2005
DOI: 10.1108/ijsms-06-04-2005-b005
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

What is being done to deter ambush marketing? Are these attempts working?

Abstract: This paper examines industry responses in Australasia and Europe to the growing practice of ambush marketing, to establish whether the measures that have been put in place to deter the practice have indeed prevented the 'ambush' effect, whereby audiences associate non-sponsoring organisations with particular sporting events. Although some of these measures may be more effective than others in blocking ambush attempts, they also come with potentially negative consequences for event sponsors.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
8
0

Year Published

2008
2008
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 9 publications
(8 citation statements)
references
References 7 publications
(11 reference statements)
0
8
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Control the participants, sponsors, and the media (Crompton, 2004) (Hartland & Skinner, 2005) 1. Specifying how tickets will be dispersed to avoid a competitor accessing blocks of tickets and awarding them as prizes 2.…”
Section: Study Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Control the participants, sponsors, and the media (Crompton, 2004) (Hartland & Skinner, 2005) 1. Specifying how tickets will be dispersed to avoid a competitor accessing blocks of tickets and awarding them as prizes 2.…”
Section: Study Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To top it all off, today, with the help of social media and viral marketing, ambushers can quickly reach large masses (Schmidt et al , 2018). According to Hartland and Skinner (2005), by saving on sponsorship agreement fees, ambushers have a larger marketing communication budget to create effective ambush strategies. All these facts make analyzing consumers' attitudes toward ambush marketing more crucial.…”
Section: Conceptual Frameworkmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The average fan is generally not able to differentiate between sponsorships, advertising and ambush marketing because he/she views all marketing communications activities as advertising (Gemma, 2003;Head, 1981;Lyberger & McCarthy 2001). For example, Adidas was cited as the seventh most recognised brand during the 2000 Sydney Olympic Games even though the company was not an official Olympic sponsor (Garrahan, 2000, as cited by Hartland & Skinner, 2005). Lyberger and McCarthy (2001) identified a growing trend in consumer apathy towards the sponsorship of mega sporting events, citing the growth of sports' sponsorships and the amount of clutter from signs and banners at the events as a factor in consumers' inability to differentiate between advertising and sponsorship.…”
Section: Olympic Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…One of the first recorded incidents of ambush marketing was in the 1984 Los Angeles Summer Olympics when Kodak became the sponsor of ABC's broadcast of the Olympics and of the US track team (Sandler & Shani, 1989). Another instance of ambush marketing happened during the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics, when Nike placed their logo on a building opposite the Olympic stadium (Hartland & Skinner, 2005). During the 2002 Salt Lake City Olympic Games, Schirf Brewery, a small local company that was not an Olympic sponsor, devised a marketing campaign to connect itself with the Olympics by labelling delivery trucks with "Wasatch Beers.…”
Section: Ambush Marketingmentioning
confidence: 99%