Sponsors like Magellan shouldn’t walk away from Cricket Australia
As brands begin to disassociate themselves from Cricket Australia, Jason Rose considers if sponsors are revealing their true colours as nothing but fair-weather friends.
The recent ball tampering fiasco once again highlights the risks for brands of aligning themselves with athletes and sporting codes. It certainly didn’t take long for Magellan, the global fund managers, to rip up their three-year sponsorship deal with Cricket Australia.
I understand why they chose to do so. For a company that invests other peoples’ money, values such as integrity and honesty are central to their brand. They certainly don’t want to be associated with lying and cheating.
However, I wonder if a brand like Magellan – or any other brand – that reacts to a scandal such as the one we have just seen by exercising their right to terminate a contract is actually missing out on a far larger brand-building opportunity.
The simple rationale for a company taking out a high-profile sponsorship is two-fold: first, the exposure of aligning with something of major public interest and, two, the rub-off of associating with something that is loved and admired.
That’s why sport is such a powerful drawcard for sponsorships, because it creates unrivalled passions that companies are willing to pay very large sums for an even marginal association. It’s also why these same companies dive to the ground yelling “grenade” when things go wrong.
To me, the starting point for any marketing decision has to be to assume that the public isn’t completely stupid. No-one believed that Magellan in any way supported the deceit at the centre of the sandpaper fiasco simply because they were a sponsor of the cricket team. The public gets that.
What the scandal actually did was hand Magellan a unique moment to very publicly demonstrate its true values as a business. These moments are rare and should be embraced rather than run away from.
Imagine if rather than calling stumps on its sponsorship, Magellan said that it was deeply disappointed with the actions of Smith, Warner and Bancroft and that the company had seriously considered terminating its relationship with Cricket Australia. Fair enough.
However, after much deliberation, it had decided to continue with its sponsorship because it loves cricket, it understands that sometimes people make mistakes, even egregious ones, and that it takes courage to admit it and to fight to regain respect.
Now, maybe Magellan was looking for an out clause for completely separate reasons, but imagine if it had adopted that kind of approach to the scandal? It would have truly demonstrated far more about itself than what some very expensive signage on the MCG during the Boxing Day Test ever could.
As of last week, they are no different from countless other brands that are fair-weather friends of sports and sporting stars – there for the photo ops in the good times and nowhere to be seen when things turn.
The guys behind Magellan are whip smart and have done exceptionally well by pouring into global equities in recent years. No doubt, however, at some point in the future, they will run into problems. Returns will be down. An employee will do something dodgy. Who knows?
For Magellan’s sake, I hope their customers will show more loyalty, solidarity and understanding than they themselves showed towards Cricket Australia.
Jason Rose is a corporate advisor and co-founder of Manifest.Fund, an early-stage investment fund focused on marketing growth.
Magellan wanted publicity before their IPO.. they got that..
This was a perfect chance to get out.. and save $$
User ID not verified.
Of course customers would leave Magellan if they were caught evading their taxes or defrauding their investors – which is pretty much what the cricketers were caught doing.
User ID not verified.
I was just saying the same thing on the weekend. These sponsors have been given an ideal opportunity to build brand equity. It’s a shame that few have seen far enough into the future.
User ID not verified.
It was an odd fit from the start, they got the perfect opportunity to exit and took it with open arms
User ID not verified.
I think they should have stayed. They should have confidence this is a player issue not a CA issue and should be supporting the ethics shown by CA in penalising the offenders. As most investment companies say, they should be investing in the long term and ride out the market downturns. Its what they would tell their clients…
User ID not verified.
I think the writer and most commenters here are writing as cricket fans: sponsors should stay because … cricket.
Sponsors choose a sport because of the spirit of the game, the values, names, character and reputations of the players and the attraction of those to fans. What you saw here was repeated dishonesty and a huge betrayal at the highest level of all the things that sponsors wanted.
So pretty much all of them, not just Magellan, have walked.
User ID not verified.
I suspect timing was at play here. Public opinion about the cheating definitely took a turn after Steve Smith’s tearful press conference, where he admitted his leadership failure and demonstrated courage and perhaps what true leadership really looks like.
With the benefit of hindsight after that press conference, it’s easy to say that Magellan could have come and said “However, after much deliberation, it had decided to continue with its sponsorship because it loves cricket, it understands that sometimes people make mistakes, even egregious ones, and that it takes courage to admit it and to fight to regain respect.”
But prior to Steve Smith’s press conference (and still now, to a certain extent), the public narrative was about the cricketing culture that led to the cheating incident occurring. It would take a brave sponsor to want to be associated with such a narrative.
User ID not verified.
All publicity is a gift. Memories are short. Perfect time for a brand to create a stronger image by demandind CA step up to their integrity etc. Damage control is woeful in Australia.
User ID not verified.
Opportunity Missed.
How brands react in a time of crisis is really important. If I’m looking at a company to secure my financial future with I want a brand who’s with me for the bad as well as the good times. Showing solidarity in a time of crisis shows strength.
Sport and financial markets are both unpredictable – the consistent should be the brands that stand beside them to yes pat them on the back when things are going well but also to pick them up when things are not so good.
User ID not verified.