Innovación Tecnológica

The World Cup Brand Winner: Adidas or Nike?
10:25 AM Friday July 9, 2010

With approximately 2.6 billion people worldwide following the 2010 World Cup, the spectacle has been a field day for marketers, each trying to connect their brand with the strong emotions fans have for their favorite teams. But the stakes are particularly high for those brands that actually sell football gear. Twocontenders, Adidas and Nike, each have a shot at becoming undisputed market leader when the whistle blows on July 11 and the final game concludes. Coming into 2010, their records show them evenly matched: each is estimated to have earned $1.5-1.7 billion in football merchandise sales in 2008 and 2009, and each controls about a third of the total market.
Adidas is playing its tried and tested strategyof being the official FIFA sponsor of the World Cup games. This means the referees wear Adidas uniforms, the footballs are Adidas-branded and televised ads for football apparel and equipment during matches can only be, you guessed it, for Adidas. Moreover, Adidas is the official sponsor for 12 of the 32 teams playing in the World Cup — so the uniforms of teams such as Germany, Argentina, andSpain (all of which advanced to the quarter finals) were emblazoned with the Adidas logo.
Given the shutout sponsorship strategy by Adidas, Nike has had to fight back using different tactics. Back in the 2006 World Cup games, it tried an end-run using digital technology, tapping into consumers' new penchant for online social networking. Collaborating with Google, Nike created the world's first socialnetwork for football fans, which it named Joga.com (in reference to the Brazilian phrase joga bonito, which means "play beautifully"). The site featured discussion groups on various teams, games, and players, and video clips of Nike-sponsored football stars performing awe-inspiring moves. Fans, thought Nike, would flock to the site as a place to commune with like-minded individuals all over theworld, and their enthusiasm would make the videos go viral.
Although Nike came out of the 2006 World Cup in decent shape, thanks in part to the fact that a Puma-sponsored (and not an Adidas-sponsored) team won the championship, its digital strategy didn't deliver as much lift as it hoped. The vision of millions of fans heavily engaged with the Joga website (while subtly being reminded of the Nikebrand) didn't quite materialize. The problem, so it would seem, was that while Nike's move recognized consumers' shift to new media and technologies, it did not capitalize on the deeper and less obvious changes in consumer expectations, attitudes, and behaviors that accompanied that shift.
Fast-forward to the 2010 World Cup games. Once again Nike faces the Adidas official-sponsor shutoutapproach, and once again Nike opts for a digital offense. Only this time, its marketers take a very different approach.
On May 20th, several weeks before the games began, Nike released a three-minute video ad called "Write the Future" on its Facebook page. The well-crafted ad features some of football's most famous players (all in Nike gear) imagining what their future would be if they were to make orfail to make a certain play in the game. In less than a week, the number of Nike followers on Facebook doubled, driven by the desire to see the ad and pass it along. But "Write the Future" is not just a static ad. Fans are given tools to edit the spot — and their edited versions compete for votes from appreciative peers. Meanwhile, a "Write the Headline" opportunity via Facebook and Twitter givesfans an even bigger opportunity to see their creativity in lights; it invites them to post a short grabber of a phrase reporting on the future of a player. The most popular of these are displayed in a bright LED light show (visible from 2.5 kilometers away) on Johannesburg's fourth largest building, which Nike has taken over.
Nike also supported its online campaign with "Write the Future"...