Second tier sponsorships

I was driving past Carrow Road the other day, when I saw some tactical ads for the Barclay’s Premier league. In essence they were a nice little ‘welcome back’ to Norwich city and its fans in 48 and 6 sheet format, all bought in proximity to the football ground. All in all very nice.

I’ve done a lot of work over the years on sponsorships of one type or another - ranging from beer companies and football cups, to financial organisations and rugby trophies and insurance providers and athletics, heck I’ve even done some work on the premier league.

Now, obviously, the most high profile sponsorships are of the flagship properties The Premier League, The FA Cup, The Heineken Cup, The FIFA world Cup (ahem, less desirable now? discuss). But what about the others… the minnows… the vast pyramid system supporting the top tier? Who sponsors them? And frankly why do they bother?

Swansea City were promoted yesterday, via the play-offs, to the top tier. As a football fan I extend them a warm welcoming hand and note that they were one of the better sides I saw in the championship all year. All in all thoroughly deserved (justice is done… ahem? QPR? Any Cardiff fans discuss). And presumably there’ll be nicely placed tactical ads all around the Liberty stadium for the next two weeks. My question is… what becomes of the Npower championship?

For most championship fans the experience of the second tier is a painful one, punctuated by financial disaster and memories of the good old days in the Prem’. When they eventuially do get promoted, the sponsor is forgotten in a minute and all attention becomes focused on preparations for the next challenge. So why sponsor it?

The justification for second tier sponsorship is often about grass roots. We’re the real fan because we support the lower tiers. Well… no actually. You’re just a brand sponsoring the league we don’t really want to be in and if you treat us like you do premier fans we’re going to get annoyed. – I lost count of the number of Sky adverts I’ve seen in Championship toilets with grinning images of Chelsea and Man Utd players looking down on me.

Second tier sponsorships have to be about the fans, not the competition, not the ‘grass roots’… and to do this you need to do a few things.

Understand them – look at what they actually do.

Championship fans for example tend not to go near the football ground in the closed season. Proximity targeting fans there is a waste of money – I’m talking to you ‘the premier league.’

They also resent being told that you have a unique offer for them when every tom dick and harry is offering the same thing (you know who you are).

They hate the fact they have to sit through Match of the Day to get to the football league show.And they are some of the biggest users of the iplayer – for exactly this reason.

Here is my plea: Talk to real fans (there are millions of them). Ask them what they do on a match day, ask them why they do it. Ask them their frustrations; listen to how you can help. Then and only then act. And after it’s all over maybe, just maybe they’ll believe you’re on their side.

I’m not criticism second tier sponsors, I’m just saying if you’re going to spend your money that way, make sure you do it properly.

The nature of truth, libraries and tourism

A while ago now I did a talk about the nature of truth, and how it is changing in a digitally enabled world. The conclusions weren’t ground breaking but covered such things as:

Negotiated truth (the idea that truth can be reached via dialectic between two or more sources ala Wikipedia) vs Absolute truth (where one source defines what it sees as true. ala the Encyclopedia Britannica).

For young audiences the former seems to be the model for what is true and whilst there is widespread understanding that Wikipedia should not be used for university essay’s it is still the source they tend to turn to check a fact.

Amongst the other things we touched on was, sources of truth. From the research we carried out young people have a completely different set of trusted sources to say over 25’s. Now this isn’t surprising in a modern age – the kids are much happier to read around a news source online and draw their own conclusions.

I was chatting to a chum the other day who happens to work for a well known red-top. We were chatting about truth and papers and what’s going on with digital in that industry. One of the interesting things he said to me was that lately, his paper was being turned to by football fans checking their facts. They were literally e-mailing or picking up the phone to check on transfer rumours… interesting isn’t it.

We’re all really happy to read around a topic, but certain topics have traditional authority figures who we still turn to.

Again, the other day I was talking to someone about libraries. They came up with the fact that in the UK 85% of casual library visits (i.e. people who don’t routinely use the library) are tourist enquiries. Funny eh? Aside from books libraries are most trusted as sources of local tourist information. I think this is really interesting.

In a world where digital access and apps (library applications are there or there abouts) are all the vogue it’s really important to understand exactly what it is a consumer wants from you, what he or she trusts you to deliver… and then to deliver it. And then maybe monetise it.

This week saw the 100^th anniversary of New York’s Library. I noticed because I live in Norwich, and Norwich was the first city in the world to have a public library. I love libraries and I worry for them. I also love e-readers… I wonder what the future holds. Maybe I’ll have a think.

Politwits and deselection – why not to use social networks for personal politics

I like new words as much as the next man – spuffle is my favourite, it’s the word Hugh Laurie created to describe the foamy cover you put over a microphone.  So here’s a new one for you… Politwit. Go on then, I hear you ask derisively, if you must, what is it? And the answer, drum roll please…

Politwit

Noun

A person who makes a political point on a social network (e.g. twitter)

The verb should be easy enough to derive…

Over recent months I’ve noticed (as I’m sure we all have) the increasing trend towards using social media to make political points. Just about every modern political party is busy sinking their hands into the new social media opportunity – and this is all good and fine, I guess.

Now politicians spend a lot of time being boring. It’s expected of them. Invite a local councillor to dinner and you almost expect, after a glass or two of sherry, a discussion on PR or the pedestrianisation of Norwich city centre (a hot issue where I’m from fifteen years ago, and one I saw Alan Partridge lampoon live at the Theatre Royal Norwich on one memorable occasion). Invite a Euro MP to tea and… well it’s likely to be expensive. Normal people on the other hand, tend not to bang on about politics so much.

Actually I talk quite a lot about politics, which is probably why I don’t get invited to many dinner parties. My point here is that most people you know on a social or superficial level don’t make sweeping political statements all that much.

So, yesterday the UK went to the polls. It was dubbed ‘Super Thursday’ by the media, though it had no shiny costume, cloak or pants as far as I could see. In the build up to polls opening social networks were awash with everyday people making political points (I did it myself). And to some extent this is all part of a healthy democracy. To some extent.

The problem is, I didn’t sign up to social networks so people could push things I don’t believe in at me. Most of my social friends and followers are business colleagues, mates, acquaintances and people who I can’t be arsed to send Christmas cards to… not you of course, I like you.

What I don’t want from these people, and what they almost certainly don’t want from me, is pushy political ‘Vote for X’, hilarious political cartoons clearly commissioned by X central office, or clever but misleading points on electoral reform.

In short the content did not match the context, and it failed to do so because we were making political points.

It doesn’t happen with these people in the real world. It shouldn’t happen online.

Stephen Fry (whom I love, and I expect to see at tomorrow’s post season celebration down at carra Rud. On the ball City! Etc.), spent ages trying to convince us that AV was the right choice – and he may have had a point, however that’s not why we all follow him. We follow him because we love him, because he’s warm, clever, amusing and a national treasure – not because of his political views. Which makes him (and me I hasten to add) a Politwit.

I’ll go further. Over the last few days I’ve seen loads of people saying that they are getting bored of Mr Fry (I’m not, I love him). I suspect this has more to do with politics than any sudden dislike of the man. I’ll call this ‘Deselection’ – see what I did there.

Politweet too much and you get deselected. Nice, and at the same time sickly huh?

It’s not just politicians. Recently a rash of charitable campaigns have sprung up insisting we change our status to reflect their views… and if we don’t. If we don’t... nothing actually. I’m not on Facebook or Twitter to tell people I support cancer charities (which I do, very much as people who know me well will tell you). I’m on Twitter because I like to tweet and to hear what others have to say. I’m on facebook for all kinds of reasons – but not for politics.

The lesson is obvious and as old as the hills – the content must match the context.

The buzzwords are new and instantly forgettable – Politweet and get Deselected.

There you go.