Leading the way in sponsorship analysis, insight, valuation & measurement

Fresh Insights from IEG

IEG’s sponsorship experts provide unique perspective on the latest industry developments, news and trends. These posts will make you think, challenge conventional wisdom, give you new ideas, and spark discussion.

Learn more about IEG > Work with IEG >

Sponsorship Blogs

Is $27 Million Too Much For Primary Status Of A NASCAR Team?

Posted: 7/13/2009 11:31:31 AM by William Chipps | with 4 comments

Heard at this past weekend’s NASCAR race that Aflac paid $27 million last year for its primary sponsorship of Carl Edwards’ Roush Fenway Sprint Cup Series team.

Talk about buying at the top of the market.

To be sure, Aflac does a good job activating the sponsorship, at least through TV ads. There’s no escaping that pesky duck.

But really, one has to consider what else that kind of money could buy. Speaking in ballpark terms, $27 million would easily cover the cost of other national marketing platforms—ranging from nonprofits to stick-and-ball pro sports teams—with millions to spare.

I don’t mean to pick on Aflac, but you’ve got to wonder what kind of return they’re getting from the sponsorship. $27 million is a boatload of money, and really drives home the need to use the sponsorship to garner new and incremental business, not just as an add-on to TV commercials. Presumably Aflac is gaining ROI from B2B and B2C audiences as a result of the sponsorship. If not, good luck justifying that kind of expenditure to the company’s top brass.

On an unrelated note, heard that Ask.com—NASCAR’s only new major sponsor for the ’09 season—has pulled its merchandise trailer for driver Bobby Labonte. Apparently the search engine blew its activation budget during the first half of the season.

 

Read more blog posts

Filed under: motorsports, NASCAR, sponsorship measurement

Share |

Comments

Please login to post a comment.

Vinu Joseph
For me this exchange helps underscore a common challenge in sponsorship, particularly deals at such high-dollar levels. If you look at it purely in terms of dollars invested vs. returned, it would take a whole lot of insurance policies--or soda, detergent or allergy medication--to offset an eight-figure expense. Within the industry we understand that the objectives and the metrics are more nuanced than that. But we have to be able to explain such visible partnerships in real-world terms--whether it's to investors, government officials or colleagues in other departments.

As for Ask.com, if their goal was to connect with fans at the track, then the loss of the trailer would seem to be a concern if it's not replaced by something else--I wouldn't want to try explaining to a kid that his or her #96 gear will be arriving in 3-5 business days. But, as Mark seems to suggest, if it were my budget I'd be putting it into the NASCAR site integration, since there's a closer business alignment.
7/18/2009 10:45:01 AM
 
Mark Crepeau
AFLAC is no different than any other sponsor, if your program is not driving new business, it's over. That's not a story nor great insight.

As for Ask.com, I am not sure how not being able to buy a Bobby Labonte t-shirt impacts Ask.com activation plan. Seems to me very little except maybe now fans are forced to go to ASK.com to find out where they can get a t-shirt.
7/17/2009 7:56:54 AM
 
William Chipps
The point is Aflac paid huge dollars for the sponsorship, and it better be getting its money’s worth. Not just media impressions and other top-line metrics, but actual new business. I hope they are—if not, chances are the program won’t be long for this world.

As far as Ask.com, yes, maybe they are activating through NASCAR.com or other channels. But what happens when Bobby Labonte fans can’t buy a T-shirt at a race? Sponsorship activation should help enhance the consumer experience, not detract from it.
7/14/2009 1:17:28 PM
 
Mark Crepeau
Not sure what point you are trying to make here. There is no doubt that $27M is a lot of money, but not sure that AFLAC's TV sports spending for any other sport is not significantly above $27M. MLB? NFL? Is it any more difficult to imagine the type of ROI any company is getting on spending $27M any where?

In addition, you should not equate the pulling of a merchandise trailer with Ask.com blowing its activation budget. Perhaps their activation continues where there is greater alignment, like NASCAR.com.

Bill, you may want to consider getting some better information about each of these partnerships before blogging unbalanced stories about sports sponsorship.
7/14/2009 10:06:27 AM
 

Tags