01 cover sbi 152.indd - FIFA/CIES International University Network

NAMING RIGHTS
IT’S ALL IN A NAME
While economic uncertainty has hit many parts of the sponsorship world, the demand
for naming rights for stadia and arena remains high. Andy Fry asks why naming rights
deals retain their attraction in touch economic times and looks at the fresh thinking
that are being used to derive maximum value.
NO ONE IN SPORTS MARKETING would
really question the value or impact delivered
by naming rights sponsorships. But brands
considering this approach need to realise it is
far more complex than simply hoisting a banner
over a sports stadium.
For a start, it needs to be supported by a good
marketing programme, explains Gareth Moore,
international sales director at sponsorship
consultancy Sport+Markt: “Naming rights
sponsors form a league of their own,” he
says. “But to guarantee success they have to
implement their partnerships through further
communication. Early communication with
stakeholders such as fans and journalists is
important because they have to be willing to
accept and transport the name.”
Moore’s point about fans cannot be overstated.
While most are willing to tolerate a shirt
or event sponsorship, the prospect of a company
buying a venue’s name is - potentially - a much
more direct assault on the fan’s relationship
with their chosen club or team. Get it wrong
and a naming rights deal can quickly become a
millstone around a brand’s neck.
This is why brands mostly prefer to be
involved in new-build projects rather than
trying to rename existing stadia. In the former
scenario, it’s possible to be seen as the financial
lynchpin of a project - as Emirates Airline was
when it took naming rights to Arsenal’s new
stadium in Ashburton Grove.
In the latter, however, there’s a real risk that
both fans and the wider community will reject
the sponsorship - either by criticising it overtly
or refusing to use its name as required. It’s
tough, for example, to imagine Liverpool FC fans
accepting a new name for Anfield. It’s easier,
instead, to picture a brand attached to Liverpool’s
proposed new-build at Stanley Park - since fans
have yet to imprint on that venue and would be
grateful for financial input into their club.
A timely example of this issue is the decision
by Newcastle United’s board to rename its iconic
soccer stadium St James’ Park as sportsdirect.
com@St James’ Park. Although this is just a
stopgap measure until next season - when a new
naming rights partner will be chosen - fans have
already made it clear that they regard the move as
an attack on the heritage of the club. Any brand
that chooses to step in to this breach next season
will need to think very carefully before doing so.
The appeal of new-builds isn’t just about sidestepping
a negative fan reaction, however. While
established stadia have history on their side,
it’s far more compelling for a forward-looking
brand to be associated with a state-of-the-art
stadium than a damp, crumbling fleapit where
the toilets don’t flush. Not only that, but the new
generation of stadia are being integrated more
effectively into communities - something that is
of real value to sponsors. Spurs chairman Daniel
Levy made this point recently when he said
his club’s proposed 56,000 stadium had been
designed to be “a vibrant area 365 days a year -
not a stadium with dead space surrounding it.”
This distinction between new-builds and
existing stadia isn’t a hard and fast rule - since it
is possible to get involved with legacy facilities
in a supporting role (naming a stand, for
example, or partnering one part of a complex -
as Timex has just done by linking up with the
New York Giants’ new practice facility - now
called the Timex Performance Center).
The right fit
But it’s worth noting that even in the US, where
naming rights is a well-established and accepted
concept, fans are not always comfortable with
stadia name changes. The classic example is
the San Francisco 49ers’ Candlestick Park
which was known for a while as 3Com Park and
Monster Park. Neither brand name ever won
support from hardcore fans.
Of course, getting fans and journalists on
board is only part of the challenge - even in the
context of a new-build facility. Assuming you
get both those relationships right, there’s still
a lot of work to be done in terms of making
such a deal work, says Trevor Watkins, head of
the sports team at legal firm Clarke Willmott.
“Critical to a successful naming rights deal is
creating a partnership where both the rights
owner and the brand feel they are achieving
their goals,” he explains. “For most venue
owners, naming rights will be their single
biggest asset, so they need secure a true value
for them. Equally, brands need to feel that the
venue rights owner is a partner which will work
with them to fulfil their core objectives.”
At the same time, it’s important not to
operate as silos with the two sides pursuing
agenda in parallel. “A real partnership is one
where the two sides reinforce each other’s
activities,” adds Watkins - who spent a period
of time as chairman of AFC Bournemouth. “A
good rights owner can facilitate the naming
rights partner’s integration into the wider
community. Likewise, leading brands have a lot
more to offer than cash.”
Still on the subject of new-builds, the
importance of a transparent and pro-active
partnership is evident from the moment
the plans for the venue are drawn up, says
Watkins: “Naming rights contracts are usually
very long so marketers should ensure that
their requirements in terms of exposure and
activation are considered right from the start -
before it’s too late. Getting involved early also
means that the risk of an alternative venue
name being used by fans is diminished.”
Moore and Watkins agree that new-builds are
generally a better option than existing stadia for
the reasons above. But what kind of new-builds
Should brands only be interested in NFL and
soccer - or do other sports have something to
offer And does it have to be major clubs like
Arsenal - or do smaller sports franchise have
something to offer “The answer to the first
question is that a lot of venues are suitable for
naming rights,” says Watkins. “Within sport,
we’re seeing interesting activity in cricket (eg
the Brit Oval and Swalec Stadium) and I’d say
horse-racing is an untapped opportunity. But it’s
not just professional sports venues. I think we’ll
see activity at universities and multi-purpose
civic facilities.”
This point is underlined by recent trends
in the US, where five college sports facilities
have managed to secure deals worth more than
U$20m in the last few years. Looking outside
sports, one of the hottest US naming rights
opportunities on the market right now is the
GM Building, an iconic skyscraper in the heart
of Manhattan’s shopping district - available
for the first time in 40 years. What, you might
say, has this got to do with sports marketers
Well the simple fact is that it is competition for
sports rights holders - just like the O2-branded
millennium dome in London. Sports rights
holders that are serious about securing a partner
need to demonstrate the kind of best-practice
seen in other sectors.
At the same time, it’s a reminder that brands
need to approach naming rights with an open
mind. Leaving aside the fanbase, does the rights
holder have a clear strategic vision Is the venue
based near a transport hub Is it close enough to
retail locations to facilitate experiential activity
such as sampling Is the local economy in
growth or decline Watkins, for example, talks
up Plymouth - whose bid to be a 2018 World
Cup city could transform its value to a naming
rights partner.
As for the second point, the size of the
rights owner, Watkins says it’s clearly a relevant
consideration. “If you’re a global brand like
Emirates then you want a partnership that delivers
30 SportBusiness International • No. 152 • 12.09