2010 billboard fury

In terms of bylaws gazetted by all the World Cup host cities, companies that are not official sponsors of the FIFA 2010 World Cup may not advertise on billboards on "protocol routes" brands that are competitive to those of sponsors from 15 days before the tournament until five days after it ends.

This could lead to big revenue losses for local advertisers because all roads used by the 32 competing teams from airports to hotels and 2010 stadiums must be free of advertising unrelated to the soccer showcase.

Skhumbuzo Nkosi, the chief executive officer of Primedia Outdoor, which has more than 15000 billboards across the country, said his company has not been told which roads are "protocol routes".

"Our problem is that we are getting closer to the tournament and we are not being given clarity regarding restrictions on areas that are exclusive to FIFA marketing rights."

Nkosi said his company has billboard contracts for the tournament period but has not been told if it will be compensated for removing them.

"We are also concerned about accommodating FIFA sponsors who might not be willing to pay for advertising based on market-related rates," he said.

Max de Jong, managing director of Ad Outpost, another big outdoor advertising company, said the bylaws were promulgated with "no regard for companies, clients or their unforeseen financial impact."

"[The bylaws] have created discomfort for clients who have contracts running for three to four years.

"There are other players in the market who are not happy about the bylaws," he said.

Les Holley, executive director of Out of Home SA, a trade association for the outdoor advertising industry, said the advertising bylaws were unfair to the local advertising industry because they failed to address losses incurred because of FIFA's requirements during the tournament.

"How can you expect companies to remove their advertising to [make way for] someone who is only coming into the country for a few weeks?

"I think this is unfair because [local companies] will lose lots of business and this might result in job losses," he said.

Lele Mamatu, spokesman for the Mangaung Municipality's World Cup office, said that, according to 2010 advertising bylaws, "advertisers have been timeously informed that they cannot have competitive advertising along these routes."

"The protocol route and the exclusion zones are expected to be free from all commercial advertising during the exclusive-use period," he said.

Mamatu said that if any advertisement - billboard or other - was in conflict with FIFA's rights it would have to be "removed or covered".

But FIFA spokeswoman Delia Fischer denied that non-2010 advertising along protocol routes would have be covered up or removed.

"The so called protocol routes are unaffected by advertising rights agreements.

"There are no restrictions on the use of external advertising space. Companies along the route do not need to cover company logos on their buildings."

Fischer said, however, that there would be no advertising in "exclusion zones", which are areas such as those in the vicinity of the host stadiums.

"In these areas, no alternative events should take place on match days or the day before a match, to ensure the seamless organisation of Fifa World Cup fixtures.

"Certain additional advertising and sales activities should also not take place on these days," she said.

Earlier this month, FIFA won a case against a South African business, Metcash, which admitted it had the 2010 soccer tournament in mind when it created its soccer lollipops.

According to Business Day, the North Gauteng High Court, Pretoria, ruled against Metcash for selling lollipops in a wrapper on which was printed a soccer ball and a South African flag.

FIFA claimed in court that Metcash's 2010 lollipops were "ambush marketing" because it used the tournament to gain publicity for its product.

In another case, before this year's 2009 FIFA Confederations Cup, FIFA took on a Pretoria bar, Eastwoods Tavern, after it carried World Cup signage on its roof.

Other host cities approached for comment did not respond.

Source: The Times

Published courtesy of