What Companies Spend The Most Money In The 1996 Olympics

Going for the gold

Baronial 1, 1996: 8:23 p.chiliad. ET Nike, Coca-Cola win Olympic marketing game; IBM, Reebok don't

NEW YORK (CNNfn) - Athletes aren't the only competitors at this year's Olympic Games -- some major corporations competed too.
     Many critics consider this the nigh commercial Olympics ever.
     Some of the greatest success stories involved advertisers and marketing strategists who staked millions of dollars on the Atlanta Games.
     But while some struck gilt, others didn't even come away with bronze.

The winners

     Able-bodied-show maker Nike placed prominently in the winners' circumvolve.
     The company swept through Atlanta with what advertising executives called a "guerrilla set on."
     Without directly investing in the hallowed Olympic rings, the famous

logo was seen everywhere.
     Teeth-gnashing Reebok officials had to remind the earth that they paid $twenty million to be an official Olympic sponsor.
     Amidst other "winners," Coca-Cola gets high marks from advertizement executives.
     The company spent at least $60 one thousand thousand on its "For the Fans" campaign, airing nearly 100 commercials, both sometime and new.
     Still, some critics saw the soft-drink maker'southward approach every bit overkill. Some even dubbed the Olympics "The Coca-Cola Games."

The losers

     Other sponsors volition leave Atlanta licking their wounds.
     Chief among them is IBM.
     Big Blue faced bad publicity when a computerized system it built to give European news organizations Olympic results spit out tardily and inaccurate information.
     Some media companies demanded fractional refunds.
     "Big loser, IBM," said Donny Deutsch of Deutsch Advert Co. "Very, very controversial. Hither the equipment they were touting on the Olympics -- this great calculator -- fell autonomously, notwithstanding they go along to run ads touting the equipment. It is almost laughable."
Split up decisions
     NBC, which paid nearly $500 million for exclusive rights to circulate the Games, had mixed results.
     Goggle box critics roundly panned its coverage, saying the network didn't show prime-time events live and gave little if any recognition to about non-U.South. medal winners.
     But since viewers take watched NBC's broadcasts in huge numbers, Betsy Frank, media analyst for Zenith Media Services said the network isn't fretting. (148K WAV) or (148K AIFF)
     NBC already has the rights to 6 of the side by side 7 Olympic Games, extending through to the year 2008.
     Even though the network will exist hard pressed to meridian this year's numbers, some ad executives take already approached NBC most putting together future Olympic marketing campaigns.
     How did the Olympics' host fare?
     Like NBC, the metropolis of Atlanta received mixed reviews.
     Atlanta took its share of knocks for transportation nightmares and what many labeled as excessive commercialism.
     Some Olympic officials too publicly grumbled well-nigh the individual venture that had organized the Atlanta Games.
     "In Los Angeles (site of the 1984 Olympics), it worked very well," said Anita DeFrantz of the International Olympic Commission.
     By contrast, she said that in Atlanta, "it'due south been a struggle to raise the funds. (Atlanta) had to build facilities. 50.A. never had to build facilities." Back to top