A Story in Two Parts.
One:
Der Spiegel
Gag rules, ambush marketing, press guidelines: SPIEGEL spoke to FIFA's marketing director for Germany, Gregor Lentze, about the football association's rigid sponsor protection program -- and about FIFA's poor image.SPIEGEL:
50 days before the start of the World Cup, FIFA's image couldn't be any worse. What happened?Lentze:
That may be your impression. According to a recent poll, 70 percent of the people questioned take a positive view of FIFA's work. The negativity comes mainly from the media, unfortunately. But of course this kind of event always involves conflicts of interest.SPIEGEL: Like with the 12 host cities that feel harassed by FIFA's excessive regulations? Munich mayor Christian Ude even spoke about "gag rules."
Lentze: That was a while ago. In the meantime,
we've established new agreements with the cities, on the fan parties for example, and there was never any gag rule involved. On the contrary, we're providing the cities with sponsors.
It's only thanks to us that the parties can be financed.SPIEGEL:
Because you're not allowing the cities to find their own sponsors.Lentze:
Of course the cities can find their own sponsors. Those sponsors can't be competitors of our partners, of course. We have 15 official partners and six national sponsors, and we have the obligation to protect their rights. If this were a tennis tournament at some local sports club, no one would be complaining about this sort of thing. We're not even taking the protection of our sponsors as far as we could. Local beer will be sold at the parties in Berlin, for example.
SPIEGEL: That's not the impression we got. Not so long ago, the company Berlin Tourism Marketing wasn't even allowed to display the flags of the 32 participating countries. Is FIFA now claiming property of national flags?
Lentze: No, of course not. The 32 flags were displayed, as they will be again, obviously. The whole thing was played up a bit. It wasn't about the flags at all; it was about cooperation with Berlin Marketing's sponsors. Anyway, the issue has been resolved.
SPIEGEL: Another example. During the official ticket lottery in Leipzig, the city of Nuremberg was allowed to hand out its local specialty, Lebkuchen (a sweet cake), but the city of Frankfurt wasn't allowed to hand out its own specialty, Weingummi (wine gums). Isn't that a bit absurd?
Lentze: FIFA and the Organizing Committee provided lottery stands free of charge, as well as financial support for the participants. The cities had an opportunity to present themselves to the international media -- in accordance with clear rules. We made an exception for Lebkuchen from Nuremberg, because they're world-famous.
SPIEGEL: With all the bad press you've been getting, it's a wonder your sponsors aren't urging you to be a little more flexible.
Lentze: Our partners take a sober view of what we do. They know very well that we're adequately protecting their rights.
SPIEGEL: By setting up a dress code in the stadiums?
Lentze: The idea that we're going to turn away people who happen to be wearing the wrong T-shirt is absurd. Just like the rumor that official state guests will only be allowed to drive around in Hyundai cars, or that taxis will have to cover their advertisements. In Bavaria, there was a carnival joke that we would only allow square-shaped beer mugs. Some people actually phoned us ...
SPIEGEL: ... which just goes to show what kind of rules people have come to expect from FIFA.
Lentze: No, when you speak to people, they all know it's nonsense, as you'd expect. That sort of thing just seems to go well in the papers.
SPIEGEL:
So how much money are you getting from these sponsors whose rights you're defending so vigorously?Lentze: We're receiving about €700 million ($858 million) from our sponsors. The overall revenue will be about €1.8 billion ($2.2 billion) -- with costs in the region of €1.1 billion ($1.4 billion).
SPIEGEL:
Which leaves the €700 million ($858 million) profit from your marketing activities. So why bother with all this advertizing lunacy? And is FIFA even allowed to make a profit, as a registered association?Lentze:
I don't think you can reasonably call private financing through sports sponsorship "advertizing lunacy." Of course FIFA needs an income to cover its expenses. More then 70 percent of the income goes right back into international soccer, in the form of either financial support for soccer associations or grants for various projects -- FIFA just set up the hundredth soccer project in Africa. In fact, the World Cup is currently the only FIFA event that involves a profit. Even the Confederations Cup was a matter of grants.
SPIEGEL: What the host cities find especially aggravating is that FIFA's endless regulations aren't restricted to the stadiums, but involve "protected areas" all around the stadiums.
Lentze: Forget the expression "protected area." FIFA and the Organizing Committee have to be responsible for what happens outside the stadiums too; that's why we're negotiating with the cities over the creation of a "controlled territory." Such measures are necessary for guaranteeing security and efficient transportation. Of course we don't want any ambush marketing or competing events there either. It's perfectly normal to protect the rights of your sponsors; the German and European Football Leagues do exactly the same thing, as does the IOC. If we didn't take this sort of thing seriously, people would accuse us of being unprofessional -- and rightly so.
SPIEGEL: German law prohibits restrictions on advertizing and trade -- and FIFA really has no business outside the stadium.
Lentze: Of course there shouldn't be any such restrictions, and FIFA isn't imposing them. But you do need a license for putting up a large poster -- that's something a city has the power to decide. Although it's not in their interest to adopt a restrictive policy either.
SPIEGEL: Why not?
Lentze: The cities and stadiums are getting international attention. I don't think they want to be seen surrounded by salesmen, huge banners and posters.
SPIEGEL: When the banners and posters aren't those of the official sponsors, you mean.
Lentze: Obviously, our partners are subject to the same regulations.
SPIEGEL: And who makes sure the rules are respected -- an army of FIFA lawyers?
Lentze: Our marketing division will have 250 people in action during the events, roughly 20 of them legal experts. They'll be traveling between stadiums in teams, and they'll be helped by volunteers.
SPIEGEL: Isn't your fear of free riders cashing in on the World Cup a bit exaggerated?
Lentze: Excuse me? We've already had 1600 cases of ambush marketing, and the World Cup hasn't even begun. In 2002, a major corporation paid a fan from Costa Rica $5000 to drag a 100-meter (328 feet) advertizing banner into the stadium. That's reality. But everyone is always talking about the little bakery being sued for damages. Which is just complete nonsense: there hasn't been a single case of FIFA suing a bakery for its "World Cup roll."
SPIEGEL:
Isn't the most prominent free rider the leader of the Organizing Committee himself -- Franz Beckenbauer, with the Erdinger beer advertisement that's currently showing on German TV?Lentze:
No, I wouldn't say that at all.SPIEGEL: There are other reasons why FIFA is widely considered a spoilsport. Many public screenings of the World Cup are being cancelled because of the costs involved -- and because your regulations make it too difficult to find sponsors.
Lentze: The main reason why these screenings are being cancelled is that the security measures are so expensive -- security checks at the doors, fences to surround the event space. That's got nothing to do with marketing. We've been very flexible with regard to marketing issues. 95 percent of the public viewings take place in schools, restaurants and churches -- as free-of-charge, non-commercial events. The others (about 60) involve the usual sponsorship rules: sponsors have to be regional, and they mustn't compete with our sponsors. The negligible royalty fees are donated to charity, by the way.
SPIEGEL: The way you deal with the media is pretty extraordinary too. Your so-called "guidelines" infringed on the freedom of the press.
Lentze: The document in question is dated, and in practice FIFA has always followed different principles. The document was a slip-up, and one we took care of in March. We now no longer have "guidelines." We have an "information leaflet." Of course there are no restrictions on what can be written and published.
SPIEGEL: Your restrictions on the use of online images of the games also caused a lot of trouble.
Lentze: That issue has been resolved too. There are no more restrictions with regard to online images -- neither with regard to the time when the images can be used nor with regard to the number of images. It's true that online images are a new source of profit; the market for them is only beginning to take shape. But we've reached a compromise and consider the debate closed, at least as far as this World Cup is concerned.
-Interview conducted by Marcel Rosenbach
Show Posts
- free transfer - May 2005