Publicising Orienteering (/European Orienteering Championships)

[Oldman]

Community orienteering + fill out some forms = government in recession sized funding 

Medals + hard work + good PR = glossy sexy big bucks sponsorship 

this is one of the most sensible things I've read on here for a while

I have to disagree, I'm afraid. "Big bucks sponsorship" requires media (and particularly TV) coverage on a regular basis, and most sports in UK including orienteering can't offer that to a potential sponsor. It's not about "PR", which is something else altogether.

Also, while coverage of orienteering's achievements at EOC will be of interest to a proportion of orienteers, very few people not already interested in orienteering will go looking at the BOF web site for that, and even if they do look, will only be mildly interested in what to UK orienteers may be fantastic performances. So, yes it should get coverage, but primarily for the committed orienteers who're interested in the results, and then the priority is sadly in my opinion not as high as you might think.

[WillG]

[quote="Oldman] Also, while coverage of orienteering's achievements at EOC will be of interest to a proportion of orienteers, very few people not already interested in orienteering will go looking at the BOF web site for that, and even if they do look, will only be mildly interested in what to UK orienteers may be fantastic performances. So, yes it should get coverage, but primarily for the committed orienteers who're interested in the results, and then the priority is sadly in my opinion not as high as you might think.[/quote]

Is this simply not isolating the existing and commited base that BOF has, leading to more criticism such as that going on on this forum?

On a different note anyone care to suggest a reason why (not taking anything away from the competitors achievements!) the women qualifying in the top 17 are up to 12 minutes down on the winners when in the mens they are around 5?

[aiming off]

Ruth has a really, really good point which deserves careful consideration.

British Triathlon: just look at the feel of their website, and contrast and compare with the BOF site.

Annual Income Statement

£800,000 from Sponsorship (Tata, GE, Adidas etc, etc,)
£350,000 from Membership
£200,000 from UK Sport

Result is a sport with a far better marketing and PR profile. And a huge annual increase in participation year on year. And with Government not driving the bus.

And what is centre stage. Alistair Brownlee, not the Slopton-in-the-Slush local triathlon club night initiative.

[MIE]

why is there nothing on the BOF website about the competition? Poor that they're not supporting the guys that are out there representing the nation!

There is now -- eventually

[SJC]

British Triathlon: just look at the feel of their website, and contrast and compare with the BOF site.

Annual Income Statement

£800,000 from Sponsorship (Tata, GE, Adidas etc, etc,)
£350,000 from Membership
£200,000 from UK Sport

But Triathlon will get a huge amount of tv coverage during the Olympics which orienteering won't. Not surprising that that is where the sponsors money is going.

[MIE]

Ruth has a really, really good point which deserves careful consideration.

British Triathlon: just look at the feel of their website, and contrast and compare with the BOF site.

Annual Income Statement

£800,000 from Sponsorship (Tata, GE, Adidas etc, etc,)
£350,000 from Membership
£200,000 from UK Sport

Result is a sport with a far better marketing and PR profile. And a huge annual increase in participation year on year. And with Government not driving the bus.

And what is centre stage. Alistair Brownlee, not the Slopton-in-the-Slush local triathlon club night initiative.

So at the moment the Non-Olympic orienteers get more from the "government agencies"
than the Olympic Tri-Athletes.

For a sport in the public eye with a large number of participants (of which quite
a few are in the 18-40 age group(s) ) the total income appears to be less than
that for BOF. On top of that everyone knows that Triathlon is a sport whilst a
large portion of the British public thinks that orienteering is a walk in the park
(literally)

[Oldman]

Ruth has a really, really good point which deserves careful consideration.

British Triathlon: just look at the feel of their website, and contrast and compare with the BOF site.

Annual Income Statement

£800,000 from Sponsorship (Tata, GE, Adidas etc, etc,)
£350,000 from Membership
£200,000 from UK Sport

Result is a sport with a far better marketing and PR profile. And a huge annual increase in participation year on year. And with Government not driving the bus.

And what is centre stage. Alistair Brownlee, not the Slopton-in-the-Slush local triathlon club night initiative.

So at the moment the Non-Olympic orienteers get more from the "government agencies"
than the Olympic Tri-Athletes.

For a sport in the public eye with a large number of participants (of which quite
a few are in the 18-40 age group(s) ) the total income appears to be less than
that for BOF. On top of that everyone knows that Triathlon is a sport whilst a
large portion of the British public thinks that orienteering is a walk in the park
(literally)

I don't understand what point is being made. Triathlon is an Olympic sport with all the media attention (and public awareness and perception) that that (and world champions in an Olympic sport) brings. Membership income is double BOF's, government support for performance athletes is double BOF's (and BOF's is soon to be zero), and there is an extra £0.75M or more in sponsorship. Would Triathlon get any of that sponsorship if it were not an Olympic sport? Give an example of a non-Olympic sport to compare orienteering with and I'd be interested in the comparison.

[Oldman]

A further piece of data: Triathlon in England got more than double the grant that orienteering did in the period 2009-13.

[aiming off]

There is a widespread perception that orienteering is incapable of attracting commercial sponsorship as

1) It is not an olympic sport.

2) The current marketing of orienteering has been optimal, yet the sport has not been capable of attracting commercial sponsorship because it is inherently unmarketable.

There are many examples of non-olympic sports that get huge amounts of commercial sponsorship, so clearly that is not the only barrier. So the spotlight has to be on marketing. Marketing is key: hence is the sport marketable and could it be marketed better?

I would suggest triathlons success is more to do with successful marketing than the fact it is an olympic sport.

[Oldman]

There are many examples of non-olympic sports that get huge amounts of commercial sponsorship, so clearly that is not the only barrier.

This is proving an interesting debate.

What other sports are you referring to and are there any without significant TV coverage?

[aiming off]

Clearly Formula 1 and Golf are two obvious examples of non-olympic sports: simply to make the very obvious point that it is not whether your sport is an olympic sport that matters, it is one of many things that can lead to attracting media attention.

On a much smaller scale the McCain UK Cross Country Challenge Series receives sponsorship, but has no TV coverage, I think. And it is not an olympic sport.

The key determinant of whether you receive sponsorship is can you market the sport effectively and get it into the media spotlight? So has orienteering done the very best it possibly can here?

[WillG]

I know that when I was a bit younger the attractive thing about triathlon was that it was marketed as one of the true endurance sports. If the marketing was better for events like the Bloodshlitter, now Tim Watkins Trophy, then at least this event could become of of those "hey have you heard of" events. This would move orienteering away from it's "country park treasure hunt" status and more towards that of the endurance sports, where it belongs.

[brooner]

This is an interesting discussion (hence splitting it off from the EOC thread), and probably as good a place as any to ask, but if anyone would like to get involved (ideally doing, not talking) with improving the publicity/marketing/reporting/photography/videoing/anything else around orienteering in the build up to WOC2015 (& the 6 days, and any other events across the UK tbh) drop me an e-mail brooner @ nopeindustries.com

[brooner]

And in addition, if anyone ever feels like writing for us about anything (within reason) please do so or get in touch.

[Scott]

On a much smaller scale the McCain UK Cross Country Challenge Series receives sponsorship, but has no TV coverage, I think. And it is not an olympic sport.

Although it's a bit simplistic to say "it is not an Olympic sport" - the XC sponsorship is just a tiny part of a much bigger sponsorship deal that covers track & field as well - the McCain-UKA deal (£5million over five years) does make for a pretty interesting comparison.

Although UKA is an Olympic governing body, the McCain deal is for sponsorship of grassroots activity: these national "Challenge Series", which obtain pretty minimal media coverage, the Power of 10 website, and club activities/open days. The high-publicity Olympic/performance side of things is covered under a completely different sponsorship deal (with Aviva).

Of course the big difference is that UKA has the "guaranteed" income from the (very, very substantial) sponsorship of its the high-profile Olympic activities that it can use to pay a large, professional marketing department (or consultancy - I'm not sure which they actually do) who are then able to go out and obtain further sponsorship to fund their other work.

It's also interesting to see that UKA sees "securing commercial partners and sponsorship" as one of its three primary roles.