Marketing Against the Marketers

As part of these summer games, the London Organising Committeeof the Olympic Games (LOCOG) have issued strong brand protection guidelines that detail what you can't say, and the combinations of words that are banned. They even go so far as to help with organising parties in your own home or street.

This all adds a slightly big brother edge to the games though, as I described in my previous post, and as Oddbins have observed. This report in the Drum website describes how Oddbins are tackling these brand restrictions head-on. Their marketing director describes the campaign as "a marketing counter-strike in defiance of the labyrinthine restrictions placed on businesses by the Olympics’ legion of brand guardians".

As well as a prominent window display campaign, anyone who comes into an Oddbins branch wearing Nike trainers and has in their pocket a set of Vauxhall car keys, an RBS MasterCard, an iPhone, a bill from British Gas and a receipt for a Pepsi bought at KFC will receive 30 per cent off their purchase.

So it's good to see some marketing creativity coming out of the games. As a campaign, it stands out cleverly, alongside British Airways brilliant Home Advantage campaign urging us: "Don't Fly. Support Team GB." Also, in the defiantly anti-brand-strangling bracket is the Lodnon 2012 Oimplycs campaign, undertaken in a window display by Focus Formal Wear, again in protest at being told how not to capitalise on a vibrant time in the UK.

Sport For All?

Nothing puts the icing on a cake of something like the Olympics like being involved. Imagine the honour of being one of the 2000 schoolchildren lining the route to the Olympic stadium on the eve of the Opening Ceremony. At 9pm on Friday, the eyes of the world will be on London, with estimated viewing figures of millions, and there you are, centre screen, ushering the athletes to the Olympic Stadium, bearing the flags of their nations.

But don't think that you're just going to dress up, turn up and enjoy it, because you could be turned away. It was announced this week that the children would have to wear Adidas trainers, or wear unbranded trainers, if they wanted to be part of the ceremony.

As if the branding madness hadn't gone far enough, the rule was further reinforced that athletes will have to wear Adidas branded sports goods on the podium.

Now I know that Adidas have to protect their brand - they're one of the premium sponsors for the Games, and they have provided millions of pounds worth of equipment and so on. But to put proud parents in a position where their child cannot get involved unless they wear a specific brand of footwear just seems draconian in the extreme.

And if I had spent my whole life training for one event, and had prevailed against the lifelong challenge that presents, and all my competitors on the day, the last thing I would accept is a sponsor telling me what to wear.

Little wonder perhaps that a recent survey indicates that children would rather watch sport than take part. Now is the time when openness, nurturing and positive attitudes to all forms of sport should be garnered,

So on both counts, stories like this fail .. they must damage Adidas' brand, as now we all think they're idiots, and children are just going to be disillusioned with the whole thing. Particularly the child sent home because he wouldn't fund Adidas policy of paying £10 a week to impoverished Cambodian workers to manufacture Olympics sports wear.