How much does this bad moment affect the sponsors of the Peruvian team? do you have to sponsor for your for your best moment?
When a company decides to sponsor a football team, a company, an event, a player, or whatever it considers sponsoring, it has the expectation of highlighting it in a positive way, that is the objective of the company, that the sponsorship is positive. Being positive in a football team goes hand in hand with good sporting results, because in some way those behind it are the fans, the players. If a team does well sportingly, the fans will be attached and happy and will consume more. For example, there are foreign teams that are listed on the stock market and their sports results directly impact the value of their shares. That is, if the team wins, its shares will tend to increase, and if it loses, just the opposite, the same thing happens with a company that becomes a sponsor of a team. The consumer, who is ultimately the fan, will be more linked to the team if the sporting results are good; Today that does not accompany the national team, it has been quickly seen in the attendance at the stadium, there have not been many people with their shirts, in fact some companies held internal events to leave early so that their workers could watch the games, that has been lost. Finally, it is an economic loss for the sponsors.
Given these poor selection results, what do the sponsors lose?
In some ways, there is reputation involved. One seeks to associate or get together with someone who in some way shows and prospects for success. Brands associate because they feel like peers and they come together and feel successful between them, so, joining or associating with a club, a team that is ultimately not well regarded, that will generate some impact on the sponsor, or in terms economic, or in reputational terms. There are cases that we have seen, in the business world, where they end up withdrawing sponsorship due to some negative event.
Would this damage to the sponsors of the selection be in the short, medium or long term?
It will depend a lot on the type of company you are sponsoring; For example, Adidas is the main sponsor of the team’s uniforms. The economic impact is direct, since people are going to stop buying uniforms, t-shirts, or some team clothing, because they are not happy with the results, and therefore, they are not going to be in the mood, or with the disposition. of consuming this type of products. It is a direct impact in economic terms, and surely the other brands will also be affected, if the results remain that way.
A few days ago, Yape, sponsor of the national team, released a spot on the current situation of the bicolor team. What did you think of this idea of making the fans’ desire for changes felt?
Well, it was a risky strategy too, Yape somehow assumed that risk, by launching this type of message in a situation like the one the team is experiencing, because in some way the sponsor has to support whoever they are sponsoring, so it was somewhat controversial. . Now, what it did generate was visibility, in some way the Yape brand has been exposed through that viralization.
There have also been recent cases where sponsors have withdrawn their sponsorships, with the national team and due to this bad streak, can it also reach this point?
One always wants to be associated with a winning brand, a brand that gives a good reputation and that returns to whoever is sponsoring. Finally, it is an investment, and whoever invests seeks it to be repaid and generate profits or profits. As long as sponsors see an option to make their investment profitable, they will continue supporting, but the moment they perceive that this is not happening, they will stop doing so. I think that now it is too premature to say that they are going to abandon their support for the national team, but if this does not improve, at some point, someone will start thinking about that alternative. But today it is too early to think that this is going to happen, surely it could happen later. The next date is almost a year away and the Copa América is coming, there is still great exposure for the team outside the country.
Returning to a World Cup and experiencing two good processes with Ricardo Gareca made brands and companies bet on the team. If the bad streak continues, is it possible that everything that was advanced in sponsorship could be reversed due to the team’s poor image?
Yes, of course, if the image of the team deteriorates, it becomes less attractive for the user and therefore for the sponsors themselves, because that investment pays off with either reputation or economic benefits, which go hand in hand. So, if the selection loses credibility, it loses value and will therefore be less attractive for sponsors to want to continue sponsoring, and the value of the selection or the amount they are willing to sponsor will probably decrease.
How much does it affect the sponsors that Juan Reynoso continues to be in charge of the national team?
What happens is that the current coach, if compared to the previous coach, also loses in percentage, and whoever the new coach would have been was always going to be behind. In some way, he was going to complicate it, as he is now complicating the image of the current coach. Now, results make you famous for both good and bad, because if you win everything, you are famous, positively, and if you don’t do well, you are famous, but negatively. That is what is currently happening to the coach, but we must also understand that in football you have the most loyal client there is. The results help him consume more, of course, so, whether it is a coach or another, the fan is not going to stop being a fan of the national team. What his discontent will possibly cause is lower consumption.
What needs to be evaluated before sponsoring a selection with reach and exposure to criticism like the Peruvian one?
You always want to join a winning company, with a winning team, and in the last seven, eight years, the Peruvian team has proven to be that. But let’s remember that more than 30 years ago that was not the image of the national team, finally it is a risk. Whoever sponsors an event, a national team, a club, a team, or a player is taking a risk, they are taking a risk because the brand, or what they are sponsoring, remains a winner over time, but that cannot happen. It is easier to bet on a team that continually wins, such as Brazil or Argentina. It is more difficult to make the decision to sponsor a team that does not have those characteristics, or that historically has not had them, but the profit could also be greater, like those who sponsored in 2018 and prior to that World Cup, because they had greater exposure. So, evaluate what you are going to sponsor, in this case the selection that has the possibility of being a winner; In the last processes, we have placed fifth, and now a couple of places have increased, so the probability of the team going to the World Cup was high. Now, these first six results have made us think that suddenly that is not going to happen, but, of course, the decision has not been made today, the decision was made some time ago prior to the Qualifiers, so, they have evaluated the The success of the team in going to a World Cup, that is what a team evaluates, that it is in expectant positions. The other thing that must be evaluated is the reputation, in this case of the team, the team had a great reputation prior to these six games, so there was great exposure, not only in our market, but in the market international. Basically that’s what you have to analyze.
Receives our newsletter: We will send you the best sports content, as Depor always does.