
When consumers choose a foil from a list and
label it as a sponsor of a mega event, it’s a sign that the foil brand
or company is big enough to sponsor the event in question. In 2012,
Toluna found that 16% of 1,034 U.S. consumers surveyed thought that
Google was a sponsor of the 2012 Olympic Summer Games. Further, 60% of
those asked about their feelings regarding the sponsorship indicated
that it made them feel more positively about Google. Nice for Google,
admittedly, but not necessarily damaging to the “true” official
sponsors.
Foils also work via association. Academic
research has shown repeatedly that the misidentification of a foil as a
sponsor is due, in part, to the relatedness, or the logical link, that
the brand holds to the event. Running shoe, running event, voilá! When
one combines size and relatedness, and a bit of clever marketing, you
get the advantage that Nike holds whenever it’s listed as a foil in a
survey of sport event sponsors.
Yes, the false recognition of a foil as a
true sponsor also can result from ambushing, when a non-sponsoring brand
becomes associated with the property of interest, which may, of course,
be detrimental to the true sponsor. However, at least one research
study has shown that the presence of a competitor actually can help
consumers’ recall of the true sponsor. Because the event, the sponsoring
brand and its direct competitor are all likely linked in memory by the
event context, this actually could support memory links to the true
sponsor.
praveen sharma
pgdm 2nd year
No comments:
Post a Comment