Extended Dissertation by James Perea

How did Nike and adidas use viral advertising and sponsorship during the FIFA World Cup 2010 to create flexible brand values?

James Perea 0703977 Advertising and Brand Communication (BA Hons) University for the Creative Arts Farnham January 2011

Acknowledgements

I would like to thank Adriance Brooke, adidas Account Manager at the FIFA Alliance Marketing Team, and Alexander Dotterweich, Manager of FIFA Affairs at adidas Global Sports Marketing Football. Both were professional and efficient in their communications and did the best they could to help me with a difficult enquiry.

Title Page

Acknowledgements

Contents

Abstract

Introduction

Part 1. The Literature Review

Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands

Football Sponsorship

Importance and Flexibility of Brand Values

Part 2. The Discussion

Fast Vs Fast & Write the Future: A Brief Summary

Creation of Flexible Brand Values

Measuring Success

Conclusion

Bibliography

Appendices

Abstract

A consultant for Intangible Business (Intangible Business, 2011) expresses the ongoing competition between adidas and Nikeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s FIFA World Cup marketing strategies in the following extract:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;The two sporting goods giants are battling for global supremacy in the soccer category with two distinct and different brand marketing campaigns. Nike is focusing on sponsoring great teams and players while Adidas does the same but also focuses on larger stages within the sport to market itself to tournaments and leagues. Adidas has been the undisputed leader in the soccer market for many years but its market leadership is under attack by Nike with both sides claiming superiority.â&#x20AC;?

I found this quote to be an exciting prospect to base my dissertation around. Both brands are established, however in terms of football market share, adidas are slightly ahead of Nike. Focusing particularly on viral campaigns and sponsorship, could adidas maintain football market leadership during the FIFA World Cup through building strong values? Or could overall sports apparel and footwear market leader Nike use their marketing power and viral innovation to overcome their closest adversary, creating brand values strong enough to take top spot in the football market as well?

Introduction

The FIFA 2010 World Cup provided powerful inspiration to create video campaigns for both adidas and Nike. It provided the two with an opportunity to show the world how their brand could contribute to such a momentous occasion and give people a reason to talk about them in the context of the world’s biggest sporting competition. adidas* entitled their campaign ‘Fast Vs Fast’ whilst Nike opted for ‘Write the Future’. Drawing comparisons between the two provides an interesting subject matter as they are both similar and dissimilar on a variety of levels. The focus of this dissertation is on the flexible brand values created through these virals, as well as the effect of sponsorship – adidas were official partners of the World Cup, but was this an advantage over Nike virally? Firstly, in Part 1: The Literature Review, I would like to set out the context of this discussion outlining the three key areas involved, which are: 

Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands



Sponsorship



Importance and Flexibility of Brand Values

This gives us a background insight into the subject matter of Part 2: The Discussion, where I will attempt to create an in depth analysis of these two viral videos discussing the theories outlined in Part 1: The Literature Review. After introducing the two campaigns in ‘Fast Vs 5

Fast & Write the Future: A Brief Summary’, I will discuss the ‘Creation of Flexible Brand Values’, before debating the outcome of each campaign in ‘Measuring Success’. Finally I will summarise my findings in ‘The Conclusion’. Here I will state my argument in regards to the research question posed by the title of this dissertation, based on the primary and secondary research carried out for this project.

In regards to research methodology, I decided to issue questionnaires to a focus group of eleven males aged 18-24 who all play for the same football team. The reason behind this is that the target audience for adidas’ and Nike’s World Cup viral campaigns would be males of this age group, particularly who play football and therefore have an interest in purchasing products such as football boots. On reflection, this amount of people was not enough to draw any solid quantitive data, although certain trends did start to show. I also managed to get in contact with the adidas Account Manager at the FIFA Marketing Alliances Department, Adriance Brookes, although she was unable to divulge any information worth using in this study. Kindly, she put me in touch with one of her contact at adidas, the Manager of FIFA Affairs at adidas Global Sports Marketing Football, Alexander Dotterweich. Unfortunately he was also powerless to present me with the specific details in question, although he did direct me to a website source with some further information. The e-mails are recorded in the Appendix section of this paper.

I tried to find as many different secondary sources as possible to back the primary data at hand. I have used books, websites, online journals, online newspaper articles, a TV extract, a printed press release and even a film. Alternatively if I were to have more time, I would have liked to have gathered more quantative data to strengthen my arguments for certain data trends. 6

Intriguingly, as the FIFA World Cup 2010 competition panned out, the resultant final game was fought out between adidas sponsored Spain and Nike sponsored Holland. The coverage provided for both brands was record breaking:

â&#x20AC;&#x153;Though final figures aren't available, soccer's governing body FIFA estimates around 700 million people watched the final live. If that is correct, the match would beat out the estimated 600 million that caught the opening ceremony at the 2008 Beijing Olympics and would be on par, or slightly above, the 700 million that watched the World Cup final four years ago.â&#x20AC;?

This shows the magnitude of people who can be reached by one 90 minute game of football; the grand finale, not just for the competition but for adidas and Nikeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s World Cup marketing campaigns. The match itself was neck and neck until the 84 th minute, when Andres Iniesta scored for adidas sponsored Spain, securing them the victory and the title of World Cup champions.

Did adidas achieve this victory over Nike off the pitch as well? Or despite their team losing on the day, did Nike beat adidas for viral statistics and market share?

As they say in sport, may the best team win!

*Please note that throughout this dissertation adidas is purposely spelt entirely in lower case, as this is how the adidas group officially spells the brand name being referred to. 7

1. The Literature Review

Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands

“What’s the most resilient parasite? A bacteria? A virus? An intestinal worm? ...An idea. Resilient, highly contagious. Once an idea’s taken hold in the brain it’s almost impossible to eradicate. A person can cover it up, ignore it – but it stays there.” (Inception, 2010)

In this section I would like to discuss the concept of ‘viral advertising’ and the effect that it may (or may not) have on the consumers’ perception of a brand. This is a necessary subject area to deconstruct, as the second part of this dissertation focuses on the analysis of adidas’ and Nike’s World Cup 2010 viral video campaigns. In this chapter, we will debate the power of shared ideas as a marketing force, looking into how this method differs from non-viral forms of communication. I will attempt to answer the fundamental question: Does a brand create an idea and unleash it upon an unsuspecting audience or do the public choose to spread the idea of their own accord?

Let us start by defining viral advertising. Adverts are traditionally categorised by the variation of the media conduit used to execute the campaign (e.g. TV advertising, radio advertising, online advertising, ambient advertising and so forth). What kind of medium, then, does ‘viral’ advertising employ?

Essentially, viral advertising can be executed through any medium, providing that the idea behind the advert has the capacity to be spread. In his book ‘Unleashing the Ideavirus’, Godin (Godin, 2001: 19) discusses this concept:

“How does an Ideavirus manifest itself? Where does it live? What does it look like? …it can be an image, a song, a cool product or a process… the medium doesn’t matter. The message does.” As far as traditional media conduits are concerned, viral is unconventional. Rather than using a man-made distribution channel, it uses man himself to spread the information like a virus. Dr. Smith of the British Medical Association (Smith, 1990: 1055) notes that there is an intricate method behind the circulation of any virus:

"Different viruses employ different strategies, some highly complex, to make copies of themselves once they have invaded a host cell."

The host cell in marketing terms is the receiver; viral advertising indeed thrives on preinstalled ideas for reproduction and dispersion, once their brand’s idea has been sufficiently planted into this host cell’s head. In this process, ideas are passed on to a few early adopters, who then spread these messages onto others, much like the passing of a common cold. Rosen describes this adoption of terminology in his book ‘The Anatomy of Buzz’ (Rosen, 2000: 190):

“Because each customer who receives information from a friend on the net can reproduce it instantly and spread it to dozens, hundreds or thousands of others, this form of Internet marketing is called ‘viral marketing.’ In the same way that the common cold spreads through sneezes, coughs, and handshakes, your offer now spreads through e-cards, electronic coupons, and invite-a-friend e-mails.” Each individual who receives the idea then passes it onto many others who, in turn (as individuals), pass the idea onto many others – perhaps because the content is funny, or intriguing, or different; at any rate, the idea must give the receiver a reason to share it with others. They may spread it on so that people perceive them as cool and innovative for having known about it before their friends and colleagues, or maybe they decide pass it on just to create conversation. Whatever the motive, the idea will only spread if it promises to show the sharer in a good light. After all, nobody wants to look bad in front of their peers. Viral expansion could be compared to cell reproduction – each time a cell splits, each half becomes a cell itself, before splitting again. This cycle of growth is charted in the exponential graph shown below, taken from Godin’s book ‘Unleashing the Ideavirus’:

Fig. 1 Ideal Ideavirus

Here, the ‘x’ axis represents time, where the ‘y’ axis represents the number of people that the idea has reached. Thus, a good idea, like a strong virus, has an accelerated growth pattern not dissimilar to that of a snowball rolling downhill; the longer it travels, the faster it grows. Viral advertising does not always focus on selling a particular product. Sometimes it sells an idea. For example, viral may be used as a method for creating interest in a brand as a whole. In this sense, the idea, being the brand and its values, is pre-product – if the consumer ever needs a product or service from this market in the future, their first thought will be of this brand, because of this idea that is planted in their head. Godin (Godin, 2001: 18) argues how influential an idea within a viral can be for a brand:

“We recognize that ideas are driving the economy, ideas are making people rich and most important, ideas are changing the world… if you can get people to accept and embrace and adore and cherish your ideas, you win.”

Ultimately, in viral adverts, these ideas are intended to create a positive brand perception in order to generate larger profit margins for a company. What, therefore, are the most effective ways for advertisers to spread these brand ideas?

Due to rapidly increasing developments in technology, the internet is the most commonly used method of viral advertising today. Online viral, or the ‘ideavirus’ as referred to by Godin (Godin, 2001: 39), has soared in popularity: “Ideaviruses spread fast and they spread far. With word of mouse (word of mouth augmented by the power of online communication), you can tell 100 friends, or a thousand friends.” The amount of people that can be reached and influenced through ‘word of mouse’ is phenomenal. Social networking websites, such as Facebook, are ideal conduits for spreading an ideavirus. Take, for example, the recent cartoon character campaign by the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC). Facebook users were asked to change their display picture to a cartoon character from their childhood, as well as to copy and paste text, concerning the campaign against child abuse, into their ‘status’ (a Facebook blog used to describe the user’s thoughts and feelings, which then appears on their friends’ homepages). This would be copied from another user’s status, which would have appeared

on the homepage earlier through the same process. The Society later commented (NSPCC, 2010): “A Facebook campaign last weekend urged users to swap their profile picture for a cartoon character in support of the fight against child abuse and has led to our number of Facebook fans increasing from 65,000 on Friday to 110,000 today.” The goal was to replace all human display pictures on Facebook by the end of the campaign (06.12.2010). The result was a remarkable feat. It can be debated whether the NSPCC officially sanctioned this concept, but in terms of viral success, the idea spread like wildfire. Here we can open the debate into who is in control of this process – the brand or the consumer? When a concept is created and unleashed, is it bound for success or do consumers make a conscious decision, allowing and catalysing this idea to come to fruition? It can be argued either way. One could propose that ‘viral advertising’ works best when an idea is mysteriously unveiled, immediately followed by the withdrawal of the brand’s presence in order for the consumers to speculate and create their own hype. Godin (Godin, 2001: 15) argues that: “…The future belongs to marketers who establish a foundation and process where interested people can market to each other. Ignite consumer networks and then get out of the way and let them talk.” This suggests that a brand must be confident enough in its campaign to step back and assume that consumers will take to the idea. An advertiser’s confidence will, more often than not, come from carefully developed market research, although no amount of planning can ensure success. This still ultimately depends upon the consumers’ reactions. The key 14

then is to create as much mystery or controversy as possible in order to give consumers something to talk about. Viral campaigns by sports conglomerate Nike have demonstrated precisely how to perfect this. Montague (Montague, 2010) duly notes that: “Viral video that blurs the boundaries between truth and fiction have had viewers second guessing their veracity for years. Nike, in particular, has filmed stunts ranging from basketball star Kobe Bryant jumping over a speeding Aston Martin to A.C. Milan and Brazil striker Ronaldinho striking the crossbar from the half way line over and over again. Yet it is exactly this uncertainty that has fuelled the speculation, and the interest, in the films.” It would appear that creating a debate about truth and fiction is an effective way to get people talking. Furthermore, note here the transition from selling a product to selling a brand value. It is not Nike or its latest products that people will be talking about, but whether it is possible that Christiano Ronaldo could outrun a Ferrari, or the likelihood of Roger Federer’s serve being so accurate that he could knock a bottle from the top of somebody’s head. It appears almost incidental that these characters, along with their amazing talents, are brand ambassadors for Nike, promoting Nike on almost every medium imaginable, worldwide. The continuing success of this strategy would suggest that both execution and placement have a degree of effect on the outcome of a viral campaign. This puts some of the power back into the advertisers’ hands. Nike are fully aware of the ‘buzz’ surrounding their superstars. Their pre-World Cup viral video campaign ‘Write the Future’ even recognises stars such as Ronaldhino’s ability to spread the brand virally by including footage of ‘Facebook’ and ‘Youtube’ hits rapidly increasing: 15

Fig. 2 Nike - Write the Future, 2010

This viral within a viral, entitled ‘Ronhaldinho’s amazing tricks – again’, reaches a hit rate of nearly thirty million, a substantial viewing figure for any video found on Youtube. As Ronaldhino shows off his skills with a football, Nike show off their skills at viral marketing. This is not arrogance for arrogance sakes. This is Nike being flamboyant, as we will discuss later. It was no coincidence either that the players in this viral were wearing brightly coloured silver and orange boots, clearly visible from a distance:

Fig. 3 Nike – Write the Future, 2010 This set the scene for players to wear them at the World Cup, making Nike a visible force on the pitch despite Adidas being the official sponsor. Boulden’s argument (Boulden, 2010) reinforces this point: “With the sheer number of Nike ticks seen on the clothes and the shoes of the footballers, you could be forgiven for thinking the American sportswear giant is an official corporate sponsor of this year’s World Cup in South Africa.” At the time of writing, this particular version of the viral video on Youtube (Fig. 2 Write the Future, 2010 & Fig. 3 Write the Future, 2010) has amassed over 21.5 million views. It takes both an engaging idea and the appropriate target audience to make a viral campaign successful. They co-exist; it is almost as if one would be nothing without the other. Godin

(Godin, 2001: 20) suggests that consumers are becoming immune to the persuasions of a direct approach: “We live in a world where consumers actively resist marketing. So it’s imperative to stop marketing at people. The idea is to create an environment where consumers will market to each other.” However viral advertising gives the consumers an identity they can actively choose to participate in, discuss with friends and take on as a part of themselves. In this context, they need the brand as much as the brand needs them, to stay in touch with popular trends and stay fashionable. Having sourced ‘Unleashing the Ideavirus’ so frequently, it seems appropriate to end this chapter with a quote from Godin (Godin, 2001: 43): “If something is new and different and exciting and getting buzzed about, we want to know about it, be part of it. The fashion is now to be in fashion, and ideas are the way we keep up.”

Football Sponsorship

This section will debate the logistics behind the relationship between brand sponsorship and the game of football. Why do certain companies pay huge dividends to sponsor football clubs, national teams and tournaments? We shall start by defining the term ‘sponsorship’ within the context of the globalisation of football (football spreading worldwide through the development of new technologies and media). Companies make payments, either individual or ongoing, which secure them the right to be associated with an event, team or player. Amis & Cornwell (Amis & Cornwell, 2005: 2) describe global sport sponsorship as: “...an investment in an individual, event, team, or organisation with the expectation of achieving certain corporate objectives in multiple countries...” These corporate objectives usually cover areas such as brand visibility, celebrity endorsement and brand association (where brands share the same values, they tend to have similar target demographics, so provided the brands are not in direct competition, it is mutually beneficial to attract new customers through each other). While non-sporting events may be sponsored, the primary player in sponsorship, by a considerable margin, is sport. Billions are invested in sport annually and the amount increases every year. According to Amis & Cornwell (Amis & Cornwell, 2005: 2):

“...companies spent approximately US$30 billion worldwide on sponsorship in 2003, with about 77% of that total being spent on sports.” Whilst the focus of sports sponsorship in the USA is on American football, basketball and baseball, Europe and South America favour ‘the beautiful game’, as it has become known. So why does the accumulative expenditure of global football sponsorship continue to grow to such abundant amounts? We must look at three key areas of football sponsorship – kit manufacture and replication, media visibility (e.g. pitch side banners, equipment, etc.) and player image rights. Perhaps media visibility is the overarching aim, however I deem it necessary to investigate all three areas equally as each have their own lucrative merits. Due to the continuing globalisation of football, it is no longer local companies who sponsor top level football teams’ shirts. Multinational corporations such as United Arab Emirates and AIG are willing to negotiate deals worth over £10million a year. In 2006, the BBC reported on Manchester United Football Club’s sponsorship deal with AIG (BBC, 2006): “Manchester United have signed the UK's biggest shirt sponsorship deal. The agreement with insurer American International Group (AIG) is worth £56.5m over four years, the club said.” A football club’s directors are likely to accept the highest shirt sponsorship bid, as this creates further revenue for the club, and as the potential return from the exposure a club such as Manchester United can provide is uncapped, corporations are willing to pay out. The amount of exposure given by replica shirts alone is extraordinary. Boyle & Haynes (Boyle & Haynes, 2004: 73) detailed the sales figures for Real Madrid shirts at the beginning of the millenium: 20

“In 2001, Real Madrid sold more replica shirts than any other club in Europe with revenues from direct sales in excess of £27 million.” Although these figures are now a decade old, this sales revenue has only increased in the last ten years due to the growing popularity of football, mainly down to globalisation. Not only do the sales create direct revenue, but every time a shirt is worn, the consumer displays the brand’s logo as a walking advert. It must be said that this kit sponsorship works similarly for all sports, prime examples including rugby, basketball and baseball. However our focus remains on football. For the same reason that local company shirt sponsorships have been replaced by multinational corporations, grass roots kit suppliers such as Umbro and Mitre have been replaced or bought out by sportswear conglomerates such as Nike and adidas, whose financial backing simply cannot be contested. They have a hegemonic strangle-hold over the sports apparel and footwear market. Analogically, they are similar to Sky Sports in their power over clubs. Sky Sports even have the power to reschedule games to suit their programming schedules, turning football from sport into entertainment. Duke (Duke, 1994: 131) describes this transformation: “The elitist pretensions of the Premier League and its lucrative link with BSkyB television herald the presentation of football as a part of the wider entertainment industry.” Because the stakes are so high, football clubs cannot afford not to cooperate, and must therefore bend to the will of Sky Sports. Returning to kit sponsorship, on the turn of the

century, Harris (Harris, 2000) documented Manchester United’s kit supplier swap from Umbro to Nike:

“Manchester United enhanced their status as the world's biggest football club last night by confirming the game's largest ever sponsorship package, a 13-year deal with the sportswear manufacturer, Nike, worth £303m. The "strategic alliance", which starts when United's current kit deal with Umbro expires in August 2002, will make Nike the team's official sponsors and kit supplier and will also give it the global rights to all United merchandise and retail operations.”

Five years into this term, Nike proceeded to buy Umbro for £285 million (BBC, 2007). This means that Nike paid more to sponsor Manchester United for a fixed 13 year period than they did to own indefinitely the entire kit manufacturing company whom they replaced. This puts into perspective the amount of money involved in football sponsorship – and these figures are constantly rising.

However, the expenditure of football sponsorship is far from limited to shirts. adidas, who have been involved with top level football for over fifty years, have been an official partner of football’s global governing body FIFA (Fédération Internationale de Football Association) for over 30 years. At events organised by FIFA, including the World Cup, this gives adidas premium coverage as they exclusively provide equipment and apparel to all FIFA representatives. adidas (adidas GROUP, 2010) proudly state on their website:

“adidas is Official Sponsor, Supplier and Licensee of the FIFA World Cup™. adidas thus provides the Official Match Ball and supplies the equipment for all officials, referees, volunteers and ball kids.” 22

Supplying the official match ball itself provides a major talking point for fans as it is the quintessential piece of equipment, without which the game would simply not exist. In the words of FIFA President Joseph Blatter (Blatter, cited in FIFA, 2006):

"In my opinion, the ball is an even more important symbol than the FIFA World Cup trophy simply because the whole essence of the game revolves around this object." It is not only replica shirts which create industrious revenue; fans trust that FIFA will use the best ball available for the World Cup, and therefore replica adidas match balls are sold in their millions. The distinctive gold and white design of the ball makes it easily recognizable even from your TV screen (see Fig. 4 World Cup final game action), using a similar tactic to Nike’s silver and orange boots discussed in ‘Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands.’

Fig. 4 World Cup final game action 23

It is this exposure that brands associating themselves with major footballing events are attempting to create. For a price, FIFA provides its official partners, such as adidas, with exclusive avenues for brand visibility pertaining to the World Cup. FIFA (FIFA, 2010) declare that: â&#x20AC;&#x153;The Official Partners could benefit from a standard marketing package that included the exclusive rights to associate with the event, the use of the trademarks, exposure in and around the stadium, in all Official FIFA publications and on the Official Event Website www.FIFAworldcup.com.

In addition, they had the possibility to individualize their sponsorship according to their marketing strategy and needs.â&#x20AC;?

The elite benefits gained from sponsoring the event itself allow brands to communicate in popular spaces without rivalry from competitors, giving them full attention from witnessing consumers who fall into their target market. In the sportswear market, it would then appear that adidas use sponsorship to provide themselves with an advantage over main competitors Nike during major footballing events including the World Cup.

However, sponsorship can also be used as a leverage tool by Nike. Official FIFA events themselves may be officially sponsored by adidas, but many of the players and teams competing within these tournaments are sponsored by Nike. This brings us onto the importance of image rights within the realm of football sponsorship. Due to the globalisation of football, a playerâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s value is now not only measured by their footballing

talent, but also their marketability. Boyle & Haynes (Boyle & Haynes, 2004: 73) use Nike sponsored superstar Wayne Rooney as an example:

“Image rights featured strongly in the reporting of Everton teenage striker Wayne Rooney who in 2003 agreed his first professional contract after a month long dispute over the value, not of his footballing ability but his potential to be marketed as a ‘brand.’” As designer fashion brands seek attachment to celebrity models, musicians and movie stars, sportswear brands focus on sports stars. Nike has both the financial backing and global appeal to attract many of the world’s greatest and most famous football players to represent their brand during major events. These brand ambassadors were fully utilized in Nike’s 2010 World Cup viral campaign ‘Write the Future’. Bandini (Bandini, 2010) recognises this: “Assembling a small horde of the most recognisable players taking part in this summer's tournament was always going to be the starting point for any such advert for Nike and on that front they certainly do not disappoint. Didier Drogba, Wayne Rooney, Cristiano Ronaldo, Fabio Cannavaro and Franck Ribéry all appear...”

These players’ affiliation with the brand, as well as sporting Nike gear on and off the pitch, provides Nike with an alternative method of utilising sponsorship during the World Cup to increase brand awareness and sales, staying in direct competition with sportswear rival, and official partner to FIFA, adidas.

Sponsorship within football is clearly a powerful marketing tool due to the sportâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s popularity and ubiquity. It is therefore not surprising that companies are willing to pay such excessive amounts. The return, both in profit and contribution to brand objectives, makes the deal worthwhile when looking at the bigger picture; this perception is often the benchmark of successful marketing.

Importance and Flexibility of Brand Values

In this section I would like to discuss the concept of ‘brand values’. To effectively analyse the brand values created by adidas and Nike’s World Cup virals, it is important to have a developed knowledge of this subject area. By understanding the definition of a brand value, in addition to its underlying purpose, we can begin to acknowledge the amount of impact they can have on a consumer’s purchasing decision. What makes a set of brand values strong and unique, giving a brand the edge over other brands? Can these values be flexible in the context that they can be disposed of if and when necessary? An apt starting point is defining the term ‘brand value’. In ‘Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands’ I argue that a modern brand sells an idea before a product. A brand value is a belief or characteristic which consolidates this idea, in order to relate to consumers on a number of levels. Aaker’s research in his book, Building Strong Brands (Knapp, cited in Aaker, 2002: 95), tells us that: “A brand’s value proposition is a statement of the functional, emotional, and self-expressive benefits delivered by the brand that provide value to the customer. An effective value proposition should lead to a brand-customer relationship and drive purchase decisions.” A collection of brand values builds what might be termed the personality of a brand. Based on market research, these values are intended to appeal to the target market into which the

brand is entering. This process of personification through values relies on the communication of a brand to its public, for example through advertising, publicity and word of mouth. A brand’s mission statement may state their intended personality, but if this is not communicated effectively, the brand will not be credited as having these values by consumers. As with actual people, it can take years for a brand to build a certified personality; in the world of business, talk is cheap, therefore a brand must earn its reputation. In his book ‘From Brand Vision to Brand Evaluation’, De Chernatoney (De Chernatoney, 2006: 115) uses the Body Shop as an example of a brand whose personality is certified by their actions: “Three of the Body Shop’s values – social responsibility, environmental protection and animal protection – provide a clear sense of direction for its business activities. When sourcing products, it seeks to revitalize deprived areas through its Community Trade Programme.” This commitment to proving personality traits earns a brand people’s trust over time. If a consumer has affection for this personality then a connection is forged between customer and brand, which may inform the individual’s selection when they are next looking to buy a product or service from this market. Consequently, a brand must strive to understand the personality preferences of its target audience in order to create compatible brand values. As De Chernatony (De Chernatony, 2006: 115) points out: “…brand values offer an opportunity for brand differentiation and attract people whose values match those being projected by their chosen brand.”

Where, for example, a number of people have similar tastes in music, fashion and lifestyle, a brand must emulate the latest trends in order to become popular amongst this group. People’s choices of friends are often based on first perceptions; if you like what you see, then you are more inclined to give them a chance. Similarly, people choose brands initially because they feel they have something in common, or would like to feel they have something in common, as De Chernatony (De Chernatony, 2006: 114) explains: “…values relate to particular personality traits, and thus customers choose brands with values that reflect the actual or desired personality of the user.” By buying into brand values, consumers can further strengthen inner and outer perceptions of themselves, or what De Chernatony refers to as the ‘actual’ and ‘desired’ personalities. Aaker (Aaker, 2002:11) highlights the difference between the two: “...a distinction is drawn between actual self-concept (how people actually perceive themselves) and ideal self-concept (how people would like to be perceived).” This, Aaker suggests, is the purpose of brand values. When a customer buys a product or service because it makes them feel better about themselves, the brand has appealed to the consumer’s actual self-concept. For example, buying trainers by Novacas, a “vegan owned, ethical European shoe company” (Vegan shoe addict, 2009), may not aesthetically catch people’s attention, but the user may feel happy that they are helping the environment. Aaker (Aaker, 2002: 97) notes that: “When the purchase or use of a particular brand gives the customer a positive feeling, that brand is providing an emotional benefit.” 29

In contrast, buying expensive cutting-edge trainers by Nike may even create a negative feeling due to the relatively high cost. However, this is compensated for by a reinforced ideal self-concept. The user buys the trainers in the hope that other people in their community will judge them (by their trainers) as being fashionable and wealthy. Aaker (Aaker, 2002: 99) comments that: “A brand can thus provide a self-expressive benefit by providing a way for a person to communicate his or her self-image.” It is important to remember that a brand’s values must be applicable to the function of the products or services provided. For example, Nike trainers’ original function is to increase performance in sport. De Chernatony (De Chernatony, 2006: 115) lists Nike’s brand values as: “Authenticity – being real in the eyes of athletes Inspirational – through emotion and passion for sports Courage – conviction to stand by beliefs Innovation”

Despite the fact that Nike trainers are often purchased for day wear fashion rather than for actual use in sport, the underlying glamour of sports performance remains ever present during advertising campaigns. Therefore, the functional benefit of Nike trainers, improved sports performance, is reflected by Nike’s brand values. Aaker (Aaker, 2002: 95) argues in favour of this:

“The most visible and common basis for a value proposition is a functional benefit – that is, a benefit based on a product attribute that provides functional utility to the customer.” Own-label or budget brands tend to focus purely on the functional benefit rather than on the emotional or self-expressive benefits. They tend to sell products before ideas, claiming that the only difference between themselves and other brands is in price. This is an interesting moral counter argument to the brand phenomenon, despite own-label brands still being brands themselves, adeptly summed up by Jones & Morgan (Jones & Morgan, 1994: 3): “From the point of view of society… it might be better to improve reality than to sell dreams and fantasies.” Now that we have identified the definition and purpose of brand values, we can look into what constitutes an effective strategy. Brands must carefully select appropriate yet original values in order to differentiate themselves from their competitors. De Chernatony’s argument (De Chernatony, 2006: 117) in support of this theory states that: “One of the issues when conceiving a brand’s values is to ensure they are unique and are not the generic values of the category within which the brand competes.” This is not always an easy task, particularly in saturated market segments. As in building a house, building a brand relies on a solid foundation. The brands that manage to capitalize, even in the most challenging of markets, are those with strong core values, which lie at the

heart of the brand and cannot be perturbed. De Chernatony (De Chernatony, 2006: 115) observes that: “Identifying the core values for the brand enables an organization to be very clear about why it is different. While there are many brands of trainers and sportswear, Nike differentiates itself through its brand values... Having a clear set of values provides guidelines about how to develop a brand for the benefit of its consumers.” As mentioned by De Chernatony, Nike’s selection of core values is so recognisable that you could not mistake them for a competitor brand. These patent values are appropriate to the sportswear market, in which Nike not only competes but consistently leads. According to the National Association of Securities Dealers Automated Quotations, more frequently known as NASDAQ (NASDAQ, 2010): “Nike is the world's largest manufacturer of athletic footwear, apparel and equipment by sales. The company reported revenues of nearly $18.5 billion in calendar year 2009, far ahead of competitors like Adidas AG ( ADDYY ) and Puma (ETR:PUM).” They are also original in that they take a different angle from their competitors, mainly Adidas AG and Puma, who are also looking to tap into appropriate values in the same market. This strong brand personality, built upon these core values, puts Nike ahead of the competition. Wheeler (Wheeler, 2006: 34) recognises that: “Effective identity is valued because it builds awareness, increases recognition, communicates uniqueness and quality, and expresses a competitive difference.” 32

To this extent, core values cannot be flexible because they are the foundation of a brand’s identity. A brand with flexible core values is unlikely to be successful, because it will lack distinction and recognisability, and will therefore not stand out from the competition. Consumers will have a confused idea of the brand’s personality, because they will have nothing solid or ever-present to base their judgements on. However, it can be argued that brands must adapt to suit the conditions of an ever changing world, or be left behind. This is where additional flexible values come into play. Provided that the core values of a brand are preserved, it is possible to supplement these by adding temporary brand values. These are designed to meet the demands of a constantly evolving market if the core values are not sufficient on their own. The difference between core values and flexible values is that the latter are dispensable; like the colour of a chameleon, a flexible value must be changed if it is no longer of any use in its surroundings. As De Chernatony (De Chernatony, 2006:122) describes: “A brand’s core values are those values that the brand will always uphold, regardless of environmental change, and which will always be a central characteristic of the brand. By contrast, peripheral values are secondary values that are less important to the brand and which can be deleted or augmented according to environmental conditions.” These flexible values can be used to associate a brand with popular modern fads or temporary environmental or cultural changes, but just as easily, and importantly, the brand can dissociate from these values (if necessary) when the popularity of the craze diminishes.

For the purpose of this dissertation, the change of environmental condition will be the coming and going of the FIFA World Cup of June 2010, focusing on the different viral strategies used by Nike and adidas to create peripheral values.

Part 2. The Discussion

Fast Vs Fast & Write the Future: A Brief Summary

adidas – Fast Vs Fast ‘Fast Vs Fast’ was a 90 second viral video created by 180 Amsterdam and Riot in Amsterdam. It was produced by Knucklehead and released in May 2010, just prior to the start of the FIFA World Cup in June. The release of this viral coincided with the release of adidas’ latest football boot, the F50, described by adidas as being ‘The Lightest, The Fastest.’ The boot itself features strongly in this video; close-ups reveal its unmistakable design incorporating adidas’ purple and yellow colour scheme:

Fig. 5 adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast, 2010

These features seen close up, along with the famous three stripes, plant the boot in the viewer’s mind - the next time they pass a shop displaying these boots they will recognise them from this viral, triggering the feelings evoked from watching it and perhaps be tempted to purchase. Executions of the campaign vary slightly, for example one version focuses strictly on a game between Argentina and Spain. Two adidas superstars, Lionel Messi and David Villa, score breathtaking goals for their respective countries, which puts them and their teams in a deadlock. During this action, former ‘FIFA Player of the Year’ and adidas ambassador Zinedine Zidane pushes a classic car to its limits as he accelerates through a tunnel and over a bridge. The velocity of this scene is set as a voiceover booms: “Speed meets speed, and the Gods will decide.” This thundery voice effect helps to create an atmosphere of foreboding and anticipation; the magnitude of this clash is so immense that it requires divine intervention. Another version uses much of the same footage, but also depicts other adidas superstars, from the 32 nations competing, putting their skills and speed on show. The video style is always film noir; the colours are pale, there is a lot of shadow and the action moves quickly. Marketing Director of adidas in the UK Nick Craggs described the reason behind this (Craggs cited in Thomas, J. 2010): “We needed a special way to launch the lightest, most technologically advanced boot ever made and the graphic novel with its world of superheroes really lets us showcase the genre defining F50 adiZero.”

This choice of style, described here by Craggs as a ‘graphic novel’, creates a dramatic and serious mood. The player’s expressions, aided by lighting techniques, show their determination:

Fig. 6 adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast, 2010

For them, failure is not an option and adidas has provided them with the equipment they need to win; the kits, the boots and the ball are all clearly branded with either the classic three stripes or the adidas logo, despite the films grave, shadowy style. The entire video is lit artificially. As well as creating mood, this lighting helps to accentuate special effects such as the smoke and sweat emitted from these lightning paced players. For example, in the shot demonstrated by Fig. 6 adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast, the smoking boot is synonymous with the smoking exhaust pipe of Zidane’s sports car, emphasizing just 38

how fast the boot actually is. This effect would not be as powerful in daylight because it would be very difficult to see. However in the dark, the smoke catches the articificial light and becomes clearly visible:

Fig. 7 adidas â&#x20AC;&#x201C; F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast, 2010 This lighting, aided by Mexican stand-off music and a voiceover, sets an epic film noir scene. In addition, great cinematography and high resolution digital imagery showcase the latest technology in film making which is symbolic of the latest technology in sports apparel and footwear. These special effects, which create an atmosphere filled with pace and action, are the backbone of adidasâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; viral campaign.

In summary, Fast Vs Fast is a hard hitting, action packed, film noir style viral with plenty of attitude and grit. The production is strong and the characters have credibility amongst a target audience of young males.

Nike – Write the Future ‘Write the Future’ shares several aspects with ‘Fast Vs Fast.’ Firstly, Nike’s viral was also created in Amsterdam, although by Wiedon and Kennedy. The release dates coincide too – Write the Future also first aired in May 2010, just before the World Cup’s commence in June. Content wise, another similarity is the strong appearance of the brand’s latest football boot; Nike’s Elite football boot range is clearly visible due to its silver and orange colour coding (discussed earlier in my chapter ‘Viral Advertising and the Perception of Brands’). Both brands use striking colours to make their boots highly visible against the background pitch; however the colours they use are opposite in order to differentiate from each other. Again, the boots are highly visible in the viral, making them easily recognised at places of purchase, particularly in Nike’s own outlet ‘Niketown’ which has a specific section for football boots called the ‘Boot Room’:

Fig. 8 Niketown: Entrance

Fig. 9 Niketown: ‘The Boot Room’ 41

Fig. 10 Niketown: Nike Elite on stand

The examples shown here are from Niketown London, however this is the same set-up as all other Niketowns globally. Niketown allows customers to become physically involved in the Nike brand, described by Nike (Nike, 2010) to be a ‘retail-as-theatre experience.’ The Boot Room is no exception, creating an experience of the Write the Future viral. You are surrounded by multi-screen video clips of the boots in action, walls full of silver and orange boots, and of course, a till to purchase your own pair. The story behind Write the Future is familiar to all football fans; on the biggest platform in world football, its ‘make or break’ time for Nike’s superstars, juxtaposing inflated success

stories against the elaborated consequences of failure. The viral exaggerates these predictions for comedic effect - for example Wayne Rooney’s alternative futures reward victory by showing a ward full of babies all being named after him, but punish defeat by showing him ending up as a bum in a trailer. However amusing and unbelievable these ideas may seem, there is a truth behind the concept that players who make terrible mistakes resulting in their teams exit from the World Cup are vilified, whilst those who bring glory are looked upon as national heroes. Adding to the sense of humour, Write the Future incorporates cameos from famous characters outside the realms of football. Part of Wayne Rooney’s success story shows him effortlessly beating tennis ace Roger Federer at ping-pong, whilst Homer Simpson from the acclaimed American cartoon answers the door, using an integration of his catchphrase, to an animated version of another Nike superstar, Christiano ‘Ronal-DOH!’ This shows Ronaldo’s success story, as his elevated status grants him a guest appearance on the show which is reserved only for celebrities and famous people. Surplus to comical effect, this inclusion of non-football stars grants accessibility to non-football fans, allowing them to talk about the Nike viral despite not being interested in football. Since we have established that viral is created to spread an idea as far and wide as possible, this seems to be a strategically smart move. There were two production companies involved in the making of Write the Future: Mokkumercials in Amsterdam and Independant Films in London. Interestingly, Nike managed to secure the services of Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, director of 21 Grams (2003) and Babel (2006). The full version was nearly 3 minutes long, almost twice the length of Fast Vs Fast.

Write the Future is an action packed showcase of football skill and pride, displaying a variety of emotions ranging from disappointment and frustration to elation and ecstasy. It is expertly produced to conjure up a range of feelings within the viewer, using a carefully selected soundtrack to reflect each scenario. As the World Cup itself provides an array of emotions, this is synonymous. The amusing exaggerative tone of voice brings a sense of humour even to the bitter taste of defeat, and gives viewers plenty of visuals to discuss and remember.

Flexible Brand Values

It is evident that both brands took a different approach to producing World Cup virals. Although there were common themes, such as brand ambassadors displaying their footballing ability in their brand’s latest gear, Nike focused on flamboyant skill and humour whereas adidas preferred speed and solemnity. This brings us to the creation of flexible brand values. Unmistakably both brands have used the opportunity of World Cup viral to further strengthen their core values, but did either brand attempt to create something new and dismissible? In the case of Fast Vs Fast, it would seem that adidas barely reference the World Cup at all in their video, despite being an official partner of organisers FIFA. The only indicators that the viral is World Cup related are that the players are wearing their national team’s football kits and the ball they are using is the adidas official World Cup match ball, although at the time of airing (prior to and during the World Cup), this would be more than enough to alert viewers to the context of the video’s setting. The key theme of the viral, as suggested by its title and discussed in the previous section, is speed. adidas’ core values, as listed on their website www.adidas-group.com, are innovative, passionate, committed, authentic, honest and inspirational. It would appear that being ‘fast’ is a new value, created and used here specifically for the purposes of the World Cup, and is therefore flexible because if it vanishes at some point after the World Cup, the brand’s original values remain strongly intact. It could be argued that dynamism is already a value of both adidas and Nike, and aesthetically 45

this would be true. However this is not a core value of either adidas or Nike because it is expected of all sports apparel and footwear brands to be dynamic; it is a given, and therefore not strong enough a value to base a successful brand around. As an added focus during a football competition evermore relying on speed, being fast is not a bad proposition. The brand is not dependant on this value to sustain its overall reputation, as it is with its core values, but adidas will sell more pairs of football boots, apparel and other footwear during the World Cup if the brand is perceived as fast. Write the Future is more obviously World Cup orientated, mainly due to a multitude of establishing shots showing how different nations and cultures watch and react to games. Crowds only gather around a TV screen wearing their national team’s football shirt for big footballing occasions, and at the time of airing (again just before and during the World Cup) it would be obvious which event was in question. In my earlier chapter ‘Importance and Flexibility of Brand Values’ I quoted De Chernatony as describing Nike’s core values as authentic, inspirational, courageous and innovative. The World Cup being a joyous occasion, Write the Future opted for a key theme of humour. This created a new brand value for Nike: fun. Again, this is a flexible value which fits in perfectly with the World Cup but could easily be dismissed after without damaging Nike’s core values in any way. As with being fast, being fun is not an entirely new concept to Nike, but again it is not the foundation of the brand, and is therefore a flexible value used to reflect the enjoyment of the World Cup. Sharing this value with consumers will help them to increase sales during this period. However Nike could drop this value should the mood of environment change to something more serious, without causing any damage to their brand.

Measuring Success

This section is an analysis of the various data I have collected during this project, both primary and secondary, which gives us an insight into how the brands performed on a number of different levels. To gain specific results into viral success, I issued questionnaires to a football team of eleven males aged 18-24, who were the primary target market for both of the viral campaigns being studied. Although this was a small amount of people, I created quantitive data charts which show the emergence of certain trends in data, backed up where possible using qualitative research to give a more in depth analysis. I also researched secondary data from articles written at the time of the World Cup relating to these campaigns, to see if my information correlates with that of other researchers. After grouping and presenting my primary data, it occurs to me that Nike performed better in terms of viral success. Looking at Chart 1, it seems that Nike’s campaign was only slightly better remembered than adidas’. However, studying the responses, it is clear that everybody who remembered Nike’s advertising during the World Cup referred to one particular viral, Write the Future, most respondents mentioning it by name. In contrast, from those who remembered adidas’ advertising, only three remembered having seen Fast Vs Fast, with not one respondent able to refer to the name of the viral. This can be a problem when representing qualitative data quantitively, as the statistics should show Nike in a stronger position than they do, however either way, it is evident that Nike had a more memorable viral campaign than adidas.

Analysing Chart 2, there is no question of a doubt that Write the Future was more popular than Fast Vs Fast, although this answer is bias as it does not take into account the fact that more people in this group have seen the Nike advert than its adidas counterpart. Qualititively, there was some good feedback, with one respondent answering: “Nike was the World Cup campaign which I preferred, not just because of the players that were involved but the campaign also had a comical side to it, it gave more of a creative edge in regards to others *adidas+ and was not as serious.” This comment certainly suggests that Nike’s flexible value of being fun seems to have creatively outmanoeuvred adidas’ temporary value of being fast. Whilst the focus group were themselves football fans, it would have been interesting to see which was more popular with non-football fans. One respondent’s answer suggests that Nike would triumph in this market too: “Nike. I saw it more and it was cinematically very different to others. It also had a range of celebrity and cameo sections that engaged all audiences. Not just the football followers.” Of the two who did answer in favour of adidas, only one of these had seen the Nike viral. So far, Nike would appear to have the upper hand. Moving on to Chart 3, the statistics start to become more interesting. Drawing analysis, it seems that Nike and adidas had an equal brand presence during the World Cup, according to our focus group. With adidas being an official sponsorship partner of the competition, I had expected their brand presence to top Nike’s overall. However it seems that Nike’s marketing

campaign – spearheaded by their viral video Write the Future – was successful enough to counteract this proposed handicap. Chart 4 shows that the majority of respondents believed that adidas being an official partner of the FIFA World Cup gave them an advantage over Nike, however detailed analysis of the answers shows a fairly mixed review. In agreement with sponsorship giving adidas an advantage, one respondent reflected: “The World Cup is one of the most highly viewed televised events. Sponsoring an event of this magnitude with the brand values it possesses will naturally reflect well on your brand. I think Adidas knew this well. Just how fashion related brands gain publicity during London Fashion week, Adidas was no exception during the WC.” Although this answer appears to be in favour of adidas having an advantage, it duly raises several very interesting questions. It is not just adidas but Nike too who were clearly visible at this highly televised event, and despite not being a sponsor Nike still affiliated itself with the World Cup and its values. Where, therefore, is the advantage? I took this opportunity to delve into some secondary research. Interestingly, whilst looking over a copy of an adidas AG press release (adidas AG, 2010) I noticed that the main three advantages stated in the press release correlate with the key areas of my earlier chapter ‘Football Sponsorship’:

1. Kit manufacture and replication. “In the first quarter of 2010, sales of football products were already up 26%. With more than 6.5 million replica jerseys sold, the number of jerseys has more than doubled compared to 2006 (3 million).” 2. Media visibility.

“No matter how you look at it: In terms of sales, market share and visibility – adidas is and will remain the leading football brand.”

3. Player image rights.

“Additionally, stars such as Lionel Messi, Kaká, David Beckham, Michael Ballack, Lukas Podolski, Arjen Robben and David Villa represent their respective clubs wearing state-of-the-art adidas football equipment.”

As kit manufacture and replication and player image rights can both be used equally by adidas and Nike, it appears that the main advantage of being FIFA World Cup partner is media visibility, as their logo is ever present in all FIFA activity. As discussed in ‘Football Sponsorship’ media visibility is the overarching aim of sponsorship – so for Nike to be considered to have an equal brand presence means that their viral marketing campaign must have been far more successful than adidas.’

An analysis of Chart 4 would suggest that overall both brands created a positive feeling towards themselves through associating with the World Cup. The two negative responses received by adidas evidently suggest that this reponse is relative to Nike’s success; they do not feel adidas did enough to create a positive feeling to match that of Nike’s, so the word negative in this context is perhaps misleading – these two answers would be better placed in a third column suggesting indifference. Where Chart 5 seems to be almost too good to be true for these brands, Chart 6 raises an issue relative to Chart 5 which people seemed to have forgotten about – what is the feeling towards these brands when teams get knocked out? The combined figures of ‘small negative impact’ and ‘strong negative impact’ equal just less than half of the group – a huge increase upon the last chart which seemed not to take this factor into account. One answer raises an idea as to why the sudden divide in opinion: “This is quite interesting, England being a country that views soccer as a religion. Seeing their team getting knocked out at such early stages might have curtailed their exposure in the U.K market, as viewership naturally decreased exponentially post - knockout. But, the WC is a global affair, so promotion and exposure globally would have carried on till the end of the world cup.”

This is an interesting concept, perhaps for another research paper – What are the effects of a country getting knocked out of the World Cup on associated brands in different cultures?

Sticking with this dissertation, I must now discover whether or not my results are coherent with other researchers’ findings. My primary research suggests that Nike’s viral campaign 51

Write the Future was more effective than its adidas equivalent Fast Vs Fast in creating and distributing itself through the means of a temporary brand value, despite adidas holding the position of official partner to FIFA and the World Cup. Analytical company TradeTheTrend (TradeThe Trend, 2010) reported: “A recent Nielsen study of blogs, message boards and social networking sites has found that Nike has been able to create a notably larger ‘online buzz’ through the ad, associating the company more closely to the World Cup than competing brands.

Though the company is not an official World Cup sponsor, Nike ‘had more than twice as many references in relation to the World Cup than official sponsor Adidas,’ the Guardian reports.”

It would appear through comprehensive research that the Write the Future viral and its surrounding marketing campaign really were more successful than Fast Vs Fast according to statistics from acclaimed market research company Nielson. Executive vice president of digital strategy at Nielson, Pete Balackshaw (Balanshaw cited in Sweney, 2010), summarizes Nike’s successful campaign: “This study shows that compelling, savvy marketing can establish this sort of connection in the eyes of consumers without having to write that expensive sponsorship check.”

Conclusion

Based on my own research, I strongly believe that adidas and Nike share more in common in regards to core brand values than is suggested in my chapter ‘Importance and Flexibility of Brand Values’, where I stated with evidence from other writers how Nike uses its core values to differentiate from its top competitors, including adidas. Although both compete in the sports apparel and footwear market, I had always supposed that the two brands stood for completely different values within this market segment, and my initial research seemed to support this. However, I never stopped to assess what the competitors’ (including adidas) values actually were until further down the line. Nike’s trademark ‘swoosh’ and adidas’ respective ‘three stripes’ seemed to separate the brands, when actually they both primarily stand for: 

Innovation



Authenticity



Inspiration

Interestingly, where both brands are in direct competition, for example selling football boots during the World Cup, it falls to flexible brand values to differentiate the two brands and create unique selling points. In other words, if both pairs of boots represented only the brands’ core values of innovation, authenticity and inspiration, they would not have an advantage over each other apart from in design preference. To increase sales, temporary

brand values must therefore be attached to each brand’s pair of boots in order to create a different angle to that of their competitors during this climate, i.e. the World Cup. Studying the Write the Future and Fast Vs Fast virals from adidas and Nike (being the two main competitors in global sports apparel and footwear where both videos were released at the same time and based on the same event) I would conclude that this necessity for flexible values certainly is the case. Both virals create additional values suited to the nature of the World Cup, but to differentiate from each other they have chosen completely opposing values. Where adidas uses a serious tone of voice to create a value of being fast, Nike uses a flamboyant intonation to create a value of being fun. Both being fast and being fun are associated values of the World Cup, which tie Nike and adidas into the event. However they do not expose either brand to any risk of demise once the competition has ended because these values are not at the heart of either brand and can therefore be abandoned subsequently if necessary. My research also suggests that although the overall official sponsorship campaign of adidas during the World Cup had an effect on people’s memory of the brand’s presence, it seemed to have almost no effect on the flexible brand values created through their viral campaign. Strangely, the Fast Vs Fast viral does not even acknowledge at any point adidas being an official partner of the FIFA World Cup, and as my research shows, fewer people remember the adidas viral than the Nike viral despite Nike having no official affiliation with the World Cup whatsoever, only sponsoring certain players and teams within the competition. Mark Sweney from the Guardian (Sweney, 2010) described Nike’s viral success over adidas during the World Cup by stating:

“A study by Nielsen found that Nike has created a significantly bigger "online buzz", based on an analysis of blogs, message boards and social networking websites, and association to the World Cup than any other brand.

Nike, which is not an official sponsor of the World Cup, had more than twice as many references in relation to the World Cup than official sponsor Adidas.”

It seems that as far as viral success is concerned, adidas being an official partner was either not powerful enough or not made clear enough to give adidas an advantage over Nike, who have become specialists in this area of marketing. Despite not being officially connected to the World Cup, Nike does everything within their power to attach themselves, regardless. Nike date this development in marketing strategy back to the success of their 2002 World Cup campaign (Nike, 2010):

“‘Secret Tournament’ incorporated advertising, the Internet, public relations, retail and consumer events to create excitement for Nike’s soccer products and athletes in a way no single ad could ever achieve. This new integrated approach has become the cornerstone for Nike marketing and communications.

Today, Nike continues to seek new and innovative ways to develop superior athletic products, and creative methods to communicate directly with our consumers.”

Nike uses these different marketing approaches to further establish their flexible value of being fun, alongside consolidating their existing core values. The strategy is highly effective, as we have seen from my research into their success rate. The viral video Write the Future is

just one part of this; Nike are forward thinking in their experiential branding and furthered this idea by creating an interactive webpage where users could upload their picture and create their own Write the Future virals:

Fig. 11 Nike, 2010

In brief, this extension of the Write the Future viral gives users a chance to star in their own viral versions of Write the Future, by uploading their picture onto a template. They can then either imitate their favourite stars, or just show their friends for a laugh – again this coincides with Nike’s strategic value of fun in their World Cup associated marketing.

adidas responded with a facebook campaign entitled ’50 Days of Fast’ which featured interviews with adidas’ stars into the evolution of speed within the game of football. The campaign included quizzes and a competition (Thomas, 2010):

“Facebook fans also have the chance to take part in a "fast" knowledge competition to win a pair of new F50s exclusively signed by Messi.”

Again this campaign sticks with the value of being fast, both mentally and physically, supporting and furthering the Fast Vs Fast video and the brand’s new flexible value. However research shows that this time around, Nike’s Write the Future viral, which created the value of fun rather than being fast, was more successful in terms of online buzz and recollection.

Despite this result, the battle for supremacy will continue at the next major footballing event, Euro 2012, as both brands will look to gain an upper hand through the use of these (and probably new) viral techniques. It is already established that adidas will be an official partner of Euro 2012, and that Nike will have no official affiliation. It will be intriguing to see whether Nike maintains their viral leadership, or whether adidas will dominate next time with a fresh and innovative idea. I would like to end with a quote I found to be very interesting on the subject matter which has been discussed in this paper (Intangible Business, 2010):

“The Adidas brand and the Nike brand are strong brands that are recognized around the world and the fight for world dominance will continue as Nike pulls closer to Adidas in the soccer market and Adidas pulls closer to Nike overall. As more technically advanced and innovative products are developed by each company and efforts are made to gain a greater market share, the true winners in this competition between the two mega-brands will be the consumer.”

Bibliography

Aaker, D. (2002) Building Strong Brands. London: Simon & Schuster UK Ltd.

adidas AG (2010) 2010 FIFA World CupTM already sales success for adidas. [print based press release]

adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast Commercial (2010) Directed by Johnny Green & Gary Shore: Netherlands

adidas GROUP (2010) 2010 FIFA World Cup™ already sales success for adidas. http://www.adidas-group.com/en/pressroom/archive/2010/21June2010.aspx (Accessed on 05.01.2011)

Amis & Cornwell (2005) Global Sport Sponsorship. Oxford: Berg Publishers

Bandini, P. (2010) World Cup 2010: A word on our sponsors - Nike write the future. In: The Guardian [online] http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/blog/2010/may/21/world-cup-2010nike-advert-review (Accessed on 09.01.2011)

BBC (2006) Man Utd sign £56m AIG shirt deal. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4882640.stm (Accessed on 22.12.2010)

BBC (2007) Nike to buy Umbro in £285 million deal. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7057577.stm (Accessed on 23.01.2011)

Boulden, J. (2010) Nike’s World Cup tactics smarter than any ‘ambush’ http://worldsport.blogs.cnn.com/2010/07/01/nikes-world-cup-tactics-smarter-than-anyambush/ (Accessed on 06.11.10)

Boyle, R. & Haynes, R. (2004) Football In The New Media Age. Oxon: Routledge 58

De Chernatony (2006) From Brand Vision to Brand to Brand Evaluation. (2nd ed.) Oxford: Butterworth-Heinemann

Duke, V. (1994) The drive to modernization and the supermarket imperative: Who needs a new football stadium? In: Williams, J. & Giulianotti (ed.) Game Without Frontiers: Football, Identity and Modernity. Hants: Ashgate Publishing Limited. pp. 129-149 FIFA (2006) adidas http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/marketing/partners/adidas.html (Accessed on 07.01.2011)

FIFA (2010) Sponsorship – 2002 FIFA World Cup. http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/marketing/marketing/sponsorship/fwc2002.html (Accessed on 25.12.2010)

Figure 1. Godin, S. (2001) Ideal Ideavirus. [graph] In: Godin, S. (2001) Unleashing the Ideavirus. p.40. New York: Hyperion

Figure 2. Nike – Write The Future – World Cup 2010 Commercial. (2010) Directed by Alejandro Inarritu: Netherlands

Figure 3. Nike – Write The Future – World Cup 2010 Commercial. (2010) Directed by Alejandro Inarritu: Netherlands

Figure 4. Soriano, J. (2010) World Cup final game action [photograph] At: http://www.vancouversun.com/sports/Photos+World+final+game+action/3263886/story.ht ml (Accessed on 09.01.2011)

Figure 5. adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast Commercial (2010) Directed by Johnny Green & Gary Shore: Netherlands

Figure 6. adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast Commercial (2010) Directed by Johnny Green & Gary Shore: Netherlands 59

Figure 7. adidas – F50 adizero: Fast Vs Fast Commercial (2010) Directed by Johnny Green & Gary Shore: Netherlands

Figure 8. Perea, J. (2010) Niketown: Entrance [photograph] In possession of: the author: London.

Figure 9. Perea, J. (2010) Niketown: ‘The Boot Room’ [photograph] In possession of: the author: London.

Figure 10. Perea, J. (2010) Niketown: Nike Elite on stand [photograph] In possession of: the author: London. Figure 11. Nike (2010) Nike Football: Write the Future http://www.nike.com/nikefootball/write-your-future/campaign/tools?locale=en_GB

Godin, S. (2001) Unleashing the Ideavirus. (1st ed.) New York: Hyperion

Harris, N. (2000) Nike deal nets United £303m. http://www.independent.co.uk/sport/football/premier-league/nike-deal-nets-unitedpound303m-624681.html (Accessed on 21.12.2010)

Inception (2010) Directed by Christopher Nolan [DVD] UK: Warner Bros. Entertainment Inc. and Legendary Pictures

Intangible Business (2011) World Cup Series Part Five: Nike and Adidas Battle for Soccer Supremacy http://www.intangiblebusiness.com/Brand-Services/Marketingservices/News/World-Cup-Series-Part-Five-Nike-and-Adidas-Battle-for-SoccerSupremacy~409.html (Accessed on 06.01.2011)

Jones, G. & Morgan, J. (1994) Adding Value: Brands and Marketing in Food and Drink. London: Routledge

Montague, J. (2010) Top five sports virals: fact or fiction? http://edition.cnn.com/2010/SPORT/tennis/08/24/federer.viral.william.tell/index.html?iref =allsearch (Accessed on 06.11.10)

NASDAQ (2010) Nike Could Grab 6% of Global Sports Apparel Market http://community.nasdaq.com/News/2010-09/nike-could-grab-6-of-global-sports-apparelmarket.aspx?storyid=37156 (Accessed on 04.01.2011)

Nike (2010) History and Heritage: Nike extends its reach http://www.nikebiz.com/company_overview/history/1990s.html (Accessed on 21.01.2011)

Nike (2010) History and Heritage: Leading a new generation http://www.nikebiz.com/company_overview/history/2000s.html (Accessed on 21.01.2011)

Nike (2010) Nike Football: Write the Future http://www.nike.com/nikefootball/write-yourfuture/campaign/tools?locale=en_GB

Nike â&#x20AC;&#x201C; Write The Future â&#x20AC;&#x201C; World Cup 2010 Commercial. (2010) Directed by Alejandro Inarritu: Netherlands

NSPCC (2010) NSPCC welcomes Facebook friends. http://www.nspcc.org.uk/news-andviews/our-news/nspcc-news/10-12-07-nspcc-welcomes-facebook-friends/nspcc-welcomesfacebook-friends-article_wda79940.html (Accessed on 20.12.2010)

Smith, T. (1990) The British Medical Association Complete Family Health Encyclopedia. London: Dorling Kindersley Ltd.

Sweeney, M. (2010) World Cup 2010: Nike ad beats official sponsors for online buzz In: The Guardian [online] http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2010/jun/11/world-cup-2010-nike-adbuzz (Accessed on 22.01.2011)

Thomas, J. (2010) Adidas kicks off World Cup activity with Messi, Villa and Zidane ad http://www.brandrepublic.com/news/1002447/Adidas-kicks-off-World-Cup-activity-MessiVilla-Zidane-ad/?DCMP=ILC-SEARCH (Accessed on 20.01.2011)

TradeTheTrend (2010) Nike's "Write the Future" World Cup Ad Campaign Creating Online Buzz for the "Unofficial Sponsor" [online] 11.06.2010 http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=fvsr&v=H_d-5mbf1gw&gl=GB (Accessed on 03.01.2011) â&#x20AC;&#x153;

Rosen, E. (2000) The Anatomy of Buzz. New York: Doubleday

Roxborough, S. & Jones, B. (2010) World Cup finale draws 700 million viewers http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE66C0ZV20100713 (Accessed on 23.01.2011)

Vegan shoe addict (2009) Vegan shoe companies. http://www.veganshoeaddict.com/brandguide/vegan-shoe-brands (Accessed on 05.01.2010)

Wheeler, A. (2006) Designing Brand Identity. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Appendices

Adriance, Brooke (FIFA)

Adriance, Brooke (FIFA) Brooke.Adriance@fifa.org Send email Find email Add to contacts To James Perea From: Adriance, Brooke (FIFA) (Brooke.Adriance@fifa.org) Sent: 21 January 2011 08:44:20 To:

James Perea (jperea1@hotmail.com)

Hi James,

Thanks a lot for the below and apologies for the delay in my response, as I have been out of the office.

Regarding the rights that adidas have with FIFA: As a FIFA Partner, you are correct that they have rights to use the FIFA assets (logos, mascot, etc.) for promotion. Unfortunately, I cannot disclose the details of their contract as it is confidential. Your questions should be answered by someone at adidas rather than at FIFA. I have sent on your questions to my contacts and have asked them to get back to you. If you would like some additional information that you can use in your paper (regarding the marketing structure at FIFA, etc.), I would like to direct you to the marketing section on FIFA.com: http://www.fifa.com/aboutfifa/marketing/marketingconcept.html. Kind regards, Brooke

From: James Perea [mailto:jperea1@hotmail.com] Sent: Donnerstag, 20. Januar 2011 12:52 To: Adriance, Brooke (FIFA) Subject: RE: sponsorship

Dear Brooke, I understand that you are very busy, however I would just like to make you aware that my deadline is 26th January. Any information you could provide me before then would be most welcome. As I mentioned before, even a few words from a person in your position would mean the world to me, and would greatly improve my dissertation paper. Please forgive me for bothering you, as I said I do realise how busy you must be and that this is not a priority for you. However I was very excited by your response, and felt it my duty to follow up such a great opportunity. Kind regards, James Perea jperea1@hotmail.com 07783433281

From: Brooke.Adriance@fifa.org To: jperea1@hotmail.com Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2011 09:37:03 +0100 Subject: RE: sponsorship

Hi James,

Thanks for the below. I will be out of the office for a few days but will get back to you later next week. I will ask my contacts at adidas if you can contact them directly as well.

Best regards, Brooke

From: James Perea [mailto:jperea1@hotmail.com] Sent: Mittwoch, 5. Januar 2011 13:38 To: Adriance, Brooke (FIFA) Subject: RE: sponsorship

Dear Brooke, You are very kind for responding. Having correspondance with the adidas account manager will add great depth to my dissertation, so for this I cannot express my grattitude enough. I understand that you must be very busy, and also that there may be certain information you do not feel at liberty to disclose. To this end, I appreciate any feedback you are able to provide.

Firstly, it is my understanding that the position of adidas as an official partner of the World Cup gives them exclusive rights, such as logo use, supplying the official match ball and supplying the apparel for FIFA officials, referees, ballboys and volounteers. Could you briefly outline any other advantages of being an official partner, particularly through your experience, that may not be as widely known? My essay focuses on brand values created through association with the World Cup. Which key values do you believe adidas aim to project through being an official partner of FIFA and the World Cup? Can these values be emulated as efficiently by brands who are not official partners? Leading up to and during the World Cup, what is the process of communication between adidas and FIFA? How is the relationship between adidas and FIFA established and maintained? Finally, would it be possible to get hold of any replica's of marketing strategies, mission statements or market research used to inform adidas' World Cup sponsorship campaigns? Thank you again for your time, Kind regards, James Perea. jperea1@hotmail.com 07783433281 > From: Brooke.Adriance@fifa.org > To: jperea1@hotmail.com > Date: Tue, 4 Jan 2011 17:11:50 +0100 > Subject: FW: sponsorship > > Dear James, > > Thank you for the below. I work in the marketing alliances department at FIFA and am the adidas account manager. Can you please send more details on the information you would like to have? > > Best regards, > Brooke > > > Brooke Adriance > Alliances Manager > Marketing Division > > FĂŠdĂŠration Internationale de Football Association > FIFA-Strasse 20 P.O. Box 8044 Zurich Switzerland > Tel.: +41-(0)43-222 7777 Tel. Direct: +41(0)43-222 7926 > Mobile: +41(0)79-276 2147 Fax: +41-(0)43-222 7878 > brooke.adriance@fifa.org www.fifa.com > > > -----Original Message----> From: feedback@fifa.com; on behalf of Mr. James Enrique Perea [jperea1@hotmail.com]; [mailto:feedback@fifa.com] > Sent: Samstag, 25. Dezember 2010 22:56 > To: Contact (FIFA) > Subject: sponsorship

> > Dear Sir/Madam, > > I would very much like to ask some questions about the sponsorship between yourselves and official partner adidas conducted during the World Cup this past summer. This would greatly help me with my University dissertation paper which focuses on brand values created through viral advertising and sponsorship during the World Cup (focusing on sportswear brands). As adidas was an official partner, this gives them certain advantages, such as the permission to use your World Cup logo, and I would like to explore these. > > Could you please put me in contact with an appropriete department? I would be very grateful indeed. > > Yours sincerely, > > James Perea > > 07783433281 > jperea1@hotmail.com > > > DISCLAIMER > The information in this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and/or privileged and intended only for use by the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and/or any attachments or if you have received this e-mail and/or any attachments by mistake or accidentally, please notify the sender immediately, delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system, and do not disclose, or make copies of, such information. Any unauthorised use, copying, dissemination, distribution or disclosure of the information in this e-mail and any attachments is strictly forbidden. > > E-mails may be intercepted, altered or read by unauthorised persons. Accordingly, no (contractual) obligations may be imposed on FIFA as a result of an undertaking contained in an e-mail. We further recommend that you use regular mail, courier services or facsimile transmission for any information intended to be of a confidential nature. However, please note that by sending us messages via email, we will be given to understand that you authorise and instruct us to correspond by e-mail in the relevant matter, unless the use of e-mails is not permitted according to FIFA regulations.

DISCLAIMER The information in this e-mail and any attachments are confidential and/or privileged and intended only for use by the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail and/or any attachments or if you have received this e-mail and/or any attachments by mistake or accidentally, please notify the sender immediately, delete this e-mail and any attachments from your system, and do not disclose, or make copies of, such information. Any unauthorised use, copying, dissemination, distribution or disclosure of the information in this e-mail and any attachments is strictly forbidden. E-mails may be intercepted, altered or read by unauthorised persons. Accordingly, no (contractual) obligations may be imposed on FIFA as a result of an undertaking contained in an e-mail. We further recommend that you use regular mail, courier services or facsimile transmission for any information intended to be of a confidential nature. However, please note that by sending us messages via email, we will be given to understand that you authorise and instruct us to correspond by e-mail in the relevant matter, unless the use of e-mails is not permitted according to FIFA regulations.

Dotterweich, Alexander

Dotterweich, Alexander Alexander.Dotterweich@adidas.com Send email Find email Add to contacts To James Perea From: Dotterweich, Alexander (Alexander.Dotterweich@adidas.com) Sent: 25 January 2011 09:00:41 To:

James Perea (jperea1@hotmail.com)

Dear James,

even though I like your passion about this entire topic I'm sure you understand we are very reluctant to share any internal information on strategies, campaigns or collaboration with an asset like FIFA with external parties.

Therefore, I'm afraid, I can only direct you to our PR website where you probably have already searched for valuable information. Here's a link where you will find all FIFA related releases.

http://adidas.synapticdigital.com/HOME/search/FIFA

Maybe a quick note on communication between FIFA and adidas. As Brooke has already mentioend she is dealing with adidas from a FIFA side. So she's our account manager if you wish. And obviously there are a series of workshops, meetings and site visits taking place in preparation of such an event like a FIFA World Cup, starting as much as 4 years before kick-off.

But again, we cannot share any specific details.

Of course, I wish you all the best for your essay and your future career.

Best regards Alex Dotterweich

From: James Perea [mailto:jperea1@hotmail.com] Sent: Freitag, 21. Januar 2011 17:53 To: Dotterweich, Alexander Subject: RE: adidas sponsorship Dear Mr. Dotterweich, You are very kind to respond so quickly. My deadline is on January 26th which is this coming Wednesday. I am extremely grateful to Brooke for all of her help, any information you can provide would be fantastic, however brief. To be able to quote any relevant information from a source such as yourselves would look excellent in my dissertation, and so far I am actually really enjoying the subject matter of adidas' sponsorship during the World Cup. In particular I have focused on 'Fast Vs Fast' and the implementation of viral technique, however I am interested in adidas' advantage over Nike's 'Write the Future' campaign given that adidas are official sponsors. It would just be fantastic to have the thoughts, opinions and maybe any extra information from the people who are actually involved in this proccess to give my dissertation that extra dimension. I understand that certain information is sensitive, however absolutely any answers you can provide would be appreciated more than you can imagine. Even if it is just your opinion on the proccess as a whole. Here are the questions I posed to Brooke:

"Firstly, it is my understanding that the position of adidas as an official partner of the World Cup gives them exclusive rights, such as logo use, supplying the official match ball and supplying the apparel for FIFA officials, referees, ballboys and volounteers. Could you briefly outline any other advantages of being an official partner, particularly through your experience, that may not be as widely known? My essay focuses on brand values created through association with the World Cup. Which key values do you believe adidas aim to project through being an official partner of FIFA and the World Cup? Can these values be emulated as efficiently by brands who are not official partners? Leading up to and during the World Cup, what is the process of communication between adidas and FIFA? How is the relationship between adidas and FIFA established and maintained? Finally, would it be possible to get hold of any replica's of marketing strategies, mission statements or market research used to inform adidas' World Cup sponsorship campaigns?" I understand that this is a big ask, but as I stated earlier, my deadline is next Wednesday, so anything relevant to these subjects that you could provide before then would make such a difference

to my project. I must say that so far the speed of communication from both you and Brooke has been excellent, and for this I am grateful. Kind regards, James Perea. jperea1@hotmail.com 07783433281

> From: Alexander.Dotterweich@adidas.com > To: jperea1@hotmail.com > Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2011 16:38:07 +0100 > Subject: adidas sponsorship > > > Dear James, > > I have been informed by Brooke Adriance from FIFA that you have requested information regarding our sponsorship contract with FIFA. > > If you specify what kind of info you need I will look into this and see what we can share. > > I totally understand that it can be frustrating at times to get hold of substantial information for a dissertation, still I'm sure you will understand that a lot of that information is not meant to be shared with "the outside world". > > Best regards > > > Alexander Dotterweich > Global Sports Marketing Football > Manager FIFA Affairs > > adidas AG | World of Sports | Adi-Dassler-Strasse 1 > 91074 Herzogenaurach | Germany > Phone: +49 9132 84 4947 > Fax: +49 9132 84 3974 > Mobile:+49 160 884 4947 > Alexander.Dotterweich@adidas.com > > > > > > > >

> adidas AG, Herzogenaurach, Germany, Amtsgericht F端rth, HRB 3868 > Chairman of Supervisory Board: Igor Landau, Chief Executive Officer: Herbert Hainer > Further Executive Board Members: Glenn Bennett, Robin Stalker, Erich Stamminger > > This e-mail and any attachments contain privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the addressee(s). If you are not an intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, copying or use of information within it is strictly prohibited. If you received this e-mail in error or without authorization, please notify us immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system. If you need any further assistance, please send a message to 123@adidas-group.com. Thank you in advance.

Questionnaire Results – Grouped Answers

Question 1

Think back to the World Cup 2010 in June. Which Nike campaigns can you remember seeing or being talked about during or around the period of the World Cup?

       



 

“The nike campaign that featured all of the top world players.” “The 'write the future' campaign with Ronaldo and homer Simpson” “i remember the one with all the players in a game...the really long ad with roony in a caravan” “Write the Future. Seeing the TV ad and also the extended one at the cinemas.” “The write the future one.” “i remember the 'write the future' advert by nike... thats about it” “I remember the nike- write the future campaign. it was insinuating that if you buy nike football boots you can make your own future and what you want it to be.” “I remember stars like Didier Drogba, Wayne Rooney, Fabio Cannavaro, Landon Donovan and Cristiano Ronaldo. As I remember the advert is about a match featuring all of these players (including Ronaldinho, who ended up not making Brazil's squad) and shows how one move can lead to a future of glittering success with statues in your honor and guest appearances on "The Simpsons" or washed-up destitution like a bearded Wayne Rooney with a beer gut, eating beans in a trailer park, all tying into Nike's "Write the Future" slogan.” “Nike write the future was a commercial in which featured one of the worlds most admirable football players registered to nike, playing for the countries. Players such as Ronaldo, Drogba, Rooney, were featured players in the ad, and were also among other world football stars. The Commercial ideally reflected the world cup campaign as all player's were wearing their national team shirts.” “errrr nike i think was write the future” “Surprisingly, I can't remember too many of the Nike campaigns”

Question 2

Which adidas campaigns can you remember seeing or being talked about during or around the period of the World Cup?

          

“I cant remember one.” “I dont remember the campaign at all.” “i dont remember any adidas ones. i'd have to look it up.” "Impossible is nothing" “I cant.” “i cant remember any adidas.” “the f50 advert. the motto is that the trainers are 'the lightest, the fastest', if you wear adidas f50 you will outrun your competition.” “The adidas quest advert featured the legend Zidane with other heros such as messi kaka, villa in whom are registered to the brand. The campaign explored players who wish to lead there team to glory.” “errr f50” “I don't recall any specific adverts.” “only the adidas one, with akon, keri hilson and dogrba.. the song ‘o Africa’”

Question 3

Sticking to World Cup related advertising, which campaign did you prefer, adidas or Nike? Why?

 

        

“I only can remember the Nike campaign.” “After seeing both of the commercials i would say that the adidas commercial "impossible is nothing is quite an intense advert and also quite good to watch but it doesn't give enough reference to the brand and it wouldn't make me think adidas as such. The full Nike campaign at least shows the nike logo on more then one occasion, on the boots of the players and the billboards in the background. I also prefer the tag line (write your own future) because when looking at the end turn out of the commercial, It relates the brand to being a winning one.” “nike i guess because i havent forgotten it!” “Nike. I saw it more and it was cinematically very different to others. It also had a range of celebrity and cameo sections that engaged all audiences. Not just the football followers.” “Nike it was a brilliant advert dramatic and grabbed your attention.” “nike. it was a pretty good advert and i can still remember it 6 months after the competition which means it must've been a better campaign that adidas which i cant even remember (did they even have any)?” “i preferred the adidas advert as i like adidas already and the fact that they used zidane in a car as a comparison to messi's speed in the trainers was an effective touch.” “Nike, was the world cup campaign that i preferred, not just because of the players that where involved but the campaign also had a comical side to it, it gave more of a creative edge in regards to others and was not as serious.” “Nike but mainly because of the amount of adverts i have seen in the past and i tend to buy the brand more than adidas” “adidas only remember seeing that” “Nike’s was better”

Question 4

Which brand, adidas or Nike, had the biggest overall presence during the World Cup, and how did they achieve this?

     

 

  

“I think Nike did.” “Nike - much more brand awareness” “Nike? but adidas did sponsor spin offs like the world cup video games and stuff.” “Don't know sorry. Watched only a few games and no after game analysis.” “Adidas possibly due to the ball” “n terms of sponsorship i'd say adidas edged it over nike. Both sponsoring the biggest names in the competition (besides england who still insist on umbro). But adidas sponsored 3 of the teams tipped to win the competition (spain, germany and argentina). however, Nike's 'write the future' advert was more successful than anything adidas put out because they used some of the competitions biggest players (rooney, drogba, ronaldinho, ronaldo). in doing this, i think nike put a bigger stamp on the world cup.” “adidas had the bigger presense as they were an official partner.” “Adidas had overall the biggest presence, the world cup legend was featured and it was an ad that was talked about allot. The downbeat music in the add and the movie trailer-ish intro gave the serious feel and enhanced the adidas image everyone wanted to see.” “if i was to choose id say nike because there publicity already” “I can remember that Adidas had a stronger presence being an official partner of the World Cup” “adidas because the football they used was supported by adidas”

Question 5

adidas was an official partner of the World Cup 2010. Do you think this gave them an advantage over Nike? Why?

   

 



“The only thing I can think of that Adidas did was creating the new ball, which was a bit controversial.” “no, because i dont remember the advertising campaigns and even after watching the commercial i don't think the campaigns were powerful enough.... i still wouldnt say nikes was all that good either.” “i would of thought some advantage but only in regulations as they had no restrictions on advertising. adidas logos were everywhere.” “To the thicker market yes. But those who know both brands that are listed above are some, if not the only, main target competitors where people/ consumers are willing to couple the brands together. There would probably be no Nike without Adidas” “Yes, the football itself which was a big talking point.” “i personally dont think it did. nike are far more established in the world of football than adidas are. the fact that adidas were parters of the tournament would have boosted their presence, but not enough to contend with over 10 years worth of being associated with the worlds biggest teams and players.” “i beleive it would have given them an advantage because if they are partners then adidas might have been given more airtime to advertise which means more people would have seen that advert.” “Being the official partner of such a big event is always an advantage, i.e the official match ball they use is adidas and this has remained for years. However people may see it differently both brands are internationally well known, and there are people that might prefer nike or adidas in which reflects there idol/ admirable football players.” “i didnt even no that they had the official partner ship” “The World Cup is one of the most highly viewed televised events. Sponsoring an event of this magnitude with the brand values it possesses will naturally reflect well on your brand. I think Adidas knew this well. Just how fashion related brands gain publicity during London Fashion week, Adidas was no exception during the WC.” “yea because they had more promoting allowed around the world cup, and I am a living statement of this because I only can remember the adidas adverts”

Question 6

Do you think that association with the World Cup created positive or negative added brand values for adidas and Nike?

   

 

  



“i think adidas received negativity due to a lack of presence whereas Nike received positivity because they were always there” “i think its the best way relate the brand as the best one in that particular sport but i dont think that addias capitalised on it, so negative for them. Nike were probly seen positively” “positive for both” “Positive. It kept them in the public eye and also they did not favour one team. They were in association with the World cup, not a team. However it was expected that a brand that's sales are dominated primarily by the sporting market, and to an extent football market, would sponsor or be in association with a major sporting / football event.” “Positive, any exposure at the top level is good.” “i think positive for both brands but more so for adidas. nike is a renowned associate of football. whereas adidas is more associated with other sports (basketball, athletics etc)as well as football, so their big presence in the world cup would have boosted their name as a sports brand.” “positive. all the football fans and aspiring football players would more than likely go buy a pair of nike or adidas trainers due to the commercial” “I feel positive for this new day and age. World cup is a marketable event so for football players that were both brands boots its a positive value. It makes them sell and attract.” “positive. for the following reasons, 1 the world wide awareness of the event 2 the amount of games being broadcasted all over the world. and lastly the hype before the world cup advertising news papers magizines ect.” “FIFA is an organization that supposedly prides themselves on fair play, racial equality, and charity. Being so strongly associated to FIFA (Official Partners) naturally rubs of FIFA's brand values and possibly equity onto Adidas. Also, being a sporty brand, it might suggest that Adidas is ethical in their production of goods. (However, we all know that little brown children in Sri Lanka are actual the source of production) This was an important step for Adidas, as - like Nike, they were under the magnifying glass due to rumours of sweatshops under their payroll. (Again, being the corporation that they are, and being a MNC, it would not be in the interest of the country to whom they provide ample GDP, to actually expose them.) However, it is positive press for both Adidas and Nike.” “positive, because it was about getting there names out there.. the world cup is very important to some people because it only happens every 4 years, so being apart of something like that could only be a good thing.”

Question 7 What about the backlash when teams get knocked out?

  

 

  



 

“countries that are no longer participating find it harder to relate when they cant be the winning team.” “i dont think this mattered. but i imagine adidas would have been less popular in engalnd afterward. because we subconciously hated the world cup after we did so shit. and adidas was a part of that as a whole.” “That doesn't matter. There were always going to be winners and losers. Sponsors are affected largely by the representation of a team they pour money into. On the other hand it either brand promised a win for a home team then there may of been some blame but then consumers would realise they need some more clothing or product and realise that they would probably buy it from one of the two market leaders.” “Irrelevant you don't blame Nike or adidas for england getting knocked out.” “i think when the big teams get knocked out it doesnt reflect badly on the brands as 99%of the fans buy products before the competition. and as the final saw both nike and adidas with teams still competing, so in terms of both morale and finance, teams being knocked out of the competition wouldnt have had a big effect on the brands” “It still remained as an exciting world cup in which it always is. The 2010 final was highly respected as it featured one of the worlds biggest player on stage.” “none on the brand wot so ever.” “This is quite interesting, England being a country that views soccer as a religion. Seeing their team getting knocked out at such early stages might have curtailed their exposure in the U.K market, as viewership naturally decreased exponentially post knockout. But, the WC is a global affair, so promotion and exposure globally would have carried on till the end of the world cup.” “no, I don’t think there is a backlash.. I think it’s a low risk the brands are taking by supporting the world cup and there are thinking about the big picture… so the more people that watch the world cup, more ppl would see the brand and their advertisments.” “it doesn’t matter – the show goes on” “definitely becos when a team gets knocked out the majority of viewers in that country stop watching or caring, it is only the diehard football fans who carry on”

Which campaign was remembered? 100

0 Nike Remebered name of advert

adidas Didn't remember name of advert

Remember no specific advert

Which campaign was preferred? 100

Participants (%)

0 Nike

adidas

Which brand had the biggest presence during the World Cup?

Participants (%)

0 Nike

100

adidas

Unsure

Was being an official partner of the World Cup an advantage for adidas over Nike?

Participants (%)

Yes

100

Did association with the World Cup create a positive or negative brand feeling?

Participants (%)

0 Nike

adidas Positive

Negative

Measuring the negative effect on Nike and adidas when teams get knocked out. 100

Participants (%)

No change

Small negative impact

Stong negative effect

120

Market cap rebased ($)

110 100 90 80 70 60 May-10

June-10 Nike

July-10 Adidas

A companyâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s success can often be measured in share price, particularly for a comparative analysis of two companies competing in the same segment, so I have investigated the share prices for both companies for the months before, during and after the World Cup. Although the FIFA tournament was a huge event and would certainly have had an impact on these figures, I felt that these charts were not restricted to the football market but rather reflect the wider sports apparel and footwear market, so they are not proof alone of viral success because there could have been other factors involved. For this reason, whilst this graph is included in the appendix, I have chosen not to analyse it in my main body. It is interesting to note here that both companies are affected by the same economic factors as they are in the same market sector, however as you can see, Nike does not lose as much value as adidas. This can quite often be put down to marketing and advertising; it is highly likely that Nikeâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s successful World Cup marketing campaign gave shareholders reason to have faith in the company, whereas adidas share prices might have dropped due to a less prolific campaign.