Federer is still the biggest 'brand' at Wimbledon

Despite his quarter-final exit from this year's Wimbledon tennis championships, Swiss star Roger Federer remains the sport's best brand ambassador, according to a consumer poll commissioned by Marketing.

The OnePoll research also showed that Britvic-owned soft drink Robinsons is the brand most associated with the tournament.

Of the 1000 respondents, almost 31% cited six-time champion Federer as the best ambassador for brands. Briton Andy Murray was in second place, with slightly more than 17% of the vote. Federer represents the Gillette, Credit Suisse and coffee maker Jura brands, among others.

About 14% said men's runner-up Rafael Nadal was the best ambassador, while of the female players, Russian Maria Sharapova was considered the most attractive prospect for brands.

From a list of official sponsors, 47% of respondents identified Robinsons most closely with the championships; Slazenger was second with 23%.

However, there was a lack of awareness of sponsors IBM and Sony's association with Wimbledon. Just 1.6% and 0.6%, respectively, connected the pair with the event.

Only 23% of respondents believed Wimbledon was becoming 'too commercial'; more than 53% disagreed. The 2011 men's title was won by Serb Novak Djokovic, who beat Nadal in front of a UK TV audience of 5.5m.

_{taken from http://www.marketingmagazine.co.uk/bulletin/dailynews/article/1078393/?DCMP=EMC-BreakingnewsfromMarketing}

We seem to be going through a new transition at the moment. A few years ago the big rivalry was between Rafa and Roger with Roger being the 'old guard' and Rafa the up and comer; now Rafa has replaced Roger and Djokovic has stepped into the picture to take Rafa's spot. He's already become world No.1 and I think this could be the next big changing of the guard. I don't think we'll see Roger winning anymore grandslams with the way in which Rafa and Novak are playing.

I think there is an element here of public being asked to name a tennis player. To the average British person who doesn't particularly follow tennis, Roger Federer would likely be the first name they think of and Andy Murray would be the second.
I have nothing against Murray but to suggest he is the second best brand ambassador with his monotone interviews, on court tantrums and lack of grand slam title is ludicrous! I don't mean that as a dig at Murray but surely he isn't the kind of personality that brands tend to go for?!

Got to disagree with you there, what you're saying isn't back up with any objective evidence. Federer has the better head to head against Djokovic in the last few years (than Rafa who's lost something like 8 matches[maybe 10] and won just 2 vs Djokovic, Federer's is 7 - 5, but in Federer's favour).

Since the Australian Open 2009 when Nadal established his dominance over Federer on all courts, Nadal has won 4 grand slams and Federer 3, a difference of one. Talk of Roger winning no more slams is no more true than saying Rafa will not, given the recent records of slams are similar and that Nadal, unlike Federer, doesn't seem to be able to beat Djokovic (with 5 losses in a row). Fed hasn't won a slam in a while but unlike Nadal, Fed didn't lose Wimbledon or the USO during his peak years (which Nadal is now in). You might do well to remember media and tennis pundits said the same thing as you about Federer after the Australian Open '09 and were proved wrong. Most will agree, if Fed plays for a few more years, he's bound to get a slam or two, just like Sampras and Agassi.

There's no doubt or denying the fact that Federer legacy has been HUGE for tennis. However, I think things have started to change, fickle masses will always prefer winners.
I am one of those who have loved Federer's tennis, but not the player himself.
In Novak Djokovic, I love both and I have a feeling if he keeps winning Wimbledon, he'll become one of the most loved champions here.

In Novak Djokovic, I love both and I have a feeling if he keeps winning Wimbledon, he'll become one of the most loved champions here..
-------------------------

Maybe but he has way to go cause everytime I have seen him play live or on TV, the crowd was against him strangely.

It's not my view, just what I saw/heard.

Tenez wrote:In Novak Djokovic, I love both and I have a feeling if he keeps winning Wimbledon, he'll become one of the most loved champions here..
-------------------------

Maybe but he has way to go cause everytime I have seen him play live or on TV, the crowd was against him strangely.

It's not my view, just what I saw/heard.

I know, but like I said, crowds are fickle....

Crowd was against him because he doesn't have the biceps and over the top VAMOS that accompanies Nadal.

I think Novak can win atleast 2 more times Wimbledon

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:In Novak Djokovic, I love both and I have a feeling if he keeps winning Wimbledon, he'll become one of the most loved champions here..
-------------------------

Maybe but he has way to go cause everytime I have seen him play live or on TV, the crowd was against him strangely.

It's not my view, just what I saw/heard.

I know, but like I said, crowds are fickle....

I just think the the OTT *celebrating* goes against Novak NiTB .
Also the fact that his supporters regularly spar with the rest of the audience doesn't help him much !

Look at the trouble at the AO - MAYHEM!

Wimbledon is all about stiff upper lip - genteel applause - Pimms dont cher know !

The Old School still rule (unfortunately)

Funny seeing how gutted the crowd were that Novak could crush Nadal so hard they must be really blinded that beating Murray means you'll win the whole thing

And your point is exactly JM ????????????????

Crowds may be fickle, but they also tend to take a bit of time to show their fickleness.

It's no big surprise that Federer is still the most recognisable 'brand' in the male game - he's been at or near the top of the game for so long that he is instantly recognisable. Taking out the British bias, Rafa should definitely have been 2nd - again, he has the legacy and the image. To be honest though, other than these two, McEnroe is probably the next most recognisable and marketable guy around the tennis circuit (although whether you would consider him a good ambassador for the game is another question).

Djokovic - Not yet a 'brand' image. It might come, but he will have to keep going for a while longer. I do quite like his personality in interview though - seems to have a good natural humour to him.

Other than Robinsons and Slazenger, the only brand I associate with Wimbledon is Rolex, who have been either producing or sponsoring the scoreboards for a bloody long time. Even then, it's understated marketing.

Remember the good old days dummy_half when the players had
No chairs and had to queue at the Robinsons' *barrel* to get
a drink? And Dan Maskell saying *Oh I say* ?

Now THAT was tennis as we knew it before the advent of the
*Team ????* whatever.

Men were Men in those days and did what a Man had to do

my point is that BBC know nothing about tennis I mean to think Murray is part of the "Fab four" is just amusing as he always gets leathered by the other 3.

Josiah Maiestas wrote:my point is that BBC know nothing about tennis I mean to think Murray is part of the "Fab four" is just amusing as he always gets leathered by the other 3.

Ummmm no he doesn't. He has had notable victories over all three, including knocking Nadal out in 2008 USO semi final and again at AO in 2010, plus many victories in masters tournaments against Federer. Unlike the other three, he was unfortunate in his 1st grand slam final to meet a player of the calibre of Federer especially after a marathon with the then number one player. I would agree he was perhaps a little disappointing in the other two, not because he lost but because we all expected a closer scoreboard given his record against both Djokovic and Federer in other events.

He has the talent, he had the belief a couple of years ago and hopefully now he can re-discover both his enjoyment in the game and some of the old surety/confidence without the complacency that very occasionally sent him out against lesser players too prematurely.

The worst piece of journalism I read was from a Yahoo sport jounalist who is very complimentary of Nadal and probably a fan. Can't remember his name. He choose Wimbledon 2009 (Nadal was absent of course) to write an article and complain about players taking too much time between points and said it was a disgrace to have Djoko abusing the time rule and was wasting people and players time.

That clearly showed how biased some can be and cannot be accepted on one player is no problem when it concerns a prefered player.

yummymummy wrote:

Men were Men in those days and did what a Man had to do

And women were women, and new how to cook.

:run2:

yummymummy wrote:

noleisthebest wrote:

Tenez wrote:In Novak Djokovic, I love both and I have a feeling if he keeps winning Wimbledon, he'll become one of the most loved champions here..
-------------------------

Maybe but he has way to go cause everytime I have seen him play live or on TV, the crowd was against him strangely.

It's not my view, just what I saw/heard.

I know, but like I said, crowds are fickle....

I just think the the OTT *celebrating* goes against Novak NiTB .
Also the fact that his supporters regularly spar with the rest of the audience doesn't help him much !

Look at the trouble at the AO - MAYHEM!

Wimbledon is all about stiff upper lip - genteel applause - Pimms dont cher know !

The Old School still rule (unfortunately)

The Old School rule.....INDEED!

And while they rule there'll be no champions from this country, because in the limpid clapping there is no fire and passion ....

I don't mind a bit of over celebrating. I myself have been guilty. I like it when a player shows some emotion. I think it is only natural if your in a long rally or win an important point or win an important game and you let out a roar or a massive COME ON!!!

I don't miss the Tim fist pump (if you can call it that)

Here we are trying to talk about Federer and his brand awareness with the public in the UK and we again start to talk about the "time limit" cr4p again.

Can't you guys give your backsides a break !!!

The stats for this article are based on OnePoll.com's survey of 1000 UK adults on the 30th June and 1st July. Being a British poll, one should realise that Murray is going to be up there at the top, it doesnt matter what you think, you didnt take part in the survey, this is just a statistic based on peoples thoughts and reactions to a sporting event at that time, and Murray happened to be big on the public's mind obviously when Wimbledon comes around.

That it happened after the event should prove to you that he still generated interest and a lot of people see him as a figure that represents the sport in a familiar way. That Federer came top only shows how they view their opinions based on what they see on TV, in the papers and live at the event.

Hard luck for some of you that disagree with a poll that the average person in the UK thinks that Murray is only second to Federer as an ambassador of tennis brands in this country. Good for him, his image is clean and healthy despite all the bad press he gets sometimes.

Murray doesn't afford the same criticism or fanatical bashing that we get on here, when he's discussed in conversations that take place other than in cyber space. That's why you will see more unusual opinions in the wild, that the homogenised image of Murray you get on forums inhabited by the minorities.

Jubbahey wrote:
The stats for this article are based on OnePoll.com's survey of 1000 UK adults on the 30th June and 1st July. Being a British poll, one should realise that Murray is going to be up there at the top, it doesnt matter what you think, you didnt take part in the survey, this is just a statistic based on peoples thoughts and reactions to a sporting event at that time, and Murray happened to be big on the public's mind obviously when Wimbledon comes around.

Call me crazy, but I took the fact that the survey results were raised on a discussion forum to be an invitation to say what I thought about them.

Jubbahey wrote:
Hard luck for some of you that disagree with a poll that the average person in the UK thinks that Murray is only second to Federer as an ambassador of tennis brands in this country. Good for him, his image is clean and healthy despite all the bad press he gets sometimes.

I'm not in the least bit concerned where Murray came in the survey, just mildly amused. As I suspect Murray himself would be!

Don't think I mentioned your name Mr Murdoch, but I was not tempting a fate worse than a Tenezcism by trying to imply you weren't entitled to your opinion, but I "was" saying that its no use arguing that Murray is 2nd because we didnt take part and its a UK poll anyway, what did we think would be different from that result ?

Jubbahey wrote:Don't think I mentioned your name Mr Murdoch, but I was not tempting a fate worse than a Tenezcism by trying to imply you weren't entitled to your opinion, but I "was" saying that its no use arguing that Murray is 2nd because we didnt take part and its a UK poll anyway, what did we think would be different from that result ?

No offence taken or intended Jubba! I don't know whereabouts in the world you are but I'm in the UK and I have to have a wry smile at the bizarre but sadly predictable results my compatriots provided!

Novak has a lot of extra pressure to win fan support. He doesn't come from a large market. Serbia doesn't have the best PR association although Novak has gone a long way to change that. Novak also has the added issue with many fans who love Federer and Nadal and rivalry. In many ways he is seen as the interloper.

socal1976 wrote:Novak has a lot of extra pressure to win fan support. He doesn't come from a large market. Serbia doesn't have the best PR association although Novak has gone a long way to change that. Novak also has the added issue with many fans who love Federer and Nadal and rivalry. In many ways he is seen as the interloper.

I agree with this. I felt a bit sorry for him at Wimbledon because his opponents were two smiley crowd-pleasers (Baghdatis and Tsonga), a bright young prospect (Tomic) and a legend of the game (Nadal) and Djokovic was the party pooper knocking them out of the tournament! He always ended up appearing as the villain of the piece!

Yes, murdoch, I actually really think his life story and his experiences are very unique and if more people were aware of some of things in his life that he is a marketable figure in the global market. But if Novak was british, American, or Spanish, or swiss for that matter he would have a lot of the same issues and obstacles that he has had in his career. Coming out of war and a poor little country. If you look at it, Novak has never been a fan favorite although he has a great personality and a great game. He isn't the hearthrob like Nadal, he isn't british like murray, he isn't as elegant as federer. But if he keeps winning, well nothing in the world builds a brand like winning.

HM Murdoch wrote:

Jubbahey wrote:Don't think I mentioned your name Mr Murdoch, but I was not tempting a fate worse than a Tenezcism by trying to imply you weren't entitled to your opinion, but I "was" saying that its no use arguing that Murray is 2nd because we didnt take part and its a UK poll anyway, what did we think would be different from that result ?

No offence taken or intended Jubba! I don't know whereabouts in the world you are but I'm in the UK and I have to have a wry smile at the bizarre but sadly predictable results my compatriots provided!

I quite agree, but the timing could have been better. Just after Wimbledon had finished, all the paper and media reports about "his" match with Nadal and all that went before it, how can he not come out near the top as a popular brand name. Bizarre it may be and predictable too, but its not surprising given the advertising that Murray gets over here when compared to the other top players. Only Federer can achieve a higher status due to his slam record at SW19. He's been more famous for a lot longer.

Although I would never have attributed his name to Robinsons, to Slazenger maybe, but not the drink, but that may be down to the fact that I don't read or watch adverts seriously, but playing tennis I see his mug all over the place.

I like Novak's story, and I like him too in some respects. His parents seem way too involved and don't conduct themselves with the customary quiet pride. This might be cultural, and understandable given the small David & Goliath feeling running through Serbia right now, though to my eyes is still annoying.
Time will tell if major brands would like to use him, though to be honest it's irrelevant. He is already one of the best known people in that region, is influential politically, his dollars go very far, and the use of the big brands isn't yet relevant to his image. If anything he should go the other way, supporting non-profit or charitable brands that provide an image of equality, growth, overcoming hurdles, etc. His choice of sponsorship will most likely influence the politics and economics of his region, and I would be surprised if this kind of conversation didn't appear in negotiations. Think mobile networks, oil or mining companies, tourism companies and other brands relevant to his country.
Even though Fed and Nadal are international figures, they mostly support brands relevant to their countries.