P&G may be the premiere packaged goods company in America. Their people are at the top of the business. In the world of retail, P&G is on the leading edge of product display. I have seen them take over an entire aisle just to make sure the products are properly merchandised. P&G also has a long and storied history in brand advertising. From show development to award-winning creative, P&G practically has their own wing in the halls of broadcasting.
So the “Proud Sponsor of Moms” Olympic campaign has left me wondering if the program might have drifted afar. First, P&G signs a $10mm deal that takes them through 2012 Summer Olympics. They sign several athletes to help them promote their top household and beauty brands. Then they create the sponsor of moms campaign which has been running during the games. P&G has backed it up by underwriting some expenses for athlete’s mothers to attend the Olympics as well as sponsoring the family house in Vancouver. While the campaign is endearing and may provide one of the most touching ads of the games, there seems to be some kind of disconnect in the integration. What seems to be missing is synergy and activation. POS is clearly absent in some notable chains and the only consumer activation I have seen is a microsite Thankyoumom.com which offers additional mom-inspired commercials and a sentimental acknowledgement option for consumers to send their mothers. It just does not tie together. I get the sinking feeling that there may have been too many cooks in the marketing kitchen on this campaign.
The elements of the P&G Olympic campaign are not connected. For example, P&G is heralding mothers, yet has not sponsored a mother. All of the athletes they originally signed are childless. 20 mothers competed for the US team in the 2008 games and 6 are currently competing in Vancouver http://www.momsoutloud.com/content/you-go-girls-6-amazing-2010-olympic-athletes-who-are-also-moms. While they may not have the cache of Lindsey Vonn, they do make a connection with the creative and offer a very compelling merchandising proposition. To be fair, the Olympics are a sponsorship gamble when it comes to athletic endorsements. P&G also sponsors Lindsey Jacobellis who failed to complete her run in the snowboard cross. In a recent release, P&G picked up an additional 10 endorsements which include two of the Olympic moms http://newsblaze.com/story/2010010706354800002.bw/topstory.html. It remains to be seen if they will tie the sponsorship to the mom campaign. An ideal candidate would have been Jenny Potter of the US Hockey Team – a true “hockey mom” that offers many creative activation concepts. The US women’s hockey team is favored to medal and could lend itself to a favorable comparison to the 1980 “Miracle” hockey team that is celebrating the 30-year anniversary of winning gold.
It seems that P&G went the slick Madison Avenue route rather than the grassroots “Thanks Mom” approach. They are running the same ad on a high-frequency schedule and some early reviews have been a little chippy on the BRANDWEEK web board http://www.brandweek.com/bw/content_display/news-and-features/direct/e3i550e90cd48d89b8ce78660b3fc0da37e?pn=2 . It may have been more effective to have a montage of commercials featuring Olympic moms as well as mothers of athletes. Home video clips would also be an effective way of showing that every champion had to start with a mom shuffling them off to practice. It certainly works for those NBC Sports features. I literally have to have a box of Kleenex handy for my wife and daughters when those air!
P&G may be holding their cards until after the games to activate their sponsorships. This allows a clear and concise picture of the athletes they want to congratulate and those they would rather forget in the their merchandising. It seems that, in the application of the mom campaign, they may have missed the boat. The world’s eyes are upon Vancouver for the next week and I have yet to see any publicity for the support of mothers P&G has already committed. Considering it is one of the most altruistic sponsorships of the Olympics, it would be a shame for it to also be one of the biggest secrets of the games.
