Experts in sports marketing analyze in MARCA the repercussion for a sponsor of gestures such as those suffered by Coca Cola or Heineken
Can't talk about Cocacolagate, or Heinkengate yet. In addition to because they are horrible terms, it is that the fire, for now, seems to be remaining in embers. Cristiano Ronaldo, perhaps unintentionally (or perhaps on purpose, knowing himself almost untouchable), pushed the bottles away from the UEFA sponsor. Later it was Paul Pogba who copied the gesture, even more contemptuously (he totally withdrew it), with the beer.
There has not been, nor does it seem that there will be, any direct consequence on the part of UEFA, nor of the Portuguese and French federations. At least not publicly. Surely in terms of sponsorship, even the brands themselves prefer to let go of an issue that will die on its own in a few hours.
Some competitor tried to take advantage of what happened with publications on social networks, such as Pepsi Max, although the tweet was later withdrawn. Because you never know when they can mess with you... And therein lies the key to what happened: many times the sponsor (Coca Cola or Heineken in this case), the sponsored (UEFA and, therefore, the federations) they are light years away from controlling the stars who have to show off their products. Stars sell, but they are also much more complicated to manage.
MARCA has wanted sports sponsorship experts and consultants on what happens after such an action. "This would not happen in the US. If something like this happens in the NFL or the NBA, that player would have been sanctioned. They have a very rigid discipline regimen, they cannot do such a thing. There you can enter the changing rooms and no player thinks of stopping you. Those sponsored must protect their sponsors", explains Carlos Cantó, specialist and consultant in sports marketing and CEO of SPSG consulting.
"There are three parties involved: Coca Cola, Cristiano Ronaldo and UEFA. For Coca Cola they have had more media coverage, but I don't think they value that excess more because it is a brand known throughout the world. They have also had a drop in the value, it is not that they lost 4,000 million but that their valuation fell 4,000 million after the gesture. Then they recovered. Sponsoring an athlete has its risks, you do not control everything he does although the sponsorship agreement should include it. There are always risks to do what they want," he adds.
Regarding Cristiano, Pogba and his gestures, the conclusions go in the same direction: "If I am a sponsoring brand, I would at least have the ability to put myself on an amber level to clarify his behavior a bit. Ronaldo in his life has had many sponsorships that they have arrived and then they have ceased to be. When an athlete does something like this, the marketing departments are alerted so that it does not happen to them. It is credibility in the medium, long term, for the brands.
The third leg, for Carlos Cantó, is UEFA. "They have the obligation to protect the rights and interests of their sponsors, because they pay them. One solution may be not to make more fire from a small bonfire. But if I am a sponsor of UEFA, I would be concerned that my rights were not violated. by the entity to which I pay. Perhaps responding through the media is not the best solution, but of course UEFA has an answer to give. If I were Coca Cola I would call immediately to say "hey, you have to protect me", ditch.
For Cinto Arjam, founder of CA Sports Marketing, the problem with such a situation may be that it repeats itself, or becomes generalized. "Probably, as there is no precedent, there is no sanctioning system but there should be. More than in UEFA in the national teams. Just as with a red card you miss a game, because if a player does not want to meet the sponsorship requirements or commitments, either he's expelled from the championship, or his team will suffer a sanction. But I think they won't because, thanks to Cristiano, there are millions of people who watch the games. But it opens up a very dangerous melon at the level of income for UEFA. The problem It's not that Cristiano does it, it's that... if Cristiano does it and nothing happens, why shouldn't Griezmann or Busquets do it?"
Cinto Arjam, who is also very close to and knows first-hand the position of an elite athlete and his repercussions in the market thanks to his brother Josef, the problem is that position of almost untouchable strength that the big stars. "Soccer players have become gods. That has good things, because they move masses and are heroes, but heroes cannot forget that in the end they represent someone who pays and who has accepted some rules. It cannot be that you are the hero , but you also want to be the bad boy. What footballers don't understand is that, after the good message they want to send, is that there is another reality: the footballer is a worker who is due to a national team than to participate in a championship like this one, he accepts some rules of the game. Among them that there are some sponsors and that each team has to fulfill some commitments with them. Just as Cristiano puts aside the Coca-Colas, he does not cross out other logos that he does not like. He is in front of a shop window advertising which is what brands pay for, among other things".
"What he did seems wrong to me. But from the brand side. If I were Coca Cola I would actively complain. But also from the side of the national team, that any of its footballers who does something like that. What they should do is make it clear to them that they are there under certain rules and, if not, they cannot be there," says the founder of CA Sports Marketing, who ends with a harsh reflection: "How is UEFA going to sell sponsorship to Coca Cola for the next European Championship if the players are allowed to remove them and nothing happens? Who is going to buy it? The value becomes zero".
The reality is that as much hype as Cristiano's gesture may have had, the foundations of Coca Cola have not shaken. "For investors, this is not a drama either. There has been more talk about Coca Cola as a result of this than if Ronaldo had not touched it," explains Marc Menchén, specialized journalist and director of 2Playbook.
"It is very daring to link the stock market crash to a simple gesture by Cristiano. It is not the same as when, for example, they eliminate Juventus from the Champions League and, the next day, their shares fall. It is a more general situation than the Cristiano's gesture. The shares recovered: on Monday they were at 55.5 dollars, they fell to 55.4 on Tuesday and on Wednesday they remain the same. The evolution in its last six months says that Coca Cola is higher than when the European Championship began And Heineken is even growing," adds Menchén.
"The repercussions are not so drastic. A lot of importance has been given in the world of sports, but it is very naive to think that a great drop in the brand's stock will be produced by a gesture," Marc Menchén ditches. Although of course, it will be necessary to see what happens if it ends up becoming a fashion, that of separating the brands that each player, individually, does not like. How many would refuse to live with bookmaker advertising imposed by their clubs? To cite just one example...
