Being a life-long West Ham fan, I read with a huge amount of resentment and bitterness about Tottenham’s latest cunning plan to make more money last week. Not content with having one sponsor, they’ve only gone and got themselves a second one – just for cup and European games.

Why didn’t West Ham think of that? Aside from the fact that we’re not in Europe, will no doubt get knocked out of the Carling Cup by Oxford United tonight and possibly of the FA Cup by, hmmm… let’s say Bolton in the fourth round, it seems to be a pretty good idea to generate more revenue for clubs in these tough times for the beautiful game.

Realistically, this brainwave will mainly suit the bigger, more successful clubs as the additional sponsors would have to feel they were getting enough exposure for their money and therefore a decent run in these competitions. But why not extend the idea even further to have a separate sponsor for home and away kits?

Logic would dictate that this will result in one of the following outcomes:

either the floodgates will open for the marketing departments of companies not currently represented to get their brand names splashed across the kits of other top-flight clubs in some way, shape or form;

or existing sponsors will up their money to retain exclusivity across all competitions.

The other scenario is that brands won’t play ball at all – but I suspect the lure of all that publicity will be too great and there will always be someone who will jump in to fill their shoes.

And let’s not forget the replica kit sales – 4p to make, £40 to buy and now you not only need home and away, but also the limited edition Champions League, FA Cup and Carling Cup version. All revenue for these cash-strapped clubs!

Come to think of it, why stop at football – there are plenty of other televised sports to target too.

I suspect there will be a window of opportunity opening for affiliate marketers and sponsors following Tottenham’s tactics and my advice to agencies is to hit those phones now – or better still get the longest established (and best) new business agency to do it on your behalf!

PS – for any Spurs fans reading this, check out http://www.dearmrlevy.com – it’s a cracking site.

I read an article in Marketing Week recently which explored the new buzzword of digital marketing, ‘Social eCommerce’.

Social eCommerce is the integration of eCommerce and social media and it’s a movement that has really taken off in the past few months. However, I do wonder whether this concept has been introduced to the digital mix too soon, especially at a time when some retailers have not even mastered the art of providing good transactional sites and many websites still remain difficult to navigate and fail to entice customers to buy their products.

Amazon is one of the first companies to embrace social eCommerce and they have definitely earned that right, as advocators of the eCommerce explosion.

So what have Amazon actually done?

Amazon has launched a new program that lets shoppers access their Facebook pages directly through Amazon.com. The program allows them to receive personalised movies, music and book recommendations based on the preferences listed within their profiles on the social networking site. The application also keeps track of friend’s birthdays and can automatically provide you with gift suggestions based on their listed preferences.

Amazon, sensing the backlash about privacy, has already promised not to share information with Facebook or any outside sources. However, despite this promise, there still seems to be scepticism about other companies going down this route and it remains to be seen how popular this new feature will be.

Whatever the cost, brands in this day and age need to be continuously demonstrating that they are moving with the times and this is probably why Amazon have been prepared to take the risk.

Please let us know if any of you have had any experiences with social eCommerce and whether you feel it will take off.

The news that Lean Mean Fighting Machine has lost the Coca Cola account after it’s Dr Pepper social media marketing campaign put a reference to “2 girls one cup” (I won’t put a link to that here!) on the Facebook page of a 14 year-old girl shows the pitfalls of a medium where the brand owner loses a certain amount of control in the direction that a campaign can take.

Before the days of interactive marketing, a brand would commission its agency to produce work that was carefully monitored and signed off at every stage and then released to the world. There would be the occasional blunder – anyone remember the Hoover Airmiles sales promotion offer during the recession of the early nineties? – but on the whole, it was the brand rather than the agency that was holding the reins.

Whilst the development of technology has allowed brands to communicate with consumers in exciting new ways and at relatively low cost, the sheer speed and scale at which these campaigns can gather pace (and notoriety) shows how the brand can go from hero to villain in an instant.

Agencies know that they sometimes need to push the boundaries to give the brands they represent the edge over competitors but, as LMFM found out to their cost, it can be a very fine line between what the intended target audience, people outside this (as was the case here) and the brand owners themselves find humours or horrific.

How ironic the old Dr Pepper slogan of “so misunderstood” must seem now – but maybe not so much as “What’s the worst that could happen?”… Well, you could lose a multi-million pound account.