Ambush marketing in sports

Sports Marketing Ambush

What then, is ambush marketing and how does it work? There are at least 7 kinds of ambush marketing, but basically it involves a non-sponsor for an event taking advantage of the media coverage -- and making the fans aware of its presence -- to market products in competition with authorized companies.

Discussion Question #1: Do you consider ambush marketing to be ethical? Why or why not? Ambush marketing can be both ethical and unethical. The issue of whether or not a company is being unethical in its ambush marketing depends on the definition used for "ambush marketing." In Holger Preuss's book, Economics of Staging the Olympics: A Comparison of the Games 1972-2008, Preuss explains that ambush marketing seeks to "…benefit from the image of being a sponsor without paying for it" and in fact those marketers damage the Olympics "and themselves" by increasing the "apparent number of sponsors" and embarrassing themselves. The example he gives is American Express (AE) (VISA is the official Olympic credit card sponsor), a company that horned in on VISA in 1992 and 1994 by using "misleading phrases" (and in some cases AE actually used the Olympic rings) that were intended to let viewers believe American Express was a legitimate sponsor, which it wasn't.

According to Welsh Marketing Associates president Jerry Welsh, ambush marketing can be ethical. Indeed, ambush marketing done ethically is not as draconian as some would suggest. An ambush marketer doesn't necessarily suggest "any connection with the event" but rather he is not deceptive or unethical through the process of giving his own brand "larger exposure" by attaching his product to the event (Louw, 2012, 149). Welsh goes on to insist that when a corporation sponsors an event, it does not "…purchase the rights to all avenues leading to the public's awareness of that property" nor does a company buying a sponsorship purchase the rights "…to the entire thematic space in which the purchased property" is normally just one entity (Louw, 148).

Discussion Question #2: what advice would you give to a sports league that seeks to minimize impact that ambush marketing is having on the official sponsors of that league? For one I would urge them not to try and get anti-ambush legislation passed. That is because some "anti-ambush marketing legislation" has gone too far in its attempt to prohibit "…head-to-head competition" (Louw, 150). An example of taking the anti-ambush marketing campaign too far was the FIFA attempt in 2010 to "own" the World Cup by suing companies that used the number "2010" (Louw, 148).

Secondly, competitors to existing authorized sponsors have a "right" and an "obligation to shareholders to take advantage of such events" (Hoek, 2005, 208) So long as they don't blatantly use the league's logo they are legal (Hoek, 2005, 208). Going after other companies with legal remedies when those other companies are not really stealing the show is wasteful. Thirdly, I strongly recommend doing thorough research on marketing from all legal aspects.

Discussion Question #3: what advice would you give to a new sporting goods manufacturer with a limited budget that is considering ambush marketing at the Final Four?

First, come up with the money needed to convince well-known basketball players (retired NBA players?) to become part of the marketing campaign. Next, set up media gatherings in the city with the Final Four to allow the press to have access to those players. Don't pretend to be an authorized sponsor, just go about the business of marketing your new sporting products during the Final Four-week. Host fundraisers for local youth sports programs using high-visibility former or present NBA players (and local media personalities); fundraisers get good publicity for the new products and show the public that the sporting goods company is a good citizen as well.