When the World Cup final kicks off this Sunday, futbol fans everywhere will be watching the Netherlands play Spain for soccer supremacy. But in the world of sports marketing, only one competition matters: the battle of stripes versus swoosh.
The Dutch team is one of 10 countries wearing Nike-branded uniforms for the duration of the World Cup, while Spain is on Team adidas, the most successful of the 12 countries that the legendary soccer brand has outfitted. But the championship match that will pit logo against logo is just the final phase of a tournament that has seen the two Goliath sports brands vying for exposure on the world stage with the world’s game.
The score so far? Nike grabbed the early lead with a star-studded, three-minute World Cup ad, created by Mexican film director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, that helped it to steal buzz before the tournament launched. But then it stumbled when several of those stars, such as English superstar Wayne Rooney, disappointed and their teams were knocked out early.
Adidas, meanwhile, which has shelled out huge sums to be the official sponsor of the World Cup among sports apparel companies, has gained momentum as the tournament progressed, dominating the pitch with its billboards and controversial, but stylish, Jabulani ball, which has sold 13 million since the design launched.
“As for the final … I would call it a draw,” said Rob Tuchman, the executive vice-president of marketing firm Premiere Global Sports, adding that each company will be hoping that its side wins this weekend to get the most goal celebration and post-event exposure.”
Adidas and Nike are the Coke and Pepsi of the soccer realm.
Just as Coke has paid dearly to ensure that a Pepsi billboard never appears at the Olympics, adidas has long held a lock on its relationship with FIFA, soccer’s governing body, for sponsorship of the sport’s signature event.
But that doesn’t mean Beaverton, Ore.-based Nike, a relative upstart in the sport compared to its German competitor, hasn’t tried to break through. In addition to the deals it has made to outfit teams, it struck individual agreements with players to wear Nike cleats (footwear is not part of the team outfit arrangement). The company says nearly 50 per cent of the players on the field laced up their shoes.
For this World Cup, it also launched campaigns including a search for undiscovered soccer players to attend a Nike academy and donated a facility in Soweto that offers sports fields, HIV testing and education.
And then there was that epic television ad, which has racked up more than 18 million views on YouTube.
“It created great momentum right out of the gate. It had such a great response,” Nike spokesperson Derek Kent said. Research firm NM Incite noted that the campaign had an ambush marketing effect, taking attention away from adidas – though that was reversed once the tournament began.
Of course, the Nike campaign wasn’t helped by the fact that among the seven superstars featured in the spot, only one scored a goal, and all have now been eliminated from the tournament.
Jeff Cooper, director of marketing communications at adidas Canada, was coy about whether the “Nike curse,” as it has been dubbed, has caused some schadenfreude in the adidas camp. But he said the company was always comfortable relying on the power of its official FIFA partnership.
“They had tremendous success with that creative,” Mr. Cooper said. “But we were counting that when the show starts, it’s adidas. … That story was written because we sponsor, and we invest our dollars, in the World Cup.”
