People recognize the companies more when companies are involved in the sports sponsership. On one hand such sponserships give some cheer marketing team on the other hand it can be a nightmare for finance as such sponserships are very expensive as a typical sport event only last few weeks. In my opinion company should support both social causes and sport events (even the non-flashy ones).
It depends entirely on the brand image. Personally, I dont see semiconductor companies and distributors as sporty brands. Hence, I would be a little surprised if I found them along titles for sports events. In any case, events sponsorship are mainly driven by which markets we are targeting. A sports goods manufacturer will have ROI from investing on a sporting sponsorship. Semicon companies will do better sponsoring engineering conclaves, semiconductor conferences, lighting trade fairs et al.
Sports is a draw; no doubt. For several years I did creative marketing communications work for Canon U.S.A., Inc., a former title sponsor of the Greater Hartford Open golf tournament in Hartford, CT. This event was typically referred to as "The Canon GHO." That's good branding when you hear it roll off the tongues of people who don't even follow golf that much. But Canon was smart. It kept its sponsorships broad to remain visible to a wide audience. Nature on PBS, The Nature Conservancy, The Metropolitan Museum of Art, the American Cancer Society...point being look at the strategy too. Just saying.
In my college times, I used to be actively involved in organizing different events. These ranged from sports events to educational competitions and some times pure entertainment events such as concerts etc. For each event, we had to contact with the organizations to get sponsorships. The basic question every company asked us when we want to them was "what's in it for us?". I think every company considers this before giving out the funds because no matter how big the company is, the funds are precious nevertheless.
The best way to convince them was to show them the financial and non-financial benefits out of sponsorships. From what I feel, the audience definitely respects the sponsors if the event turns out to be good. The company or the brand comes under the good books in the minds of the consumers and they will surely have a preference for the brand once they go out to purchase stuff in the market.
However, I also feel that there should be some relation between the audience and the organization sponsoring the event. This means that some portion of the target market of the company should be amongst the audience of the event. For instance, this golf event will definitely have members from the corporate sectors who would be decision makers in their organizations and are likely to be Avnet's target audience. In this case, Avnet can expect a positive outcome of sponsorship of the event.
I think our society today needs companies, which have Social Responsibility policies.
Sponsorships tend to be between a company and organizations for a big event. This fact makes the people to think that companies use the Sponsorships as an advertisement tool Furthermore, they don't get an immediate benefit from this.
I believe when companies spent time and money to help and to improve local societies then they get a "human" profile and people recognize their "work" .
I think that companies that sponsor large events, although the spend a lot of money for the exposure, it is definitely worth it. Brand names, whether we like it or not, matter to the public. The more a company can donate, participate and be involved in the day to day activities of the outside world, the more gain they will get in brand recognition and ultimately in their bottom line.
Is this a quid pro quo relationship? The companies donate to the community and the reciprocity of the people to the sponsorship of events will be to buy products. I question the social responsibilty? But it comes with the territory!!
"When companies sponsor events, do you become more aware of them? Do you respect the fact they are making that investment? Or, do you prefer that we do good things in the community?"
I feel sponsoring the events definitely helps the companies to build a stronger Brand image. But I feel it would be more appropriate if they spend part of the amount on sponsoring and part of the amount in doing good things in the community rather than fully investing on building brand image.
Sporting events are huge throughout the world. I am a huge sports fan and attend as many games throughout the year of my teams in a variety of sports. When I'm not busy, I enjoy watching these games on the T.V. Sponsors are a sports mainstay. I am all for sponsors promoting events and teams. They usually do this in a classy manner and many put any earnings towards charities or funds. This shows me these companies want to be involved in the communities where they are located. As long as any ads or sponsored events aren't trashy, I'm all for it.
Sponsorship of events in particular can be especially effective as a marketing tool because it can be a means of accessing a wide range of audiences such as decision makers in business, government entities, and of course customers...
I think sponsorships are a great way to give back to events, causes, customers and suppliers. In the case of golf tournaments, I know companies invite suppliers, customers and employees to enjoy a day on the course and some great competition. It raises visibility of the company and is a way of saying thanks to valued partners.
When companies do advertise through Sporting Sponsorships it just makes them more and more famous/catchy for consumers.
I am sure that Avnet's sponsorship will lead to greater visibility for the core brand-the only issue is whether you are targetting the right segment of Users through this Golfing sponsorship-But then I am sure you already know the answer to that question.
From your article I see two types of sponsorships... one is the LPGA type, big names, lots of banners, etc but nothing to do with the core business. And then there's the Avnet's Tech Games which in a way is trying to promote ideas that have something to do with the core business.
In a sense, I respect more the later - that's a real investment. But in a World that has so much exposure and knowing that the brand exists and is active is so important, the traditional type of sponsorship is also important.
The difference is that it tackles a different type of audience that might not be interested in the tech games to begin with.
I went to school with a fellow who is an executive at a company that sponsors sporting events. From what I can tell, the sponsorship helps the executives' egos a lot. They even get to play golf with some big names while they are dishing out the moolah. (Not their own, of course.) They rationalize it right and left as a necessary (and smart!) marketing expense. Without the sponsorships, the executives would no longer feel that they could show their faces at social "power" events.
Rich, i think that you have a valid point. Why executives should benefit from something which is company's money. I have a suggestion to those executives. Rather than choosing themselves they can make a lucky draw out of all the employees to get a chance to rub their shoulders with the players. They can put a better face forward of the company.
Actually doing good and being in news for sponsoring an event are both required. So by sponsoring an event if you are able to project the ' doing good to community ' part .... I think raises the image of a sponsor in public eyes. And if a brand has already done some percentage of ' good stuff ' then it is all for good!
And if somebody at any level in right means is benefiting from the doing good part .... that is also too good :-)
I can't deny the respect among golfers that beer companies get when they advertise on the PGA tours. Some other companies, in times past, however, may have been more interested in obtaining opportunities for pairing important clients with sports stars on golf events--which is a pretty good way to get business, I'll bet. Back in 1985, there was some controversy in the U.S. Senate about passing a bill that would prohibit defense contractors from deducting advertising costs, where the taxpayer wound up in effect paying the bill for sporting events sponsorships, which may have just been a way to get some general a little golf time with a big name golf pro.
Do you remember ever seeing commercials for defense contractors for golf events? I haven't watched any lately, I admit. They may be justified as ways to keep the stock price higher by keeping the company in the minds of investors, I suppose.
So, you have to worry about being in the news for the wrong reason, when you sponsor an event. You also have to worry that the players aren't misbehaving, which can reflect on your company.
When you want to play in the big leagues, you have to think big. I used to do a lot of work with Canon U.S.A. Inc. a sponsor of several well known events and programs including what used to be called the Greater Hartford Open (or Canon GHO), part of the PGA tour. Another famous optics company, Olympus pitched its big tent at another PGA event on Long Island some years later. These companies, and others like them, gain an incredible amount of good PR and visibility that can't be underestimated. And if you get into a conversation with some of the VIPs who were at these events, they don't forget who's name was on the reception ticket. And when you're a member of one of the divisions of any of these companies, that's the impact you just can't get by leaving a brochure with a free cup cozy at reception.
Sponsorship of events is the best marketing tool because it can be a means of accessing a wide range of auidences like decision makers in business, government entities, and of course customers. Whether it is a sport event sposorship or community service sponsorship it doesn't make difference, as long as sponsorships are strategic and well-conceived, they can boost both short-term and long-term sales.
This is a win-win from many standpoints. The financial crisis has impacted many, and with traditional goverment support eroding, the causes supported are facing especially challenging times. The people at Avnet deserve their share of credit for their contributions.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.