Let’s talk about our relationship

With the “internet” (perhaps you’ve heard of it), satellite tv, satellite radio, podcasting and so on, traditional outlets for advertising are disintegrating into a galaxy of niches, according to many of the theorists.

So cycling – to take a random example – will still be a niche, but so will pretty much everything else except for the Super Bowl and American Idol. (Good for us!)

Thus, at the advertising industry events that I’ve attended and in the trade publications that I’ve read of late, the ubiquitous rhetorical question sounds something like this: “With media becoming highly personal, how do we reach consumers in highly targeted ways?”

There are a ton of buzzwords to describe the typical answer – ‘narrowcasting’ comes to mind – but the basic idea is that by tailoring your marketing to consumers’ interests, you can create a more valuable relationship even if you’re reaching a relatively small audience.

In practice, this implies that running ads based on keywords in people’s blogs or sponsoring a sport that’s their passion would connect with those individuals more personally than would traditional ads in sitcoms, print newspapers, and other ‘old media’ that deliver more ‘eyeballs’.

Even in an industry used to thinking about consumers as dismembered body parts, quality is gaining ground from quantity.

Although this trend could point to great potential for cycling, it brings up an important question: as a sport, are we effectively making a personal connection with our fans?

Lance certainly did, and still does. And for his sponsors, the fact that his story touches people so intimately (quality) is probably more valuable than the fact that so many people know it (quantity).

But for those of us who haven’t survived cancer and won the Tour de France seven times, the questions remain. Do the fans know us? Do we know them? Are we doing more than just delivering eyeballs?

For instance, you might be surprised to learn – as I was – that companies don’t just sponsor any ol’ NASCAR driver. According to William Clements of Masterfoods USA, what made Elliott Sadler particularly attractive for the M&M’s brand was that he was already popular with kids.

The Jelly Belly team is also popular with kids, but I would guess that it has more to do with their sponsor giving away free jellybeans than with any Elliott Sadler-like qualities inherent to the team itself.

The team does a great job and so does Jelly Belly, but my point is more about the value of being able to say with certainty that you’ve built a real relationship with a specific audience.

Cycling is really growing, but the next challenge is to show that we’re really speaking to what you, the fans, want to hear.

I have some new ideas that you might see on the road in 2007, but for now, check out the riders’ photo diaries on KGSNCycling.com and let me know if they connect with you.