Watch Portugal, $3,870. See Portugal, $799. Watch England, $3,402. See England, $799.
If you’re a fan frustrated at sky-high World Cup ticket prices and you see that billboard, you might sigh knowingly, giggle, then think about flying to Lisbon or London instead of heading to a game.
If you’re soccer’s governing body FIFA, you’re not laughing at the Air Transat campaign, which went up on billboards across Toronto last week. Nor are you amused by Tim Hortons’ special edition Taste of the Globe Timbits which went on sale last month.
The four new Timbits are accompanied by a soccer-themed ad campaign, and are on sale until July 17, just two days before the World Cup final.
While neither Air Transat nor Tim Hortons are official World Cup sponsors, it’s clear they’re trying to catch some of the attention generated by soccer’s biggest global showcase, said marketing expert Ken Wong.
“Campaigns like these are really about trying to associate themselves with a big event, or get some of the attention, but without the sponsorship piece,” said Wong, a marketing professor at the Smith School of Business at Queen’s University. “You can call it ambush marketing or guerrilla marketing, but some might call it just being clever.”
Still, said Wong, companies who try to take advantage of big events like the World Cup or Olympics need to walk a very fine line when it comes to using official terms or brand names associated with the event, or they’ll soon find themselves reading a snippy lawyer’s letter, or getting sued.
“They tend to be very, very, very, very strict looking for infringements of trademarks, implied associations, ticket giveaways, especially in areas around venues,” said Wong.
The most recent event held in Canada which drew global attention was the Vancouver Winter Olympics in 2010. Subway — not an official sponsor — ran an ad campaign with U.S. swimmer Michael Phelps, Wong noted.
“They had him in ads talking about ‘the winter action in Vancouver,’” said Wong. “Because he’s an Olympian, of course, viewers associated the ad with the Olympics, even though Subway didn’t mention the word.”
For Rafik Belmesk, head of strategy at Courage Inc., which produced the Air Transat campaign, dancing around the edges makes for a better creative challenge — and for more memorable ad campaigns.
“Every brief comes with restrictions, and i think that’s where creativity flourishes,” said Belmesk, adding that official sponsors often face strict rules too. “If you have a brief without restrictions or a challenge without restrictions, it rarely gives birth to good work.”
Garci Inigo, vice president of marketing at Air Transat, said the campaign came together quickly.
“It was very quick,” Inigo said. “A matter of a few weeks.”
Making a campaign like Air Transat’s work, said Courage’s Belmesk, means tapping into existing conversations in a way that fans can relate to.
“The opportunity for brands when they’re not a sponsor,” Belmesk said, “is to integrate themselves in a way that makes sense from the fan experience point of view, which I think we managed to do with this campaign, because it really tapped into this frustration fans have at being priced out.”
While the campaign might be a creative success for the airline and agency, that kind of advertising has sometimes led to lawsuits — or the threat of them — from organizations like FIFA or the International Olympic Committee. And there’s a simple reason, say sports business experts — money.
With FIFA expected to rake in $2.8 billion (U.S.) in sponsorship revenue this year, they don’t want sponsors questioning the value of their own investments, said Kieran Maguire, a professor specializing in soccer finance at the University of Liverpool.
Top tier sponsors like Visa, Coca Cola or Lenovo pay $400 million (U.S.) for a four-year World Cup cycle, Maguire said.
“FIFA is very careful not to upset them. If the attention goes to rivals, then the value of the sponsor deal evaporates, which is why FIFA enforces it so aggressively,” said Maguire.
In a written statement, FIFA said brand protection is vital to “secure the revenue streams, which enable us to support the development and growth of football globally.”
And with World Cup headlines talking hotel cancellations, delayed visas and exorbitant ticket prices, that means sponsors will be even more cautious than usual, said David Carter, founder of L.A.-based Sports Business Group.
“If the bloom is off the event because of all the negativity around it, and now you say ‘wait a minute, now our competitor has successfully ambush marketed here,’ that doesn’t set yourself up for a really great…discussion,” said Carter.
Still, said Carter, while FIFA, the IOC and other sports organizations might guard their trademarks zealously to keep sponsors on board, they have to strike a balance at not cracking down too hard on nonofficial marketing, especially on things which have a significant fan participation element, like office pools.
“Ultimately those properties want that dialogue, they want the debate, they want the young people consuming the content. I think it ultimately can play to everybody’s benefit,” said Carter. “When you’re filling out the March Madness bracket at the office, or the Super Bowl pool, I don’t think that’s anything but good for the NFL or the NCAA.”
So far, said Transat’s Inigo, the airline hasn’t been contacted by FIFA over its Watch-See campaign. Still, though, he’s gotten plenty of feedback worldwide.
“It’s nice to see it in different languages and see how it resonates,” Inigo said. “I even had a former colleague in Korea tell me they’d seen it.”
