A++ Work ( No Plagiarism, On time, Quality Work) Science Assignment
Science Project
RESPONSES 2
Running head: RESPONSES 1
The Evaluation Process
As our society has become more litigious, there are many areas that must be evaluated to protect consumers from safety perspective, as well as the sport organization legally. In addition, every event is an opportunity to improve for the future. Therefore, the importance of evaluating an event cannot be emphasized enough.
The evaluation process must be handled appropriately to determine areas that can be improved and impact the end result in a positive manner. There are three phases to the evaluation process that will be discussed throughout this lesson. Phase 1 involves the pre-event research. Phase 2 involves an iterative evaluation. Phase 3 involves a post-event evaluation. Below is a brief description of each phase:
· Pre-event Research- This phase determines whether the event is feasible and has the potential to be successful from a financial perspective and a performance perspective. This phase often includes a stakeholder analysis and swot analysis to determine how effective the event can be.
· Iterative Evaluation- This phase provides continuous evaluation throughout the event management process. It creates opportunities to determine alignment with objectives and determines operational deadlines. Continuous monitoring is essential in this phase.
· Post-event Research- This phase begins after the events is complete, but plays a very significant role in determining the overall success of the event. This phase takes a deep analysis of all feedback and determines specific areas of success and failure.
Week 7 Assignment | Final Project – Event Critical Assessment
This project/paper incorporates the core concepts learned in this course and demonstrates an understanding of Sports Event Management.
Over the course of these eight weeks you must select a sport event to attend and provide a critical assessment of the event. You must have your event approved by the end of the fourth week of the course. Your write-up of this assignment should be 8-12 pages in length, not including the title or reference page and follow the criteria below.
The purpose of this assignment is to give you the opportunity to visit a sporting event and evaluate the key elements comprising the sport experience based on information from the text and course. Your task is to apply course-related material to a real-world sport event. For this assignment, you are to attend a sporting event and perform an assessment of that event. By analyzing the event you should heighten your understanding of consumers’ reactions to the event and understand how to better manage an event that meets customers’ and sponsors’ needs.
1. Name of event, date, location, and other descriptive information (e.g., website address, scanned ticket stub, flyer, other pertinent information that you see fit).
2. Briefly describe the event and the organization responsible for hosting the event. You should provide a background and historical perspective of the event and venue.
3. Conduct a detailed SWOT analysis (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) for the following:
· The organization that put on the event.
· The event itself.
4. Describe some of the various stakeholders and their influence on the event.
5. Explain if there are short term benefits and long term legacies developed by this event.
6. Describe some of the sponsors of the event and their relationships to the event, community, organizers, etc.
7. While at the event, observe both the spectators and the event staff. What does the organization do well? What do they do poorly? How effectively did the organization meet customers’ needs? Do they offer what customers want? Are there ways in which the services could be managed or performed more effectively? Report your key observations.
8. Interview at least three customers/spectators and make note of the demographic characteristics of the people you interview (sex, race, age, etc.). You may not interview people with whom you attended the event. Try to find out what influences the consumers/spectators decision to attend the event. What really attracts customers to this event and how are they attracted to the event? Try to find out what influences customers’ overall experiences at the event. What aspects of the event do customers find most/least appealing? What aspects of the event most influence customers’ satisfaction?
9. Based on your observations and interviews, make some recommendations that seem appropriate for improving the overall event experience. What will keep customers and sponsors satisfied? What will it take to bring them back and encourage others? Base your recommendations on what is in the text and what you found through your interviews and your observations.
10. If you were to do a post-event evaluation, which method would you use and why?
Tips:
• Decide early on which event you will select.
• Do the assignment from a manager’s perspective rather than a fan’s perspective.
• Summarize your impressions by placing emphasis on the evaluation rather than mere descriptions.
• Be sure to tie your evaluations to the things that we have learned in class.
• This report should be between eight and 12 double-spaced pages.
Lough, N. L., & Irwin, R. L. (2001). A Comparative Analysis of Sponsorship Objectives for U.S. Women’s Sport and Traditional Sport Sponsorship. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 10(4), 202.
Nufer, G., & Bühler, A. (2010). Establishing and maintaining win-win relationships in the sports sponsorship business. Journal of Sponsorship, 3(2), 157–168.
Marketline Case Study: Sponsorship and Sport Profile: A marriage of convenience. (2012). Sponsorship & Sport: A Marriage of Convenience, 1–19.
O’Reilly, N. (2011). Sponsorship in professional sport A burgeoning discipline? Journal of Sponsorship, 4(3), 209–210.
Evans Jr., R. D. (2010). Summary Brief: Olympic Sponsorships: A Winning Investment? Society for Marketing Advances Proceedings, 181–182.
In March, I had the opportunity to meet
with the Commissioner of the National
Hockey League (NHL) — one of the ‘Big
4’ sports leagues in North America — in
his office in downtown New York City. As
a fan of sport and a student of the business
of sport, it was a most inspiring and illu-
minating experience. The Commissioner,
Gary Bettman, and I discussed a number
of business-related issues during a 75-
minute chat, including a solid 20 minutes
on sponsorship. Although we know that a
good proportion of sponsorship spending
is invested in professional sport (about
CAN$319 of the CAN$1.55bn spent in
2010 in Canada1), little is written about
the details, trends and intricacies of spon-
sorship specific to professional sport. My
meeting with the Commissioner was an
opportunity to delve into this a little.
My most important overall learning
from Mr Bettman is that sponsorship is
important, growing and providing value to
NHL partners. This was illustrated just
days after our meeting when Molson
Coors announced a deal with the NHL
for a seven-year sponsorship reportedly
worth US$375m, making it the largest
sponsorship deal in NHL history (sup-
ported by a league announcement).
During our interview, the Commissioner
also outlined some very important obser-
vations on sponsorship in major profes-
sional sport, including:
• Sponsorship is important to NHL clubs
on two levels: direct and indirect rev-
enue. There is a revenue component
from the sponsor to the club but, more
importantly, there is the indirect com-
ponent of how the sponsor activates on
the sponsorship to the benefit of the
NHL using web, television and other
marketing tools. He noted two sponsor-
ships in particular where he had
observed effective activation: Tim
Horton’s and the NHL Heritage
Classic, and Bridgestone and the NHL
Winter Classic.
• An important metric to measure
growth in sponsorship is the level of
activation carried out by sponsors.
Commissioner Bettman reported an
increase of 87 per cent in activation by
NHL sponsors in the past two years,
meaning that NHL partners are spend-
ing close to double on activating NHL
sponsorships compared with 2008–09.
• Sponsorship remains an untapped ele-
ment. ‘I think the future is limitless’, the
Commissioner summarised after
explaining plans to grow the NHL’s var-
ious sponsorship-enabling platforms,
including web, satellite radio, the
nhl.com portal, NHL mobile and
others.
• Sponsorship is important to the NHL at
a human resources level. The
Commissioner estimates that approxi-
mately 30 of the NHL’s 400 full-time
staff spend a significant proportion of
their time working on sponsorship.
• Sponsorship does not discriminate
against small market teams. The
Commissioner pointed out that spon-
sorship at a city level for a professional
� HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1754-1360 JOURNAL OF SPONSORSHIP VOL. 4 NO. 3. 209–210 June 2011 209
Journal of Sponsorship Volume 4 Number 3
Editorial
Sponsorship in professional sport
A burgeoning discipline?
Editorial:JSC page.qxd 14/07/2011 13:13 Page 209
sports team is affected by the number of
franchises in the market. New York, the
largest market, has nine teams, while a
small market like Ottawa only has one
professional sports franchise.
• Community involvement and engage-
ment are vital. The Commissioner
emphasised in detail the point that, for
club sponsorship to be successful, a
team — including its players, coaches
and management — must be active in
the community, doing charitable work,
connecting with people of all ages and
demonstrating to sponsors and potential
future sponsors that it cares and will
provide opportunities for activation.
In summary, Commissioner Bettman sup-
ported, added to and provided specific
insights into much of what we know about
sponsorship and the reality of sponsorship
in a major professional sports league where
franchises are valued at hundreds of millions
and where players can make upwards of
US$10m per season. Importantly, he
emphasised the role of the league in sup-
porting its clubs on all levels of operation,
including sponsorship, and where that sup-
port includes both a strong league sponsor-
ship base and the provision of platforms by
which the clubs can provide activation
opportunities for their own sponsors.
Norm O’Reilly
North American Editor
May 2011
REFERENCES
(1) O’Reilly, N. and Seguin, B. (2011) ‘5th
Annual Canadian Sponsorship Landscape
Study’, paper presented at the
Sponsorship Marketing Council of
Canada Conference, Toronto, 7th April.
Editorial
� HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1754-1360 JOURNAL OF SPONSORSHIP VOL. 4. NO. 3. 209–210 June 2011210
Editorial:JSC page.qxd 14/07/2011 13:13 Page 210
Copyright of Journal of Sponsorship is the property of Henry Stewart Publications LLP and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
Loading…
Accessibility Information and Tips
Revised Date: 07/2015
A Comparative Analysis of Sponsorship Objectives for U.S. Women’s Sport and…
« Result List
Refine Search
Download PDF
☰
- Sign In
-
Folder
- Help
A Comparative Analysis of Sponsorship Objectives for U.S. Women’s Sport and…
Document Viewing Options:
- Detailed Record
-
PDF Full Text
Source:
Sport Marketing Quarterly
Date:
December 1,
2001Inside this work
Full Text Contents
chapters 1 – 5
chapters 6 – 9
189
SMQ PROFILE/INTERVIEW.193
NASCAR’s “Customer G…202
A Comparative Analys…212
A Two-Stage Study of…223
An Exploratory Study…231
Role of Sporting Eve…241
“Typosquatting” Forb…243
The Three Most Impor…245
The Role of Corporat…Illustrations
Choose Another Issue
scroll up
2020
2019
2018
2017
2016
2015
2014
2013
2012
2011
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
1993
1992
scroll down
- HTML Full Text
Tools
- Google Drive
- Add to folder
- Cite
- Export
- Permalink
Running head: EVENT AUDIT 1
EVENT AUDIT 3
Event Audit
20 Aug 2020
Assignment: Event Audit
For this Audit assignment, I am chossing to review and audit the American 6275 fixed seat multipurpose arena (The Allen Event Center) located in Allen, Texas. Since its first launch on 6th November 2009, the Center hosts all home games to Dallas Sidekicks and the Allen Americans. The Allen event Center hosts an average of 100 and more sporting activities every year. Nevertheless, the sporting facility has hosted activities such as hockey, boxing, wrestling, concerts, basketball, car shows, and many other events. The purpose of this science assignment is to perform an audit of an event. For my review, I decided to attend the Dallas sidekicks ECHL hockey game against the ice hockey team (Allen Americans) hosted at the Allen event Center. I contacted the ECHL management offices to inform them of my Audit plans so that they could grant me access and authority. The event is to take place on 12th September 2020 at 1 p.m.
The thought of organizing, planning, or managing a sporting event can sometimes be more discouraging when the managing authority is operating on a budget faced with limited funds. Most management agencies will require the practice of financial forecasting to enable them to be able to project the impact of inclinations and changes facing the environment of operation on future activities (Xiaoyan Xing, Chalip, & Green, 2014). Financial planning, forecasting, and budgeting are important for activities such as sporting activities since it clarifies needs, issues, and trends that need to be addressed when preparing budgets. Financial planning also enhances or guarantee decision making at all levels of any administration (Wilson, 2009). On the other hand, apart from the idea of forecasting, planning, and organizing a sporting activity, communication, and the use of proper medium/channels of communication determination is how everything runs.
References
Patel, A., Bosela, P. A., & Delatte, N. J. (2013). 1976 Montreal Olympics: Case Study of Project Management Failure. Journal of Performance of Constructed Facilities, 27(3), 362–369. https://doi-org.ezproxy2.apus.edu/10.1061/(ASCE)CF.1943-5509.0000332
Wilson, R. (2009). Economic impact of hosting major sports events. In S. H. Callahan, The SAGE dictionary of leisure studies. Sage UK. Credo Reference:
https://search-credoreferencecom.ezproxy2.apus.edu/content/entry/sageukdicles/economic_impact_of_hosting_major_sport_events/0.embed
Xiaoyan Xing, Chalip, L., & Green, B. C. (2014). Marketing a Social Experience: How Celebration of Subculture Leads to Social Spending During a Sports Event. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 23(3), 138–147.
181
Summary Brief
Olympic Sponsorships: A Winning Investment?
Robert D. Evans, Jr., Texas A&M International University
Olympic sponsorships are considered by many marketing
managers to represent the premier opportunity to have their
product advertised on a global stage. Two previous studies
examining the changes in shareholder wealth associated with
Olympic sponsorship announcements have returned mixed results.
Miyazaki and Morgan (2001) found that these sponsorship
announcements produced neutral to positive abnormal returns,
while Farrell and Frame (1997) found that these sponsorship
announcements produced negative to neutral abnormal returns.
In an effort to clarify the value of Olympic sponsorships, the
author uses announcements of the most elite Olympic sponsorship,
TOP (The Olympic Partner Program) announcements, and finds
that these elite sponsorships produce almost universal negative
abnormal returns to the sponsoring firm over individual days
surrounding the announcement date and various event windows.
The results suggest that not all sponsorships are created equal
and that investments in the Olympic TOP Program are penalized
by shareholders.
Introduction
Sponsorship has increasing become a focal point for
promotion in corporate and brand communications marketing
strategies. This is evidenced by the fact that the pace of
sponsorship-linked marketing expenditures has consistently
outstripped that of traditional advertising and was $43 billion
worldwide in 2008 (IEG 2009). Further support is found in the
fact that overall advertising expenditures declined 4.1% in 2008
while spending on sponsorship increased 3.9% (IEG 2009). This
reflects the sentiment that despite overall declining advertising
expenditures, sponsorship is considered such an important
medium that spending continues to grow, and many firms continue
to utilize sponsorship as a preferred marketing medium.
The dramatic growth of this medium has drawn increased
interest from academic researchers and a considerable literature
base has developed in recent years. Within the context of the
marketing-finance interface, a number of studies have assessed the
impact of various categories of sponsorship announcements upon
changes in shareholder wealth. Overall, marketing studies have
tended to confirm that investors generally hold a favorable view of
these marketing investments. The evidence relating to specific
types of sponsorship announcements, however, remains less than
clear. For instance, Cornwell et al. (2005) are unable to identify a
significant positive abnormal return for firms announcing official
sponsorship status for five major U.S. sport leagues, leading them
to support their hypotheses using longer event windows. Miyazaki
and Morgan (2000) interpret their results as suggesting a positive
financial effect for firms announcing sponsorships for the 1996
Atlanta Olympics, whereas Frame and Farrell (1997) reach the
opposite conclusion in their study of sponsors of the very same
event. Thus, the question of whether Olympic sponsorship is an
economically sound marketing strategy remains a point of
contention.
Data and Methodology
Announcements of The Olympic Partner Program (TOP)
were identified using information gathered directly from the U.S.
Olympic Committee, Lexis-Nexis database, corporate websites,
and other online sources. The TOP program was designed to
designate and reward the most elite group of official Olympic
sponsors and extend to them exclusive rights to claim that they are
the official product of the Olympics as well as to receive special
placement at Olympic venues. No title or event sponsorships were
included in the sample. As recommended by Brown and Warner
(1985), all sources were scrutinized to ensure the date of the very
first communication was identified. The stock data analyzed in the
study were obtained from the University of Chicago’s Center for
Research in Security Prices (CRSP) data tapes.
The Scholes-Williams standardized cross-sectional market
model (Cowan Research 2000; Scholes and Williams 1977) was
utilized to test for changes in stock prices associated with the
sponsorship announcement and was estimated over event days t =
-275 to -26. The Scholes-Williams approach eliminates the
problems associated with nonsynchronous trading that sometimes
occurs in event-based studies with firms of widely varying market
values. A 51-day event window beginning 25 trading days prior to
and ending 25 trading days following each announcement was
analyzed for evidence of stock price changes. The CRSP value-
weighted index of all stocks was employed as the stock market
proxy. All statistical calculations were performed using the
EVENTUS program developed by Cowan Research, LLC.
Empirical Results
Table 1 presents a summary of the mean abnormal returns
for individual days and their associated test statistics for TOP
sponsorship announcements while Table 2 presents a summary of
various event windows. In addition, nonparametric tests reflecting
the fraction of firms registering positive abnormal returns is
provided.
Table 1 presents a summary of the mean abnormal returns
and their associated test statistics for the interval from t = -5 to +5
for the overall sample of TOP sponsorship announcements. Also
reported in Table 1 is the number of events in the sample
registering positive and negative abnormal return changes and
their associated test statistic for this fraction for each event day.
Using the assumption of a no-sponsorship announcement wealth
effect, the returns for each firm should approximate zero, whereas
the fraction of firms registering abnormal increases should
approximate the random chance probability of .5. Significant
negative abnormal returns were found for two days with six of the
ten days examined returning negative abnormal returns.
182
TABLE 1
Mean Abnormal Return Levels and the Number of Firms
Registering Positive/Negative Abnormal Returns for
Olympic TOP Sponsorship Announcements
Abnormal
Return
Changes
Event
Day
Mean
Abnormal
Return
Sample Z-
Statistic N
Positive:
Negative Z-Statistic
-5 -0.39% -1.259 40 20:20 0.278
-4 -0.24% -0.776 40 15:25 -1.305*
-3 0.32% 1.044 40 20:20 0.278
-2 0.10% 0.314 40 21:19 0.595
-1 -0.33% -1.064 40 15:25 -1.305*
0 0.32% 1.043 40 24:16 1.544*
1 -0.67% -2.177*** 40 11:29 -2.571***
2 -0.20% -0.651 40 17:23 -0.672
3 0.30% 0.962 40 22:18 0.911
4 -0.79% -2.552*** 40 10:30 -2.887***
5 0.14% 0.453 40 19:21 -0.038
***, **, * indicate significance at the 1, 5 and 10 percent levels respectively
This result suggests that investors and the market may not view
investments in Olympic TOP sponsorships positively. In fact, the
day following the announcement of Olympic TOP sponsorships,
29 of the 40 firms examined registered negative abnormal returns
and the mean abnormal return for the day was -0.67%.
To further examine the effects of Olympic TOP
sponsorships on firms, various windows were examined. Table 2
reports the results of tests of mean cumulative abnormal return
levels over six different event windows surrounding the official
sponsorship announcements. The most striking result in Table 2 is
that each window examined produced negative abnormal returns,
with four of the six windows registering significant abnormal
returns ranging between -0.35% to -3.24%. The results suggest
that when viewed from the standpoint of a longer event window,
Olympic TOP sponsorships are shown in this study to be viewed
in a negative light by investors.
TABLE 2
Mean Cumulative Abnormal Return Levels and Number of
Firms Registering Positive/Negative Abnormal Returns Over
Select Intervals Around the Date of Announcements of
Olympic TOP Sponsorship Announcements
Abnormal
Returns
Event
Window N
Mean
Cumulative
Abnormal
Return Z-Statistic
Positive:
Negative Z-Statistic
0 to +1 40 -0.35% -0.746 14:26 -1.621*
0 to +2 40 -0.55% -1.387* 17:23 -0.672
-1 to +1 40 -0.68% -1.448* 15:25 -1.305*
-2 to +2 40 -0.78% -1.377* 16:24 -0.988
-5 to +5 40 -1.44% -2.115** 14:26 -1.621*
-10 to +10 40 -3.24% -3.047*** 9:31 -3.204***
***, **, * indicate significance at the 1, 5 and 10 percent levels respectively
Conclusions
Results indicate that firm investments in Olympic TOP
sponsorships are almost universally viewed in a negative fashion.
Potential reasons for this shareholder reaction are that Olympic
sponsorships are expensive and infrequent. TOP participants
typically pay in excess of $40 million for sponsorships during the
Olympic Games, and for an event that is as infrequent as the
Olympics, shareholders could view it as a poor investment of
marketing funds. Results of this study signify that shareholders
view investments in Olympic sponsorships as a poor investment.
This shows that not all sponsorships are equal, and that a careful
examination of the context of a sponsorship investment is critical.
These results also add to the growing literature examining
the marketing-finance interface and provide direction to managers
wishing to invest in Olympic TOP sponsorships. By examining the
returns to marketing investments, the study provides guidance to
those seeking investment opportunities for their desired marketing
medium, in this case, Olympic sponsorship investment
opportunities. Also, this study provides guidance for investors
seeking to evaluate firm marketing investments. Not all
sponsorships are created equal, and by examining this specific
sponsorship program, this study adds to that literature base. The
Olympics provide several different levels of investment
opportunities for firms seeking to invest in sponsorships. Future
research should examine those different levels to assess the value
of those levels of Olympic sponsorship investment. Also,
comparison of official and unofficial sponsorship investments
should be examined, whether at the Olympic level, or through
investments in other sponsorship opportunities.
References
Brown, Stephen J. and Jerold B. Warner (1985), “Using Daily
Stock Returns: the Case of Event Studies,” Journal of
Financial Economics, vol. 14(1): p. 3-31.
Cornwell, T. Bettina, Stephen W. Pruitt and John M. Clark (2005),
“The Relationship Between Major-league Sports’ Official
Sponsorship Announcements and the Stock Prices of Sponsoring
Firms,” Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, vol. 33(4):
p. 401-412.
Cowan Research. 2000. Eventus User’s Guide. Version 6.3C.
Ames, IA.
Farrell, Kathleen and W. Scott Frame (1997), “The Value of
Olympic Sponsorships: Who is Capturing the Gold?” Journal of
Market-Focused Management, vol. 2(2): p. 171-182.
IEG Guide to Sponsorship 2009. Chicago, IL.
Miyazaki, Andrew D. and Angela G. Morgan (2001), “Assessing
Market Value of Event Sponsoring: Corporate Olympic
Sponsorships,” Journal of Advertising Research, vol. 41(1): p. 9-
16.
Scholes, Myron and Joseph Williams (1977), “Estimating Betas
from Nonsynchronous Data,” Journal of Financial Economics,
vol. 5(3): p. 309-327.
Copyright of Society for Marketing Advances Proceedings is the property of Society for Marketing Advances
and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright
holder’s express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.
In March, I had the opportunity to meet
with the Commissioner of the National
Hockey League (NHL) — one of the ‘Big
4’ sports leagues in North America — in
his office in downtown New York City. As
a fan of sport and a student of the business
of sport, it was a most inspiring and illu-
minating experience. The Commissioner,
Gary Bettman, and I discussed a number
of business-related issues during a 75-
minute chat, including a solid 20 minutes
on sponsorship. Although we know that a
good proportion of sponsorship spending
is invested in professional sport (about
CAN$319 of the CAN$1.55bn spent in
2010 in Canada1), little is written about
the details, trends and intricacies of spon-
sorship specific to professional sport. My
meeting with the Commissioner was an
opportunity to delve into this a little.
My most important overall learning
from Mr Bettman is that sponsorship is
important, growing and providing value to
NHL partners. This was illustrated just
days after our meeting when Molson
Coors announced a deal with the NHL
for a seven-year sponsorship reportedly
worth US$375m, making it the largest
sponsorship deal in NHL history (sup-
ported by a league announcement).
During our interview, the Commissioner
also outlined some very important obser-
vations on sponsorship in major profes-
sional sport, including:
• Sponsorship is important to NHL clubs
on two levels: direct and indirect rev-
enue. There is a revenue component
from the sponsor to the club but, more
importantly, there is the indirect com-
ponent of how the sponsor activates on
the sponsorship to the benefit of the
NHL using web, television and other
marketing tools. He noted two sponsor-
ships in particular where he had
observed effective activation: Tim
Horton’s and the NHL Heritage
Classic, and Bridgestone and the NHL
Winter Classic.
• An important metric to measure
growth in sponsorship is the level of
activation carried out by sponsors.
Commissioner Bettman reported an
increase of 87 per cent in activation by
NHL sponsors in the past two years,
meaning that NHL partners are spend-
ing close to double on activating NHL
sponsorships compared with 2008–09.
• Sponsorship remains an untapped ele-
ment. ‘I think the future is limitless’, the
Commissioner summarised after
explaining plans to grow the NHL’s var-
ious sponsorship-enabling platforms,
including web, satellite radio, the
nhl.com portal, NHL mobile and
others.
• Sponsorship is important to the NHL at
a human resources level. The
Commissioner estimates that approxi-
mately 30 of the NHL’s 400 full-time
staff spend a significant proportion of
their time working on sponsorship.
• Sponsorship does not discriminate
against small market teams. The
Commissioner pointed out that spon-
sorship at a city level for a professional
� HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1754-1360 JOURNAL OF SPONSORSHIP VOL. 4 NO. 3. 209–210 June 2011 209
Journal of Sponsorship Volume 4 Number 3
Editorial
Sponsorship in professional sport
A burgeoning discipline?
Editorial:JSC page.qxd 14/07/2011 13:13 Page 209
sports team is affected by the number of
franchises in the market. New York, the
largest market, has nine teams, while a
small market like Ottawa only has one
professional sports franchise.
• Community involvement and engage-
ment are vital. The Commissioner
emphasised in detail the point that, for
club sponsorship to be successful, a
team — including its players, coaches
and management — must be active in
the community, doing charitable work,
connecting with people of all ages and
demonstrating to sponsors and potential
future sponsors that it cares and will
provide opportunities for activation.
In summary, Commissioner Bettman sup-
ported, added to and provided specific
insights into much of what we know about
sponsorship and the reality of sponsorship
in a major professional sports league where
franchises are valued at hundreds of millions
and where players can make upwards of
US$10m per season. Importantly, he
emphasised the role of the league in sup-
porting its clubs on all levels of operation,
including sponsorship, and where that sup-
port includes both a strong league sponsor-
ship base and the provision of platforms by
which the clubs can provide activation
opportunities for their own sponsors.
Norm O’Reilly
North American Editor
May 2011
REFERENCES
(1) O’Reilly, N. and Seguin, B. (2011) ‘5th
Annual Canadian Sponsorship Landscape
Study’, paper presented at the
Sponsorship Marketing Council of
Canada Conference, Toronto, 7th April.
Editorial
� HENRY STEWART PUBLICATIONS 1754-1360 JOURNAL OF SPONSORSHIP VOL. 4. NO. 3. 209–210 June 2011210
Editorial:JSC page.qxd 14/07/2011 13:13 Page 210
Copyright of Journal of Sponsorship is the property of Henry Stewart Publications LLP and its content may not
be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder’s express written
permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.