How Effective are Sponsorships in Terms of Consumer and Shopper Engagement?

Consumer recognition of brands sponsoring Euro 2024 raises questions over how effectively sponsorship spend is being planned and activated

New research showing only a minimal difference in consumer recognition of brands that are official sponsors of this month’s Euro 2024 football tournament in Germany compared with rival brands who are not sponsors, calls into question how effectively sponsorships are being activated and the value for money in terms of consumer and shopper engagement.


Sellex conducted research finding that whilst 28% of those surveyed correctly named Coca-Cola Zero as an official sponsor, 23% also thought that rival Pepsi Max was an official sponsor. This trend was replicated with 31% of those surveyed identifying Adidas as an official sponsor, but 30% naming Nike, who are not a sponsor, as an official sponsor of the tournament. Official sponsor Visit Qatar was correctly identified by 17% of those sponsored, yet Emirates Airlines, which is not a sponsor, was named as one by 25% of those questioned.


Other non-sponsor brands identified as sponsors by respondents included Budweiser (22%), Samsung (21%) and BET 365 (15%). Other official sponsors identified by respondents included (14%), Lidl (14%), Hisense (11%), BYD (6%) and Alipay (5%). Over a quarter of those surveyed (26%) said that they didn’t know whether any of the brands were official sponsors or not.


In addition, the percentage of those people surveyed who correctly named a Euro 2024 sponsor declines the older the person who has been asked the question becomes, particularly among those who responded, “I don’t know”, which could suggest a lack of interest as much as a lack of brand recognition.


Given the significant amount of money that is being committed by brands to be sponsors of the tournament, raises questions as to how brands are planning, deploying and measuring the impact of their sponsorships. You would be hard pushed in stores to know, for example, which brands are sponsors of the tournament, versus sponsors of the England Team, versus a brand that has simply negotiated great space in advance of the consumption occasions that the tournament creates.


We continually see patchy execution and availability across many brands, regardless of their status. Unfortunately, execution of sponsorship like this is a great example of failed ‘strategy to execution’ for so many brands. Here are some examples of how to achieve better results towards consumer and shopper engagement:

  • The level of investment being made by brands should demand a more joined-up approach to ensuring activity is optimised


  • For those sponsoring and having secured the best space they can in-store, they need to ensure that KPIs between Sales and Marketing are genuinely shared and aligned


  • Monitor store inventory in the days ahead of the promotional go-live, measure the ROI very forensically, capture learnings for post-evaluation, and be ready to talk openly with retail partners about what worked and didn't work for the category and brand


  • Make sure you are working cross functionally to ensure that the "vision of success" is delivered. This might all sound like common sense, but you would be amazed at the number of businesses who still don’t do it!

Sellex exists to co-create Business Growth Strategies with clients. Commercial Marketing is so often biased towards the brand or the customer, meaning no one wins. Sellex helps ensure that Brand Managers, Category Managers, Shopper Marketing Managers and National Account Managers can work together to deliver the KPIs required to drive profitable market share.

Ready to find out more?

Email us at