MM Group Presentation

“Events and Sponsorship”

Presented by:

Himanshu Tyagi

Suket Gupta

Anjali Agrawal

Ravi Khedar

Tarun Vasnani

Prateek Chitranshi

What is an Event..??

• Something that happens or is regarded as happening; an occurrence,

especially one of some importance.

• It can not take place without any human efforts.

• Best place for marketeers.

Types of Events

1) Social / life–cycle events

2) Education and career events

3) Sports events

4) Entertainment events

5) Political events

6) Corporate events

7) Religious events

8) Fund raising/ cause related events

Career Events

Sponsorship

Sponsorship

• To sponsor something is to support an event, activity, person,or organization financially or through the provision of productsor services. A sponsor is the individual or group that providesthe support, similar to a benefactor.

• Sponsorship is a cash and/or in-kind fee paid to a property(typically in sports, arts, entertainment or causes) in return foraccess to the exploitable commercial potential associated withthat property, according to IEG.

WHY

• Sponsorship can deliver increased awareness, brand buildingand propensity to purchase, it is different from advertising.Unlike advertising, sponsorship can not communicate specificproduct attributes. Nor can it stand alone, as sponsorshiprequires support elements.

Types of sponsorship

• Financial

BENEFITS

• Raise brand awareness and create preference

• Create positive PR and raise awareness of the organisation as awhole

• Provide attractive content for a range of products and services

• Build brand positioning through associative imagery

• Support a sales promotion campaign

• Create internal emotional commitment to the brand

• Act as corporate hospitality that promotes good relations withclients.

Disadvantages of sponsorships

• Negative image association

• Lack of control

• Sponsorship clutter

• Ambush marketing

Case Study : OLYMPIC SPONSORSHIP vs. "AMBUSH" MARKETING WHO GETS THE GOLD?

Case Study : OLYMPIC SPONSORSHIP vs. "AMBUSH" MARKETING WHO GETS THE GOLD?

Objective: The main purpose of the study reported in this article was to investigate the effectiveness of special-event sponsorship in the presence of ambush marketing and determine if official sponsors are achieving consumer awareness of their sponsorship status.

• In 1987, 3,700 companies spent over $1.75 billion just for sponsoring sports events, which represents a 500 percent increase from 1982.

• Companies as diverse as Wrangler Jeans and Marriott Corporation had full-time special- events managers to select, plan, and administer sponsored activities.

• Organizations are now becoming interested in obtaining and measuring the tangible return for their special-event sponsorship. This is partially due to the dramatic increase in cost for sponsoring major events (e.g., Coca- Cola spent more than $22 million for the Olympic Games in 1988).

What Is "Sponsorship“ and "Ambush Marketing": ?

• Sponsorship is defined as: “The provision of resources (e.g., money, people, equipment) by an organization directly to an event or activity in exchange for a direct association to the event or activity.”

• "Ambush marketing" is defined as: “A planned effort (campaign) by an organization to associate themselves indirectly with an event in order to gain at least some of the recognition and benefits that are associated with being an official sponsor.”

Results:

• The large drawing power of the Olympics was evidenced by the fact that 82 percent of the sample watched some part of the Olympic telecast. Subjects were classified into 3 viewer groups based on the number of days they reported they watched the Games:

• 1 Light viewers (watched 1 to 4 days),

• 2 Moderate viewers (5 to 9 days), and

• 3 Heavy viewers (10 to 16 days).

• Of our respondents, 41.4 percent were light viewers; 27.2 percent were moderate viewers; and 31.3 percent were heavy viewers.

• Men watched significantly more of the Games than women, 7.26 days versus 5.9 days, respectively .

• Almost 60 percent of viewers found the broadcast either interesting or very interesting; however, over half (55 percent) felt that there were more commercial breaks during the Olympics as compared to regular TV programming.

• The study showed that official sponsors were able to achieve significantly higher levels of awareness than non-sponsors who attempted an ambush strategy.

Sponsorship Linked Marketing

Journal of Business & Industrial MarketingVolume 26, Issue 8

Authors:David Nickell (University of West Georgia, Carrollton, Georgia, USA)T. Bettina Cornwell (University of Oregon, Eugene, Oregon, USA)Wesley J. Johnston (Georgia State University, Atlanta, Georgia, USA)

Purpose– The purpose of this paper is to review the existing literature

on sponsorship‐linked marketing and to present a set of research propositions.

Design/methodology/approach– The approach to the research propositions was to explore

the existing literature to discover areas where opportunities for further research exist.

Balance theory

Fritz Heider (1946)

- Need for individuals to sustain stability in their attitudes towards an object, person, or idea

- When a person compares two concepts that are linked through sponsorship and one is viewed favourably and one is not, then there is a lack of balance in attitudes.

# Which of the relationship is greater decides the tilt of the event attendee towards sponsorship.

Sponsorship Expectations

• Difficult to detect and measure effects of a sponsorship.

• There is a forming consensus that positive changes to buyer attitudes are the most desired outcome (Speed and Thompson, 2000).

• Three desired factors (Pyun, 2006):

1. Product information.

2. Building image.

3. Positioning.

Research Propositions

• The longer the relationship between the sponsor and the sponsored property, the stronger will be the effect on buyer/Consumer.

• Sponsors with some mid‐level brand attitudes should expect to see the greatest immediate impact from sponsorship.

• A brand with little to no congruence with the sponsor will be just as effective at building brand cognition as brands.

• The presence of ambush marketers will decrease the buyer's cognition of the sponsor's brand.

EVENT

• FOOTBALL WORLD CUP - 2010

PRE-EVENT ANALYSIS

• Bidding for the host nation- Egypt, Morocco, South Africa and a joint bid from Libya and Tunisia. South Africa won the bid with 9350 TUSD

• Sponsors- adidas, coca cola, emirates, hyundai, sony play station, visa, EA sports, etc.

• Preparations- stadiums- 10 (260 million usd)broadcasting- ESPN Star Sports, sky Italia, etc (2408 million)

accommodation- The Fairway Hotel and others, (29 million)

• Marketing- FIFA fan fests, advertisements etc. (204 million)

• All major companies try to capture the buzz of WC and launch new products in the markets. Sony launched its new high end televisions etc.

Post event effects

• TRP-14.8 million viewers have switched on to ESPN star sports to watch the games.

• Popularity of sport and players- 24% increase in the popularity of football.Thomas Mueller was awarder golden boot, which increased his transfer valuation by 40 million euro.

• EA Sports- 16 million copies of the game FIFA 11 have been sold across all platforms.

• Airtel rising star- program was launched to promote soccer talent in India.

• Tourism- around 3.8 million people visited south africa during the world cup, which brought $3.03 billion to the tourism industry.

SPONSORSHIP

NIKE SPONSORSHIP OF FIFA WORLD CUP 2006 : Pre-event strategies and Post-event effects

PRE-EVENT STRATEGIES

• NIKE always comes up with innovative and technically improved shoe range before World Cup.• These shoes are endorsed by the most famous players.(Nike boots also delivered the most goals, with 55 of the 147 goals scored coming off a boot bearing the Nike swoosh.)• They have also been innovative in their marketing strategies

• 1998- Airport Ad• 2002- Football.com served as Nike’s first interactive marketing website•2006- Viral marketing via YouTube (‘Touch of gold’ video)• Joga.com- Virtual interaction among fans

TEAMS SPONSORED

POST-EVENT EFFECTS

References

• http://www.conferenceboard.ca/conf/sponsorship/default.aspx

• http://www.straightmarketing.co.uk/2013/03/sponsorship-pros-cons/

• David Nickell, T. Bettina Cornwell, Wesley J. Johnston, (2011) "Sponsorship‐linked marketing: a set of research propositions",Journal of Business & Industrial Marketing, Vol. 26 Iss: 8, pp.577 – 589

• Sandler, D. M., & Shani, D. (1989). OLYMPIC SPONSORSHIP VS. 'AMBUSH' MARKETING: WHO GETS THE GOLD?. Journal Of Advertising Research, 29(4), 9-14.

• Annual report of Fifa world cup.

• Wikipedia

• Case study of ‘Nike football: world cup 2010, South Africa.

• http://Airtel.in

• http://blabla.co.za/

• FIFA.com

Thank You