When the men’s World Cup kicks off tomorrow from Germany, the whole world will be watching, and for once that’s no exaggeration. According to a report from Initiative Futures released this week, the Cup may attract a cumulative audience of 5 billion people for the tournament, which would set a record for the biggest TV audience ever. Games featuring defending champ Brazil will be the biggest draw, the report predicts. But just how many will be watching in the US, where the World Cup has been shown on English-language broadcast TV for only the last 12 years? Estimates vary. Most media people don’t expect this Cup, in which the US has a difficult first-round draw, to fare as well as 1994, when America hosted the Cup and the final game averaged 14.5 million. It will probably better the 2002 final, however, which aired from Asia at 7 a.m. and drew only 3.9 million diehard fans. ABC and ESPN will split coverage of the games. Univision, which has Spanish-language rights, averaged 3.6 million viewers for its last three World Cup finals and will likely do just as well this year with several aggressive cross-platform ventures planned between TV and the internet. But the bigger winners will likely be the advertisers, set to receive billions of dollars’ worth of exposure, and this year’s breakout players, who will get millions in endorsements. To discuss all the media issues surrounding this World Cup, Media Life talks with Irving Rein, professor of communication studies at Northwestern University and co-author with Philip Kotler and Ben Shields of the forthcoming book “The Elusive Fan: Reinventing Sports in a Crowded Marketplace;” Bill McDermott, host of XM Radio’s “World Cup This Morning” who has done commentary for every World Cup since 1970; and Mike Woitalla, executive editor of Soccer America magazine.
How much interest has the World Cup generated in the United States this year compared with past World Cups?
McDermott: I think an immense amount, simply because of what the U.S. did in 2002 [making the quarterfinals]. I think you’ll agree the American sporting public are big-event people. They still seem drawn in by the spectacle of World Cup, so I would say the awareness is very high, perhaps more so than ever in the past.
Woitalla: I’d say more than any other World Cup besides 1994. In 2002, the real wave of major interest didn’t start until the US beat Portugal and it became clear the team would do well. I think it’s also a cumulative effect, with each World Cup there’s more and more interest. Also, I think the media and people in the U.S. are realizing how much interest there is from the various ethnic groups.
Rein: This year's World Cup could generate the most interest among Americans in the history of the tournament. The United States team, ranked fifth in the world, is the most competitive it's ever been, and the German time zone is more convenient for Americans to watch the games. The advertisements from ESPN/ABC Sports, Nike, Adidas, and other companies are also helping publicize and attract fans to the event.
The real question is whether the team's competitiveness, favorable broadcast times, and promotional awareness will be enough to actually translate into fan interest. There is so much competition in the marketplace that soccer's jewel event could fall flat again in the US.
The biggest domestic audiences for the World Cup came when the U.S. hosted it back in 1994. But that did not spark much carryover. Since then, interest in soccer has remained low despite the start of Major League Soccer and kids who grew up playing soccer now becoming adults. Will soccer ever become really popular in this country?
McDermott: I think that soccer will always continue to grow, but I do not think--just because of the culture of our country—it will ever surpass the other major sports. That said, I don’t think any of us involved said it would do that, we just want it to find its niche and be competitive for the sports dollar.
Woitalla: Well, ‘94 was the springboard to launching MLS, which is in its 11th year, so that’s a significant contribution. We needed the World Cup to create a league. You also did see a bump in youth registration, but of course that was already high. Around 80,000 people showed up against Mexico in a friendly game in Los Angeles, I would think that would mean the game is pretty damn popular here, and those were Americans there.
Also, back to the demographics, our country is becoming more Latin American. What I think is interesting, you’ve always had ethnic populations coming to the U.S., but often they left their affinity for soccer behind. Now soccer is an American pastime, it’s absolutely mainstream, so it’s the best of both worlds for new immigrants. It’s no longer a foreign sport here.
What sort of marketing opportunities do advertisers have in the World Cup that aren’t available elsewhere?
McDermott: I think they grab on to the World Cup because of the international aspect of it. This is the sport that is the only one true world championship because it is nation against nation. The World Series is a North American series. People will say, well, the US has the best teams, they’d easily beat the other countries, and maybe they would, but at least other countries would be invited. This is the only one true world championship. To show the magnitude of it, it’s played only once every four years.
Rein: The official partners of the World Cup are willing to gamble an estimated $30 million to $50 million on sponsoring this year's event because of the size, location, and intensity of the fan base.
The fact that fans are so loyal to their national teams to the point of essentially closing down countries during matches is also appealing to advertisers. Finally, since sports are live events, fans are less likely to TiVo the programming, and it gives advertisers an uninterrupted platform through which they can communicate to their target audiences.
How much will the big stars to emerge from the World Cup earn in endorsements?
Woitalla: The World Cup is crazy. If you score a couple of goals, you can end up with a multi-million dollar contract. A lot of players going in are already very well paid and have endorsements. If you’re talking about American players, in a way it’s uncharted territory. Traditionally, American players would have to go abroad to make money.
Rein: The biggest soccer stars like Beckham, Ronaldo or Zidane are earning as much in endorsement dollars as athletes in any other sport. If you look at the top 50 earners, they are well-represented but are no bigger than Tiger Woods, LeBron James, or Michael Schumacher.
How valuable is the World Cup to advertisers? What sort of financial return do they see from this compared with other sports advertising venues?
Rein: The World Cup is the sports world's biggest stage, and its ability to generate strong viewership in a fragmented marketplace is obviously attractive to advertisers. The problem is that the World Cup platform is so valuable that it is has been the victim of ambush marketing in the past. Trying to take advantage of the World Cup name without paying for the association has forced FIFA [soccer’s governing body] to institute a Rights Protection Program for its major sponsors in order to retain the value of a sponsorship.
For advertisers, the World Cup is an all-or-nothing gamble, and the massive amounts of resources spent on the event means that there will probably be nothing left in the budget to be spent on other venues.
An interesting sidelight to the advertising mix in the World Cup is that many of the principal advertisers are targeting their messages to specific countries. So, for example, advertisers are customizing, with the help of technology, their ads to Ecuador or France with the same message but adapted. This strategy bears watching. It will be interesting to see if it becomes a part of the globalization of the advertising world or it causes resentment and kickback from the target markets.
What sort of things is Univision doing for this World Cup that's different from past ones?
Woitalla: At the last World Cup, Mexico was eliminated by the US in the round of 16, and I think after that Univision covered the US as a home team. I think it was interesting and delightful to see, and they did a lot of man-on-the-street type things. I think Latin American fans start to consider the US as one of their home teams. I think Univision has done a pretty good job of covering both teams, and I think we’ll see that this time.
If you went down the street in the U.S. and asked 20 Latinos, I think they could name more U.S. national team players than non-Latinos. If you want soccer to succeed in this country, if you want to make money on it, then what you want to do is give respect to, pay attention to and cater to the Latino community, because the passion is already there.
Rein: Univision is covering every day of the World Cup like Fox or CBS would the Super Bowl. For the month-long tournament, the network will have pre- and post-game programming, the games themselves, and primetime replays every night. It is all World Cup, all the time, and the network is using its three television channels and advances in new media technology to meet the expectations of a soccer-demanding viewership.
A big change in the strategy from 2002 is the inclusion of new media. Univision's web site offers streaming video, photo galleries and insider event coverage, and the network also signed an agreement with Verizon wireless to provide video clips and instant updates about the event to fans on their cell phones. It's quite likely that many fans will now turn to these highlight features for updates and sometimes even a substitute for watching the whole match. If the NCAA Final Four is any indication, this will be a major turning point in how fans view and interact with the sport.
Lastly, with Brazil the obvious favorites, what are three other teams you could realistically see hoisting the Cup on July 9 in Berlin?
McDermott: Argentina, England and France. I think even though Germany is at home, they’ll get nipped out at the end by Argentina. I’ve always liked the way they’ve played.
Woitalla: They certainly don’t have the talent they have in the past, but Germany could [make a run]. Italy is always a favorite, Argentina, which plays excellent soccer and the expectations aren’t as high as last time. France isn’t as strong, but they’re a good team, but top five, Italy, Brazil, Germany, Argentina, and oh, England.
Rein: Mexico, the Netherlands, and England.
