The Aftermath of the Brand Essendon bombshell
In this guest post, Tom Healey of sports marketing agency Octagon assesses the damage for sponsors of the Essendon doping scandal.
To have been a fly on the wall inside AFL house on Wednesday evening.
Twenty four hours on from the closure of negotiations between the AFL and the Essendon Football Club, the key players were keen to emphasise that their energy will be invested in the future, rather than the past.
With this in mind, let’s take a close look at what the future holds for the respective brands involved…
Brand AFL
Critics were quick to condemn the key powerbrokers within the governing body for distancing themselves from the scandal in the early days and highlighted a certain ‘aloofness’ at AFL HQ.
In hindsight, whilst the AFL might have tackled the issue more proactively, the timing of this final settlement is profound. The AFL has drawn a distinct line in the sand and the sport can now enter its showpiece period (and commercial focal point for league sponsors), the AFL Finals Series, without a black cloud above.
Most importantly, from this point on, the 2013 season will be judged by the contest on the field, rather that the shady conduct behind closed doors. You can almost hear the sigh of relief from administrators, sponsors and fans alike.
Verdict: The AFL brand has proven to be as resilient as any in the county and it will move on. Generations of goodwill earned between the league, key partners and fans, built on the back of a fantastic product, innovative partnership offerings and sound management, will ensure the AFL continues to prosper. Were it not for this stored goodwill, the outcome may have been significantly different and I dare say other codes may not have emerged as well under the same circumstances.
Brand Essendon
The Essendon Football Club brand appears to have emerged from this soap opera in better shape than one might have anticipated six months ago. As defiance gave way to genuine contrition, the club has stood tall in the face of great adversity.
The true impact of the affair will become more apparent in the coming months as key partners respond, yet to date their major sponsors are standing alongside the team. Kia’s lucrative deal with the club extends until 2016 and is understood to include clauses regarding banned drugs, whilst the relationship with True Value Solar is scheduled to end in October, as do many smaller commercial relationships. Whilst they have had an exit option, there is value in loyalty. Fans look to sponsors even more in the tough times to see how this loyalty is placed. Essendon’s ‘self-reporting’ of their misconduct has enabled them to take the moral high ground in certain areas and as a result helps their sponsors demonstrate their loyalty.
Verdict: Sponsors have kept quiet to date so the damage to the Essendon Football Club brand is yet to be fully realised. This has the potential to be a tale of redemption – a tale that savvy existing sponsors can be a positive key part of. However the heavy sanctions and subsequent performances may impact the club’s commercial appeal for new sponsors in 2014 and beyond.
Brand James Hird
As the central face in the saga, the impact on the James Hird brand promises to be the most compelling story of all. Hird boldly denied any inappropriate conduct and has shown a resilient attitude under immense pressure. The club has offered their full support, via a contract extension effective after his ban – a huge endorsement. All this considered, it is unlikely that Hird’s reputation and personal brand have emerged unscathed. Fairly or not, there was untoward conduct and the buck stops with the coach.
Verdict: Hird will return to the fold in 12 months as the head coach of the club, but his personal brand will be damaged. Regardless of the sanctions, fans will feel some level of betrayal by this episode. Trust is a crucial element in any endorsement and trust is a very fragile commodity.
Conclusion:
Whilst the Australian Sports Anti-Doping Authority investigation is ongoing and may yet yield further sanctions, the official announcement by the AFL commission on Wednesday 27 was the end of a chapter. The longer term impacts on the key brands involved is difficult to predict, but as we all know Australian sport is a fickle beast and a triumphant win this weekend will go a long way to closing the book completely.
I’d like to see what would happen in the world of sports if Lance Armstrong was demoted to fourth (or ninth) overall. Nothing solid has been spoken about drugs in sport, it’s all the usual blather about the game being in disrepute.
User ID not verified.
Essendon is not a brand – it’s a football club.
The AFL is not a brand – it’s a sports organization.
James Hird is not a brand – he a person, a coach and former football player.
User ID not verified.
Peter. To follow your logic…
Coles is not a brand – it’s a supermarket
Coke is not a brand – its a drinks manufacturer
Apple is not a brand – it’s a technology company
Really?
Of course they are brands. Just like sporting codes, football clubs and profile people. And like any brand they have positive and negative attributes earned by their actions that can be improved or damaged by their representatives (staff, players, fans etc…).
I’m not sure the point you are making, but I’m happy to debate it if you have one.
Adam.
User ID not verified.
peter that is the most delusional comment i have ever seen…they are all brands. sports organisations are brands and athletes/coaches are all brands.
User ID not verified.
My logic is simply the definition of the word, not the jargon that marketers foist upon us.
brand
brand/
noun
noun: brand; plural noun: brands
1.
a type of product manufactured by a particular company under a particular name.
“a new brand of detergent”
synonyms: make, line, label, marque; More
type, kind, sort, variety;
trade name, trademark, proprietary name
“a new brand of margarine”
a brand name.
“the company will market computer software under its own brand”
synonyms: make, line, label, marque; More
type, kind, sort, variety;
trade name, trademark, proprietary name
“a new brand of margarine”
a particular identity or image regarded as an asset.
“you can still invent your own career, be your own brand”
a particular type or kind of something.
“his incisive brand of intelligence”
synonyms: type, kind, sort, variety, class, category, genre, style, ilk, stripe More
“her particular brand of humor”
2.
an identifying mark burned on livestock or (esp. formerly) criminals or slaves with a branding iron.
synonyms: identification, marker, earmark More
“the brand on a sheep”
archaic
a branding iron.
a habit, trait, or quality that causes someone public shame or disgrace.
“the brand of Paula’s alcoholism”
3.
a piece of burning or smoldering wood.
“he took two burning brands from the fire”
literary
a torch.
4.
literary
a sword.
verb
verb: brand; 3rd person present: brands; past tense: branded; past participle: branded; gerund or present participle: branding
1.
mark (an animal, formerly a criminal or slave) with a branding iron.
synonyms: mark, stamp, burn, sear More
“the letter M was branded on each animal”
mark indelibly.
“an ointment that branded her with unsightly violet-colored splotches”
synonyms: engrave, stamp, etch, imprint More
“the scene was branded on her brain”
describe (someone or something) as something bad or shameful.
“the do-gooders branded us as politically incorrect”
synonyms: stigmatize, mark out; More
denounce, discredit, vilify;
label
“the do-gooders branded us politically incorrect”
2.
assign a brand name to.
“branded goods at low prices”
the promotion of a particular product or company by means of advertising and distinctive design.
noun: branding
Origin
User ID not verified.
Very interesting article. Thank you.
It continues to astound me how Essendon have been treated, vs Melbourne Storm, and ….Lance Armstrong. In fact any Olympian proven to be involved with drugs. Essendon have gotton off lightly, and I suspect its actually all about the 18 team game, and the associated commercial agreements, and millions of dollars in sponsorship rights tied up in it all.
Demetriou again has come out silky smooth, protected his league, and with the commercial outcomes in tact!
User ID not verified.
“The longer term impacts on the key brands involved”…will be easy to predict if any Essendon player starts to develop health problems caused by the weird and wonderful things put into them.
User ID not verified.
It’s been poorly managed by all concerned. All I want to know is did the players take performance enhancing or banned drugs?
User ID not verified.
Peter, think you’re a bit off but not much. My crude definition of a brand is ‘it has a logo’, which goes to the whole verb of branding. I don’t think (many) famous people are brands – I agree it’s a wanky marketing term. Certainly not us everyday people. We do not have ‘personal brands’. What we have is ‘character’.
The AFL however is a brand competing in the Sport category. The modern day Essendon is a brand competing in the AFL with other clubs for supporters/players/sponsors etc.
Of course players/coaches can endorse a product. I don’t think that makes them a brand, unless a specific product line carriers their name e.g. Air Jordan. Jordan is a brand (and a person too of course) and what’s more he has his own logo! I would classifiy very few athletes as brands.
David Warner might endorse some sports socks, but I wouldn’t call him a brand. It looks like he does his adverts as a favour for his uncle’s company, rather than any sort of intrinsic brand alignment. It feels like there is little inherit connection between the athlete and the brand. This is the same as all of those Swisse athletes, who all look like athletes for hire, rather than having an inherit deep connection to the product
James Hird is closer to the Dave Warner category, rather than the Jordan, Messi, Tiger Woods, Federer category. It is his character that will be affected, not his minimal or non existent brand.
User ID not verified.
This has been a challenging and most frustrating case. There is no firm evidence of “drug” taking at Essendon. There HAS been evidence of some sort of experimentation with supplements which may or may not have been drugs and there is definite evidence that the Essendon football Club as a whole did not exercise good governance over what was happening. Now while I agree with some penalties for the Club i thought those imposed by the AFL were excessive. What penalties are left if a Club is proven to have used drugs? Make them so severe that the Club folds? James Hird, in particular, has a hefty penalty despite the fact that he is a new coach and perhaps had not been fully informed by the Club of what was happening and about his responsibilities. James will have to carry the scar forever that (by inference) he was party to drug cheating. The entire episode has been tragic, but it is also a wake-uo call to all sports administrators that governance is a major issue in sport now that it has become professional.
As to the branding discussion, all parties (perhaps with the exclusion of Hird) will come out stronger and those sponsors sticking by Essendon will gain from their steadfastness.
User ID not verified.
A Brand is anything that you can monetise and then earn money from it’s image. Very much Brands…. I just want to know who thought that it would be a good Idea to use “Whatever it Takes” as the Essendon catch cry for this season?
User ID not verified.
Peter, I can see you don’t work in the marketing industry, which is actually really refreshing. I, too, sometimes wish words only meant what was in the dictionary, and those meanings never changed. But I’m sorry to say you’ve missed the mark on this by a long way.
A brand is a LOT more than a product – all brands start with one, but over time they grow further and further removed from each other. Think of something like IBM – unless you’re much closer to that company than I am you probably have no idea what kind of products they make any more – but the name IBM itself surely still means something.
Us marketers do love our jargon, and love to debate exactly what is meant by the term ‘brand’ as it is nebulous and intangible. My favourite definition is: a brand is a promise, that the product then has to keep. Maybe you have a better word in which case please share it, but I’m sure you can agree that the AFL, Essendon FC and James Hird have certain expectations attached to them that they have to fight to uphold.
And sorry to say, based on your two comments thus far in this thread you already are a ‘brand’ yourself and peopel are forming their own opionions of you. that’s how it works.
User ID not verified.
I suppose the point I’m trying to make in a contentious manner is that I’m opposed to vanilla words that quickly become meaningless – hence the overuse of the term brand renders it somewhat meaningless.
It’s all part of what I call the McDonaldisation of the language – a McDonald burger is purposefully bland to attract the largest possible pool of consumers. A one taste fits all kind of thing.
We have a series of such one-word-fits-all words commonly used such as event, reaching out, facility, space, which in fact are meaningless because you need to inquire what sort of event. A weather event? What sort of weather event? Oh, a typhoon. A facility? What sort of facility? Oh, a prison. Or sorry, should that be detention centre?.
Etc etc
Brand is falling into that category. The people who use it obviously think they are hip and clever.
I don’t share the view.
User ID not verified.
I resent ‘McDonaldisation’ being foisted upon me
User ID not verified.
Ian – they have addmitted to giving players AOD-9604 and Jobe Watson admitted to knowingly taking it. AOD-9604 is a BANNED substance.
User ID not verified.
Anyone heard of “Brands Essence of Chicken”?
User ID not verified.
The media seem to think that we eat breathe and think Essendon.no one has been shamed or called a drug cheat. Think Lance Armstrong think Alex Rodriguez. The while thing stinks .
User ID not verified.
Essendon was prepared to fund Julian Burnside QC to defendJames Hird’s reputation, so why doesn’t it seem as keen to fund a player’s [test] case against Steven Danks to force him to stand before a judge and jury and answer under oath exactly what he injected into the player? Or, is Hird’s reputation more important to Essendon than protecting it’s player’s health?
User ID not verified.