FAI, soaring and Olympic Games

Marketing success is, at its most basic level, measured in terms of "exposures." In other words, how many times is your brand, product or company "exposed" to the eyes and ears of your target audience. Soaring is a general thing so IMO our audience is everyone. Next there is the "meaningfulness" of the exposures. Somewhat more subjective but worth considering. It is far more cost effective to focus on basic exposures than it is to try and target. Especially when you have little or nothing to start with (our situation). Trying to target from the beginning is like trying to land on the centerline after your rudder has fallen off the glider. Especially true when the sport is so amazingly obscure (almost hidden from the public) here in the USA. That and the fact that our demographic is 55+ (perhaps 65+) and needs to be equalized or exceeded at the teen and twenties demographic if we are to grow again (or even survive).

What I am talking about is basically regularly leveraging free exposure as a matter of practice. Employing the media and other marketing engines to work for us as normal operating procedure. It only takes paying attention. For example, every SSA contest (or any soaring event for that matter) should be writing press releases and calling local media outlets (TV, print, web) to visit. Media loves invitations. The exercise of inviting media can be automated and tuned. Media involvement is very rare in the USA, even at Nationals or SSA Conventions. It should be absolute at every event. Particular attention should be paid to sports media. As a sport, we are sitting on the ground with the engine off in terms of marketing. We have few youth members to leverage for help as other sports do (paragliding). Quite embarrassing. We need to work harder to make up for this unfortunately.

The Olympics is important and valuable. Shrugging it off because you have watched curling and not picked up curling is fairly dumb (sorry). Imagine an average Joe seeing 10 minutes of the Olympic glider race event similar to some of the better SGP coverage you may have seen. Now imagine 1.8 Billion people (Olympic viewership in Brazil this summer) being potentially exposed to glider racing. The Olympics have very, very strong youth demographics. They provide sports with a certain legitimacy as well. It might be hard for some of you to get your heads around, but I am thinking 10-20 years down the line here. If we want to have a great, thriving sport then we need to get our heads out of our butts and shamelessly expose the sport as much as possible. Why not? Or should we just keep standing around with our hands in our pockets? This conservative, tip-toeing around alone has gotten us where we are today. It cannot be allowed to continue.

Finally an Olympic bid is not that big of an undertaking for us here in the USA. The good news is that the US so separated from the FAI and Europe (the big boys) that we would not have to move a muscle. They would lead that effort because FAI is relevant and US rules are irrelevant. We should all be absolutely begging the FAI to build an Olympic bid for soaring. All upside for us and zero work.

Olympic Sailplane Racing. Sounds great to me! What is there to lose?

Sean

I hate being a "Debbie Downer" but.......... I was on the 1988 Olympic Team and have been part of an orphan sport for 45 years

"What's to lose" actually also What is to gain? is another good question before embarking down a road without a map.

I will give you 2 experiences that kind of speak to both.

1. We had a woman who had place 5th in the prior World's and felt to get on the podium requires her not to work at all and therefore fundraising was a high priority. She raised sufficient funds, unfortunately the thing she was unable to do was have sufficient time to train - she did not make the Team.

2. This/my Sport has been in every Olympics since 1936. They felt pretty cocky and safe after the 1980 Olympics - we won 3 medals, had Olympic profit sharing money, excellent exposure and a great sponsor. They forgot to take good care of the sponsor and that exposure alone would not gain any new Athletes.

The sponsor is gone - the money is gone and how many of you have heard of Olympic Sprint Kayaking

It is dangerous to lose focus and to believe growth comes easy via exposure.. It is all about the execution of a plan and allowing it to evolve and follow where it succeeds, while stopping what does not.

Soaring is a beautiful Sport and I believe there are many ways to expand - I am not sure Olympic exposure is a magic bullet or maybe even a waste of time.

my 2 cents

WH

On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 10:46:43 PM UTC+3, wrote:
I hate being a "Debbie Downer" but.......... I was on the 1988 Olympic Team and have been part of an orphan sport for 45 years

"What's to lose" actually also What is to gain? is another good question before embarking down a road without a map.

I will give you 2 experiences that kind of speak to both.

1. We had a woman who had place 5th in the prior World's and felt to get on the podium requires her not to work at all and therefore fundraising was a high priority. She raised sufficient funds, unfortunately the thing she was unable to do was have sufficient time to train - she did not make the Team.

2. This/my Sport has been in every Olympics since 1936. They felt pretty cocky and safe after the 1980 Olympics - we won 3 medals, had Olympic profit sharing money, excellent exposure and a great sponsor. They forgot to take good care of the sponsor and that exposure alone would not gain any new Athletes.

The sponsor is gone - the money is gone and how many of you have heard of Olympic Sprint Kayaking

I seem to recall a couple of chaps by names of Ian Ferguson and Paul MacDonald who weren't too bad at it.

Olympic Sailplane Racing. Sounds great to me! What is there to lose?

Sean

Dignity. Precious time. Besides those two Sean you are out of touch with modern reality of information processing. Only 6% of people trust the media, so why would take up a sport based on mainstream media coverage? If the media says it is safe and fun, 94% hearing that won't believe it. http://www.activistpost.com/2016/04/...ent-trust.html
And lest you think old school media still has credibility, the ghey old lady is near death.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ly-profit.html
SGP is perfect you make the rules to make it how pilots want to fly and new media compatible. Then pump it out with youtube, vimeo, twitter, gab, get a soda company involved, etc. The X-Alps is redbull media's largest audience event. Soaring and walking, plus human drama. The mainstream media and the olympics are extinct, they just haven't realized it yet. Waste of time and dignity.

Geeze. No wonder we are nearly extinct. The glass is half empty, arrrrrhg!

Let's just peck away on our private Facebook accounts and tell more lies? That will fix things. :-)! Immediate gratification in small private groups beats hard work, trying new things and having a chance at success any day! In other words, we will never know if we never try.

Seriously, I think that the FAI has dropped the ball by not answering this question for all of us and trying over the bast 80 years to being soaring into the Olympics. Soaring would be a great Olympic television sport.

I was part the US Olympic Sailing Team. I did the Pan Am Games (our class was not in the Olympics) and it was a great experience. The Olympics definitely does not hurt sailing in the slightest. It is outstanding coverage and a huge highlight for the sport and for youth sailors. It would be amazing for soaring in my opinion...

Notice women are in the race, level with the men and ages range from 18 to 52 yrs old...

https://youtu.be/4emdfoTvNKk

On Wednesday, November 2, 2016 at 11:59:32 AM UTC-4, Sean wrote:
Marketing success is, at its most basic level, measured in terms of "exposures." In other words, how many times is your brand, product or company "exposed" to the eyes and ears of your target audience. Soaring is a general thing so IMO our audience is everyone. Next there is the "meaningfulness" of the exposures. Somewhat more subjective but worth considering. It is far more cost effective to focus on basic exposures than it is to try and target. Especially when you have little or nothing to start with (our situation). Trying to target from the beginning is like trying to land on the centerline after your rudder has fallen off the glider. Especially true when the sport is so amazingly obscure (almost hidden from the public) here in the USA. That and the fact that our demographic is 55+ (perhaps 65+) and needs to be equalized or exceeded at the teen and twenties demographic if we are to grow again (or even survive).

What I am talking about is basically regularly leveraging free exposure as a matter of practice. Employing the media and other marketing engines to work for us as normal operating procedure. It only takes paying attention.. For example, every SSA contest (or any soaring event for that matter) should be writing press releases and calling local media outlets (TV, print, web) to visit. Media loves invitations. The exercise of inviting media can be automated and tuned. Media involvement is very rare in the USA, even at Nationals or SSA Conventions. It should be absolute at every event. Particular attention should be paid to sports media. As a sport, we are sitting on the ground with the engine off in terms of marketing. We have few youth members to leverage for help as other sports do (paragliding). Quite embarrassing. We need to work harder to make up for this unfortunately.

The Olympics is important and valuable. Shrugging it off because you have watched curling and not picked up curling is fairly dumb (sorry). Imagine an average Joe seeing 10 minutes of the Olympic glider race event similar to some of the better SGP coverage you may have seen. Now imagine 1.8 Billion people (Olympic viewership in Brazil this summer) being potentially exposed to glider racing. The Olympics have very, very strong youth demographics. They provide sports with a certain legitimacy as well. It might be hard for some of you to get your heads around, but I am thinking 10-20 years down the line here. If we want to have a great, thriving sport then we need to get our heads out of our butts and shamelessly expose the sport as much as possible. Why not? Or should we just keep standing around with our hands in our pockets? This conservative, tip-toeing around alone has gotten us where we are today. It cannot be allowed to continue.

Finally an Olympic bid is not that big of an undertaking for us here in the USA. The good news is that the US so separated from the FAI and Europe (the big boys) that we would not have to move a muscle. They would lead that effort because FAI is relevant and US rules are irrelevant. We should all be absolutely begging the FAI to build an Olympic bid for soaring. All upside for us and zero work.

Olympic Sailplane Racing. Sounds great to me! What is there to lose?

Sean


"Marketing success is, at its most basic level, measured in terms of "exposures."""

Marketing success is based on ROI of the marketing budget. We have data that tells us where we are likely to find new pilots, to ignore that and go broad reach is silly and a losing proposition. As to the exposure .. being in the Olympics and getting exposure is two different tasks. Networks pick what they cover based on mass appeal, soaring leaves little to the viewer and after NBC took a bath on the last Olympics what makes you think they are going to want to take valuable viewer time on a difficult to follow unknown sport like soaring on their next run?

"Trying to target from the beginning is like trying to land on the centerline after your rudder has fallen off the glider."

Goes against standard strategy. Have you ever directing a company’s marketing function? I have and I would not have lasted using your logic. Rudder allows for direction... broad reach by definition lacks direction.


Dennis

DC

DC, yes, as a matter of fact, I have. Highly successfully, several times in entirely different markets. But you can disagree. I couldn't care less. No harm, no foul.

If the SSA stays it's course (same people, same mindsets, small moves) it will die. Fairly soon. In several ways it is already dead. Sad to watch. But hard to deny.

It needs a total reorg. A major shake up. Complete disruption. Chaos. It has been the same for far, far too long. In numerous ways. "And that's the way we like it!"

I am so bored of these discussions. Like trying to motivate sand.