I was watching the PGA championships last weekend, marveling at the incredible talent playing the course. By this time, most avid fans have come to realize just how much of a stake advertising has in the events. With the advent of television, print publications and the internet, producers have discovered how lucrative the opportunity truly is.
There’s just three easy steps to all of this:
Step 1: Pick a winner. Everybody loves a winner, and if people (especially kids) see their winner wearing a Nike hat, polo, or drinking Gatorade, they’re going to want to as well. The more your player/team wins = the more exposure they get = the more you sell.
Step 2: Push the brand. Stick your brand’s logo on as many pieces of equipment, clothing and event signage as humanly possible. It’s important to associate your name and image with an immediate subconscious response.
Step 3: Produce adequate reserves of product, price accordingly, and sit back to watch the profits roll in.
And thats really all there is to it. Of course people are paid millions of dollars to figure out precise marketing strategies, and how to reach specific demographics with specific products, but for the bare bones, this is pretty close. (Don’t tell your marketing agent I told you all of this by the way).
You may be wondering where I’m going with all of this, and I know it’s sloppy to get to the point this far into the post, but here it is anyway: what happens to the advertising prices at sporting events when television has reached the “HD Revolution?” Television stations have been broadcasting in high definition for a while now, providing a resolution over seven times greater than standard definition TV. Needless to say, it’s pretty crisp. HD promises that you will see more of your programs, with details that were never before visible. Details like logos and advertisements? Sounds about right.
A few years ago, you’d be hard-pressed to make out the Nike logo on Tiger’s hat unless he was relatively close to the camera. HD extends that distance considerably further. For instance, if the logo is distinguishable for 40% of the time with standard definition, HD may increase that figure considerably, perhaps even double it.
How does this affect television, pro sports, and advertising as we know it? Here’s how, and we’ll use Tiger as our hypothetical example once again. Tiger Woods walks around all day long sporting whatever Nike tells him to wear, and they pay him a lot of money to do it. On a good day on the course, a few thousand people see the logos on his hat, shirt and shoes. The real exposure, however, is on television, especially for championship rounds, and spectatorship undoubtedly reaches into the millions. If HD allows more people to see the Nike logos for more of the time, Nike is going to sell more apparel, and make more money. As a result of this, Tiger is going to want more money for his efforts, and in my opinion, he certainly deserves it. This reasoning would also hold true for the golf courses offering advertising opportunities, as well as any other sporting or other event.
As with any form of marketing, more exposure equals more money. HD has brought us an advancement in picture quality, though perhaps also a curse in the constant delivery of advertisements. It’s almost like a never ending stream of commercials. Maybe we’ll even learn to ignore it in time, just like we change the channel or skip thorough them with the Tivo.
Next Week: I’ve decided to start a weekly post devoted to my favorite shots. No not vodka, schnapps and the like, but rather images I’ve made over the years (or last week) that I’m truly proud of, and ones that I think I can bring some light to way they were produced. Nothing exceptionally fancy, but if you’re looking for technical tips on production and cinematography, these are the posts to look for.
