While reviewing my news feeds a week or so ago, I came across an announcement that Qantas had taken up naming rights sponsorship of the Australian Formula 1 Grand Prix. It was a short announcement, but the implications are much bigger.

The first consideration is that Qantas is already the official airline partner of the Australian Grand Prix, giving them a credible and appropriate platform around this event. In 2001, they actually downgraded from naming rights to that level.

I believe they’ve got this wrong and should have stayed at the official partner level, as they were in the perfect position to do what is referred to as “ambushing up”. The thinking is similar to ambush marketing, but not the mechanics. In an ambushing-up situation, a sponsor takes their perfectly legitimate sponsorship and leverages it so effectively – creating so much target market connection and meaning – that they get the marketing results you would expect from a much bigger sponsor.

While there are plenty of good reasons to take up naming rights sponsorship, in most situations, it is unnecessary. Being thorough and creative and focusing on the connection with the target market, not the property, can create huge results – much bigger than your typical naming rights sponsor, who concentrates on visibility, not creating real returns for the brand.

Every sponsor can benefit from ambushing up, and the airline category is in the ideal position to do it. They have planes full of bored people reading their magazines and watching their videos. They have lounges, terminals, and gates. They have ongoing relationships with millions of frequent flyers to nurture. They have travel agents and corporate accounts who need fostering. They send millions of emails to their customers and frequent flyers. Their online experience is heavily used, but virtually commoditised, and could do with some interesting, relevant content.

Airlines have so many customer touchpoints – and most of them provide a comparatively lengthy and captive opportunity to enhance the customer experience. They have countless opportunities to create real, meaningful wins for all or most of their target markets, so why aren’t they doing it? Why does Qantas they think having a bigger sponsorship is a better approach than actually… you know… using the one they’ve got?

As a Qantas customer who both flew with them and bought tickets online just last week, I can tell you firsthand that what they are doing is pretty standard, old school stuff. Case in point, if you go to their website – www.qantas.com.au – you’ll notice a that you could “win a trip to the Grand Prix”. Hoo-wee, now there’s some innovation! I get to give them my details for the slim chance of being the one person who wins two economy class tickets to Melbourne to watch the racing for the weekend!! Yawn.

Oh, and any frequent flyer can pay almost $2000 to use the Qantas Skydeck at the race. Any frequent flyer – you don’t have to be loyal or important to Qantas, you don’t have to be invited to participate, and it’s not in any way exclusive. You just have to have $2000 and a frequent flyer number. Their most frequent flyers can’t even cash in any of their millions of points to get a spot.

Seriously, it’s two weeks before a huge international event they’re sponsoring – now at an even higher level – and that’s the best they can do? They should be embarrassed.

Naming rights of an event of this size is a huge financial commitment and provides a commensurately huge platform to leverage. If a sponsor is prepared to fully leverage the opportunity – investing the time, creativity, and resources required – then naming rights is a viable option. On the other hand, if a sponsor can’t be bothered getting a lower level sponsorship right, stepping up is an opportunity wasted.

There is also the issue of timing. The announcement was dated 24 February. The race weekend is 25-28 March. Even if Qantas is justified in spending up for this bigger platform – and I’m not at all convinced that they are – all they’ve done is bought a larger opportunity. Leverage is what turns that opportunity into results for a brand. What kind of leverage program will create a result from a platform of that scope? One that takes a lot longer than a month to plan and implement!

As canvassed in my recent blog, Bad Idea #77: Sponsor the Olympics Three Weeks Before the Games, strong leverage planning takes time to build buy-in and go though the creative process. It also takes time to implement. Does Qantas have time to create in-flight content? A new ad? Create and launch a loyalty promotion? Anything of meaning that is above and beyond what they could have done with the lower level sponsorship, and do it in the space of four weeks? Doubtful.

This leaves the question of why they bumped up the investment, when it was both unnecessary and unworkable, from a marketing point of view. Without being a mind-reader, experience tells me there are three main options:

1. They have let their corporate ego get the best of them
2. They are under the impression that potential inbound passengers (people coming to Australia) are unaware that Qantas exists and that simply seeing the name Qantas ad infinitum during the telecast will somehow magically make people understand why they should choose Qantas for their travels. (It would have to be magic, because reams of research have proven that visibility does not change the perceptions or behaviours around a brand.)
3. They are trying to position themselves in a positive light with state and local government by stepping in with major, white knight funding at the last minute.

I’m very interested in your take on this. Why do you think they’ve done it? Do you think this major sponsorship increase is justifiable and why? Please post your answers below. Comments are moderated, but only because there are some real creeps in this world. Go ahead and fire away!

This was a question I came across in the blogosphere this week. To be fair, the person who asked wasn’t that blunt, but had definitely seen a lot of headaches from sponsors who didn’t pay their fees, didn’t do what they had promised, and generally bullied the event. After a nightmare like that, it seems perfectly a perfectly logical question to ask!

In that situation, the answer is a simple: Those sponsors were not worth the headaches.

Why seek sponsorship?

Before looking at counting the cost of having sponsors, it’s probably worth going through why you would want sponsorship in the first place.

The downside to having sponsorship is that raising and servicing it is a lot of work and some sponsors can be real headaches (thankfully, rare). The upside is that most sponsors are great, and what they bring to properties is multifaceted and well worth the effort to seek sponsorship and do it well:

• Increase in revenue
• Enhancement of the event experience to your audience through sponsor leverage activities
• Ability to achieve your own marketing goals through strong sponsor leverage
• Introduction of your event to the sponsor’s target market, which may be larger than your own reach (or what your marketing budget will cover)
• Provision of infrastructure, expertise, merchandise, and services that will help you run your event

There is plenty more that a sponsor can bring to the table. The key is knowing how to structure it so it’s win-win-win – you win, the sponsor wins, the target market wins. There’s plenty more on win-win-win all over this blog.

Has it been worth it?

If you’re in the run-up to your event, or maybe it’s just happened, and you are feeling used and abused by your sponsors, that’s not good. The thing is, sponsorship is hard work, so feeling some degree of sponsor fatigue is normal and will pass once you’ve had a chance to decompress. On the other hand, some sponsors really are users and abusers. The trick is, figuring out which category you’re in.

To find out whether a given sponsor – or your whole sponsorship program – has been worth having or is just a toxic drain, you should ask yourself these questions:

Contract

• Did you have a contract or comprehensive letter agreement in place, signed by both parties and outlining all rights, responsibilities, and payments?
• Did the sponsor pay the full contracted fee, with all instalments paid reasonably on time?
• Did the sponsor comply with guidelines you set forth regarding the use of your intellectual property or benefits, or their conduct on-site?
• If the sponsor was denied permission to carry out an activity, did they comply?

Behaviour

• Did the sponsor behave in a professional, respectful manner toward you and your colleagues at all times?
• Did the sponsor make unreasonable demands? For instance, they demanded that you change your event or program in a way that suited them, but disadvantaged your organisation or audience?
• Did the sponsor have entitlement issues? For instance, they were constantly requesting more benefits than contracted?
• Did the sponsor try to bully you into doing something you were not obliged, nor were compelled, to do?

Cost

• Did the cost of servicing exceed 10% of the contracted fee?

The cost of servicing is not the cost of delivering contracted benefits, but the cost of providing added value benefits and support to the sponsor, for which you should budget 10% and build it into the price.

Revenue

• Did the cost of delivering the contracted and added value benefits exceed one-third of the fee charged? One-half?

As a rule of thumb, you should endeavour to build sponsorship packages that are worth to the sponsor at least three times what it costs to deliver and service them. This is NOT the exact amount you should charge, but a baseline you can use as a starting point to ensure a sponsorship is going to be worth the time and effort put in. If you start at that baseline, and whether through negotiation or other market factors, the price falls to only twice the cost of delivery – so half of your revenue is going toward making the sponsorship itself happen – you are at the point where even the perfect sponsor may not be worth having.

Sponsor added value

• Did the sponsor undertake any leverage activities that extended your marketing plan? An example would be using your event in their advertising, promotions, or other marketing in the lead-up to the event.

It’s not looking good… Now what?

Some of these are not drop-dead deal-breakers – it is possible to have a great sponsor who doesn’t extend your marketing plan, for instance. But as you go through this list, a clear picture of the real value of a sponsor or sponsorship program should appear. If the picture is bad, I’ve got a few tips.

Have a contract

If everything goes pear-shaped and you never see a cent from a sponsor, will you miss the money? If so, you need either a comprehensive letter agreement or a contract in place, and it needs to be done by a lawyer. This not only protects all parties, it outlines expectations in black and white. Gray areas are the enemy of sponsorship. (Concerned about the cost? You will find an agreement pro forma in The Sponsorship Seeker’s Toolkit 3^rd Edition that will make the process much easier and cheaper.)

Hold up your end of the bargain

Before you can improve your sponsorship situation, you need to ensure you are delivering absolutely everything that your sponsors are entitled to. Making sponsors abide by a contract will not work if you’re breaching it, too.

Take a stand

Do not ever let a sponsor bully or take advantage of you. Ever. If a sponsor is out of line and (important) you have delivered everything you’ve promised, they don’t have a leg to stand on. Just tell them “no”. If they try to bully you – and some will – you need to be prepared to get a lawyer involved.

This is particularly important if you have more than one sponsor taking advantage. Make an example of the first one that does the wrong thing. Chances are, they will pull their heads in before you get far into the process, and it shows all of your sponsors that you do indeed have a spine.

Dealing with nightmare sponsors is never fun, but as those self-help gurus seem so fond of saying, you teach people how to treat you. If you let your sponsors push you around, pay months late, or treat you disrespectfully, many of them will.

You are peers – equals – and what you are offering has real value to their brands. If they can’t see that, dump them. Life is too short for that crap.

I’m delighted to announce that I’m doing Sponsorship School again in 2010 – yay!!

This intensive, six-month program of corporate sponsorship training, coaching, and peer support was first run in 2003 for twelve people from six Sydney-based charities. It was very successful for the participants and their organisations, but I wanted to go bigger.

Finally, technology has made it possible to do Sponsorship School on a global scale!

A select number of charitable organisations will be chosen from the applicant pool to participate in this groundbreaking program, designed specifically to build capacity in the area of corporate sponsorship. It kicks of at the end of April and runs through September.

Want more information? You can…

• Download the Sponsorship School 2010 Information and Guidelines (PDF)
• Visit the Sponsorship School 2010 page
• Check out the Sponsorship School 2010 Application Form

Don’t delay. Applications close 19 March 2010.

Drop me a line with any questions on this: school@powersponsorship.com.

After hundreds of thousands of downloads, I thought it was high time to give my white papers a format that is as professional and well thought-out as I hope the content is. While I was at it, I also did some updates and revisions.

Want to have a look? The download links are below. All are in PDF form and most are around 250kb. “Last Generation Sponsorship” is around 1mb, as it has a lot of diagrams.

You are welcome to share these documents around, but please do not link directly to the PDF download (called “deep linking”) without my permission. You are more than welcome to link to this blog or our Sponsorship Articles and Tools page.

Sponsorship white papers

• “Last Generation Sponsorship” – My blockbuster white paper on best practice sponsorship, downloaded almost 400,000 times, reprinted in many, many industry publications in eight languages. Download it for yourself. Download it for your partners. Download it for your boss, board, or colleague. This article is guaranteed to get anyone thinking more strategically about sponsorship!
• “Sponsorship in a Scary Economy” – A very topical paper with practical skills for both sponsors and sponsorship seekers.
• “Survival Guide for the New Sponsorship” – Practical things you can do to shift your organisation’s approach into best-practice.
• “Don’t Go to Another Sponsorship Conference Until You Read This” – All sponsorship conferences are NOT created equal. This great guide will help you sort the good from the bad (and make organisers of the bad ones really miserable, if you want to).
• “Sponsorship and the Public Sector” – A wake-up call for all government sponsorship seekers.
• “Top Ten Tips for Sponsorship Seekers” – Short and sharp, this is a must read for sponsorship seekers, particularly if you’re new to the game.
• “What Every CMO Needs to Know About Sponsorship” – Aimed at corporate chief marketing officers, this white paper offers advice about the high-level decisions and directives that will impact on sponsorship results.

Sponsorship cheat sheets

• “Cheat Sheet: Questions to Ask Before You Hire a Sponsorship Broker” - This is a compilation of questions that will allow great brokers to shine, expose the shonks, and clarify the weaknesses and strengths of all the brokers in between.
• “Cheat Sheet: Marketing Terms a Sponsorship Seeker Must Know” – This is a list of some of the most common, but confusing, terms that sponsors use when describing their objectives and target markets. If you want to ensure you know what sponsors are talking about, be sure you know all of them!

Please, tell me what you think!

Have you read any of these white papers or cheat sheets? Got a comment? Please, add your comments below. I’d love to see them!

Please note, comments are moderated, but we get through them quite quickly. Spammers just get sneakier and sneakier!

The Winter Olympics are in full swing and the organisers are busy implementing draconian “anti-ambush” laws. Too bad they won’t work.

Anti-ambush legislation is mainly about tightening existing IP laws, bolting on a few proximity laws, and trying to control old-school communication channels. It is pedantic to the point of restricting freedom of expression – just ask the people of Vancouver – but still doesn’t stop ambush marketing.

Rather than “we’ve got you covered” platitudes, major events should front up with some home truths. They won’t, however, so I will. There are three major things that a sponsor can do to protect themselves.

Ensure your brand is a natural match

The first thing you need to do, before you commit to any major sponsorship, is to ensure that your brand is a natural match to the sponsorship – better than your competitors. One exercise for determining the fit (and your competitors’) goes like this:

First, make a list of all of your brand’s attributes and values. Describe your brand really thoroughly. Then do the same for your key competitors. Go through the lists and cross out any attributes and values that you share with your competitors, because they don’t count. Now, you’re left with the ways in which you are different. Compare these lists with a list of all of the attributes and values of the event you’re considering to determine which brand is the best match.

If your brand is clearly the best fit, it will be hard work for any of your competitors to create a strategic ambush. On the other hand, if one or more of your competitors is a better natural match than your brand, don’t invest. You will be a sitting duck for ambush. Even if they don’t do any overt ambush activity, people will tend to assume they’re the sponsor. That’s what is referred to as a “natural ambush”.

Think outside the event

Major events cost a lot of money, so it’s easy to think that’s where the value lays and concentrate your leverage on the event itself. Bad idea.

Of course, you should leverage the event itself, but do not ignore the larger event experience. There is a whole world of event experience outside of the major event you’re sponsoring. Just ask the people of Vancouver whether they’re having an event experience. I’ll be having an event experience watching those nuts on luges on TV at the pub. All the chatter in social media is part of the event experience. The real value is in the personal experiences, the stories, of the people you are targeting. That isn’t controlled by the event and laws can’t control it either. The winner in the sponsor vs ambusher competition is the one who leverages the entire event experience.

Add value

The question is then, how do you leverage that entire event experience. Do you try to “own” the experience? Turn your message up to eleven? Again, that’s a bad idea.

First off, it won’t work, because the whole point of the larger experience is that it is owned and controlled by the people, making it the most authentic forum around the event. Disrespect that – try to “own” it – at your own peril.

Instead, concentrate on adding value to that event experience. Improve the not-great stuff and amplify the best stuff, with the goal being to provide small, meaningful benefits that will demonstrate your understanding of your target markets, enhance their experience, and make your brand a welcome and appreciated part of it. If you don’t, an ambusher will.

A good example of this in Vancouver is the Bell Ice Cube, hosted by Bell (Canada). They have created a purpose-built venue that will operate as a free live site and host a live show every afternoon with Olympians. Yes, they will certainly be showcasing their products, but they are also creating an epicentre where people who may not have got tickets to the events can meet Olympians and immerse themselves in the Olympic experience. A number of Games sponsors are doing live sites, some are embarking on great social media campaigns – the key for them, and for you, is to think outside the event.

Ambush prevention really isn’t that tough, but it’s not the law or the event that will save you. In fact, ambush prevention has very little to do with defence and everything to do with your choices, your creativity, and your thoroughness. Sponsor well and there is no room for ambush.

There have been a few great questions on LinkedIn groups lately, particularly the Sponsorship Insights group. I put my two cents in on the discussion boards, but thought other readers might find them useful.

One question I found was about the five key factors sponsors take into account when selecting sponsorship. Great question! The problem is, the factors some sponsors do use for selection are a long way from the factors sponsors should use for selection.

Being a best practice sponsorship zealot, I’ve gone the route of what sponsors should be taking into consideration, and these are my top five:

1.

Did the event/property do any homework before they contacted me? Was the proposal customised? Was it about my brand at all, or simply about their worthiness or need? Customisation is not an absolute requirement, but in the initial stages, will tell you a lot about how professional and astute this potential partner is.

From here on in, they are absolutes…

2.

Is the event/property relevant and meaningful to my target market? Note, I didn’t say “does it reach my target market”. Getting in front of a market is old school thinking, connecting with them in a meaningful way is where it’s at now.

3.

Do we have sufficient lead-time to create and implement a leverage plan? For most major sponsors, we are talking several months, at minimum, and six months to a year or more for major investments.

4.

Do I have buy-in, internally? Sponsorship is no longer supported by huge amounts of incremental support, but is used as a catalyst to make already budgeted activities work harder, or replace less effective existing activities. (Yes, there are exceptions, such as quadrennial events, which are so big as to warrant war-chesting some budget and spending up on extra activity.) The key to using sponsorship in this way – maximising results and minimising incremental spend – is to get buy in and a commitment to leverage before starting negotiations. An extra bonus is that the process of creating that buy-in also creates a brains trust for creativity and troubleshooting.

5.

Can I negotiate the benefits I need, which based on the leverage ideas emanating from my stakeholders, are probably much different that they are offering? Can we get those benefits at a price point that is appropriate and within my budget? If it’s appropriate and desirable, but more that I have to spend, can I access other budgets, offer useful in-kind benefits in lieu of some of the fee, or otherwise get creative without disadvantaging my potential partner?

There are a few more hygiene factors, such as ensuring it doesn’t contravene any category exclusivity you require and that it fits in the context of your whole portfolio, but assuming those areas are in line, those are my top five.

If you want more on sponsorship selection, you can find more specifics in some of my other blogs. I suggest you click on the topics of sponsorship selection and sponsorship leverage.

There are also some good white papers for sponsors, downloadable from the Free Stuff section of this website, http://www.powersponsorship.com/free-stuff.html.

Good luck!

I have recently started getting involved in discussion groups on linked in and wow, what a lot of great questions there are! Today, I addressed a question about the top five things a sponsorship seeker should bring to a presentation to a sponsor.

Before I found the question, many people had answered, but those answers had a lot more to do with how sponsorship has been sold in the past than how it should be sold, and how the world’s most successful sponsorship seekers sell it. And when I talk about the world’s most successful, I’m not talking about the biggest. No, I’m talking about the sponsorship seekers who increase their sponsorship year-on-year, even in really tough years. I’m talking about sponsorship seekers who deepen and extend their relationships with sponsors, until they become one of the highest-performing sponsorships in those sponsors’ portfolios. I’m talking about sponsorship seekers who engender such fierce loyalty and support from their sponsors that they actively advocate the property to other sponsors.

If that’s what you want, you need to drop all the crap about “impression rates” and ROI. Impressions and visibility as sales tools are about 20 years out of date. And as a sponsorship seeker, you are in no position to be able to tell a sponsor what the sponsor’s returns are against their many and varied objectives. While you’re at it, drop all the overt, self-important hoo-ha about how great or needy or worthy you are. You’re selling. It’s about the sponsor’s need, not your need or your ego.

That said, this is what I recommend you bring/discuss/incorporate into your offer:

1.

Evidence that you understand the sponsor’s brand (attributes, values, personality), target markets (psychographic more than demographic), and objectives. This is actually quite easy to get, if you know where to look.

2.

Creative ideas for leverage. Your proposal must be anchored on creative ideas you’ve come up with for them to leverage the sponsorship. Put yourself in their shoes. If you could do ANYTHING what would you do with the sponsorship. The best several ideas will form the core of your proposal.

3.

Examples of how your other sponsors have achieved a commercial return, defined as changing the perceptions and/or behaviours of their target markets. This can include financial data, but much of this can be measured in other ways, such as increasing propensity to try or trust. This shows that you know how to be a partner and know it’s not about you and your need.

4.

Market research from your most recent event. Bonus points if you have asked what the three best and three worst things are about the event, as it shows you are a) asking the right questions; and b) have some opportunities for your sponsor to amplify the good stuff and fix the bad stuff, creating added value for the audience.

5.

Short case studies about how other similar sponsors have done amazing, creative things around sponsorships like this. This shows how astute you are and gives the sponsor a high comfort level about working with you. Again, this information is not hard to find, but you have to know where to look.

If you need a rundown on the whole sponsorship sales and servicing process, complete with numerous checklists, brainstorming exercises, and templates, you may want to get hold of my book, The Sponsorship Seeker’s Toolkit 3rd Edition.

According to some company that really should know better, Sun Life got $26 million in exposure for their new sponsorship of Dolphins Stadium during the Super Bowl.

What is this, 1992??

Media equivalencies should be banished to wherever Milli Vanilli disappeared to, because as measures of sponsorship success go, it is just as fake and insubstantial.

Where are the measures of changes in perceptions? Where are the measures of behaviour changes? Why did they find it necessary to issue a press release touting a measure that is so roundly condemned as irrelevant? What kind of advice are they getting??

I’m flabbergasted.

This entire blog is full of how to make sponsorship work and alternatives to old school thinking, so I won’t repeat myself here. My only recommendation is for readers to do themselves a favour and ignore this corporate chest-beating. It’s just an ego trip.

Read all about it in Media Week.

The Super Bowl is over and the Saints won. As a Vikings fan, I’m not super happy about that, although I am happy for the people of New Orleans, who deserve some good news. At least Brett Favre will be delighted, as he has now relinquished the title of “Most Heartbreaking Interception in the Playoffs” title to Peyton Manning. He’ll be sending a gift basket tomorrow.

I know it’s a bit off topic, but I wanted to share my favourite Super Bowl ads. I’m leaving comments open, so please let me know what your favourites were.

Want to see them all and vote? Check out www.adbowl.com.

Google “Parisian Love”

I can’t tell you how much I love this ad. This is in my top three ads of all time. Seriously.

Audi “Green Police”

Okay, I’m a tree-hugging. composting greenie and I love this ad. The only thing they’re missing is a hotline so I can turn in my neighbour who burns trash in the backyard.

KGB “Sumo

Never heard of KGB before, but I like this ad!

E*Trade “Girlfriend”

I didn’t really like the other E*Trade ads, but this was good.

Snickers “You’re Not You”

Put Betty White in an ad and you’re onto a winner!

Honourable mentions

Hyundai “Old Brett Favre”

I’m a Vikings fan and will someday forgive Brett Favre for that pass.

Flo TV “My Generation”

Love it. Great cause-related hook at the end. Too bad The Who didn’t sound like that at halftime.

Doritos “Underdog”

I thought the Doritos ads were just okay, but this one made me really crack up. A juvenile moment, perhaps.

Volkswagen “Punch Dub”

Entertaining. Maybe VW could sponsor a new division of the MMA.

Dove Men

I liked this ad, but I don’t know why. Maybe just because it wasn’t bad.

The also-rans

There were a lot of other ads that fell into the category of, “this is the best you can do for the Super Bowl??”. Why a company would pay for a Super Bowl ad and not bring their A-game is beyond me.

• Bridgestone – Yawn.
• Bud Light/Budweiser – Perhaps they should have bought just one ad and actually… you know… put some effort into it.
• A-B/Budweiser “Fences” – Beautifully shot and sweet, but a bit half-baked and preachy.
• Careerbuilder.com – Another Yawn
• Census – Why is the census even advertising on the Super Bowl? Isn’t there a better use for those millions of taxpayer dollars?
• Coca-Cola – Pepsi finally lets go of the Super Bowl and this is the best they can come up with?
• Diamond Foods – Not “awesomer”. Try “stupider”.
• Dockers – Strange. I understand the “free pants” website crashed.
• Dodge – I’m pretty sure there is not a woman alive who likes this ad.
• Dr Pepper – Meh.
• E*trade – How many times can I say “yawn”?
• EA – Good music, good tagline, that’s about it.
• Focus on the Family (AKA “the Tebow ad”) – After all the hoo-ha, the ad itself didn’t say very much. Good plan to push the polarising stuff to the website, although given people already know the rest of the story from all the media coverage, they’re probably preaching to the converted.
• Gatorade – Gorgeous, glorious ad, but it’s been done before.
• Go Daddy – Scantily clad women still go with football, apparently. Like Danica Patrick, though.
• HomeAway – Again… yawn.
• Honda – The ad would be much better without that bum-ugly car in it.
• Intel – Cute, not great.
• Kia – My daughter would love this. She’s five.
• McDonald’s – Just bring back the Jordan/Bird ad!
• Michelob Ultra – Every sport-themed ad cliche rolled into one.
• Monster.com – Every fiddling beaver should use it.
• Motorola – Going through all these ads again, I am convinced that there are only three storyboards in all of adland.
• Papa Johns – Following in the footsteps of every pit crew ad ever made.
• Round Up – What a waste of an ad.
• Select 55 – “The World’s Lightest Beer” is floating in the air… groundbreaking!
• Sketchers Shape Ups – Boring, but I bet it sells a lot of shoes.
• Sprint Nextel – This was just embarrassing.
• Taco Bell – Before that ad, Charles Barkley was cool.
• Teleflora – They made their point. That’s all I want to say about that.
• TruTV – I don’t get it.
• Vizio – A one-minute ad showing how many things your TV can do. I didn’t know Apple licensed their ads.

Did anyone else notice I got meaner as I went through this list? Bad marketing makes me cranky.

Almost a decade ago, when our event was brand new, we really struggled for sponsorship. One sponsor really stepped in with some much-needed cash. The problem is that we are now doing well and have grown a lot – in size, revenues, and sophistication – but this original sponsor hasn’t grown with us. They are now one of our smaller sponsors, never leverage, and keep exercising their right of first refusal, which includes category exclusivity. We could get a lot more money and find a much better sponsor in this category if they were gone. We have had two of enquiries from their competitors in the past couple of years. How do we get rid of this sponsor?

Quick primer on “first right of refusal”: This is a right that is often provided as a benefit of sponsorship and means that the sponsor has the first right to say “yes” or “no” to a similar contract at the end of the current agreement.

Many sponsees seem to believe that offering first right of refusal to a sponsor obligates you to offer them a similar contract at the end of the current one. Not so! All it does is prevent you from offering a similar contract to another sponsor without giving them a chance to say “yes” first. So, if your sponsor isn’t getting it, it’s time to raise the bar and see if they jump.

Create a brand new, more comprehensive, five-star proposal. Make it all about their target markets and objectives. Include lots of fantastic ideas for leverage. Make the package realistic, but commensurate with the type of sponsorship you should have in that category. Present it to them as a rethink and a great opportunity. Tell them that you want to continue to work with them, but it is inappropriate to continue with the relationship, as it currently stands. Do not back down if they want to renew the old contract instead. Make it clear that is not an option.

This is important: Be sure to go through this process in good faith. You never know, they may rise to the occasion and let’s hope they do.

Equally important: In case they don’t rise to the occasion, be sure to go through this process with a lot of lead time. There is no guarantee one of your prospects will say “yes” straightaway, so you may need time to sell to another sponsor in the category. Plus, they will need time to plan and implement a leverage plan.