The USPS has revealed its proposed schedule of stamps to be issued in 2020. Granted it’s incomplete but I see no proposed Olympics stamp. It would seem to be a no-brainer since basically every nation typically issues one in the spirit of sportsmanship. The US seems incapable (lately) of doing so. It’s got to be some impasse between the USPS and the IOC or the USOC (Olympic committees).
I’m sure there’s an actual answer to this, so I’ve put this in GQ.
[SARCASM]
So what onerous requirements must these organizations be putting on the USPS that makes them decide not to issue stamps honoring the Olympics, even though most other nations seem to be able to cope.
[/SARCASM]
Up until a couple of weeks ago there was a good chance the US was going to withdraw from the Universal Postal Union. Celebrating international cooperation and goodwill while throwing a public hissy fit over same was probably a bit much for the USPS, hypocrisy-wise.
True but that recently got resolved so that can’t be used as an excuse. They’ve pulled this in the past where at the last minute they changed an Olympics set into a generic “Summer Sports” set. I’m sure it has something to do with licensing the Olympic rings/logo but again, why does every ther nation have no problem affording it?
The USPS is not listed as a sponsor, although I don’t know if it’s necessary for them to be a sponsor to issue stamps. I would think they could issue stamps even if they are not a sponsor but who knows?
No, they can’t, at least not using the five-rings symbol or various words that are trademarked by the US Olympic and Paralympic Committee. USPS would have to license usage rights, which costs real money at a time the USPS is financially constrained. (In other countries, the trademarks are controlled by an entity within that nation, and the national Olympic committee is often government-sponsored or administered anyway, so different monetary considerations apply.) See the US committee’s brand usage guidelines.
How much is considered “real” money? Are they asking $50M? $100M? The whole licensing thing is bizarre. Does anyone seriously say “oh that fast food place is the official junk food restaurant of the Olympics, I’m going to eat there”. Presumably if McDoggles or some other restaurant wants ad time during the Olympics, they can buy it whether or not they are an official sponsor of the Olympics. Or does the USOC tell the networks who they can and cannot allow to advertise?
The stamp collecting community is rather self limiting, so the post office would see minimal profit in people “hoarding” stamps that honor the Olympics. It used to be considered an honor to be on a stamp. I would like to believe that the USOC would look at Olympic stamps as extra advertising. Now it seems it’s just another money grab by a rights holder.
I also notice that it was Congress that gave the USOC oversight of the Olympics IP. They f*cked up by not reserving the governments right to use the logos and IP for their own purposes, such as stamps. In effect the government has to pay for the right to use that which they graciously gave away. Wonderful.
Sponsorship is a HUGE percentage of the incomes generated by the games, second only to TV broadcast rights. While you might not think it’s a big deal, the companies do and they spend big money to secure the title “official Olympic xxxxx”. For the 2010-12 Olympics (Vancouver and London) it was $1.84 billion.
Generic advertising is OK, but run an ad that says “We are the official underwear of Team USA” when you are not, then you can expect to hear from the USOC’s lawyers.
I’m sure companies love the association. I just wonder if there is an actual increase in sales to justify it. I cant imagine seeing the IOC rings in an McDonalds commercial is going to make a non-eater go there; I think they’re preaching to the choir and their customers will go there with the same frequency, sponsorship or not. Now if they had giveaways associated with the Olympics that would be a different matter but I don’t recall ever seeing such things.
McDonalds ran a contest during the 84 Olympics where they gave away menu items based on which events the US medalled in. It turned out to be a marketing disaster. I’m sure that discouraged anyone else from trying that.
Sponsorship gives you some real benefits, especially at the major sponsor level which would appeal to global brands:
advertising reach - stadium dressing and your logo plastered over a dozen venues, which will go direct to a big media audience [London 2012 and Rio 2016 each had a reach of 3.6 BILLION worldwide], which is what you want as a global brand
exclusivity - if Bob’s Komplete Karpet Kare becomes a major sponsor, contracts usually mean no competitor advertising from the Rug Hospital or other skeezy competitors would be allowed during broadcasts During events there are teams of brand enforcers who had essentially unlimited access to everywhere so they could kneecap the guy in the crowd who would stand up in the ‘Discount Floor Covering repairs’ T-shirt.
association - first pick of household name gold medal athletes to do cross-promotion work afterwards.
I can’t see that link at work but IIRC McDonalds problem was one of specific implementation of the prize structure, not a general sponsorship problem. The fact the Russians didn’t come to the 84 Olympics meant that they gave away way more than they planned. It may have discouraged that type of promotion, but sponsorship money has done nothing but climb each Olympics since then.