TargetTalk

Watching the finals again this evening for mens 10 meter air rifle, I notticed that the competitors had the majority of branding, both large and small covered on rifles, visors, jackets ect. And yet, I see Vladimir Maslennikov has the model blocked on the left side of his rifle, but the manufacturer (walther) uncovered on the opposite side.

Maybe somebody can clue me in on the rationale here?

I'd take a guess that the corporate sponsors of the Games, who are paying serious money to have their logo everywhere, have stipulated that individual athlete sponsors can't advertise. Think how much Walther couh up compared to say Nike.

What is or isn't allowed is all covered under the IOC Charter rule 50, together with its byelaws and guidelines.

Individual athletes can do whatever they like, within the 'conspicuous advertising' rule, some choose to cover up the branding if the manufacturer declines to sponsor them.
If its standard branding eg the Walther logo there's no requirement to cover it.

Tim S wrote:I'd take a guess that the corporate sponsors of the Games, who are paying serious money to have their logo everywhere, have stipulated that individual athlete sponsors can't advertise. Think how much Walther couh up compared to say Nike.

IOC doesn't allow any advertising on "the field of play". So you will only see Rio 2016 and Olympic rings in the stadiums (no Nike logos everywhere, or anything like that). Those are the rules.

JamesH wrote:If its standard branding eg the Walther logo there's no requirement to cover it.

But only once per item of equipment.

If it's anything like we had in London 2012, most athletes would arrive on the range for training with branding still displayed. We had a supply of various colours of duct tape to assist them covering up.

The range was then visited by a group affectionately known as "the brand police" who checked EVERYTHING.

It amused me that, on the morning of the first match, all of the branded bottled water in the chilled cabinets and on-range was replaced with bottles simply saying "Still Water".

So that is why all the colored tape on the air rifles.

One more depressing example of how the Olympics is more about the money than the competitions

jhmartin wrote:One more depressing example of how the Olympics is more about the money than the competitions

I would have thought it's exactly the opposite.

It stops the athletes from turning themselves into mobile advertising hoardings (well it limits how much they can do anyway).

If it was only a limitation it would be OK.
But it is an exclusionary limitation ... if they are not "advertising" the IOC/ISSF sponsors they have to cover it in some cases ... com on, taping up glove manufacturers, jacket manufacturers.

heck ... the swimmers get away with it on their caps .....

jhmartin wrote:If it was only a limitation it would be OK.
But it is an exclusionary limitation ... if they are not "advertising" the IOC/ISSF sponsors they have to cover it in some cases ... com on, taping up glove manufacturers, jacket manufacturers.

heck ... the swimmers get away with it on their caps .....

Gloves - "One Identifcation of the Manufacturer is permitted, to a maximum size of 8cm2"
Jackets - "One Identifcation of the Manufacturer per clothing item will be permitted, to a maximum
size of 30cm2."

I know, I know .... it just starts looking worse.
Manufacturers could help if they were in compliance ... Had a dealer here who would sew on a label after the jackets and pants were delivered .... thru all the layers and then made them too thick & stiff ... just grouchy today....

It doesn't help that they only seem to have two colours of tape available; bright and brighter.

I have a friend that is in Rio now as a timer for the whitewater events. He has to de-brand his sunglasses, shoes, and any other brands that are visible. It's all about the $$$.

Amongst the weirder branding exercises, all the Sius Ascor scoring units have had to be rebranded as Omega, as Omega are an official games sponsor. They've literally put tiny Omega stickers over the Sius logos.

In 1996 in Atlanta the equipment control group, of which I was honored to be a part, started calling ourselves the "logo police". We spent a significant portion of our time checking the size, spacing and number of logos. We even made up our own templates to check the sizes. Even the little logos on glasses, such as "Oakley", had to be scrutinized. We used a lot of duct tape covering things up.

Another thing that we did that I am pretty sure is still done was check the athletes for disallowed items before the awards ceremony. The officials did not want anyone pulling something out of a pocket or a sleeve and waving it around, such as a sponsors emblem. Athletes were required to show that their pockets were empty and show that there was nothing hidden inside their jackets.

The other thing on top of standard IOC/ISSF rules on manufacturer logos and conflicts with official sponsors is national level deals.

I am led to believe that Jen McIntosh had to cover basically everything and couldn't even have the 1-logo per garment because TeamGB's deal with Adidas stipulated no TeamGB athlete could display any brand other than Adidas - even for non-competitive garments.

The amount of tape going on there is ludicrous - even the back of her right-hand glove. That's down to TeamGB regs rather than IOC/Games regs.

Hemmers wrote:The amount of tape going on there is ludicrous - even the back of her right-hand glove.

Ludicrous? It might look silly, but someone is paying them to promote their gear.

So if you were paying someone to promote YOUR gear, would you think it acceptable that they have your competitors name displayed?

SlartyBartFast wrote:So if you were paying someone to promote YOUR gear, would you think it acceptable that they have your competitors name displayed?

Everyone knows the rules, or at least they should do if they're in business.

David Levene wrote:Everyone knows the rules, or at least they should do if they're in business.

I was questioning Hemmers calling it ludicrous that there was so much tape.

Obviously any sponsor should know the business and realise the limits that will be placed on where there logos will be allowed to be displayed.

The need for so much tape in shooting is because every manufacturer treats it's customers as walking billboards.

Personally, brands and logos bother me. I have no need to brag about the clothing brand I wear if it's expensive and have no objection to it being anonymous whether it was super expensive or whether it was bargain basement. For cars, the first thing I do is get rid of dealer stickers and plate holders. Did they pay me to advertise for them? Did I get a special rate?

If I was an athlete in a sport that I and/or others depended on sponsorship money to compete, I'd probably self-censor any and all logos on my equipment that I didn't get some support from.

Some people have brand fetishes and want to display their tribal allegiances. I don't.