Millsport Blog

Ah, the allure of one-on-one basketball

After watching the State Farm Home Run Derby last night, I thought it might be the right time for the NBA and its sponsors to revisit this idea:  NBA One-on-One Championship, "brought to you by Vitalis Dry Control."

It had it all:  Six-foot-3 guards going against 6-foot-11 centers, a dark and deserted arena, and '70s-era on-screen graphics.  What's not to like?

Here's how Bob Lanier remembered it:

"They brought us all to a high school gym somewhere. I think that they figured that Pistol Pete was going to win it. Vitalis was the sponsor and they made a deal with Pistol to do the TV commercials for the event. But he didn’t win; he got knocked out just before the finals. Jo Jo (White) and I ended up playing in the finals.  [After beating White], they gave me a Vitalis trophy and a satchel that contained about $15,000. I remember unzipping it and pretending that I was tossing the money out to the fans."

Seriously, for a brand-supported sports promo done 30-plus years ago, it did a lot of things right.  For starters, it featured a number of the NBA's top players actually competing with a decent level of intensity.  And it was hosted by Keith Jackson and Bill Russell, which upped its credibility. 

Ok, so the production value wasn't up to today's standards and the sponsoring brand could have been integrated further into the event and broadcast.  But it was an innovative idea at the time that we might be able to learn from.

For me, it’s a reminder that less is more. (And I’m not talking about the paltry payday. A satchel of 15,000 $1 bills . . . Nice work, Vitalis.)

This competition is so elemental. A ball. A rim. And two guys (in tank tops and tube socks, no less) playing a game we all played in our driveways and at parks. The simplicity is refreshing.

Of course, this thing wouldn’t fly in this superstar-player-as-brand, attention-challenged, 21st century environment. To be incarnated, it’d have to be tricked up with 24 cams, incentive-laden gold balls, shape-shifting backboards, enhanced gravity spots, and, quite possibly a Burmese-tiger trap in the floor — all set to pulsating music.

Sports advertising, sponsorships may go flat with AB-InBev merger

With the AB-InBev acquisition apparently set, everyone from the TV networks to event marketers to sports properties are trying to calculate how this is going to impact their business.

First, recognize that Anheuser-Busch is one of the largest spenders in advertising and sponsorships with an annual spend of $475 million on advertising in the U.S., of which an estimated $218 million is spent in the world of sports.

Now, compare this to what InBev currently spends on advertising here in the U.S. - approximately $58 million annually for brands like Bass, Beck’s, Stella Artois and others.  It's easy to conclude that the AB model of “spend money to make money” will drastically change. 

As an efficiency expert, InBev has a reputation of cutting unnecessary spending, which is pretty much the opposite of the AB model.  Combine this with InBev’s traditional opposition to sports spending and you can see why the sports industry is getting a little nervous.

Look at what other brands are spending in sports.  Chevy is the second largest spender at an estimated $45 million annually.  You might say, "Sure, but that's one brand.  AB represents several brands." 

True, but it paints a picture of just how committed AB has been to sports advertising and sponsorships. 

Just looking at the beer category we can see that -- combined -- Coors and Miller spent only $172 million in sports, which further highlights the significance of AB's position in sports. 

If InBev does what it traditionally does and significantly cuts back on AB's advertising and sponsorship budgets, we could expect to see as much as a 50 percent reduction of this $218 million annual spend. 

If InBev takes a more modest approach, we might see a 25 percent reduction in sports spending to begin with, and a slower pace of these reductions.  But even at that rate this cut would surpass Chevy's annual sports spend. 

Everyone in the industry will feel this at some level.  I predict the impact will be felt first in second- and third-tier markets, and later with a new or revised strategy in key major markets.

The bottom line is this:  The days when AB outspent everyone to maintain its "King of Sports Sponsorships" crown are likely over. -- DP