What is a primary harm of ambush marketing to official sports sponsors?

What is a primary harm of ambush marketing to official sports sponsors?

• A. It causes sponsors to demand higher sponsorship fees
• B. It eliminates the need for official sponsorship
• C. It weakens the sponsors' relationship by allowing others to associate with the event for free
• D. It increases the event's expenses

Answer: (C)

Ambush marketing undercuts the exclusivity and value that official sponsors buy into by letting competitors associate with the event without paying for rights. When a non-sponsor can piggyback on the event’s visibility and reach, fans may not clearly distinguish who has paid for official sponsorship, which dilutes the sponsor’s perceived value and impact. That weakening of the sponsor–event relationship reduces return on investment and can make future sponsorship less attractive or less secure. The other ideas miss this core effect: ambush marketing isn’t primarily about raising sponsorship fees, eliminating the need for official sponsorship, or increasing event costs.

Ambush marketing undercuts the exclusivity and value that official sponsors buy into by letting competitors associate with the event without paying for rights. When a non-sponsor can piggyback on the event’s visibility and reach, fans may not clearly distinguish who has paid for official sponsorship, which dilutes the sponsor’s perceived value and impact. That weakening of the sponsor–event relationship reduces return on investment and can make future sponsorship less attractive or less secure. The other ideas miss this core effect: ambush marketing isn’t primarily about raising sponsorship fees, eliminating the need for official sponsorship, or increasing event costs.