ISSUE:
A few months prior to the 2011 Brownlow medal, TAB Sports-bet announced that they would discontinue their unprofitable multi-bet options on most votes per team.
In 2010, this was a very profitable option for gamblers, and as a consequence the TAB lost millions of dollars. Consequently the gambling option was discontinued for Brownlow medal night.
PROBLEM:
This was matched with an unbelievable social outcry - online. Loyal gamblers felt betrayed and discarded by the tabloid organisation, and vented their disappointment through social media sites such as facebook. Here is an example of a hate group:
http://www.facebook.com/pages/We-hate-TAB-Ruining-the-brownlow-since-2011/270580686304979
Some individuals chose to post threatening messages on the TAB official facebook page which were consequently deleted, due to their language and content.
RESOLUTION:
TAB listened to the fans. TAB listened to the social media surrounding this issue, and as a consequence re-opened up the Multibet betting options.
WASH UP:
Was this a 'fail' from TAB? Did gamblers view this as a slap in the face? Or did TAB react perfectly for the situation?
TAB read, listened, and acted. Perhaps this was organisationally unprofitable, perhaps it wasn't. However the impact of social media is ever-growing, and the influence of available expressed disappointment is priceless for organisations. I commend TAB for caving to peer pressure, as they listened to their consumers (Through means of social media).
Ultimately this highlights the strengthening place social media is taking in our business world today.