Sports Branding -- Questions for you manufacturers/retailers/resellers, etc

Triathlon Forum
1

Seeing Dan’s “Headbadge” article got me (and a lot other people, I’d imagine) thinking. As Dan mentioned in his article, his talk of USAT’s “Headbadge” is known by another term in the marketing/advertising community (where I work) – “Branding”.

Branding is intuitively not a new concept. It’s the idea that consumers don’t buy a product, they purchase a brand, and everything that brand represents; all its values, beliefs, etc. For instance, if I drink Mountain Dew, I am therefore an extreme skier/snowboarder/skateboarder/yak tosser, etc. If I drive a BMW, I’m a hip, performance-oriented affluent guy (or so I’d like to think). It’s about a relationship between the consumer and the product they’re buying into. Consumers will pay a premium to associate themselves with a brand they feel represents them well; that fact has been proven. Otherwise, we’d all be buying in the generic aisle in the supermarket.

The most sophisticated brand engineers are the people behind the packaged goods and automotive categories. These people spend millions every year on not advertising, but qualitative and quantitative research that delves into the minds of their “target audience”, seeing what turns their cranks, and what’s the most meaningful and relevant way to speak to them. They’re looking for that magic “insight”, that’ll lead to advertising that makes their target audience go “Ah-ha! Brand X is the genital fungus medication for me!”

So where am I going with this? Well, I’m a strategic planner, a guy at an ad agency who looks at all this research, mounds of it, sifts through it, deciphers it, and attempts to dig for that insight. Truth be told, sometimes it’s there, sometimes it isn’t. But what I’m seeing in triathlon/cycling in the short time I’ve been involved in the sport (about 2 years) is fairly limited brand management.

You have two extremes – those guys who have hugely strong brands, likely due to amazing product and history, and brands where the manufacturer relies totally on product to support their brand image. The former brands have incurred such loyalty that they have developed brand communities – “a specialized, non-geographically bound community, based on a structured set of social relations among admirers of a brand” (if you need references, PM me later). I call these individuals brand fanatics” – people like Cervelo owners, or guys who have Campagnolo. They’re nuts about the brand, so much so that they’re almost a cult (ever seen those photos of all the people with Campy tattoos?) The other end of the spectrum is populated by a whole host of brands whom I won’t mention, only to avoid slander lawsuits, etc.

My question is this: given the facts that triathlon/cycling/sports branding is in its relative infancy, is there a market for a specialist – an “Athletic Brand Consultant”, so to speak? Would you pay to have a third-party, objective individual come in and evaluate your brand within its competitive set, and do an honest evaluation of its position and the potential for its development, as well as make concrete recommendations in which direction to take the brand, and how?

2

Great post

With a few exceptions, I think that many of the key players in the bike/triathlon businesses do not concern themselves with brand in the global sense. I say this with respect, but they tend to muddle along, for two basic and specific reasons:

  1. Typically they are so busy selling and fullfilling sales orders that these marketing issues get shunned to the sidelines

  2. They don’t have the money to invest in more sophisticated marketing strategies

That being said I had the pleasure and fortune to be at a company who experienced that tipping point when they went from being a bunch of great products to a brand right before my eyes. It was an amazing experience. I knew that it had happened when more people started talking to me about how cool the compnay was and how great it must be to work for that company than people saying that such-and -uch a product had these great features.

Fleck

3

Intriguing. Was it a company in the sports market? Without reveling any names, how did it achieve this revered status?

4

What is remarkable is how much, companies of the size of the one that I worked for( and I think it is very representitive of sporting goods companies in general), are focussed on the retailers. That is THEIR first customer - not the consumers. The end user consumers seem to be only indirectly involved. It’s amazing how much of your sales and marketing reasources are focused on selling to retailers, marketing to retailers and dealing with customer service issues to/for retailers. There is only passive or indirect marketing directed at end users.

Our point of differentiation with retailers was delivery - we would deliver a retailers order on time and in full - always! We were more expensive and many retailers ummmed and aahhhed for a few years until they got it. They make money selling the stuff that is in the store - not product that you are waiting for or that is perpetually back-ordered.

Once we got a core group of bellweather retailers FULLY on side and stock in the stores, then it was time to shift some reasources to direct consumer marketing and that’s when it really started to take off.

Fleck

5

Well, you know your stuff.

Trouble is, this industry is decidely less sophisticated that most others. The value of creating brand equity exists only with a few top level guys and guys on the way to becoming top level.

Slot of industry people think that, if their product is intrinsically the best, the customers will come.

As you already know- that isn’t necessarily the case. Even if it is, then you are still only giving the customer a part of what they paid for. This is what I mean: You use BMW as a fine example of branding. I agree. When you buy a BMW you get a fine quality automobile, generally well made and well engineered. They are quiet, fast, look cool and drive nice. But you also get something else- as you so correctly pointed out- the brand. The image. The aura.

Bike companys usually don’t know how to create that. Some are better than others, but even the best are pretty pale.

Here’s my point: You could be the best brand manager in the cycling industry and it is likely your client would not listen to you.

6

Interesting. A very nearsighted approach, to focus on dealers only. Imagine if the automotive industry did that, and relied on their dealers only to flog the brands? Cripes, it’d be “hot dogs and balloons for the kiddies” all the time.

Seems like with a few notable exceptions, dealers focus on pricepoint. If the dealer is focussed on pricepoint/service, etc, and the manufacturers is focussed on dealer – where’s the consumer getting their message from?

7

Valid point, Tom. Yet why does someone buy, say a BMW 5 Series versus a Mercedes E Class versus a Lexus GS?

All make fine automobiles. Quiet, powerful, well engineered and appropriately luxurious. All are roughly in the same snack bracket. But it’s the brand image that differentiates them.

An example: I come to buy a bike from you. You do all the measurments, and tell me a Felt, a Cervelo, and a Guru all could fit me. I’ve been doing my research, lurking on ST, reading the magazines, reading your reviews. What bike will I buy?

I’d say the Cervelo.

It’s interesting that for an industry that caters to such an affluential niche of our society, they’re relatively unsophisticated in their brand management.

8

Sports branding is actually quite an interesting topic, and of course like with any other topic, there are all kinds of opinions about it. We as a company are actually in a position where we get approached quite often by some of the most prestigious ad agencies and branding specialists in the country. Most of them are very eager to work with us, and will even do a “dog and pony” show for us. “Luckily” enough they often even have one or more “cyclers” or a “triathaletes” in their creative department who are eager to tackle especially Litespeed marketing or branding. Although they have some very cool accounts too, mostly they work on many “boring” bread and butter accounts, and something “cool and highend” in the active sports arena would be great “fun”. They are usually even willing to disregard their hefty fee schedule and do it at cost or even for “FREE.”
But we all know that in life nothing is FREE other than the air we breathe and the passion we all have on this board for our fantastic sport.
That being said, the question then is. What are the motives, if not direct financial ones? Is it really the branding and growth of the company that is on their mind, or quite possible a nice mention in Advertising Age or a big thumbs up in Communication Arts. :slight_smile:
Cheers,
Herbert
Litespeed/QR

Thomas are you here?

9

I think the answer to this lies partially in the circumstances surrounding the sale as well as the brand assosciation.

I know that, given those brands, I would want a BMW becasue, in my automotive ignorance, I think they are “cool”. They had those little spy movies on their website a while back and I remember a certain German bank President who rode, quite elegantly, in the back of a big, bulletproofed 7 series that was all blacked-out and bad as hell.

Ultimately though, when I go shopping for a car, being a guy well south of the BMW price category, I shop for function and price.

10

Speaking from past experience as a current creative (no longer in the ad game), some motives you mentioned like Comm Arts…etc…but also offering it at cost or FREE! can help to start to build a broader base of work for the ad agency. So they will try to get your company on board anyway they can. If their verticals currently don’t include your field but they want to start to build an athletic division, a big name will certainly help that group grow quicker. Also, it could be a “reward”, if you will, for the creatives. I worked at design firms before where the small, plum, creative stuff would be given to people almost as a " Christmas bonus" .

-my .02

Trisha

11

Yep, good new business tool. As well, a good path to awards.

12

Trisha,
I understand completely and was being a bit of a smartass about it. I actually do think that it can be very beneficial for both parties involved, but like with anything else it also can leave both parties quite unhappy.
Cheers,
Herbert

13

“It’s interesting that for an industry that caters to such an affluential niche of our society, they’re relatively unsophisticated in their brand management”

Again, I think this is because many in the business are sales focussed and then focussed on getting that product to the retailer. That takes up, I don’t know 90%+ of the time. Also many of these companies are surprisingly small. People wear a number of different hats and time and reasources are tight. When I was working selling marketing services into the cycling and sporting goods markets it was not uncommon to hear that the Sales or Marketing Manager was, " . . out the back unloading a truck. Can he call you back?"

Not everyone turns into a Nike, but everyone invariably starts off like a Nike. I love the Nike story because, it has gone from nothing to truely a world wide brand power in less than 30 years. I recall buying my first Nike’s out of the truck of a car of the Canadian distributor at a highschool track meet in 1974. Nike could not even get into stores back then and now look at them. Imagine!

Fleck

15

Having spent most of my working life in the automotive industry and its marketing aspects, I agree that our multi-sport brand marketing pales in comparison. I would like to add that “style” sells as many cars as advertising. Both are subjective, but a great ad campaign (I was there for Joe Isuzu) does not necessarily sell cars when the product is OK at best.

Advertising budgets are huge ($100 million+) for the auto companies. A good percentage of the purchase price of that new car is advertising expense. With smaller dollars and smaller companies, the resources just are not there for extensive multi-sport brand marketing. Basically, well designed, innovative products sell in our spectrum primarily on word-of-mouth. It is very cost effective and some “brand” image building results although not very quantifiable.

Addressing a topic often raised on this forum, one thing the automotive industry does have is a set of industry standards (albeit, most were government induced). All vehicles are weighed, measured and tested the same way. I would be satisfied if bicycle/bicycle component mfrs. just told me what size they weighed for the advertising. It makes it a lot easier to comparison shop.

Also, regarding Herbert’s comments on the “free” advertising campaign, I encountered this approach many times myself. Decisions were based on the most creative ideas within a given budget. Almost without fail, the “free” guys had very creative, competitive campaigns and, as a result, ended up with the business. However, when the next project came up, guess what, they were no longer “free” and, in many cases much higher than their competitors. We would try to give them a break but in a competitive bidding environment there is very little leeway and the “free” gimmick did not necessarily buy them loyalty or future business.

My 2 cts.

“It is never too late to fix your childhood!”

16

very timely post…

i am currently in the process of writing an article on branding for my sociology of sport class final exam.

should be fun :stuck_out_tongue:

thanks for some more insight…ever little bit helps :slight_smile:

17

Interesting thread especially since I am putting together my marketing plan for my new aerobars and other tri products. Any free help will be appreciated! Thoughts on what to do and not do. Obviously know the industry well but agree that there is very little effective marketing out there.

18

I have been trying to market/brand my product for about 6 years now. I have tried to be aware of potential long-term branding issues since the get-go. Hence, the gold cranks. Something to set them apart (as if they are not different enough now) once the patent runs out. “the gold standard” etc. My company may actually start making a profit this next year (while even allowing me to pay myself a salary :-)). So, while I recognize that “branding” or “image” is important, very small companies have few resources to put much into it beyond the stuff under their complete control, which is quality control and service to the customer, which for many is the bike shop, although for me I deal with both bike shops and the end user. But, I can see why companies in the old days focused on the dealer and not on the customer - because you can’t sell anything if the dealer doesn’t stock it. Now, with the internet, that is changing somewhat.

Unfortunately or fortunately (hard to know which), at least up til now, branding has not been the problem for me, credibility has been. I just now seem to be overcoming the credibility problem my product has encountered from day one, as exemplified by the “nothing can be that good” or “another pedaling gimmick” attitude many take without even trying them.

It seems to me that cycling and triathlon are “niche” sports such that word of mouth and fads can be as important in selling as “branding”. About the only “branding” that would have much benefit to small cycling companies would be if it were known Lance really used the product. The names I have who admit to using my product are quite illustrious and lengthy, yet it hardly means anything from a branding perspective. In this crazy world, cost is almost irrelevant if the word on the street is the product is “worth it” or it has enough sex appeal. It just seems this sex appeal is not under the control of the company, but by the current fads of the athletes themselves.

Frank

19

While there is little doubt the bike industry is not very sophisticated, let’s not pretend the car industry is that good at what it does. For an industry with such huge budgets, they are pathetic.

When I open the Sunday papers, a BMW dealer ad looks the same as a Kia ad, 10 photos of cars and a gigantic 0.9% image in the middle. I know, that is not the company, that is the dealer, but if you are talking about consistent image they shouldn’t let their dealers (who at best have the independance of a franchisee) produce such garbage.

And let’s face it, the ultimate point of branding is to be able to charge a premium. So why does the car industry, an industry with few enough main players that they could even form a pseudo kartel, need these enormous rebates to sell its products? And why do most of them lose money and can they only survive with free factories paid for by tax payers?

20

I do not believe that I said that they (the automobile mfrs.) were good. I just said they had more resources ($$$) for research, advertising, etc. that can be used to increase brand awareness.

As you point out, they over produce to maximize capacity, hence the rebates. Scarce supply can be one of the best enhancements for brand image (within reason, where are those Syntace Blackbirds?).

Unfortunately, due for the most part to state/fed franchise protection laws, the mfrs. do not have much control over dealer advertising and, for that matter, business practices. You have far more control over your dealers.

What do you think about weight/testing standards for the cycling industry?

“It is never too late to fix your childhood!” Tom Robbins

21

Look at the ads in tri mags. You see many ships without rutters. Maybe its to many people saying the same things. Im not sure.

Alex - a lot of this comes down to budgetary constraints. Magazine articles are expensive - especially for smaller companies. Let’s say they can put one ad per season and that constitutes a big chunk of their budget. That company knows that they must see some sort of return so that it justifies the cost. Therefore, they figure they should put everything they can in the ad… Every picture, every description, every detail about their product. Right or wrong, they figure they “need” to do this because they only get one shot. What happens then, is a lot of ads that are all over the place rather than a concise advertising strategy and consistent look.

Ultimately, I think the smaller companies have to be very very creative with an even smaller amount of $$$$.