canadian sponsorship landscape study · 2007-2009 •new study driven by the industry •added...
TRANSCRIPT
08-08-08
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY | DECEMBER 2016
CANADIAN SPONSORSHIP LANDSCAPE STUDYELISA BESELT & ADAM DEGRASSE | T1NORM O’REILLY | OHIO UNIVERSITY & T1
10TH ANNUAL
2
10TH ANNUAL CSLS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Sponsorship Marketing Budget
26.1%As percentage of total marketing communication budget
2015 Change
Industry Size $1.74 B 4.8%
Activation Spend $0.87 B 27.9%
Total Spend $2.62 B 12.0%
Activation Ratio
0.51For every dollar spent on rights fees, 51 cents is
spent on activation
Evaluation
3.25%of overall sponsorship marketing budget is spent on
sponsorship evaluation
Average 2015 Change
Sponsors Spending $3,035,588 38%
Property Revenue $2,767,983 26%
Agency Billing $975,525 70%
236 Responses
92.7% 7.3%English French
2007-2009• New study driven by the industry• Added qualitative questions• Recession proof• Activation jump
2010-2012• Evaluation decline• SMCC partnership• Gap in service expands• Industry concerns move
from ROI to digital
2013-2015• Activation rebound• Festivals on par with pro sport• Pro sport adapts• 1 in 4 marketing $ is on
sponsorship
10 YEARS OF CSLS
3
OPPORTUNITIES AND THREATS IN SPONSORSHIP TODAY
THREAT
Talent Gap
• Lack of implementation, evaluation and activation knowledge
• Limited professional development opportunities
• Succession planning
• Having sponsors work together instead of competing for attention
• Increased integration of sponsor brands
OPPORTUNITY
Co-Sponsorship
Opportuniti
es
4
• Decline of traditional mediums (e.g., cable TV)
• Integration across platforms, as well as enhanced digital activities are realities of sponsorship today
OPPORTUNITY
Digital & Content
INFLUENCE ON SPONSORSHIP DECISIONS
Sponsor
Decisi
ons
8.3%9.0%
9.0%
9.0%
9.9%15.6%
39.2%
14.0%3.0%
15.0%
10.5%18.5%
11.0%
28.0%
Consumer PassionsInternal Data/AnalysisBiasIndustry TrendsCompetitor ActivityOtherAsset Assessment
SponsorAgency on
Sponsor Behalf
39.2% of sponsors say that “Consumer Passions” influence their sponsorship decisions. 18.5% of agencies (on sponsors’ behalf) say that “Bias” influences their sponsorship decisions.
5
ROI SATISFACTION
Sponsor
ROI
Sponsor
Property’s Perception
0%
20%
40%
60%
0% 0%
40%
55%
5%10%
20% 20%
40%
10%
Re
spo
nd
en
ts (
%)
Sponsor mean = 3.40Property mean = 3.71
SomewhatDissatisfied
Neither satisfied nor dissatisfied
Somewhat satisfied
Very satisfiedVery
Dissatisfied
6
SPONSORSHIP DISSERVICE
Proper
ty
Servic
e Gap
Recall stats
Loyalty stats
Target profile
Ambush protection
Activation w/ sponsors
Activation resources
Exclusivity protection
Activation w/ properties
Concluding report
Info/results on objectives
0 1 3 4 5
4.00
4.27
4.18
4.09
4.00
3.82
4.09
3.91
4.18
4.27
2.64
3.36
3.45
2.82
2.91
2.09
2.64
2.55
2.09
2.27
Likert Scale
ProvidedImportance
7
Industry S
ize
Activation
Rights fees
Total
CANADIAN SPONSORSHIP INDUSTRY
$0
$0.75
$1.50
$2.25
$3.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
$1.59$1.78
$2.38$2.52 $2.51 $2.50
$2.75$2.85
$2.34
$2.62
$0.48 $0.56
$0.99$1.09
$0.96 $0.91
$1.18$1.07
$0.68$0.87
$1.11$1.22
$1.39 $1.43$1.55 $1.59 $1.57
$1.78$1.66 $1.74
Am
oun
t (B
illio
ns $
)
Industry Size in 2015 was
$1.74 B
8
MARKETING COMMUNICATIONS BUDGET
Investm
ent
Structu
re0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
16.7% 15.5%
22.5%
15.4%
22.3%
29.6%
21.9% 23.1%25.4% 26.1%
Spo
nso
rshi
p B
udge
t (%
)
10-year average is
21.9%
9
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
24.2%22.1%23.6%30.8%33.6%32.3%34.8%33.0%39.0%30.0%
75.8%77.9%76.4%69.2%66.4%67.7%65.2%67.0%
61.0%
70.0%
Res
po
nden
ts (%
)
CASH VS. VALUE-IN-KIND REVENUE
Investm
ent
Structu
re
CashVIK
10-year cash average is
69.7% and VIK average is
30.3%
10
SPONSORSHIP SPEND (BIG 5)
0%
15%
30%
45%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Inve
stm
ent (
%)
Catego
ries
Amateur sport
Festivals
Cause
Pro sport
Arts
11
GEOGRAPHIC FOCUS OF SPONSORSHIP SPEND
International 8.6% National 30.6% Multi-Provincial 8.5%
Provincial 20.3% Regional 13.9% Local 17.1%
Geogr
aphy
2006 - 2015 average by
region
12
ACTIVATION RATIO
Activa
tion
CA0
CA0.25
CA0.50
CA0.75
CA1.00
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
$0.43 $0.46
$0.71$0.76
$0.62$0.57
$0.75
$0.62
$0.41
$0.51
Act
ivat
ion
to R
ight
s Fe
e
10-year average is 0.58; US is
consistently near 1.70 (per
IEG)
13
EVALUATION
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
7.80%
4.50%
6.00%
4.10%
2.60% 2.30% 2.30%3.00%
1.10%
3.25%
Spen
d o
n E
valu
atio
n (%
)
Evaluatio
n
10-year average is
3.70%
14
SUMMARY
15
1ST | 2007
LAUNCH & LEARNING
2ND | 2008
BIGGEST ISSUE: ROI
3RD | 2009
WHAT RECESSION?
4TH | 2010
ROI TO DIGITAL CONCERNS
5TH | 2011
RETRACTION
6TH | 2012
“FESTIVALIZATION”
7TH | 2013
ACTIVATION RISES
8TH | 2014
RISE OF SOCIAL MEDIA SPEND
9TH | 2015
PRO SPORT RENAISSANCE
10TH | 2016
BRANDED CONTENT
The industry spend on both rights fees will hold steady. However, the nature of how sponsors and properties activate will change.
D’ACTIVATION1
16
Organizations will move towards integrating sponsorships more internally. 2Social media will fall as a target of activation investment.
Companies will integrate traditional platforms for sponsorship with new platforms.
Live content will continue its reign as a driver of sponsorship investment.5
34
WHAT’S NEXT? OUR EXPECTATIONS
Festivalization is a fundamental activation platform that will see a lot of growth and diversification in the coming years. 6
17
Cause will need to be an integral component of all great sponsorships.7Sponsorship marketers will become more strategic about who they want to interact with. Target markets will become more defined.
The industry will see a change in how sponsorship activations and interactions are measured.
Training, education, and resources to aid with sponsorship practices will become more formalized.10
89
WHAT’S NEXT? OUR EXPECTATIONS
If you have any questions regarding the data or information found in this report, please do not hesitate to reach out to any of the authors. We encourage you to share the CSLS with your networks and complete the survey as it is made available each year.
Dr. Norm O’Reilly [email protected]
Elisa Beselt [email protected]
Adam DeGrasse [email protected]
THANK YOU!
18