Did anyone else notice that in the lead-up to and advertising for the 2006 US Open Series — the "greatest road trip on earth" — some marketing genius working for the USTA decided that "200 players in 10 tournaments held over 6-8 weeks competing for more than a $2 million prize" was a bright idea?
By my calculations, the men and women were competing for a total of more than $31 million. Granted, if the US Open Series points winner were to win the US Open Grand Slam championship in New York, he/she would take home something like a $2.2 million purse. But that's hardly the point when you're trying to make your sport look spectacular to the average remote-wielding couch potato.
Kobe Bryant hauls down $2 mil every 10 games (or less). By my reckoning, $2 million spread out over 200 players is on average $10,000. I'll keep my day job, thank you very much. What was the USTA thinking?!!!! Let's get serious about promoting our fine game and put up some numbers that will make Joe Q. Public put down his salted nuts and beer, sit up and take notice.
For crying out loud... we've got to do better than that!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Hey, I noticed that too! There is a danger in going too far in trying to promote our sport to the "average Joe". Dumbing things down is not always the way to elevate the great game of tennis so more people watch, let alone play.
I think the best approach is to play on the sport's strengths and traditions. Not every sports fan is going to watch the French, or even the US Open!!!!!!!!!! Trying to create rivalries and good guys vs bad guys is a false facade that I think could permanently damage our sport. Just because its good for marketing doesn't necessarily follow that its good for the sport.
TWR
Points well taken, TWR, but I'm not sure you're addressing the point I'm making, which is simply that in the lead-up marketing for the US Open Series "mini tour" this past summer, the USTA made the marketing 101 error of underselling themselves. Mktg 101 says: emphasize the positives, de-emphasize the negatives. $2 mil is a negative figure to throw out there, especially when you have the $31 mil card in your back pocket. On all other points, I wholeheartdely agree with you.
--Don
I agree with your numbers, Don. I do think it's going to take more than money to broaden tennis' fan base. We need player marketing strategies to make them more interesting to potential tennis fans. In the last ten years, I can only think of two players who are not only elite players, but great showmen: Agassi and Nadal. Personality and charisma creates interest.
Post a Comment