In one corner you have Manchester United, the team nicknamed 'the Red Devils'. If you visit their website, they refer to themselves as ‘Reds'. The club has become much more than a simple team. Manchester United is constantly marketing the ‘brand'. Their annual trips to the United States are based around expanding the fan base and reaching out to new audiences.

So the world is now a place in which LeBron James can own a stake in Liverpool. On Twitter yesterday, the news was greeted first breathlessly and then, by People Who Know Things, with derision. Ives Galarcep pointed out that athletes buy small stakes in teams all the time. Jen Chang declared that this was no different than if David Beckham bought 0.

Not to put too fine a point on the recent crappy marketing tactics by Houston and Vancouver, but I think this article by Jim Stengel is relevant to the tactics being employed:

One very interesting, and controversial issue, emerged from the discussions: how did Simon and Unilever feel about the juxtaposition of Dove's Brand Ideal of improving women's self esteem with Axe/Lynx's Ideal of helping geeky guys get the girl, with a "tongue-in-cheek" sexist portrayal of girls?

The South African Football Association claim that they are seriously looking into changing Bafana Bafana, the nickname of their senior men's national team.

This fact is not necessarily the 24 carrot gold bullet needed to cause some damage in the pub, it's more of a moral moaning, if you can call it that, at consumerism and brand appeal...

" Čech's use of the scrum cap, produced by sports performance company Canterbury, caused initial friction with Chelsea's apparel manufacturer Adidas, which were not pleased by a Chelsea player apparently advertising for another company.