Posts Tagged ‘twitter’

I had a great time yesterday at the 140 conference in Washington, DC. Check out the video to see some smart guys giving their perspective on sports teams and social media. These guys actually do social media/digital marketing for some of the area’s pro teams – Washington Wizards, Capitals and DC United.

The video features Andrew Rosen (Washington Wizards), Mark McClure (DC United), Sean Parker (Washington Capitals) and Steve Cobb (Activ8 Social). Hope you enjoy.

Sports Teams on Social Media – 140 Conference Video from Jason Peck on Vimeo.

I highly recommend you check out a 140 conference in your area if you get a chance. The events, put on by Jeff Pulver, are a great way to learn about “the state of now” and how real-time tools and technologies are affecting a variety of industries and businesses.

I found two excellent examples of how companies are using Twitter for specific initiatives to add value to sports fans’ experiences of events. I wanted to share them with you and would love to hear what you think.

Sony Ericcson Twitter Cup

The Sony Ericcson Twitter Cup is a really interesting mashup of Twitter and the World Cup. It’s a well-known fact that sports fans like to show pride for their teams, and like to think that they have more pride/support than fans of other teams. And soccer fans are some of the most passionate fans in the world. Sony Ericcson has created the Twitter Cup interactive website as an interesting way for fans to compete with other fans to see which World Cup team has the most support.

The concept is simple. The more tweets a specific team receives, the farther that team goes in the Twitter Cup.  Fans can score points for their team in two ways.

1) Tweet team name and World Cup together (ex: England World Cup)

2) Tweet team name and World Cup with the Twitter Cup hashtag (ex: Serbia World Cup #twc)

The website includes a cool interactive stadium that automatically fills seats with fans of a given team based on the number of tweets that team receives. This is a nice effort from Sony Ericcson and one that I think fans will definitely be talking about.

Brand Bowl 2010

This one comes from Mullen and Radian6, a reputation monitoring SAAS company. According to The Lost Jacket, Mullen approached Radian6 with an idea- leverage the power of social media for one of the biggest sports events in the world.

Why do many people watch the Super Bowl? The ads.

The Brand Bowl 2010 was born from this. This site will leverage Twitter and the monitoring capabilities of Radian6 to show people what everyone is saying about each ad. In real-time. Fans will be able to see which ads are getting tweeted the most, what people are saying about them, and if it is positive or negative.

Instead of having to wait until Monday morning to see what traditional media outlets say are the “best” ads, you can follow things in real-time. Awesome.

—

I’m seeing more and more examples of Twitter+sports=really interesting content and initiatives. What do you think about these mashups? What other interesting mashups have you seen that you liked?

In other news, I wanted to give a quick shoutout to Dan Beeman and his company, Sponsorship Insights Group, which just relaunched their website. Dan is a good guy and has done a great job building his network/company through blogging and using his LinkedIn group to connect sponsorship professionals around the world.

Have a great night and rest of the week!

It all started with a simple tweet that I posted last night:

Do you think the term “sponsorships” is outdated and everything should be called partnerships? just an idea I’ve been thinking about…

It was really just an idea I’ve briefly thought about on occasion. A lot of times the terms “sponsorships” and “partnerships” are thrown around and used interchangeably to describe deals between entertainment and sports properties and brands. But does the wording that properties/brands use reflect how they actually see their relationships? Should we be moving towards the use of partnerships (which imply that both sides benefit) and away from sponsorships (which unfortunately has not been very well explained to the general public)?

Your Responses

After I posted that message on Twitter, I got some great responses. Thanks to all who contributed the thoughts below (earliest responses posted first):

rscibetti@JasonPeck I definitely see a mix of both terms. Definitely tells you something about how the entity views the relationships

MJMunson@JasonPeck No, people just need to know what it means. Look up the latin roots for sponsor and you’ll see it is a perfect word for its use.

BizballMaury@JasonPeck It’s moving more & more toward partnerships as deals are multi-pronged. See my NY Post article on Yankees/Audi http://ow.ly/hoef

jpbrunelle@JasonPeck I think it depends on the context, but ’sponsorships’ will remain in play for the foreseeable future. Bigwigs want to sponsor.

MJPatzwaldt@jasonpeck i still think there’s a difference between sponsorships and partnerships…those sponsored tend to have longer term benefits

jeffmard@JasonPeck partnership implys 2-way street, sponsorship implys other “partners” exist. Which is more true? then u have advertiser…

Play3r_VP@JasonPeck sponsorships is out. partnerships are in. it’s about relationships + alliances… NOT about hand outs.

mmahoney13@JasonPeck I think the Sponsor should be emphasized more in many cases, esp PGA Tournaments and even teams. they enable us to do more

sponsorpitch@JasonPeck IMO, not outdated & no need to hide from the term + lots of different types of biz ‘partnerships’.. something more narrow needed

EmilyRCampbell1@JasonPeck There r still true mktg sponsorships out there even tho’ some local partnerships may lean more toward philanthropy.

briangainorRT @JasonPeck poses a great question – thoughts on “partnerships” vs. “sponsorships”? How do you see your relationship with partners?

Darren_Heitner@JasonPeck I love the idea of banning the word “sponsorship”, all successful “sponsorships” are partnerships. Both sides should win.

Sponsorships vs. Partnerships – My Thoughts

Let’s see how Wikipedia defines the terms.

“A partnership is a type of business entity in which partners (owners) share with each other the profits or losses of the business.”

“To sponsor something is to support an event, activity, person, or organization financially or through the provision of products or services.”

The partnership definition that Wikipedia gives isn’t completely relevant to this conversation–which is about using the term sponsorship vs. partnership when describing deals between sports/entertainment properties and brands. In most cases, no brand is going to be willing to equally share in the losses of the property’s business–unless it’s a special deal where the brand is actually able to share in the profits, too. I’m not aware of this happening very often.

The sponsor definition is interesting as it emphasizes giving support. In my opinion, this “giving support” aspect has not been emphasized nearly enough in discussions and articles about sponsorship. For example, all we heard about for awhile was that since Wachovia wasn’t doing well, they shouldn’t be wasting money on sponsoring their golf tournament (and they actually removed their name from it, even though it was paid for). Or that Northern Trust shouldn’t have had a party for their best executives at their tournament. People hear that, instead of hearing about how much money from each PGA TOUR event goes to charity or that the money spent on parties/events provides jobs for cooks, caterers and others. But I’m getting off subject here.

My thinking about this sponsorships vs. partnerships issue is that it’s more of a reflection on how each side sees the other and how they approach relationships. My feeling is that it starts with properties. Do you want a sponsor (someone who supports you via money or services) or do you want (can you get?) a partner (someone who has a greater stake in your success)? While some smaller properties may be happy just finding sponsors, some of the most prestigious properties can be more selective and seek partners who have very strong brands and who must commit more than just money to the relationship.

What do the big leagues/events call these relationships?

Let’s check out some websites to see what wording some of the major pro leagues and premier sports events use when publicly describing their relationships with brands.

• AVP – sponsors (listed on bottom of home page)
• MLB – sponsors (here’s the link)
• NBA – not clear from their website
• NFL – not clear from their website
• PGA TOUR – title sponsors for tournaments and huge list of marketing partners
• USGA – partners (logos listed on bottom right of their home page and here)
• The Masters – no official wording but relationships with IBM, AT&T and Exxon Mobile
• US Open (Tennis) – sponsors (list is here)
• Breeders’ Cup – partners (list is here)

The funny thing is, for some of these properties (and many teams as well), it’s hard to even tell who their sponsors are by looking at their websites! Or they hide them and make you really look around. That would not make me happy I was a sponsor/partner-no matter what the relationship is called. It definitely didn’t make me happy when I used to spend a lot of time researching that stuff.

As consumers’ attention becomes even harder to get (because we have more choices now than ever), my feeling is that the term “partnerships” will be used more often. Properties who used to sell out every event and may have been content just getting money are now in the same boat as brands–they need eyeballs and attention, too. Now both sides are asking each other for access to market to their customers, and the best relationships will be those where both sides help each other. Sponsorships certainly aren’t dying–I just think the word “partnerships” may be more beneficial in describing these relationships and ensuring that both sides are getting what they want and working to help each other succeed.

But maybe I’m completely wrong. Maybe the words should be used interchangeably and there isn’t really much difference between them. Maybe good sponsors are essentially partners. What do you think?

After the news came out last week that the NBA’s Charlie Villanueva had used Twitter to provide an update to fans during halftime of a game (and then went on to score 19 points in the second half to lead the Bucks to a win), Coach Scott Skiles and the Bucks decided to put an end to Villanueva’s halftime tweets:

“We made a point to Charlie and the team that it’s nothing we ever want to happen again,” Skiles said. “You know, (we) don’t want to blow it out of proportion. But anything that gives the impression that we’re not serious and focused at all times is not the correct way we want to go about our business.”

A few days later, Shaquille O’Neal sent fans an update via Twitter hinting that he would be giving them halftime “tweet”.

“Attention all twitterers I’m a tweet at halftime and not get fined like vill a new wave a whteva his name is,” Shaq wrote. He followed through on his word, and Suns coach Alvin Gentry knew about it beforehand and didn’t care.

Using Twitter to provide real-time updates to fans during games is an awesome way to give fans access to the players they love and get them closer to the game. Fans still crave the same thing they always have–access–but teams need to make sure they’re taking advantage of new technologies to deliver this. If fans are closer to the game and players, it’s good for the teams; creating stronger fans equals more revenue.

I’m all for preserving the game and making sure players are focused, but the benefits of using Twitter outweigh any potential negatives. Besides, how much focus can you lose by sending a 140-character message? Is this really any more distracting than when players are asked to give halftime interviews?

It looks like the new Women’s Professional Soccer league also sees the value of Twitter in involving fans in the game. But they’ve taken it a step beyond just tolerating halftime tweets. During the league’s first game on March 29, players will be allowed to use Twitter to provide real-time updates throughout the game, from the sidelines. It will be interesting to see if this is a one-time-only thing or if it is something the new league will embrace throughout the season. For a league that is seeking to attract fans in any way possible (and what league isn’t?), I think this is a great move that will generate some buzz and have some of the bigger leagues watching closely. What do you think?

Just thought it was interesting to track the NCAA and selection show updates on Twitter using Twitter’s search and Twackle. If you don’t know what Twackle is, you can check out my article about it here.

From a Twitter search, it looks like the NCAA is being mentioned on Twitter at least every minute, if not more.

Topics such as the NCAA, March Madness and Big East are ranked as the top trends on Twitter right now.

You can see some of the most popular NCAA-related links on Twackle.

If you’re a brand targeting NCAA basketball fans, do you think it might be a good idea to monitor the conversation here and maybe get involved to build relationships?

I just caught this today on Twitter and wanted to share:

Win a Suite (22 tix) against the Blazers tomorrow night. Respond #Timberwolvesgiveaway by Noon tomorrow to be entered. (1 winner @ random)

The Minnesota Timberwolves sent this out from their Twitter account as a way to reward people for following them on Twitter and surprise/delight a fan. The T-wolves only have a little over 150 followers now on Twitter, but I’m sure this will help them grow that number and give an amazing experience to one lucky fan. It’s great to see an NBA team embracing Twitter like this!