etc that will be engaged with, and how often. Even though most sponsorships do not have success metrics that include media coverage, this information can be useful when the sponsor initially is 'selling' the concept in internally.

So that's 5 do's. I promise that if you follow these suggestions you will have a great deal more success with your proposals, and also save yourself a lot of wasted time.

Cycling can learn from the America's Cup.

Hey

Did you see the TV coverage of the America's cup? If not, check out this link and forward to around 15 mins and watch. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHdmviq1kyg

This is sailing, possibly the worst spectator sport in the world, and they've transformed it into a fantastic TV spectacle. They've put cameras on top of masts and all over the boat. They've put a microphone on all of the sailors. They've got cool graphics showing how fast the boats are going and how far ahead the leading boat is. They even show the wind speed and direction.

Wow - wouldn't that be cool if they could do that for cycling? How difficult can it be? What reason is there that it can't be done at least for the Tour de France, but ideally for all major races. Hey - I've had a thought - maybe SKY could think about incorporating into their coverage?!?!?!?

If we could have the following, wouldn't it make TV coverage of cycling 100 times better - and so much easier for commentators:

1. A wind speed and direction graphic at all times.
2. Speed of the leading group and of the chasing peloton.
3. Footage from the bikes (camera pointing backwards and forwards on every bike)
4. An audio stream of race radio (anyone who's been in a team car or race car will tell you how fascinating race radio can be).
5. Distance between the break and the peloton.

These are just five things that other sports incorporate into their coverage - why can't we have this in cycling? If we did then I would be willing to bet that TV audiences will be up, which would attract more sponsors, allow teams to charge sponsors more, allow broadcasters to charge more to advertisers and generally bring more money into the sport.

Can it be done? Surely it can.

Trouble with professional racing in the UK

It's quite apparent at the moment that the professional cycling racing scene in Britain is at a crossroads. Never has the sport been in such rude health in terms of popularity, with Team Sky at the forefront, and our top cyclists more succesful than ever. So if this is the case, then why are there only 6 Premier Calendar races in the pipeline for 2013, and our only UCI one day race, the Melton CiCLE Classic, under serious threat due to lack of funds?

Funding is always going to be main reason. And here's the problem that cycling has - no gate revenue. As cycling events are free to attend and spectate, then the sources of revenue are limited. One assumes that the host council stump up some cash, but sponsors and broradcast revenue are key.

All three of these sources of revenue rely on spectators and viewers - and without these then it's going to be hard to convince broadcasters and sponsors to invest in an event if noone's going to watch it.

Here are a few thoughts on how we can get more people waching our races - both live and on TV

1 - The teams themselves need to build more of a following and support. Team Sky do this well.
2 - Event promoters need to work with the councils more to promote the event and to offer familes a good day out.
3 - Run a sportive on the same route (or part of it) on the morning of the event - this guarantees you an audience at the finish (plus rider's families who will come to support).
4 - Broadcasters need to make the coverage more 'newbie' friendly.
5 - Package the races to make the competition more interesting (team and individual competitions running throughout the series).
6 - Give some kind of ownership of the race to the teams - if the teams and the riders benefit (financially) from the success of the race, then they will work hard to attract spectators.

The Sponsorship Holy Trinity

It seems to be all the rage in sponsorship circles at the moment to talk about 'modern approaches' and '21st Century sponsorship' - for me it's quite simple. We've all suddenly woken up to the fact that there are three important groups in a successful sponsorship, and if you don't consider all three, and address the needs of all three, then the chances are you're wasting your money.

1 - The brand - clearly, as a sponsorship consultant, my focus begins on the brand. and the business and marketing objectives that have been set. Any recommendation that I make has to be rooted in fulfilling the objectives that have been set.

2 - The property - this could be an event, a person, a club - basically it's the property we're looking to sponsor. Whatever kind of deal and activation programme that we come up with has to work for the property. For example, in my view, Audi were a great partner for Manchester United. Chevrolet - hmm, I'm not so sure.

3 - The most important party in this equation - the fans. For any sponsorship to work, then the fans have to win - and to win, their experience of the property has to be improved.

I like to view this as the holy trinity - brand, property and fans. Others refer to it as win, win, win.

Whatever you want to call it, ignore it at your peril.

Is a sponsorship good value?

I had a conversation with someone this week. This person is a senior decision maker for a business who make products that cyclists want and need, and has been involved in the sport of cycling for around a decade. We were discussing the opportunities available to brands within the sport in the UK, and debating the relative merits of some events over others. We got onto the subject of one major event, and the amount of money that the rightsholder is looking to get from principal sponsorship. This guy felt it was extortionate, and couldn't figure out why it was so expensive and still available when, according to him, cycling is in such rude health and surely brands are lining up to associate themselves with the sport.

I guess this raises two questions - firstly how do you value a sponsorship opportunity, and secondly are brands lining up to get involved in cycling?

This blog is going to tackle the first question - the second one I'll try to cover at another time.

So - how much is a sponsorship worth? How can it be valued?

I find there are three ways to look at this - and probably the right answer lies somewhere in the middle. When I get a proposal land on my desk, and it is a proposal that actually has some interest to me and the brands I work for (that's around 5% maximum of all proposals I receive) then I consider three things:

1 - How much can we afford to pay for this?
2 - Is it comparable with any other similar opportunities - and if so, how much were they valued at?
3 - If this were a straight media buy, how much would it cost?

Points 1 and 2 are clearly individual to different brands, and to different sports/events, but actually should form the clearest guide as to what the right value is. Point 3 is only there to satisfy the bean counters who are still under the misguided illusion that a sponsorship is only about logo exposure and media value (but bean counters rule the world and we have to tick that box).

So for me, a sponsorship is only good value if it is both affordable and realistic in terms of the market. Obviously if we're talking about a sponsorship renewal, then hopefully we'd have an idea of the value to the business the sponsorship is giving, but when it's a new proposal, then it pays to do some research and find out what other similar properties are worth. If that means looking at properties in other countries, then do it, because someone is going to ask you, at some point, how it compares to other sponsorships - so it's worth doing your homework.

I think the guy I was talking to was only considering point 1 - i.e. it was out of his (budget)league, because I happen to know that the figure being quoted was actually very comparable to other similar properties both in the UK and in other countries.

Oh, and it doesn't stack up too badly on media value either!!

Is cycling the new fishing?

Along with a few other sports like tennis, fishing and running in particular, cycling has a peculiar position of being a far bigger recreation than it is a sport.

What I mean by that is that the number of people who are out on their bikes is far, far greater than the number of people who follow the sport of cycling. Sure the Tour de France might generate a couple of million viewers for the final stage when it's live on ITV, but according to some research I've seen there are something like 7.5 Million regular cyclists in the UK. And it's this 7.5 Million cyclists that brands want to talk to, especially as cycling becomes the new golf, these are people with disposable income who are very attractive to brands from all sorts of different sectors.

So here's the dilemna - it's hard for brands to connect with the recreational cyclist as the vehicles don't really exist. Sure, RideLondon will be a great start as there will be something like 100,000 amateur cyclists taking part over the weekend, but how many cyclists are there out there on a Sunday morning who might only enter one or two sportives a year, and really aren't that interested in races like Milan - San Remo or Paris Roubaix. And you can bet your last dollar they'll never have heard of the Lincoln GP or Melton CiCLE Classic.

I ride with a guy most weekends - he's in his late 40's, has been riding for a couple of years and is totally hooked. We've done a few sportives together, and we're undertaking a long 4 day ride together next year. He loves his bike, and loves to ride, but has only ever watched the Tour de France, and certainly wouldn't know any of our top UK pros other than Wiggo, Cav and Froome.

If the sport of cycling wants to attract sponsors into the sport, then cycling needs to think about how they are going to get guys like my mate engaged with the sport, and not just riding his bike. Sponsors want to connect with the 7.5 Million regular cyclists, not just with the 250,000 of us who will set our Sky+ box for 3 am to record the Tour of Taiwan in February.

And that means that event organisers, broadcasters and governing bodies need to think long and hard about how they're promoting the sport so that events like the Tour Series and the Premier Calendar races attract large numbers of spectators, and start delivering big numbers on TV. Here's a few ideas I've had on what needs to be done:

 1 - Imagine that every viewer and spectator is watching the event for the first time - dumb it down and make sure people understand what's going on. Cycling can be a complicated, tactical sport - it needs to be explained.

2 - Appeal to kids and to families - most MaMils and new cyclists are dads, or even mums. Have activites for the kids so it becomes a family day out.

3 - Please, please, please can broadcasters explain how the race has developed rather than going straight to the action. Yes Eurosport I mean you. Give us some context to the race and to the event rather than diving straight into the action.

4 - Create more events like RideLondon where amateurs ride the course ahead of the professionals and then hang around to watch the end of the race. Surely that's just a win win for everyone as the organiser has an extra revenue stream from the sportive, and the professionals get to race in front of bigger crowds.

5 - Teams need to engage more with the fans - Team Sky do this well. Get a loyal fan base - with social media as it is, one loyal fan will attract 5 more and so on, and so on. Things like twitter q&a's and video diaries work really well.

That's just 5 ideas, but there's loads more.

Everyone connected with cycling, who earns a living out of cycling, needs to take some responsibility. The sport of cycling is fantastic - it's interesting, full of history, dynamic and most of all fun - and the more people that watch it live or on the TV the better it is for us, and the more secure our jobs are in the future.