The case examines the concept of sports sponsorship and how ambush marketing has become an integral part of such sponsorship. Reasons underlying the increasing use of ambush marketing tactics by companies during sports events are analyzed. The case discusses the dispute between the International Cricket Council (ICC) and Indian cricketers in late 2002, regarding certain anti-ambush marketing clauses that restricted players from endorsing the products of companies other than the official sponsors chosen by the ICC. The case also examines the role of the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI), the official sponsors as well as the ambush marketers in the dispute.
In
December 2002, media reports world over provided details
of heated debates involving companies such as Britannia,
LG, Philips India and HPCL, players of the Indian
cricket team, the International Cricket Council (ICC)1
and the Board of Control for Cricket in India (BCCI).2
The cause of the tension: `Ambush marketing'3
clauses recently bought out by the ICC, that restricted
cricket players from endorsing products other than ICC's
official sponsors for any major championships conducted
by the ICC during 2002-07.
ICC
developed ambush marketing clauses to safeguard the
rights of companies who had paid huge sums of money to
obtain the sponsorship rights for all matches to be held
during 2002-07. The official sponsors had reportedly
bought the rights for $550 mn from the Global Cricket
Corporation (GCC), ICC's marketing partner. The
organization was taking proactive measures to ensure
that the problems it (and the official sponsors) had
faced earlier due to ambush marketing tactics by
unofficial sponsors could be avoided.
The
official sponsors as well as the ICC realized that the
presence of cricketers like Tendulkar, Ganguly and Rahul
Dravid was important to draw crowds to the matches.
Their presence was also necessary to generate high
Television Rating Points (TRPs),5 so that
investment in the sponsorship rights could be justified.
|
