It is true that many enterprises fund sport teams or clubs with the aim to get publicity for themselves. Although many individuals consider this practice right and correct like any other promotional material, others seem to be more skeptical. Despite this, it seems to be noticeable that the benefits behind this marketing tool far overweight the negative sides.
Even though the primary aim pursued by the company sponsors is to increase their visibility, there are several social positive effects as a result of this practice. First of all, nobody would have any interest in sponsoring this kind of activities without a rise in turnover due to it. We live in a materialistic society, where most healthy activities would never be promoted for free. This means that, even if the primary aim of the sponsors is advertising themselves, these companies play a significant role in encouraging people to join sport clubs and to live an active lifestyle. For instance, private companies like Rolex are essential for many football teams which could not even remain on the market without their financial help.
Yet, some drawbacks concerning this practice should be taken into account. Among them, one seems to be the most relevant: the disparity of performances which can result in some cases: whenever the funds in favour of the involved sport team are modest and, by contrast, the company sponsor makes a great profit by advertising itself this way, the trade itself can be seen as unfair. However, this mainly depends on the negotiation skills of the counterparts.
In conclusion, whether funding sports as a way to create publicity for themselves is right or not, it is still a controversial issue. However, it is worth sharing the opinion that sponsors are almost always necessary to allow many sport clubs and teams to stay on the market.
It is true that
many
enterprises fund
sport
teams
or clubs with the aim to
get
publicity for themselves. Although
many
individuals consider this practice right and correct like any other promotional material, others seem to be more skeptical. Despite this, it seems to be noticeable that the benefits behind this marketing tool far overweight the
negative
sides.
Even though
the primary aim pursued by the
company
sponsors
is to increase their visibility, there are several social
positive
effects
as a result
of this practice.
First of all
, nobody would have any interest in sponsoring this kind of activities without a rise in turnover due to it. We
live
in a materialistic society, where most healthy activities would never
be promoted
for free. This means that, even if the primary aim of the
sponsors
is advertising themselves, these
companies
play a significant role in encouraging
people
to
join
sport
clubs and to
live
an active lifestyle.
For instance
, private
companies
like Rolex are essential for
many
football
teams
which could not even remain on the market without their financial
help
.
Yet
,
some
drawbacks concerning this practice should
be taken
into account. Among them, one seems to be the most relevant: the disparity of performances which can result in
some
cases: whenever the funds in
favour
of the involved
sport
team
are modest and, by contrast, the
company
sponsor
makes
a great profit by advertising itself this way, the trade itself can be
seen
as unfair.
However
, this
mainly
depends on the negotiation
skills
of the counterparts.
In conclusion
, whether funding
sports
as a way to create publicity for themselves is right or not, it is
still
a controversial issue.
However
, it is worth sharing the opinion that
sponsors
are almost always necessary to
allow
many
sport
clubs and
teams
to stay on the market.