Roger Federer became arguably the greatest ever male tennis player when he won a record 8th Wimbledon title by beating Marin Cilic but did you see what he was wearing?
Now, I’m not talking about his shoes, shorts or top but rather something less associated with the sport of tennis.
Sponsorship is big business for the top sports stars and as far as Mr Federer goes he’s doing pretty well when it comes to sponsorship. Forbes named him as the world’s highest paid tennis player last year when his prize winnings and sponsorship deals earned him over £50 million.
Winning Wimbledon was a good opportunity for Federer to add to his earnings (the prize money for winning Wimbledon was £2.2 million this year) but it was also a good opportunity for the sponsors to be associated with such a successful person (and of course hope that people will buy more of their products!)
Federer has a number of sponsors ranging from Nike to Credit Suisse but back to what he was wearing though and did you notice the watch that he wasn’t wearing during the match but was wearing when he was presented with the trophy?
Another of his sponsors is the Swiss Watch Manufacturer Rolex and after Federer won the match he quickly put his £6,000 Rolex Oyster Perpetual Datejust II onto his wrist before the presentation.
The end result was no doubt a very happy Rolex company whose watch was on the front pages of all the newspapers.
Some great publicity for the company.
Will we see this trend for tennis players putting designer watches on before they are presented with a trophy expand to other sports?
Will we see the captain of the winning team at next year’s football World Cup wearing a watch when he lifts the trophy??
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Roger-Federer.png9031606Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2017-07-17 17:33:572017-07-17 17:33:57What was Roger Federer wearing?
A good friend of mine collect labels from beer bottles. As he travels around the world on holiday or business he collect labels from bottles of the local beer.
I think it’s a nice idea as it is a unique souvenir of where he’s visited, it’s relatively cheap and perhaps most importantly it gives him a great excuse to try out some local beers.
Things may be about to become more difficult for him though as a number of beer producers seem to be changing their marketing mix to save money and (some would argue) make the bottles look more fashionable.
As a lot of readers will appreciate, the marketing mix is also known as the 4Ps (Product, Price, Place, Promotion). If you look at the product component of the mix then not only does it include the beer itself but it also includes the packaging. This packaging in turn includes bottles (both glass and plastic) as well as cans.
Drinking some bottles of beer during a recent evening out with friends at a restaurant got the accountant in me thinking about what it costs to create the bottle that holds the beer.
Well if you think about it the raw materials that go into the bottle are glass (for the bottle) and metal (for the top) together with paper and glue for the label.
How can you reduce the cost of the packaging?
Can you reduce the quantity or quality of the glass? This would be tricky as the bottle could break.
What about the top? Again, this is awkward as you don’t want the beer to suddenly start leaking from the top of the bottle.
That leaves the paper and glue for the label and what a number of manufacturers now appear to be doing is producing bottles without the main label on it but instead embossing the name of the beer on the bottle itself (no additional material costs) and having the only label as a small paper “collar” around the neck of the bottle. An example of such a bottle can be seen in the image above from the successful Fosters Beer adverts in the UK.
Reducing the label size seems to make sense for bottles of beer that are sold in restaurants. After all, the label on the bottle has little impact on the purchasing decision when a person is looking at the menu or asking the waiter or waitress what beer they have. They may even know what beer they want already or can’t see the bottle anyway so the bottle wouldn’t impact on their decision.
It seems a good idea therefore for the beer companies to save money by removing the labels. Even though the paper used by one label is quite small, if you multiply that by the thousands of bottles which are sold around the world every day it could turn into a very significant saving.
What is interesting though is that if you go into a shop or supermarket that is selling beer, you will see bottles which have larger more “attention grabbing” labels on them. As people are wandering through the supermarket aisles they haven’t necessarily made up their mind whether they want to purchase a bottle of beer or if they have, what particular beer they want so having a big label which will grab their attention is a good thing.
In summary then it appears that two out of three people are happy. The accountant in the beer company is happy as production costs have been reduced due to reducing the labelling on the restaurant bottles. The marketing person is happy as he or she can use their skills on the design and thought process behind the labelling for bottles that are sold in supermarkets.
As for my friend that collect the beer bottle labels well my guess is that he may soon be unhappy as instead of trying to peel off the labels from the bottles whilst sat at a restaurant table he’s having to try to do that at the supermarket…
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/ad-fosters_gold_uk_01.png8441500Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2017-06-16 09:02:312017-06-16 09:02:31He won't be scratching the surface on this one.
With celebrity clients such as Angelina Jolie and Victoria Beckham, Jimmy Choo is one of the most famous shoe brands in the world.
It is a real success story having been started 21 years ago by Malaysian shoemaker Jimmy Choo, who trained at the renowned Cordwainers Technical College in London, and Tamara Mellon, a former editor at Vogue magazine, with a loan from her father of £150,000.
The pair started the business after Ms. Mellon met Mr Choo during her time with Vogue. Mr Choo used to make a small number of handmade shoes which the magazine used for photo shoots. Ms. Mellon saw the potential in scaling up the business and 21 years later there are now over 150 stores around the world with prices for some shoes being well in excess of £1,000.
So, why has the business been so successful?
Whilst design and quality are obviously key features, the brand arguably took off when famous celebrities such as Julia Roberts and Beyonce started wearing them.
But it’s not just shoes that they sell. They have also expanded into items such as handbags, sunglasses and scarves. In business speak this is referred to as “brand extension”.
The original founders sold their shares in the business a number of years ago and the company is now quoted on the London stock exchange with the main shareholder being JAB Luxury GmbH, owned by the German billionaire Reimann family.
They have recently announced that they were putting the company up for sale. In a statement, they said that “The board of Jimmy Choo announces today that it has decided to conduct a review of the various strategic options open to the company to maximise value for its shareholders and it is seeking offers for the company.”
It’s been reported that the company could be worth in the region of £700 million.
So why is JAB looking at disposing of a very successful fashion brand?
Recent acquisitions made by the company may give a clue.
JAB, the gigantic investment firm backed by the billionaire Reimann family has made a number of significant purchases recently.
They already have controlling interests in food and beverage brands such as Keurig Green Mountain, Douwe Egberts, and doughnut maker Krispy Kreme.
A few weeks ago they purchased the US bakery business, Panera Bread, for $7.5bn (£6bn).
It looks therefore like the owner of Jimmy Choo is more interested in concentrating on building up its food and beverage businesses than growing a high fashion business like Jimmy Choo.
I guess we’re unlikely to see doughnuts and Jimmy Choos in the same shop…
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/jazz-and-cara-s-2-.jpg7071258Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2017-05-28 20:31:542017-05-28 20:31:54Coffee, doughnuts and Jimmy Choos
According to the World Health Organisation, worldwide obesity has more than doubled since 1980 and more than 10% of the world’s population are now classified as obese.
In the UK, NHS obesity statistics suggest that nearly 60% of women and 70% of men are overweight.
The number of hospital admissions in the UK linked to obesity has increased 10 fold from 52,000 in 2006 to 520,000 in 2016.
Now whilst this obviously isn’t good news for the health of the individuals concerned it also raises challenges for businesses which are affected by this increase in weight.
Airlines for example will soon need to be looking at different sized seats or charging people over a certain weight for 2 seats.
Theatres and cinemas will also no doubt be reviewing seat sizes when the venues next come to be refurbished.
Clothing manufacturers will face higher average material costs and in the public sector, hospitals and ambulances will soon need to invest in stronger beds and stretchers to transport the larger patients.
According to recent reports for example, ambulance services in the UK are now having to purchase specialised ambulances costing significant amounts of money to transport the most obese patients. The London ambulance service has purchased 3 specialist bariatric ambulances and strechers which can take patients weighing up to 70 stone (444.5kg).
These ambulances aren’t cheap and can cost in excess of £100,000 each. Specialised heavy duty stretchers alone cost between £7,000 and £10,000 each.
These are some pretty significant costs and some people may argue that people should simply lose weight rather than rely on the National Health Service to fund these expenses.
Whether these people will get themselves down to the gym though is a different matter. Whilst there could clearly be an opportunity for businesses such as health clubs to try and target these individuals are they simply too busy to head to the gym and do they literally have too much on their plates to find the time?
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/obese-impact.png9441678Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2017-05-15 23:00:492017-05-15 23:00:49I've got too much on my plate to start dieting...
Traditional retailers are facing a lot of challenges nowadays.
If you’re selling items from a shop for example you’re facing the challenge of the ever-increasing number of people buying things online. Small retailers can find it hard to compete with the big players like Amazon who have the advantages of economy of scale and brand awareness.
In addition, some products are tricky to deliver.
Take wine for example. If you order a bottle or box of wine online and it’s delivered to you at home, what’s going to happen if you’re not in?
What’s going to happen to that box of wine if it’s left by your doorstep or with your thirsty alcoholic neighbour?
Garcon Wines, a London based vintner has come up with a novel approach to overcome this problem. They have introduced a wine subscription service which delivers wine in specially designed bottles which can be posted through the letter box.
The plastic bottles are long and slim, and come in post-box friendly sizes so after a hard day at the office you can return home and find that bottle of wine you’ve been looking for.
Admittedly, finding the wine in a plastic bottle in a cardboard box which has been posted through the letter box and is on the floor isn’t quite the same as being poured a nice glass of wine whilst relaxing in the sunshine on holiday but changing the packaging design to help with distribution is a nice idea by Garcon Wines.
If I had asked that question 10 years ago the chances are that a large proportion of answers would have been “a suit”.
Things are different now though. Tastes are changing and so are a number of office dress codes. As a result, fewer people are now wearing suits to the office.
A number of major companies revised their dress codes this year. JP Morgan for example decided to allow their employees to wear business-casual attire on most occasions. PwC also switched to a more casual dress code where employees were allowed to wear jeans as long as there were no client meetings.
Whilst this relaxing of business wear rules can have benefits for individuals who prefer to work in more casual clothing, there are some organisations who will suffer.
Fashion brands focussing on tailored men’s suits are an obvious example of a business which could suffer due to the decline in demand for men’s suits.
Brioni, the Italian menswear fashion house owned by French holding company Kering was founded in Rome in 1945 and is renowned for its high-quality suits. It has had numerous famous faces as its customers including James Bond in the Bond films from Goldeneye to Casino Royale and more recently it was reported that Donald Trump has been wearing Brioni suits during his US presidential campaign.
But things aren’t going well for Brioni.
Earlier this year Bloomberg reported 400 job losses due to a fall in demand and recently Justin O’Shea, the creative director of Brioni who was brought in to modernise the luxury Italian brand, left abruptly after just six months in the job.
Mr O’Shea is well respected in the fashion industry and has a reputation for being a very straight talking person. He told Vogue that “First of all, I would change the shitty logo. I would change the campaign. I would change the clothes. In fact, I would change pretty much everything.”
When it comes to change though, one thing seems certain and that is that the fall in demand for men’s suits is unlikely to change given the relaxing of more and more office dress codes.
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/suit-product-life-cycle.png475844Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2016-11-01 10:39:402016-11-01 10:39:40Does this suit you?
Sometimes it’s not what you do that counts but what your competitor does.
Apple are without doubt a great company and one of the most successful organisations that has ever existed.
They released their iPhone 7 the other week and whilst the die hard Apple fans will say that it is a big step forward for the iPhone, a number of commentators were not overly impressed with it.
But, and it’s a big but – their share price has been performing phenomenally well over recent weeks.
Just over 3 months ago at the end of June the price of an Apple Share was $92.04.
Since then the share price has increased by nearly 28%. This increase is partly due to the introduction of the new iPhone but the problems of their biggest competitor have also played a major part in their share price increase.
Samsung’s Note 7 has been a disaster for the South Korean company. Reports of the newly introduced Note 7 catching fire and the subsequent withdrawal of the phone from the market have caused big problems for Samsung.
Not so for Apple though as the 28% increase in their share price driven by the new iPhone and the problems at Samsung has resulted in the company increasing its value by $138 billion in the 109 days from 27 June to 14 October. Yes, the market value of Apple increased by $138,000,000,000 in just over 100 days.
$138 billion in 109 days is equal to
$1.27 billion per day, or
$52.75 million per hour, or
$879,205 per minute, or
$14,653 per second.
That’s not too bad an increase is it?
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/apple-share-price.png9401671Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2016-10-16 15:23:262016-10-16 15:23:26Is it you or your competitor?
A lot is the simple answer but some recent research by Deloitte’s has shown that the price of luxury items varies significantly around the world and foreign exchange movements play a big part in that valuation.
According to Deloitte, in US dollar terms London is now the “cheapest” city to buy designer and luxury goods.
Since the Brexit vote in June, at the time of writing the pound has fallen by more than 17% against the dollar (i.e. you need 17% more pounds now to buy the same amount of dollars you would have received back in June).
According to the research, on 7 October a Speedy 30 handbag from Louis Vuitton costs £645 ($802) in London, €760 ($850) in Paris and $970 in New York. China was the most expensive place to buy it with the handbag costing 7,450 Yuan ($1,115).
Nick Pope, fashion and luxury lead at Deloitte, told the BBC that “the trend in luxury pricing in the UK is being driven mainly by the depression on the sterling – thus making the same item more affordable in the UK than in any other luxury market”.
Of course, if your income is in British pounds then the cost to buy the handbag in London remains the same. If however your income is in another currency such as US dollars then it is $313 cheaper to buy in London than in China for example. If you are stocking up on your luxury handbags should you be planning a trip to the UK?
It’s not just the ladies from outside the UK who are buying luxury handbags who could be benefiting from the exchange rate movement.
Any male readers may be interested to know that a Brunello Cucinelli cashmere V-neck sweater now “only” costs £650 ($843) in the UK compared with $942 in France and $995 in the US.
$843 for a sweater?
Please form an orderly queue as you rush to the shops to buy one. Or maybe two…
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Louis_Vuitton_shop.png5751022Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2016-10-08 12:10:282016-10-08 12:10:28A good excuse to buy another handbag?
As England’s football manager there are certain things that you should do and certain things that you shouldn’t do.
Winning a major tournament is a thing that you should do for example whilst looking to receive large amounts of money to advise people how to get around football transfer rules is something you shouldn’t do.
Alas for Sam Allardyce he did the latter and not the former and is now no longer the England football manager.
There are plenty of ways that football managers can make money in a legitimate and ethical way and maybe Mr Allardyce should have followed the example of the current Manchester United boss Jose Mourinho.
In addition to the £12 million wages Mr Mourinho receives from Manchester United he also does pretty well from various other activities.
Hublot watches, Adidas, Jaguar, BT Sport, Lipton Tea and EA Sports all pay a significant amount of money to Mr Mourinho to endorse their products. They see him as an internationally recognised figure with global appeal.
The latest big name to sign him up is Heineken. They reportedly will pay him £4 million for a 2-year deal to be Heineken’s global football ambassador.
That’s a pretty nice sum of money to receive and it got the accountant in me thinking about the financials from Heineken’s point of view. How many additional litres of beer would Heineken need to sell to cover the cost of appointing José Mourinho?
Heineken’s latest set of published accounts show revenue of €20.5 billion with an operating profit of €3.4 billion. In 2015 they sold 18.8 billion litres of beer. Ignoring various accounting items such as contribution and fixed costs it follows that each litre of beer generates approximately €1.09 of revenue and €0.18 of operating profit.
To cover the £4 million (approximately €4.6 million) cost of José the company would need to sell an additional 26 million litres of Heineken!
This clearly shows the challenges involved when an organisation is deciding whether or not to undertake any form of sponsorship or increasing brand awareness as it is virtually impossible to accurately place a financial value to the benefits achieved. The marketing guys would argue that the value is more than purely an increase in immediate sales revenue.
The fact is that it is extremely difficult to directly link an appointment of a brand ambassador to an increase in sales. There are numerous other items which can impact on the sales of a product. For example, a sudden heatwave would increase the amount of cold beer that is drunk and not even Jose Mourinho could claim to be able to impact the weather.
Back to Mr Allardyce though and whilst I doubt that many companies will be approaching him to sign him up as a brand ambassador, at least he can claim to be the only England manager who won all of the games where he was in charge (even if it was only for one game…)
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/corporate-sponsorship.png9371666Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2016-09-29 12:28:042016-09-29 12:28:04Sam Allardyce and José Mourinho
Greece has had a bad time of it over the last couple of years in terms of their finances but a recent announcement by their Finance Ministry may result in animals coming to the rescue.
When I say animals, I should be more specific and say that dogs will be helping out and not just any dogs but dogs who can sniff out money.
Let me explain a bit.
It’s been well documented that Greece has had a few financial problems. There were fears that they would crash out of the euro. Capital controls followed and there was a new international bailout for the country.
As a result, a lot of the Greek population perhaps understandably didn’t feel that confident in trusting the banks to look after their cash and a significant amount of money is being held outside of banks.
From November 2014 to July 2015 over 50 billion euros was withdrawn from the banks and It’s been estimated that between 15 to 20 billion euros is still being held by Greeks outside of the banking system.
That’s a lot of mattresses to be storing cash under and people are looking at avoiding capital controls and instead take the money out of the country without the authorities knowing.
Taking a suitcase of cash out of the country is seen as a safe option for a lot of people.
So, where do the dogs come in?
Well, a recent posting on a government website said that a team would be put together to assess tenders for the provision of dogs whose job is to detect cash. The dogs would be in place to sniff out significant amounts of cash being taken out of the country at border points.
Given all the money problems in Greece, one big advantage of this plan is that the dogs won’t be paid in cash. Instead, they will be more than happy to be rewarded with a biscuit or two…
https://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/capital_controls.jpg8831569Steve Crossmanhttps://www.theexpgroup.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/styleguide-EXP-4.pngSteve Crossman2016-08-26 18:37:352016-08-26 18:37:35It's a dog's life...
The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.