Which is more effective? Sponsoring a league, club and/or event, or sponsoring an individual athlete?
It depends on who you talk to. Nike will tell you that individual sponsorship has built their brand. Meanwhile, Harvery Norman would argue they have benefited enormously from their sponsorship of Rugby League’s State of Origin series, with a spike in sales to prove it.
What is good for one sponsor isn’t always best for another sponsor. There are a million things to consider.
Both strategies have their own pros and cons. Sponsoring a league or event offers guaranteed and consistent coverage, more marketing and advertising resources, and some protection from competing brands. Meanwhile, individual sponsors are more at risk from red tape, inconsistent exposure, injury or bad behaviour.
However, don’t underestimate the power of individual sponsorship. When you think Shane Warne, you immediately think of Nike or even Advanced Hair. But can you name the Australian Cricket team’s sponsors during Warne’s playing days? Probably not.
On the flip side, Toyota has a great recall for it’s sponsorship of the AFL.
Of course, you can always do both. In fact, most players’ associations push for this strategy. When a sponsor signs with a league or event, they are often forced to spread the budget to include 2-3 ambassadors within that team or sport.
This negates the risk of being trumped by one athlete. A good example is adidas. They were an official worldwide partner of the 2008 Beijing Olympic Games. But they were blown away in the pool by Speedo sponsored Michael Phelps.
If you’re thinking about a league or event sponsorship, identify the standout athletes within that league or event. And ask yourself, do they have the star potential to overshadow your brand with their own endorsements? If so, you may want to re-think your strategy.
