As author of the FT Management Report, Measuring Successful Sponsorships, I was very surprised by Julian Bray’s letter (MW April 15).
First, it has been accepted for many years by all experienced practitioners, that a company has to spend at least the same sum again as the fee on leveraging a sponsorship.
Secondly, you can only measure expectations against pre-determined objectives, which range far beyond those of publicity and corporate hospitality. Indeed, these are rarely the objectives of a well-planned sponsorship programme.
So while I entirely agree a BRAD-based advertising equivalence evaluation is “beyond belief”, I have little confidence from the information provided by Mr Bray that Carlton Consulting is qualified to evaluate sponsorship, as it clearly does not understand the very basis of what sponsorship is about.
Mr Bray may be interested to know that the correct way to value sponsorship is to use a matrix which integrates tangible benefits – not just media exposure, but other benefits such as on-site branding – plus intangible benefits such as loyalty of the audience and various price adjusters (such as on-site sales rights).
Lastly, may I suggest he reads my FT Management Report, which gives many examples of how companies can and do measure the success of their sponsorship programme.