The gladiatorial sponsorship arena: how ambushing impacts memory

Abstract

Purpose The practice whereby a non-official sponsor brand attempts to “ambush” an official sponsor’s rights continues to threaten sporting events. A key motivator of the ensuing regulatory response is grounded in the ambiguity that ambush marketing generates, namely, by obscuring public awareness of the legitimate sponsor. However, the cognitive processes underpinning sponsorship identification have only recently been investigated empirically. The purpose of this paper is to investigate the effects of ambush advertising on sponsorship memory. Design/methodology/approach A 2 (brand advertising: sponsorship-linked vs non-sponsorship-linked) × 2 (ambush advertisement: ambush advertisement vs filler) experimental design was used to test the impact of exposure on sponsor recall and recognition. Findings The results indicate that exposure to ambush advertising has adverse effects cognitively. When presented with a sponsorship-linked advertisement and an ambush advertisement, the participants had diminished recall of who the legitimate sponsor was, and were less likely to recognize them. Research limitations/implications This work has important theoretical implications in that it draws together the existing literature on sponsorship, advertising and cognitive fields. Moreover, on a practical level, this work informs the debate on increased regulatory intervention into ambushing practices, which is centered on tensions between balancing fair marketing practice with the rights of sponsors and event organizers. Originality/value To date, there is a paucity of research that examines the effects of ambushing in a sports sponsorship context. The unique contribution of this study is that it shows the process through which ambushing advertising adversely impacts sponsors’ rights.

Specificity of application of marketing in sports

“…Један од њих је тзв. Маркетинг из заседе, односно Амбуш маркетинг (Piatkowska, Zysko, Goclowska 2015;Kelly, Cornwel, Singh 2019; Grady 2016). Иако од стране многобројних аутора оправдано, Амбуш маркетинг је на граници са етичким понашањем, будући да се по својим карактеристикама категоризује у нелојално понашање према конкуренцији.…”

The significance of a sponsored event on lesser-known brands in a competitive environment

“…However, this has not stopped organizations to use guerrilla marketing tactics to ambush the official sponsors of events such as Nike ambushing Adidas’ sponsorship of the Olympic Games. While ambush marketing tactics lead to diminished recall of official sponsors (Kelly et al , 2019), sponsorship activation has been lauded to protect sponsors’ investments against ambush marketing. As indicated in the results of this research, sponsorship activation and event involvement impacted consumers’ attitudes toward the sponsoring brand that activated its sponsorship compared to the non-sponsoring brand.…”

Ethical aspects of guerrilla and ambush marketing

“…The adoption of special laws against ambush marketing is a very useful legal support to the organizers of sports competitions. In one study [Kelly et al, 2019], which dealt with the effects of ambush advertising on the memory of sponsors, i.e. cognitive processes on which the identification of sponsors is based, it was concluded that exposure to advertising "from an ambush" has detrimental cognitive effects.…”