Sponsorships are an interesting phenom as far as I am concerned. I wonder how much companies pay to have their name permanently or semi-permanently associated with a television program, charitable organization or sports team. Is there a quantifiable return on this kind of investment that would offset the cost associated with this kind of endeavor? Of course, perhaps the better question is, is there a qualitative return on this kind of investment that outweighs that of traditional advertising? I suppose that depends on the sponsorship.
I am always annoyed by the shameless defacing of great football stadiums (or any team stadium) with company logos; great stadiums that signify long and rich histories that have been swallowed up by the corporate demons and high dollar expense of super star athletes and multi-million dollar facilities. Great stadiums like Mile High, Three River and Veterans have been lost to this phenomenon. But the fact of the matter is, companies need new places to place their product where they will be recognized and accepted by consumers and sports franchises need someone to help them foot the cost of operations. An example close to my heart is FedEx Field, the current, and fairly new home, of the Washington Redskins. The Redskins last stadium, which is currently used by the Washington Nationals, was their home for 36 years/seasons and was named for a U.S. politician (RFK Stadium). A lot of fans felt this sense of loss when the new stadium name was revealed because the history and greatness of the team felt compromised by marketing and franchise greed.
Regardless of my distaste, does it work? Is it any more effective than rotating :60 spots on television? Or do we simply ignore the company associated with the conduit (in this case, whomever they are sponsoring.) I don’t know but it does seem as television becomes more cluttered and consumers have more options to ignore advertisements, sponsorships and product placements will certainly become more prevalent.
