Revolution in the air
While a pristine Supertubes bank was setting heats on fire at J-Bay, rumours of the sport itself being shaken to the core were flying around the globe. Such rumours arise every few years in the sport, but this time only a fool would dismiss them.
Surfing has been vulnerable to a takeover from a big sponsor or organisation for a couple of years. Since the webcasts proved that the sport can attract a large audience without having to fit within the constraints of TV scheduling, the potential for a company from outside surfing to take over or start a rebel tour has been tangible. The quality of the action is unquestionable, but its current delivery - with each event hiring different commentators and distributing through different networks and websites - is inconsistent and disjointed, a sign of potential to a more professional organisation.
The rumours started last week, when Phil Jarratt published in the Noosa Journal a piece about Kelly's manager Terry Hardy being in talks with ESPN for a rebel tour. This tour meant business, with fewer surfers (16) and more prize money (up to $US1.5 million per event).
Kelly confirmed the rumour in an email to some of his fellow competitors, in which he said: "ESPN has signed on to support and fully back a tour to potentially start next year. This is huge news and opportunity. This would include a 'new' tour based on what the surfers want to have in terms of judging, locations, formats, etc... The sponsors that are currently sponsoring ourselves and our tour events have all been contacted and included in discussions to potentially have events on this tour. It would also include a dedicated, full-time web team and signature look to all events. Basically they are looking to present a fully professional sports package of surfing to the world with dedicated prime time TV and the best, live webcasting available.”
Surfline followed up, quoting ESPN spokesman Chris Stiepock: "We're definitely interested and in discussions with a group establishing a new global surf tour. But I can't comment in detail about what's going on because nothing is contractual yet." Likewise, no surfers have so far admitted to having been courted by ESPN, although that doesn't mean talks aren't going down in private.
STAB predicted last year that something like this would happen soon. In the strangely titled "The fourth kingdom" piece (an extract is reproduced below), we interviewed industry heavyweights and pro surfers about where the sport might be in five years. Implicit in the quotes we gathered was the message that surfing, having attracted a huge online audience, was finally ripe for picking by an outsider. We speculated that the most likely predator was Nike, which owns Hurley. That guess wasn't too far off the mark. This week, Hurley threw its own curve ball at the sport by coughing up more $US100,000 for first prize in the six-star WQS US Open at Huntington, which starts next week. The prize money is more than twice what the surf labels are paying for the supposedly superior WCT events.
Twenty-six of the top forty-four have signed up for the US Open, an amazing number, given it's held at Huntington's shitty beachbreak. Kelly's in, for the first time in five years. So too are Fanning and CJ, among others. Might this be a portent of how pro surfers will respond if ESPN offers them an invite to a richer, more exclusive rebel tour?
Details are sketchy, but ESPN has reportedly locked down sponsors for the first three years. An offer to include the current tour's sponsors is on the table, but so far none has announced an acceptance of the offer.
If they decline to be part of the ESPN breakaway, the surf companies might find themselves outgunned for the first time in their history. They are big within surfing, but in the wider world, they're minnows. The entire surf industry sells about $US7.5 billion worth of gear in the US per year. Revenue for Disney, which owns ESPN, for the second quarter of this year alone was more than $US8 billion. Similarly Nike, which is already a player in the sport, has annual US sales of $US9 billion. Suddenly, the surf industry is staring down the barrel of a very fucken big gun.
ASP CEO Brodie Carr is remarkably sanguine about these latest developments. He says the ASP has locked down most of the world's best locations, which presumably limits the options for any potential rebel tour. "You gotta go through the local government (to secure a permit), and a lot of our events are sewn up," he tells STAB. "That’s a pretty big point. It’s hard to know where they are going to go." Um, the Mentawais? G-Land? Reunion? South America? Morocco? South Australia? Escondido? Rincon? The rebel tour is supposedly looking to run only eight events. It wouldn't be hard to find eight world-class breaks where the ASP hasn't staked a claim.
Stay tuned. The surf companies have spent decades building the sport, and themselves, into what they are today. They won't let it go without a fight. - Fred Pawle
Extract from The fourth kingdom, STAB, November 2008:
When the global economy settles, the wolves that emerge intact will be looking for bargains. Surfing might just be one of them. A major corporate blue over our sport is brewing. Will we be the winners?
ASP CEO, Brodie Carr: People from three global surf labels came up to me at Cabo San Lucas (at the Surf Industry Manufacturers Association annual conference, in May) and asked me what Nike was up to. I told them that Nike wants to get involved in surfing the right way. They want to give back.
Marketing analyst , Abram Sauer: Probably the most outright and unapologetic (not to mention successful) brand to embrace ambush marketing is Nike. If you are a major footwear producer, Nike has ambushed you: Converse in Los Angeles in 1984; Reebok in Atlanta in 1996; adidas on just about every continent in every two or four-year competition. Strategically avoiding sponsoring events and thus exposing itself to its own tactics, Nike instead sponsors teams or individuals.
Hurley marketing and team manager , Pat O’Connell: Nike is super serious about the action sports world. They are bright, unbelievably smart people. There is a rhyme and a reason behind the decisions they make. They don’t make just one-off decisions.
Nat Young , Nike 6.0’s most successful surfer: Nike 6.0 are super cool. There’s no-one over 21 (on the team). They are slowly working their way into the surf industry.
Koa Smith , also sponsored by Nike 6.0: It’s super fun to be a part of Nike. Nike are like part of every sport and I guess they’re more experienced. Companies like Nike that are going into the surfing industry are probably going to take it over.
Pat O’Connell: Nike is doing the right things. Ultimately they will change surfing. People will have a positive relationship with Nike. Nike has a big vision. I’d like to see Nike bring surfing out of the bubble a bit.
Matt Keen , head of marketing , Quiksilver Australia: Whilst Nike is a great sporting brand, they will never have the true credibility and heritage of great surfing brands like Quiksilver. This credibility has been born from years of genuinely supporting and developing the industry – it’s our heart and soul. Nike do their thing well, and so do we – that’s why we don’t sell runners.
SIMA president Sean Smith: Nike as a single company is bigger than our entire industry put together. All 200 of our members, if you put all their gross US sales together, they are still dwarfed by Nike. Our studies show we are $US7.5 billion. (Nike’s US sales are about $US9 billion.)
What if Nike snookered the surf industry by producing a better, cheaper, lighter wetsuit? Has Nike considered this?
Rip Curl global marketing manager, Neil Ridgway: Nike could comealong and make a half-decent westuit. I’m sure they could. But willcore surfers trust them more than they trust us with their wetsuits,after we’ve got 40 years of tradition and heritage, and we are anauthentic surf company? No. At the end of the day we think surfers aregoing to trust us, so I’m not that concerned. It’s like Salomon didwith surfboards – they brought all that technology with them butsurfers didn’t trust them in the end and they are gone. We’ve beenglassing blanks since 1969.
Pat O’Connell: Nike and Hurley are definitely giving wetsuits attention. We’ve had some pretty bright people trying to understand just what a wetsuit does. Changing it, however, is a lot of trial and error. It could be a new material, or a new cut. It’s a big endeavour.
Neil Ridgway: In five or 10 years, Nike might go, “this is really not worth the effort”. They can make so much more money out of mass-participation sports and so much more money out of selling shoes. We don’t make surfing products and then one day go, “shit, why don’t we make golf clubs or buy a tennis company?” We could probably make a great golf club, but fuck why would we? It’s always going to be worth it for us to look after surfers and the tour and the ocean. Surfing is at the heart of the surf companies so we will always be there. Surfing is all we do.
Posts: 62
Reply #62 on : Fri August 07, 2009, 16:44:17