After all, IMG is one of the largest sports marketing groups and covers everything from athlete management to execution work.
What did raise eyebrows was that Guinness had invited a puzzling line-up of both advertising agencies and sports consultancies to pitch for the business. This move was all the more befuddling considering that one source involved claimed IMG bagged the account by simply offering to broker the rights of the sports property.
Which begs the question: what do clients look for from a sports marketing partner? A dedicated sports marketer? A strategic thinker with execution partners? An advertising agency? Sony Ericsson’s global director of sponsorship, Julian Mack, thinks the type of agency is irrelevant. Instead, he insists, independence is everything. “I look for good advice from someone who isn’t just trying to sell me media or rights that will ultimately benefit his own company.”
And ultimately Mack went with MEC Sports, based in London, to manage the mobile maker’s global tennis tie-up.
Asset neutrality may be harder to find in a large sports marketing agency. Some accuse conglomerates such as IMG, Sport5 and Global Sportnet as essentially “selling products”, as one source put it. While they certainly provide consultancy services, their colleagues in the next cubicle are trying to licence specific athletes and events.
Furthermore, detecting partial advice can be especially difficult for the inexperienced client — and perhaps more so now that many networks have launched dedicated sports units or snapped up boutique strategic consultancies.
One such network-linked unit, Ogilvy Action Sports & Entertainment (recently renamed from 141 Sports & Entertainment) begs to differ. General manager Ben Heyhoe-Flint says its services are not unlike any other independent strategic consultancy, “We don’t own any rights, so clients can come to us knowing they will get unbiased research.”
On the other hand, Terry Rhoads, MD of China-based independent Zou Marketing, is sceptical. “I don’t know if traditional agencies are looking at sports as a serious platform yet. We’ve consulted a number of brands where ad agencies have called us because they realise they need more depth and experience,” he says.
“By nature, we’re supposed to work together, but is that really the best solution?”
Leo Burnett regional planner John Hayward thinks so, especially after landing both Li-Ning and Tiger FC sports accounts last year. “I don’t believe sports marketing agencies understand brand communications to the degree that ad agencies do,” Hayward says. “In the end, the core competency of sports marketing agencies is sponsorship and rights management. Ad agencies understand consumers and brands better than most sports marketing agencies — communications is what we do after all.”
But Sid Duguid, MD of Hong Kong-based strategic consultant Field Asia, says clients remain sceptical.
“My clients often ask me whether they’re getting real value for money from their traditional agencies,” she says. “What traditional agencies are good at is delivering a brief. But most clients still need someone to advise whether the sport is relevant for the brand and how best to tap into it. The problem is that all the big clients have their own creative and media agencies, who protect their clients like hawks.”
Perhaps the upside of sports marketing is that, like a certain global event around the corner, everyone has a shot.
