Opinion

What goes into making an AFL Club’s ‘brand’?

Screen Shot 2014-09-19 at 11.37.23 AMWith the AFL finals in full swing, Team Epic head of strategy Tony McKay looks at why some clubs are always in the news, irrespective of their performances, while others fade from the headlines.

Why are some AFL clubs always in the news, seemingly always relevant and contributing to the footy story, regardless of on-field performance week-to week? And yet other clubs seem to almost disappear as soon as the losses outnumber the wins?

Look at the Western Bulldogs and St Kilda in 2014. Poor performers, yes, but also largely anonymous. When did you last hear a spirited footy discussion about either club? What’s their brand story at the moment?

Compare that to Hawthorn, Richmond and even Melbourne, all have had lean periods over the last decade. Yet they have never been out of the news. At various times Jeff Kennett, Shane Crawford, Buddy Franklin, the late Jim Stynes, Paul Roos, Trent Cotchin, Jack Riewoldt and Dustin Martin, just to name a few, have all contributed to the footy dialogue whilst their teams have been struggling. Be it President, Coach or players, it happens too often to be coincidence.

So what makes a strong footy club brand; one that can be relevant and interesting throughout the performance cycle?

Just like consumer brands, a sporting club’s strength comes from a mix of tangible and intangible brand assets. On the tangible side, each club’s brand has a commercial value based on the exposure it generates.

In AFL, brand commercial value (not to be confused with revenue) comes from three main sources:

  • media exposure
  • merchandise value
  • hospitality and events

Media exposure is important to a brand. Collingwood’s brand is more valuable than Brisbane’s because it gets more free-to-air TV, more often in the prime timeslots. In the final round of the home and away season, 616,000 people tuned into Seven and 7mate in all markets to see Collingwood’s Friday night clash against Hawthorn, whilst on Sunday afternoon a mere 17,000 people tuned into 7mate to see the Western Bulldogs play GWS, a match which was only shown in Sydney. More people have more opportunity to see the brand, therefore their sponsorships are more valuable.

Similarly, the size and strong affinity of Collingwood’s fan base means they drive better commercial return through merchandising and licensing the brand, which is self-fulfilling because it means further exposure of the brand through all those scarves and jumpers being worn.

It also means attaching the Collingwood brand to a president’s lunch, or a player appearance event, is more valuable. They can charge more than the struggling clubs for exactly the same product, because more people want to be associated with Collingwood and all it stands for.

But it’s the intangible value that’s more interesting.

Consumer brands have intangible value, driven primarily by three further factors:

  • differentiation;
  • emotional capital; and
  • relevance.

In footy terms, differentiation means a club having its own story to tell, one that gives it a recognisable personality. St Kilda is making steps in this direction, with its nascent New Zealand push, and the hiring of Peta Searle, the first female development coach at an AFL club. Others such as the Bulldogs point of difference is harder to discern. Perhaps it’s the continual pushing for equalisation, but that’s a broken record overlaid with the whiff of defeat and desperation.

Conversely, it’s easy to create a snapshot of what separates the powerful clubs. Hawthorn is for families and loyalty, Collingwood is “us strugglers against the world”, Carlton is home of the rich and self-made, Richmond is the untamed unfashionable masses. Good or bad, at least you can say they stand for something different.

Emotional capital is the degree to which we are already in love with a brand. It cannot be built overnight, but is an authentic expression of past positive associations and experiences.

I strongly suspect that footy fans had far greater emotional capital invested in the old Fitzroy, despite some atrocious performances, than currently seen with the similarly-performing GWS Giants. Some of this Fitzroy capital flowed to the Brisbane Lions, and many neutral AFL fans were genuinely glad to see their success in the early part of the last decade.

Finally, relevance is a crucial brand intangible, and where some AFL clubs struggle the most.

Footy clubs play a role in all communities, helping tie people together through a shared belief in their team. But when that faith is sorely tested, repeatedly, a club needs to find something else to hold that attention, and define the role they play in their fans’ lives. Some clubs – Collingwood, Essendon – do it through the strength of their leaders. Eddie McGuire, James Hird (pre2013) and others offer a symbol that the club is on the right path and will get there in the end. Who besides Paul Roos is currently fulfilling that role at the bottom end of the AFL Ladder?

When you look at AFL through this prism of consumer brands, you see the reasons why some clubs remain strong and relevant. They have high tangible commercial value, as all successful brands do, but it’s more than that. It’s a long history of intangible value, of being different whilst still being relevant, and with the believable promise of paying a glorious dividend on that emotional capital invested over years and decades.

On-field success is a short cut, but for the strong brands not a pre-condition to remaining powerful. Relevance, differentiation and a believable promise are the keys.

Tony McKay is Head of Strategy at Team Epic

ADVERTISEMENT

Get the latest media and marketing industry news (and views) direct to your inbox.

Sign up to the free Mumbrella newsletter now.

 

SUBSCRIBE

Sign up to our free daily update to get the latest in media and marketing.