INTRODUCTION

The explosive growth of the amount of medium types, a fragmented public, the emergence of the phenomenon ‘multitasking’ and the continuous increase of the advertisement quantity make it difficult for advertisers to reach the consumer. Interest has become scarce , and as a response will companies search constantly for other manners to reach their target group. Next to it, more and more consumers resist to traditional marketing communication instruments. Advertisement is seen as “dishonest, deceptive, and manipulative (Cornwell, Pruitand Clark, 2005). The unanimity of the supplied products ensure that it is more difficult for companies to distinguish from their competitors, through which they are obliged to outshine in activities around the brand.
Sponsoring seems to be the ideal answer to these developments. It offers advertisers the opportunity to present their self through a non-traditional, creative platform. By tying up with social projects, art, media, science or sports, advertisers are able to associate their brand with specific emotions and in this way, distinguish from their competitors.

Over the previous years, advertisers take more and more initiative to develop sponsor activities. With this, they create platforms that are totally focused on their image and their communication message. A few examples are brands that are the driving force behind a television program. But the most common sport sponsoring events are still the readymade images “off the shelf”. A few examples of existing events in Holland in which sponsors have attached their name are the Volvo Ocean Race, the ABN AMRO tennis tournament, the Samsung Super League (horse riding), the ENECO-tour (cycling), the Essent Cup (speed skating), the TNT Dutch Open (golf) and the Rabo Hoofdklasse (highest division field hockey). These are all examples of how popular sport sponsoring is in practically all divisions of sport.

But in the world of sport sponsoring not everything is always OK. The 2007 edition of the world’s biggest sport event is one to never forget. The pretended lies of the leader of overall placing, Michael Rasmussen, about his accommodation preliminary of the Tour de France and the continuous rumors about his presumed drugs abuse, enforced sponsor Rabobank, to remove him out of the cycling course. This was an unique event in the history of the Tour de France, with only four more course days to go. The ‘affair-Rasmussen’ has brought a lot of different thoughts and meanings. The big question here was, if this affair has damaged the image of Rabobank or that the bank came better out of it.

Is cycling with all her drugs affairs still attractive for sponsors? And more in general: Will the brand image of a sponsor be influenced when a sponsor object does something what not in accordance is with the law, if someone is involved with a scandal, when somebody performs undersized or if somebody comes in the media in a negative way?