VH-BZF From Australia, joined Oct 1999, 856 posts, RR: 0 Posted (14 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3325 times:
Reported on radio Sunday 3rd of September.
Ansett is to seek (legal) advise from SOCOG (Sydney organising committee for the Olympic Games) in regards to Qantas apparently using the word Olympics in its advertising. This according to AN officials is illegal (as ANsett is the official airline of the 2000 Sydney games) and if SOCOG & the Olympic bodies decide that QF have breached sponsorship laws, then AN will take QF to court to seek unspecified damages!!!!!!!!!
AN also stated that this could well be a test case for other sponsors (ie. UPS, Kodak, Holden etc) to take legal action over their rival companies also using illegal Olympic advertising!
It would be good to see AN take QF down a peg or two, as QF has been going around pretending to be the suedo Olympic carrier, with huge billboards of Aussie athletes & swim stars around the place, although in fairness to QF they do sponsor those individual athletes. I think QF is still very pi*#ed off that AN out bid them for the right to be the official airline, the first time QF has not been the official carrier since the Melbourne Olympics in 1956. 'Bring on the world!'
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
BNE From Australia, joined Mar 2000, 3197 posts, RR: 11
Reply 1, posted (14 years 9 months 2 days 20 hours ago) and read 3278 times:
Maybe QANTAS can blame it on an outside advertising firm. Ansett has been doing a lot of newspaper advertising telling people to fly to the games. At $353.00 one way no wonder people are booking with Impulse and Virgin. QANTAS are meant to have a new advertising commercial showing, anyone seen it. Does it include their San Franciso fly past.
TAA_Airbus From Australia, joined Nov 1999, 726 posts, RR: 0
Reply 2, posted (14 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3271 times:
Apparently they havent aired the new commercial yet, they keep telling us to keep watching to stay tuned for it.
I dont think they use the word olympics in there adverts, however, they use things related to the oympics.
However, I read somewhere yesterday that the new commercials are actually owned by channel 7. So that explains channel 7 encorporating there logos on the advert. So perhaps by cross advertising with channel 7, which is the official broadcaster, they can get away with it.
Trust QF to find a loophole.
Crosscheck From Australia, joined Jun 2000, 153 posts, RR: 0
Reply 3, posted (14 years 9 months 2 days 19 hours ago) and read 3273 times:
The new Qantas Adverts were premiered during last weekends AFL Grand Final in Melbourne, and I must say I've seen them several times since.
The Ads are NOT owned by Channel 7, nor do they include any reference to, or about the Olympics. It is true however, that Qantas are one of the biggest purchases of Advertising Space on Channel 7 during the forthcoming Olympic Coverage. Maybe if Ansett hadn't spent so much money getting the rights to call themselves the "Official Olympic Airline", they could have afforded to purchase some of this advertising space themselves.
While I don't condone Ambush Marketing at all, it would appear that Qantas's sponoship of High Profile Athletes (Something it has done for years), has paid a better return than Ansett's investment.
I think it's also fair to say that Qantas may have originally been annoyed about not being named the "Official Airline", but then you would have thought nearly 50 Years of Australian Olympic Association, and being a "GOLD Sponosor" of the Sydney 2000 Bid, would have been worth more than just the plain dollars SOCOG was looking for.
So Much for Long Term Loyalty
PS No sign of the Golden Gate Bridge yet. Lots of London, New York, Taj Mahal, Africa, China and of course Australia
V Jet From Australia, joined May 1999, 719 posts, RR: 2
Reply 4, posted (14 years 9 months 2 days 17 hours ago) and read 3256 times:
Qantas has stated in the past that it didnt think the price SOCOG was asking for official airline status was worth it. That has been evidenced by the fact that until the last few weeks polls showed that the Australian public thought Qantas was the official carrier. I may be wrong but I think a more recent poll said that it now has swung back to people again thinking that Qantas is the offical carrier.
C'est la vie.
VH-BZF From Australia, joined Oct 1999, 856 posts, RR: 0
Reply 5, posted (14 years 9 months 1 day 23 hours ago) and read 3238 times:
My info has it that whilst QF will make money over the Olympics, AN has reaped an absolute windfall for the year(s) after the games in Sydney. So for the outlay that AN paid for rights to be the official carrier, Ansett is set to reap huge long term contracts worth many millions! 'Go your own way!'
Ansett Australia - (was) One of the worlds great airlines!
Skystar From Australia, joined Jan 2000, 1363 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (14 years 9 months 18 hours ago) and read 3219 times:
The following is a statement from AN. In other news, AN is now the 4th most recognised Olympic sponsor according to the latest survey.
"Media statement regarding Ansett Australia v. Qantas Airways Limited
Ansett Australia and Qantas have reached an agreement regarding Olympic advertising and legal action taken by Ansett Australia this week in the Federal Court has been withdrawn.
The terms of the agreement between Qantas and Ansett Australia will remain confidential.
Ansett Australia is satisfied that the advertising Qantas has been planning for the Olympic period will not infringe Ansett's rights as a sponsor of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games.
"Ansett Australia is pleased with the resolution and we will continue to defend our rights as the Official Airline sponsor of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games" said Barry Parsons, General Manager Olympics for Ansett Australia.
In addition to its sponsorship of the Sydney 2000 Olympic Games and the Australian Olympic Team, Ansett Australia is the Official Airline of the Sydney 2000 Paralympic Games, the Australian Paralympic Committee and the Australian Institute of Sport"