For its World Cup sponsorship, Coca-Cola is "spending
more than it did" on the '96 Summer Olympics, according to
Mickey Gramig of the ATLANTA CONSTITUTION. Systemwide, the
cost to Coca-Cola and its bottling partners is estimated at
$250M. Coca-Cola Chair & CEO Douglas Ivester said the
company's sponsorship "provides sales and it provides
relationships." In '94, Coca-Cola saw a 23% sales volume
increase in Brazil in the second half of that year, "when
World Cup marketing was heaviest." Sales in Argentina also
rose 18% during the Cup campaign. The sponsorship is
"already paying off," as so far in France, sales have risen
"almost" 30% year-to-date. Gramig wrote that the marketing
push is "in more than half of the 200 countries where Coca-
Cola does business" (ATLANTA CONSTITUTION, 6/14).
A NIKE TOWN? In this weekend's FINANCIAL TIMES, Patrick
Harverson wrote that despite adidas being an official World
Cup sponsor, Nike "is trouncing its rival ... in the battle
of Paris." He called adidas' soccer-theme park
"unimpressive," while Nike's sits in a "cheerfully hectic
environment ... swarming with people." The adidas logo is
"plastered all over the World Cup site, but Nike is ensuring
its swoosh is kept in the public eye, although rumours it
would project its logo on to the Eiffel Tower every night
have so far proved unfounded" (FINANCIAL TIMES, 6/14).
MARKETING NOTES: The FINANCIAL TIMES is tracking which
companies' logos are most prevalent during the Cup in its
World Cup Sponsors' index. The index, which takes into
account various factors, especially team performance, will
be updated on the paper's Web site at www.ft.com. After the
first five games, Puma and Nike led the exposure chart
(FINANCIAL TIMES, 6/14)....The marketability of Ronaldo is
profiled by BUSINESS WEEK's Larner & Katz. The Brazilian
star "has nurtured a nice guy image" and the camera "loves"
his "infectious smile" (BUSINESS WEEK, 6/22 issue).
