No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Sponsoring joins brands with sports, the arts, and events in mutually beneficial partnerships. In the context of sports, the authors examine how sponsorship deal characteristics affect consumer inferences, attitudes, and behavioral intentions toward a sponsor and a sport property in a partnership. The authors develop a conceptual framework that links a holistic set of sponsorship deal characteristics (i.e., contract length, regional proximity of the sponsor, sponsorship fee, and sponsorship type) to individual consumer perceptions. Study 1 tests the framework in a field study of 2,787 consumers across 44 different sponsorships. Study 2 largely confirms the findings of the field study in an experimental field study. Overall, the results show that regionally proximate and long-term partnerships benefit as consumers make positive inferences about partnership fit and sponsor motives. In contrast, consumers associate high sponsorship fees, international sponsors, and naming-rights relationships with calculative motives and perceive these factors negatively. For managers, finding that sponsorship deal characteristics matter is important, not only for sponsor-property relationships but also for relationships between the sponsoring brands and consumers.

The use of brand extensions has become fundamental to the business model of most luxury brands. Many traditional luxury brands such as Louis Vuitton or Chanel have expanded into traditional luxury sectors beyond their core business. Some brands such as Armani or Prada even crossed boundaries to nontraditional lifestyle segments to pursue new business opportunities. Given the high practical relevance of brand extensions for luxury brands and the importance to understand the success factors for their extendibility and potential backward effects on the parent brand, surprisingly little research has addressed these issues for luxury brands in comparison to nonluxury brands. The current research reveals extension‐related differences between luxury and nonluxury brands by simultaneously analyzing key dimensions of parent brand value, fit, and extension category involvement on the consumer's attitude toward the brand extension, which in turn influences the postextension image of the parent brand. Results of a structural equation model based on a survey among 492 participants show that the predominant driver of brand extension success for both luxury and nonluxury brands is overall extension fit, followed by the consumer's involvement in the extension category. The influence of functional value of the parent brand on the extension evaluation is more important for nonluxury brands. The hedonic value of the parent brand is found to be of relevance only in case of luxury brands. Moreover, a reciprocal spillover effect between the extension evaluation and the parent brand evaluation is observed. The degree of luxuriousness of the parent brand moderates this relationship. This effect is weaker for luxury brands.

No abstract

No abstract

PurposeExisting research on sponsorship effects shows that the congruence (i.e. fit) between sponsor and sponsored cause is critical for a change in brand image. Congruence between sponsor and sponsored cause is seen as static in nature. From a dynamic perspective it is unclear why congruence should be seen as constant, and why it is critical for sponsorship effects. This paper aims to address this issue.Design/methodology/approachThis paper analyzes effects of sponsorship evaluative congruence on brand image over time using individual difference measures. Individual level data were obtained from two surveys before and after the 2006 FIFA World Cup™, including 268 respondents who participated in both surveys.FindingsFindings show significant positive effects of learning and remembering of a sponsorship stimulus on brand image over time. In contrast to existing literature, positive incongruence of brand image (i.e. sponsor) and event image (i.e. sponsored cause) in the pre‐analysis results in a significant increase of brand image over time. Moreover, a change in event image over time has a positive effect on the change in brand image.Research limitations/implicationsFurther research should replicate this study in different contexts, including event‐ and brand‐related contexts. Future studies should use a more detailed scale to measure brand (event) image, which would allow a more rigorous assessment of image transfer on an attribute level. A replication of the relationship between event image and brand image over time would be especially interesting in a setting, in which event image is negative or a negative Δ event image could be expected.Practical implicationsLinking explanatory variables such as (Δ) event image and Δ brand image over time is important for a reliable assessment of the positive (negative) consequences of sponsorship activities. A sponsorship that might have been positively incongruent in the beginning can turn out to be congruent over time. Hence, the current view that incongruent sponsorships are less promising might be misleading.Originality/valueIn experimental studies, congruence between sponsor and sponsored event is seen as static in nature. From a dynamic perspective, this viewpoint can be challenged. Both sponsor and event image are subject to change over time. Hence, this study determines the impact of event image change over time on brand image.