Interesting article in the Wall Street Journal on efforts by the operators of China's gleaming, new Olympic sports facilities to sell the naming rights. According to the article, six multinationals are competing for naming rights to the National Stadium/Bird's Nest among various other "partnerships" on offer for the new facilities:

Ben Sturner, chief executive of New York-based Leverage Agency, which is helping broker both deals, says six multinational companies are competing for title rights to the stadium, which cost $500 million to build and whose steel superstructure resembles a bird's nest. He won't name them but says he has been taking top executives through a whirlwind sales pitch in recent days, including visits to high-profile Olympic events.

"I would call it the most valuable piece of real estate in the world right now," Mr. Sturner says.

I don't doubt it. Imagethief attended a round of Olympic athletics finals at the Bird's Nest last night (where he was fortunate enough to see Jamaican Udain Bolt break the world record for the 100 meter dash). It was my first time in the stadium, and it's truly a remarkable structure; sleek, eye catching, and relatively comfortable inside with good sight-lines and well designed lighting. It is, with justification, a symbol of China's development and Beijing's progress toward world city.

Which makes me wonder how willing the authorities would be to see it carrying the name of a foreign brand. I think there is probably a substantial number of powerful people here who would consider the idea of the "Coca Cola National Stadium", the "Nokia National Stadium" or similar to be simply unacceptable. The article points out that (this being China), the final choice is subject to review by the Beijing municipal government.

I used the word "symbol" above intentionally. If the Bird's Nest is symbolic of Chinese national aspirations then the name or brand you put on it bears some relationship with that symbolism. That's perhaps part of what will make it attractive to potential sponsors, but also makes this a sensitive exercise.

The article reflects on this, and reminds us of the bad precedent of Starbucks' doomed Forbidden City outlet:

Putting a corporate name on such a high-profile public space in China comes with some risk. Starbucks Corp. closed a small shop in Beijing's Forbidden City after complaints from Chinese bloggers, who thought it was unsuitable to have one inside a national treasure. National Stadium's Mr. Zhang says selling the name after the Olympics has been in the plan for the stadium all along, and a survey conducted for the company by Nielsen Co. found that 70% of people in five big Chinese cities accepted the idea in principle.

Any sign going up on the front of the stadium "has to be very classy and sophisticated," Mr. Sturner says. "We will choose a company that has a very good reputation in China."

That goes without saying. I doubt we'll be seeing the SKII National Stadium any time soon. But a "good reputation in China" is, for many companies, a fragile thing. And having the audaciousness to put your name on the Bird's Nest might be kind of move that could destabilize a previously good reputation, much as the Forbidden City store plagued Starbucks' otherwise fairly smooth-sailing ship.

But which Chinese MNCs might have the juice to pull off a sponsorship deal this big, and the interest in doing it? The list seems pretty small, and largely confined to the usual suspects.  Lenovo, China's only global Olympic partner, comes to mind; Air China; Haier; current part-owner CITIC; and two or three others. It will be interesting to see who ends up holding the ring.

Imagethief at the Bird's Nest

Imagethief at the Coca Cola National Stadium?